Sports Tak the recently launched digital sports channel under the umbrella of Mobiletak.in has crossed over 1 Lakh subscribers on Youtube. The youtube channel of Sportstak.in has achieved this feat within 70 days of its launch.
Till now Sports Tak has garnered 13.79 Million video views across platforms. This clearly highlights the rapidly growing popularity of sportstak.in among video viewers on social media.
Sports Tak @ Lunch Time and Sports Tak Blast from the Past and are some of the keenly followed and viewed videos on the channel.
Sports Tak, as the name suggests, is all about sports, a channel where users can find all the latest sports news from India & around the world. Not just that, the channel also brings to you exclusive interviews, live chats with players - past and present - and also the top journalists from sports journalism. It is an exclusive platform for sports news updates for the fans. The new destination for most sharable sports content.
Discovery Kids today announced a deal with Media I.M. Incorporated Ltd, the London-based content distribution company, to premiere the hit animation series Sunny Bunnies in India.
Under the three-year deal, which covers the pay-TV, simulcast and catch-up rights, Discovery Kids will air seasons 1 & 2 of the short format non-dialogue comedy starting this November. Discovery Kids is the first Indian broadcaster to take Sunny Bunnies, bringing the total number of territories across the world to air the series to more than 160.
Talking about the deal, Uttam Pal Singh, Head – Discovery Kids, Discovery Communications India, said, ‘’We are delighted to offer differentiated content like Sunny Bunnies and be a part of the world premiere of this unique comedy series. This fascinatingly crafted short format series and the mischievous characters, has all the elements to captivate and engage with the kids in India.”
Media IM co-founder Maria Ufland said: “Introducing Sunny Bunnies to Indian kids has long been an ambition, and Discovery Kids is the dream partner to launch our little friends on their Indian adventure. India is not only one of the biggest, most vibrant and exciting markets in the world but it’s also an extremely challenging one to break into, which makes this deal a genuine milestone for Media I.M. And we know Indian children will love this show as much as their counterparts around the world”
The Sunny Bunnies are five beaming balls that can appear anywhere there is a source of light, from sunshine to moonlight. In each episode, the cheeky creatures bring their fun and games to a different location — a circus, a sports stadium, a park — embarking on mischievous adventures and spreading laughter and happiness. And at the end of every episode, the fun continues with a collection of bloopers.
This latest announcement follows the recent launch of another global franchise – Angry Birds Blues, on Discovery Kids. Sunny Bunnies will add to the growing content slate of Discovery Kids with an aim to entertain the young viewers in India.
Facebook has been in the spotlight for its role in the 2016 US Election with it appearing that as many as 126 million American users may have seen content uploaded by Russia-based operatives over the past two years.
Many of these ads were ‘dark posts’ – which is not as scary or sinister as it sounds. ‘Dark posts’ are a completely normal option offered through Facebook and are simply posts that appear in a users news feed, but do not appear on a brand’s page - this means they’re seen exclusively by the user they are intended for and nobody else. In other words, they are great for targeting.
Details and Implications
In response to the use of dark posts in the 2016 US Election, Facebook is now implementing a ‘View Ads’ link to the top of every brand owner page in 2018, which will provide visibility on all dark posts.
When clicked, the ‘View Ads’ function will allow a Facebook user to see all the ads being run by the brand, including those previously ‘dark posts’ that were targeting specific users and you will be able to see if certain ads are targeting you or not. A test is currently underway in Canada, with full implementation in the US due before next year’s mid-term elections. The update will then be rolled out to other countries, with exact timings unconfirmed at this stage.
Facebook believes that the introduction of the ‘View Ads’ link will make it easier for users to flag inappropriate content, however, it will also present some challenges for brands.
Firstly, it’s important to consider the advantages that ’dark posts’ provide a brand. Advertisers can create as many ads as they desire without spamming their followers and can tailor targeting to reach very specific audiences with relevant creative. Brands can also use dark posting to run A/B tests, for example running the same ad but with different copy or a different video to build up learnings as to which works best.
The introduction of ‘View Ads’ will mean that ads previously built to be targeted towards specific users, such as newsletter subscribers or individuals that have interacted with the brand in the past, will now be open to be viewed by anyone who clicks the ‘View Ads’ link.
This potentially limits a brand’s ability to offer things such as rewards only valid for loyal customers for example as any customer will be able to see the ads by clicking ‘View Ads’ on the brand Facebook page. Another major issue that ‘View Ads’ raises is that all adverts will be accessible to competing brands too. This could lead to creative saturation as the best ads can be seen and imitated by the competition.
Facebook is now fully aware of the power of ‘fake news’ and this new update is its way of tracking and regulating adverts that may be intended to sway voters. Whilst this is certainly a positive step forward regarding Facebook’s social responsibility, it does create a number of potential issues for brands who have been using the function to target consumers and it will be interesting to see how these challenges are tackled in the coming year.
If you are running a big brand it must seem like you have a large target painted on your back. Every other brand in the category wants a share of what you already have. And stories of big brands losing out to newcomers are everywhere. But are big brands really dying?
A group of researchers from the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute set out to answer this question using Nielsen data for 4-5 years of recent Nielsen store scanner data from 21 packaged goods categories in the USA. The paper summarizing the results of their investigation of whether big brands are dying or not is summarized here but, quoting from the original paper, their essential conclusion was,
“There is no universal pattern. Some big brands have gained share while some have lost share.”
The obvious shortcoming of this investigation is that it is limited to packaged goods brands in the U.S. so I decided to see whether a different conclusion might be drawn if a wider set of categories were examined across a wider set of developed and developing economies.
To do so I used a data set drawn from BrandZ which covers 3,087 brands of all sorts measured across a five year interval. The obvious limitation of my analysis is that it is based on claimed data and subject to sample error, however, we do know there is a close correlation between the proportion of people who claim to have bought a brand last and its market share as measured by companies like Nielsen.
My definition of change was that the proportion claiming to choose a brand last needed to increase or decline by at least four percentage points over the five years (to account for variance due to sample size). While still a work in progress, it is reassuring to note that my analysis comes to the same conclusion as EBI do. Big brands are not dying in most categories and countries. However, my analysis does add some nuance to the basic conclusion and highlights the role that category plays in defining the likelihood of big brand decline.
Across the entire data set I find that there is a negative correlation of -.0.22 between brand size in Year 1 and subsequent change in chose last across five years. However, regression finds that the relationship only turns negative for brands which had 15 percent or more of the sample claiming to choose them last in Year 1. Of these 298 very large brands, chose last declined an average of less than one percent, with 14 percent growing and 27 percent declining. So, as a build to the overall conclusion I find that only for the biggest brands does the risk of decline outweigh the opportunity of growth.
A key point to note is that these figures exclude the mobile phone observations because of the extreme volatility observed in that category. The biggest winners are invariably Samsung and Apple iPhone, growing by large amounts across different countries, and the biggest loser is Nokia which declined by equally dramatic amounts. And that would be the other conclusion from my analysis, category and innovation have a huge role to play in whether or not brands grow or decline. Service brands and consumer packaged goods are relatively more stable than infrequently purchased goods but that does not guarantee that disruption will not happen. In fact, one might argue the longer that status quo is maintained the more likely it is that disruption will take place.
Overall my conclusion must be that it is possible for big brands to hold ground and even grow no matter how hard it might be.
Written by Nigel Hollis,Executive Vice President and Chief Global Analyst at Kantar Millward Brown.
Recently, GroupM announced the global rollout of the rigorous viewability standards we pioneered in the U.S. starting in 2014.
At the same time, we strengthened our requirements for display advertising and added new metrics for emergent native, outstream and infeed video formats on social media platforms.
Unfortunately, some have misinterpreted our announcement as a softening of our video standards. We are compelled to correct this view.
Given GroupM’s position as the world’s largest media investment group, we have heard concerns from various industry players questioning whether GroupM is effectively making it easier for even more investment to shift to the dominant digital players. The answer is “no.” However, we must continue to track and analyze all metrics to understand the performance of new ad formats on these platforms.
The feed environment on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and Pinterest enables users to scroll quickly through content and advertising alike – so quickly, in fact, it is possible that neither the content nor the advertising may be seen.
It’s a fact: the thumb is quicker than the mouse in scrolling through a newsfeed, and the industry must recognize it.
So, for display ads, we now require an ad be 100 percent in view for one second to count as a viewable impression. This standard gives a fair opportunity for the ad to be seen and for the brand to have an impact on the consumer.
The explosion of native, outstream and infeed social/native video formats, as well as the innovation of advertisers and their creative agencies in designing ads that are shorter and often impactful without sound, demands entirely new metrics for these formats. For native and outstream video ads, we now require the ad to be 100 percent in view and play to at least 50 percent completion, with or without the sound, auto-played or user-initiated.
For infeed video ads, we currently require the ad be 100 percent in view, with or without sound, auto-played or user-initiated. As for the duration, we will determine that requirement after study and continued benchmarking with clients, media partners and tech vendors. We expect to complete this analysis in a few months.
Neither of these social/native video metrics is intended to suggest comparability of these newer video ad formats to premium video – or that the social video ads be considered “like TV.” In fact, the value of video ads experienced without sound and without the user’s initiation is valued at a discount relative to premium video. Further, it’s important to know that our pre-roll and mid-roll video requirements remain unchanged: 100 percent in view, 50% complete and played at the user’s initiation and with the sound on.
When we introduced our pre-roll and mid-roll metric in 2014, our goal was to provide a basis for comparing premium digital video to TV advertising; and this is needed today as much as it was then, perhaps more so as partners like Facebook introduce services such as “Watch.” In 2014, most digital video ads were being consumed on YouTube, or in other non-feed environments, and many advertisers were deploying their TV spots to those environments. So much has changed since then, and therefore it’s essential to have new metrics, and in many cases new creative, for new social video formats.
So, you can see… our original standards remain unchanged, with the exception that we’ve strengthened the standard for display ads by adding the one-second duration requirement.
The belief that an ad must be 100 percent in view remains foundational to our standards, and this remains the highest possible and market-leading standard for viewability. When we first launched our standards, many considered this seemingly tough stance controversial. After all, it was quite a step up from the MRC baseline standard which only requires that 50 percent of an ad be in view to be considered “viewable.” It was also a huge progression from the early days in digital advertising when publishers were paid based on an ad “call,” regardless of whether the ad ever displayed on screen in front of the consumer.
The U.S. market has seen the most pointed focus on viewability by GroupM and our partners, and the fruits of our labor, our attention -- and even the debates we’ve had -- have yielded a marketplace that is undeniably better than when we started.
In fact, the entire U.S. marketplace has realized a lift in viewability. When we first started measuring against GroupM’s 100 percent viewability standard in 2014, only 18 percent of video impressions met our threshold. By the middle of 2016, 55 percent of impression met our standard (excluding social video). This is huge, especially when you consider that higher viewability is linked with delivery of stronger brand metrics and even higher sales.
In Australia, new research conducted by Mindshare, Kantar Millward Brown and MOAT across a Jaguar F-Pace SUV campaign showed that when the target audience viewed just 50 percent of the Jaguar ad on screen for one second, aided brand awareness increased by 5.1 percent. However, when audiences saw the ads 100 percent in view for one second, a 10.3 percent increase in incremental brand awareness was realized. In other words, doubling viewability to 100 percent, in this case, doubled the incremental brand awareness.
As the industry’s largest buyer of digital advertising, we feel a responsibility to do our part to drive the marketplace toward greater integrity. Viewability plays an essential part. Not only does higher viewability drive stronger brand metrics and other desirable marketing outcomes, but we’ve also found that publishers delivering higher levels of viewability typically do so in a way that is contextually safer for brands.
It has always been our position that an ad that cannot be seen has no value and that our clients should not pay for anything that delivers no value. This belief continues to underpin our thinking about measurement standards in digital as we evolve them for the future.