$167,000 per second

No, that’s not the growth rate of the national debt. It is the price for a TV spot. A 30-second ad will cost advertisers $5 million this coming Sunday. Super Bowl 50 (let’s just forget about that “L” thing for a moment) will likely have an audience of 115-120 million viewers, and this is a chance to pitch all 120 million of them with your brand or product. It is the only remaining mass media event that can pull a live audience of this size…and because of that it can command outrageous sums of money from brands that want/need that kind of exposure.

Here’s a video from last year that helps to explain…

When you’re spending this kind of money you want to maximize the effect and, if possible, increase exposure. One way is to release your ad on YouTube prior to the big day, and hope that you can build buzz online with social media. One Super Bowl ad that was very effective with this approach was VW’s The Force spot. This year Budweiser is trying it with a don’t-drink-and-drive spot featuring Helen Mirren. You can see it here…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb2VXVmUga4

2 Replies to “$167,000 per second”

  1. If there are 150-200 million viewers watching the Super Bowl, and you guys spend 167,000 dollars per second then why don’t you guys make commercials for the world series, world cup, or even the Masters? Video ad’s shouldn’t have to go out of there way to try and sell there product more. Now I do understand that most people who watch the Super Bowl get a huge kick and laugh but spending close to 4.5 million for 30 seconds is not worth the time nor money.

  2. It’s crazy to think companies payed 5 million dollars to get a 30 second ad during Super Bowl 50. I don’t know if I would pay that much money to have an ad aired during the Super Bowl, but it might be worth considering how much people are watching the Super Bowl.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

css.php