Monthly Archives: November, 2013

Pandora’s Proprietary Audience Segments

pandora

With more than 200 million registered users, Pandora’s collection of user data is substantial. Now they are beginning to use that data to create marketable audience segments that advertisers can use to target their campaigns.

The first of these “proprietary audience segments” created by Pandora are Hispanic and Spanish speaking users of the service. To create these segments, Pandora cross referenced their registered users with zip codes that have a high population of Hispanic and Spanish speaking listeners, using publicly available census data. It’s still inference based targeting, meaning that the buyer has to agree to make assumptions about the consumer based on where they live, but it’s an improvement over cookie-based technology, which makes inference based assumptions as well – usually assuming that someone visiting a certain site matches a certain set of established criteria.

Critics will argue that users often give false registration data as well, and that is certainly a factor, but probably not a significant deterrent for buyers who are looking for any improved ways of reaching more of the people they want to reach, fewer of those they don’t.

Studies have shown that listeners are quite tolerant of targeted ads online, especially when they are targeted to offer products that the listener might find useful.

In fact, Pandora’s capable of slicing up their audience by market, zip code, age or gender, or the kind of music they listen to, and has been doing that for a long time. These new customer segments are available in media buying software that makes it very simple for agencies to identify, price and purchase. It’s a smart way to market their large audience to advertisers and showcase their targeting capabilities. This video features Heidi Browning, Pandora SVP of strategic solutions, discussing the streaming service’s targeting capabilities.

 

Hook, Line and Sinker

There is a debate raging about the validity of Pandora’s audience stats that has begun to seem like a pretty coordinated effort on the behalf of some large broadcasters. It seems to have begun on stage at RAIN Summit Orlando during David Field’s keynote

English: Illustration of Pimephales promelas, ...

when he said Pandora’s claim to have 7% of all radio listening was false. Soon after, Bob Pittman said the same during a speech he made, and most recently Rich Bressler from Clear Channel said the same thing on a financial call. in response to more recent announcements from Pandora that their share is now up to 8%.

I’m questioning the wisdom of spending so much time discussing the competition. The thing that I find most ironic about all of this is that they are using public forums to disparage Pandora By comparing the total of ALL LISTENING TO AM/FM RADIO to Pandora. Which only lends credibility to Pandora! Whether their share of all listening is 4% or 7%, it’s a big number compared to the entire AM/FM listening universe. I cringe every time I hear someone make the comparison, it’s such an ill informed strategy. I’ll bet the folks at Pandora are delighted. In fact they just released a new report and said their share is now 8%! That rose from 7% so quickly that I wondered if Pandora is actually baiting broadcasters to gain more publicity.

The reality is that Pandora wanted to be measured by Arbitron all along, and it was some big broadcasters that pushed Arbitron hard against doing that.

Of course, a better strategy for broadcasters is to build out their own platforms, creating innovative ways to distribute their content and forge lasting relationships with their listeners, and then spend time talking about those platforms rather than contributing buzz factor to Pandora. That’s the stuff that advertisers want to hear and the market wants to invest in.

Hook, Line and Sinker

As I have mentioned before, there is a debate raging about the validity of Pandora’s audience stats that has begun to seem like a pretty coordinated effort on the behalf of some large broadcasters. It seems to have begun on stage at RAIN Summit Orlando during David Field’s keynote, when he said Pandora’s claim to have 7% of all radio listening was false. Soon after, Bob Pittman said the same during a speech he made, and most recently another guy from Clear Channel said the same thing in response to more recent announcements from Pandora that their share is now up to 8%.

The thing that I find most ironic about all of this is that these radio broadcasters are using public forums to disparage Pandora By comparing ALL LISTENING TO AM/FM RADIO to Pandora. Which only lends credibility to Pandora! Whether their share of all listening is 4% or 7%, it’s a big number compared to the entire AM/FM listening universe. I cringe every time I hear someone make the comparison, it’s such an ill informed strategy. I’ll bet the folks at Pandora are delighted, in fact they newly announced 8% rose from 7% so quickly that I wondered if Pandora is actually baiting broadcasters to gain more publicity.

The reality is that Pandora wanted to be measured by Arbitron all along, and it was some big broadcasters that insisted that Arbitron create reasons why that couldn’t happen. As far as the advertising community is concerned, the proof is in the pudding, and streaming stations can of course verify delivery of impressions.

Of course, a better strategy for broadcasters is to build out their own platforms, creating innovative ways to distribute their content and forge lasting relationships with their listeners. That’s the stuff that advertisers want to invest in.

YouTube Music Awards: The Fox is in the Henhouse

Speaking of seismic shifts, YouTube held it’s own music awards on Sunday, and if buzz factor is any measure of success (it is, of course), then it was a big one. Lots of people were talking about the awards, Produced by Spike Jonze, the awards were designed to be edgy, spontaneous, even strange – and definitely the opposite of the highly staged awards shows that we see on television.

By all accounts, it was a celebration of “the democratizing nature of YouTube”, with artists like Mackelmore & Ryan Lewis who became famous as a result of their hit song video on YouTube that they made for $5000 bucks with some friends. Even big record label made artist Taylor Swift got an award for her song “I knew your were trouble”, which incited more fan videos than any other.

Disruption folks, that’s the story that is being told live on YouTube, as evidenced by these awards. It’s not actually news, since YouTube’s been streaming more songs than any other platform in the land for a long time. YouTube is the place where the hip and trendy get their new music. Have you heard the song “What Does the Fox Say?” It’s a new phenom from YouTube that my daughter and her roommate played for me when we visited on parents’ weekend a few weeks ago. It’s a Norwegian viral video that’s got almost a billion views on YouTube since early September. Meanwhile, Katy Perry’s new album sold less than 300,000 copies in its first week. Not an apples to apples comparison, but certainly one that lends perspective.

If you haven’t watched these awards, and this YouTube culture thing is news to you, I highly recommend that you take a look. It’s a new world order, driven by platforms that put consumers in the drivers seat.

Meanwhile, according to Tom Taylor’s newsletter this morning, YouTube spent so much money on radio stations last week promoting its awards show that it was a top 20 advertiser….

%d bloggers like this: