Let the political ad games begin.
$200 Million down, $16 Billion in spending to go. What could go wrong?
(Editor’s Note: Apologies to anyone that already received this. We will be looking to share new content every Tuesday, so stay tuned! In meantime, please share with anyone that you think would be interested.)
And they’re off…
Iowa and New Hampshire are now in the rear-view mirror and most insiders have moved on to the GOP Veep-stakes as they pile dirt on the graves of candidates that have already bit the dust.
We’re not really about punditry at ctrl+alt+persuade+delete (maybe sometimes, just for fun) but for all those predicting the imminent collapse and/or disappearance of one Nikki Haley, we point you to the timeless De La Soul classic Buddy, and suggest everyone just “hold on, wait a minute.”
We will see.
But on to the important stuff.
What did we learn from the first two electoral events of ‘24?
Answer: Political ad spending continues to be wildly expensive, incredibly inefficient, and for anyone that dropped their own dollars into the affair more than a bit painful.
Q - How much was spent just in Iowa, and how many voters participated?
Iowa:
Total spent on advertising in Iowa Caucus: $123 million
Total number of voters who participated in the Iowa Caucus: 110,000
Formula:
Total Ad Spend / Total Voters = Cost Per Vote
Calculation:
$123,000,000.00 / 110,000 = $1,118.181818181818181818 per vote
Now, besides the fact that the math resulted in a very cool example of a repeating decimal that could extend to infinity, it shows something else, especially for anyone that works in media, marketing or…business
Over $1,000 per vote is an insanely high acquisition cost.
This is high rent territory. 1
Nikki Haley's $1754 per vote is only a few hundred dollars less than the $1,975 needed to get someone to purchase a brand new Porsche 911.
Well done Team Haley!
To it in perspective, we pulled some numbers from “traditional advertising” campaigns to spends by the GOP nominees in Iowa to compare and contrast.
Buckle up, the spending is only starting.
Beware any brands that hope to spend TV dollars this summer in…Montana? Politico reports that Senate Majority Pac (D) has reserved ad time for this summer in states across the country, including $27 million in Montana and $36 million in Nevada.
Any media buyers out there? Feel free to comment on what you could spend $27 million dollars on in Montana.
We get it already, the ads are expensive. Were they any good?
In political advertising “good” needs to be considered in context. “Effective” is the preferred term, sort of like brand marketing despite what some ad agency creatives like to think.
But let’s be honest. The huge majority of campaign ads are just not good, and you should thank your lucky <insert here> that you don’t have to watch tons of campaign ads if you are in a solid blue/red district or state.
Don’t worry though we will be scanning the airwaves all election year in the hopes of finding a few that break the mold.
Wish us luck.
Thoughts: Solid messaging, could have used much worse pics of Trump and Biden to really go for the throat. 311K views on YouTube?? How?
Thoughts: Probably should have saved that $$ for something else.
Thoughts: This ad is 100% on brand.
Thoughts: It’s fine. But this spot last year from Kentucky is…
Thoughts: the way to do it.
What’s Next?
GOP Campaign heads to Super Tuesday as a two-horse race, and the California Senate race heats up big time.
We will keep an eye out on things for you. Until then — happy advertising!
PS - Share any ads or content (good, bad, or awful) with us here ctrlaltpersuade@gmail.com.
We’re also on the lookout for contributors. If you have something to share about the ad world and Election ‘24 reach out at ctrlaltpersuade@gmail.com.
OK political insiders, you got us. These acquisition costs don’t factor in spending by Super PAC’s. For more on that check out this Politico story: Super PACs have broken records with their spending in Iowa.