Stefan Kolle from Future Lab argues that gaming advertising spend is too small compared to other media types. Many believe that gaming is too immature for advertising and this is the reason why many advertisers shy away from it. Are we right in doing so? Let's take a look at a few numbers to start off the debate:
75% of heads of households play video games
In Europe, people spend more time playing games than surfing the internet (after TV and music)
Roughly a million women play games (bridge, canasta, etc) on MSN gaming groups each day
Despite these figures people still feel games are young adolescent male oriented and media spend figures prove this. For example, newspaper usage by the European population is 4.7% and advertising spend is 32.4%. On the other hand, gaming usage is 13.5% with only 0.06% media spend. What up with that?
Think about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Why? Consider the technology barrier. The best ideas need a long time to implement - sometimes longer times than the innovation circle of the advertised goods is.
What will help is dynamic inGame advertising. Microsoft bought the leader in that technology (Massive) a year ago. With this technolgy advertisers can address their target groups in massive multiplayer online games with upo to date massages. The funny thing is though if you call microsoft to sell it to you they first do not know about this offer and than never show up. This at least was the case in Germany last year in summer.
Anyway I assume this will change or has changed already. Letr's ask the MS people.
Post a Comment