±±¾©Èü³µpk10

'The birth of a new medium' is how Tesco TV's sales house JCDecaux is billing the installation of screens in the supermarket's 100 biggest stores from next month.

Strictly speaking, in-store TV as a point-of-purchase (POP) tool is nothing new - as anyone who has inched forward in a Post Office queue while watching ads will testify. But while many supermarkets have toyed with it, Tesco is the first to take the leap of faith and install 40 to 50 screens in each store, albeit after a tentative 10 months interviewing 8000 customers.

Tesco's rivals, POP agencies and advertisers are now watching intently to see whether in-store TV will become the medium to capitalise on that POP mantra that '75% of buying decisions are made at point of purchase' - or whether it will be just another ambient media edited out by harassed shoppers or one which, worse still, irritates them.

According to JCDecaux, most of the UK's top ten advertisers think it is worth the risk and have expressed interest in Tesco TV - although how many have committed to the £50,000 rate-card price for a two-week campaign is not known.

The main attraction for marketers is Tesco's weekly 'audience' of 10m shoppers, who can be targeted not 13 hours away from a purchasing decision at home watching TV, but in the 'last 10ft' of the shopping experience.

Marketers can choose the 'zone' they wish to appear in, from grocery and health and beauty, through to the cafe. Screens in these zones are small, shelf-based and have sound. Bigger notice board-style screens located in the 'power aisle' - the central aisle from which others are accessed - will initially be available only to Tesco to flag up its own promotions.

Clients need to create tailor-made ads or promotions for the screens, as shoppers will not stop to absorb the subtleties of a conventional 30-second TV execution. Content can be either shorter versions of TV ads or an infomercial, such as 'how to make the perfect Pimms' - an example used in Tesco's trials.

In terms of effects on sales, trials in six Spar stores last November were impressive. Scottish Courage, Diageo, Unilever, News International and Weetabix signed up for the test, run by in-store specialist IQ Group.

Weetabix opted for generic brand-building ads and saw a 10% rise in volume sales, while Guinness witnessed a 23% increase in volume. However, the real success story was a buy one get one free offer for Unilever's I Can't Believe It's Not Butter, which achieved a volume uplift of 44%.

So why not roll out TV right now? The cautious response of Simon Fisher, Spar's advertising and promotions manager, typifies the stance of many retailers. 'We are looking at in-store TV and radio,' he says, 'but it's a significant investment.'

Despite a 2003 survey from POP industry body POPAI showing that a third of respondents believed in-store TV will be mainstream within three years, caution is the watchword. It was impossible to find a client or agency that believes TV will replace traditional POP, but relatively easy to unearth concerns about a medium yet to prove its worth.

'There are lots of question marks,' says P&G head of UK media Bernard Balderston. 'How effective will it be? What will it look like? It's very much a "wait and see" medium at the moment and it's too expensive.'

David McEvoy, marketing director at JCDecaux, responds: 'It might be expensive in terms of cost per 1000, but we are measuring sales rather than eyeballs and Tesco might record 20m transactions a week. Most media agencies are just getting to grips with this new media currency.'

Tim Beaumont, head of sales and marketing at agency Ida, said his clients are confused about how much control Tesco, or other retailers, will allow them over content. 'The big fight is over who owns the content, who creates it and the power brands have over it,' explains Beaumont.

Ida specialises in POP for cosmetics companies including L'Oreal, and Beaumont is defensive about traditional ways of wooing shoppers. He talks of the 'theatre' of 3-D displays, which TV cannot rival. 'A TV ad is just a pointer; it won't make the consumer pick up that product,' he adds.

The agency has created interactive POP units, such as a video for L'Oreal explaining how to apply mascara, but Beaumont's attitude to the unchanging nature of traditional POP tools in the past few years is that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The right channel?

Freddie Baveystock, strategy and communications director at POP agency The Nest, points out that for many clients TV is too expensive or inappropriate.

'The number of brands that can afford to invest in this technology is limited,' he explains. 'No one is denying the power of the moving image, but it's not right for everyone. We have just been working with Neal's Yard Remedies, redesigning the store to enable more interaction between customers and staff. TV would get in the way of that.'

Pasta sauce brand Sacla is one smaller advertiser that would struggle to afford in-store TV. 'We don't have the budget,' says Sacla managing director Clare Blampied. Yet she can see the sense in it. 'It's a great idea, for the principal reason that 75% of purchase decisions are made at point of purchase and audio-visual is the strongest form of advertising.'

Like his counterparts, Baveystock wants to wait to see whether test results on in-store TV showing sales uplifts are borne out in the long term. 'Lots of consumers were suckers for email spam at first and now block it,' he says. 'I'm not dismissing TV, but I am wary of the initial results because people aren't used to it yet. At home people are comfy and more receptive; in supermarkets they are dodging people, the kids are bugging them and they're wondering where the soap is. Also, the moving image can't deliver the texture of traditional POP.'

Mark Shaw, managing director of agency Bezier, is also unwilling to write off non-broadcast POP. 'There will be a place for TV, but I doubt it will replace traditional POP,' he says. 'You can't have a TV ad for every product-in store, so traditional POP still supports the majority with on-shelf activity.'

Shaw is confident that technology will provide POP solutions that lie between traditional and broadcast, such as tiny plasma screens small enough to sit on shelves or projectors beaming holographic images.

Broadcast benefits

While Tesco is the early adopter of TV, it is widely expected that the sector will change radically in the next few years. In the meantime, Shaw points to a more affordable broadcast POP option: radio - already used in-store by Superdrug, Asda and Debenhams. It is less invasive than TV and offers broadcasting right across the store. But for some, such as Baveystock, radio is intrusive. 'While you can avert your eyes from a TV screen, you can't avert your ears from radio,' he says.

Superdrug has offered radio to advertisers in-store since 1998, broadcasting promotional offers and product launches around music tailored to suit different audiences throughout the day. It is cagey about naming advertisers, but says 'the majority of big suppliers' have bought ad space. The store also claims its own research proves radio works effectively 'as a brand-builder and sales driver'. But it offers no evidence, which will not reassure those in POP, who complain that insufficient independent research on in-store radio is available.

Immedia Broadcasting, the company behind Impulse Live, which broadcasts live radio to 2600 convenience stores and newsagents, including Londis and Spar, is more upfront about its advertisers, which include Cadbury and Coca-Cola. It says the live element is more 'engaging' than pumping out music and pre-recorded messages, and claims to 'consistently' achieve sales uplifts of up to 65%. Many advertisers on Impulse Live combine radio ads with non-broadcast POP displays to prompt chocolate bar impulse buys, combining sound and visuals while the customer is next to the confectionery counter.

It is likely to be the same story of partnership between old and new with in-store TV; for example, stimulating shoppers to pick up a catalogue from a dump bin at the store's exit. As Baveystock says: 'The question is not how new technology will replace old, but how they will complement each other.'

ESSENTIALS

The downside of in-store TV

An anonymous marketer writes My concern is that people going to the shops will not want to be bothered with advertising messages. There's no point in showing a 30-second ad as they are simply too long. Executions will need to be 10-second bursts and even then people's attention span will be pretty low.

You don't need to be a brain surgeon to realise that people doing their weekly shop are time-poor and want to get in and out of supermarkets as quickly as possible, so the likelihood of them picking up advertising messages is slim.

I also have concerns about the longevity of the medium. In-store media is a well-trodden path. It has been around for a long time in the form of in-store radio, posters or ads on supermarket trolleys; there's nothing new about it.

I have seen plenty of presentations from companies that come in to see us and claim that sales went up 40% during their media campaign and then six months later we hear that they have gone out of business, such as Forecourt TV, for example. Basically, I haven't seen a lot of success stories in this area.

My final concern, which may well turn out to be unfounded, is the degree to which supermarkets will press this media on brands, by using it as a bargaining device over whether or not they stock products.

BROADCAST POP PROS AND CONS

Pros

1. Radio, and especially TV, are more attention-grabbing than traditional POP.

2. In-store TV trials have shown an impressive short-term impact on sales.

3. TV and radio can easily be used in conjunction with traditional POP displays.

4. Radio is heard throughout stores, so POP activity is not limited to one area.

5. TV and radio users can offer content deemed useful to the shopper, such as ideas for recipes.

Cons

1. TV is expensive compared with traditional POP, making it off-limits for many brands.

2. TV and radio could irritate harassed shoppers, who learn to edit out ad messages.

3. No retailer can provide details of the long-term effect on sales at present.

4. A flat screen lacks the tactile quality of traditional POP displays.

5. Who has control over in-store TV: the marketer or the retailer?