I liked the spot. However charging 10 dollars to have a recording of you weather guy just sounds like a cheap infomercial. From a branding stand point we offer everything for free on our air couldn't your station find a sponsor to pick up the cost for the safety of your viewers. If I was a betting man the local hospital would have jumped all over this! Putting you health and safety first local hospital and you stations names here. As a viewer I just don't like a station selling stuff that is up to the advertiser. Shame on your sales force!
intial reaction thinking like a viewer... you want me to pay in order to be kept safe? Is the station trying to make a profit? Viewers paying for anything tv news related just seems so forgeign... I'd bet either must wouldn't believe or and the rest would find it offensive... you're only going to help me if I pay...
If you're going to leave feedback, It would be nice if you would leave your name & link. You're commenting on the business model of the program, which I'm not comfortable discussing on a public blog. However you obviously are living in a fantasy land where the economy is good and the local hospital has that kind of money to spend.
From a viewer's perspective, that was my initial concern as well. I wish the economy was better and we didn't have to charge for the service. That being said, our viewer's reaction has been extremely positive with no complaints and huge numbers enrolling online.
Just wait until one of your competitors does it for free. Then your whole plan is worthless.
Of course, that's if your competitor is smart. I know that's what I'd do if the guys down the street from me started charging $10 bucks for weather calls. Or I'd offer an SMS / Twitter / Facebook / Email thing to counter yours.
What would be interesting to know here is the demographics. I bet younger viewers are thinking this is ridiculous. Who would pay for this? Older viewers think it's a nice service for peace-of-mind.
The big lesson is... when you charge, you better deliver. It's like insurance. You can't afford to miss one subscriber. If it's free, you can fall back on the "get what you pay for" argument a little more. Maybe not legally, but from PR standpoint.
It's a good spot and makes me want to log on. I think you make a mistake not making your web address prominent at the end of the spot too. Since you don't really have time to explain how the whole thing works in the spot, your goal should be to get clicks. I know you mention it in the copy, but it needs more reinforcement.
10 bucks sounds like a lot. $2.50 a week sound more palatable?
A clear message, that I understand. For ten dollars a year I can get a phone call if a storm's coming. The video is kind of dark on youtube but maybe it shows up better on TV.
The line that concerns me is "no tornado will come near your house without a call from chief meteorologist..." What happens if the call doesn't come? power outage, call error, etc.? To me it seemed like a big claim that can't really be guaranteed. But overall it's a good spot.
...and I really like the fact that you used music that wasn't all doom and gloom. Nice juxtapositon against the thunder -- maintains a feeling of security, etc.
At first I thought it was going to be a comedy spoof of the Hillary 3AM ad. Anyhow... to charge people for this service is just plain wrong. Bad idea. Promo is ok, though.
I love the visuals and the production quality. I think it has the potential to create some brand confusion with viewers. They know they can get his reliable forecasts for free ervery night. A safety purpose however does cost.
I'm not against the service. Frankly, I like it, and would like to see it here. I'm just not convinced about using your main (I assume) guy as an indirect pitchman.
13 comments:
It's a slickly produced spot... but....
I found it a bit creepy with the weather guy calling. First thought was that it was going to say in best scary voice, "GET OUT OF THE HOUSE.."
It felt like at any moment it was going to turn into an amusing parody of a weather spot, but it stayed pretty straightforward.
As I said, nicely produced spot, but probably not exactly the reaction you were expecting.
I liked the spot. However charging 10 dollars to have a recording of you weather guy just sounds like a cheap infomercial. From a branding stand point we offer everything for free on our air couldn't your station find a sponsor to pick up the cost for the safety of your viewers. If I was a betting man the local hospital would have jumped all over this! Putting you health and safety first local hospital and you stations names here. As a viewer I just don't like a station selling stuff that is up to the advertiser. Shame on your sales force!
intial reaction thinking like a viewer... you want me to pay in order to be kept safe? Is the station trying to make a profit? Viewers paying for anything tv news related just seems so forgeign... I'd bet either must wouldn't believe or and the rest would find it offensive... you're only going to help me if I pay...
If you're going to leave feedback, It would be nice if you would leave your name & link. You're commenting on the business model of the program, which I'm not comfortable discussing on a public blog. However you obviously are living in a fantasy land where the economy is good and the local hospital has that kind of money to spend.
From a viewer's perspective, that was my initial concern as well. I wish the economy was better and we didn't have to charge for the service. That being said, our viewer's reaction has been extremely positive with no complaints and huge numbers enrolling online.
Just wait until one of your competitors does it for free. Then your whole plan is worthless.
Of course, that's if your competitor is smart. I know that's what I'd do if the guys down the street from me started charging $10 bucks for weather calls. Or I'd offer an SMS / Twitter / Facebook / Email thing to counter yours.
What would be interesting to know here is the demographics. I bet younger viewers are thinking this is ridiculous. Who would pay for this? Older viewers think it's a nice service for peace-of-mind.
The big lesson is... when you charge, you better deliver. It's like insurance. You can't afford to miss one subscriber. If it's free, you can fall back on the "get what you pay for" argument a little more. Maybe not legally, but from PR standpoint.
Good luck.
It's a good spot and makes me want to log on. I think you make a mistake not making your web address prominent at the end of the spot too. Since you don't really have time to explain how the whole thing works in the spot, your goal should be to get clicks. I know you mention it in the copy, but it needs more reinforcement.
10 bucks sounds like a lot. $2.50 a week sound more palatable?
But the spot is effective, and I think it works.
Apparently they need to be clearer about the rate. It's $10 for a year. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
There is nothing wrong with charging money for a service. Advertising isn't the only, or best, way to generate revenue.
A clear message, that I understand. For ten dollars a year I can get a phone call if a storm's coming. The video is kind of dark on youtube but maybe it shows up better on TV.
The line that concerns me is "no tornado will come near your house without a call from chief meteorologist..."
What happens if the call doesn't come? power outage, call error, etc.? To me it seemed like a big claim that can't really be guaranteed. But overall it's a good spot.
...and I really like the fact that you used music that wasn't all doom and gloom. Nice juxtapositon against the thunder -- maintains a feeling of security, etc.
At first I thought it was going to be a comedy spoof of the Hillary 3AM ad. Anyhow... to charge people for this service is just plain wrong. Bad idea. Promo is ok, though.
yes, it's wrong to charge for it - you're not a business after all.
you're a tv station, you're not supposed to make a profit.
-Young Broadcasting
I love the visuals and the production quality. I think it has the potential to create some brand confusion with viewers. They know they can get his reliable forecasts for free ervery night. A safety purpose however does cost.
I'm not against the service. Frankly, I like it, and would like to see it here. I'm just not convinced about using your main (I assume) guy as an indirect pitchman.
Post a Comment