YT vs. TV: Where to invest money for video advertising?

The first obstacle

Even comparing the potential reach brings challenges, as the measurement methodologies differ between online and offline advertising. The terminology does not match for some metrics, the definition of user and unit of impact (views) is also different and the size of the population (online vs. TV) is also not the same…

In short, it’s a bit of a mess, but there’s plenty of data available, so it’s definitely worth taking a closer look at the issue!

According to YouTube/​Median, the monthly reach of YouTube in the Czech Republic in 2023 was 7.4 million people in the target group of 15-79 years old, or 89% of the population. In contrast, according to information available from Nielsen’s continuous research, 93% of the 15+ target group, or 8.2 million people, watch TV shows at least sometimes. According to this information, the total potential reach of YouTube is therefore only about 10% lower than the total reach of TV in the Czech Republic.

However, for a weekly reach, the difference widens in favour of TV. According to Admeter, YouTube is watched by about 6 million people per week (71%) and TV by 7.67 million (87%). The potential reach of YouTube is thus about 22% lower than that of all TV stations in the Czech Republic.

It’s probably no surprise that YouTube is leading with younger target groups. For users under the age of 44, it wins all the way. However, TV is hitting back with older age groups, where the reach is growing.

The potential reach of traditional TV is thus still exceptional, but the situation for TV is complicated by the increasing fragmentation of the TV market, with 52 TV stations currently competing for the total reach of the Czech population in the 15+ age group, and the share of the strongest of them hovering around 15%. 

Weekly audience of Czech TV stations. Source: https://www.ato.cz/vysledky/tyden-share/

What else can we compare?

Price

For the comparison, we would prefer to talk about CPT (price per thousand impressions). But with TV, you’re buying GRPs and the price depends on how the TV sets its value. Price is further affected by footage, time of year, airtime, and more. For a general comparison, we can use the list prices of individual TVs, weighted by the average discounts achieved, which are around 40-50%. Of course, we know that this is an estimate from an average, but for the purposes of our comparison it is more than sufficient.

Spot advertising in the form of a classic 30 s ad on TV costs around 150 - 300 CZK CPT for the general population. Depending on our target group and how affinite TV shows we manage to buy the ad for, we will then determine the price for reaching a specific target group.

A specific product of TV advertising is sponsorship, where the price can be significantly lower than for a commercial spot of the same length (10 s). However, this is compensated by the legislative limitation of the content that can be communicated in sponsorship. 

Compared to TV, with video advertising on YT you can influence the overall CPT much more yourself. Firstly by the choice of format (skippable, unskippable) and most importantly by the targeting used, where the same applies - the narrower it is, the more expensive it is.

For comparison with TV, it’s good to use an unskippable ad, where CPT for untargeted campaigns averages around 50-80 CZK, and when narrowing the targeting can be around 150 CZK. At the same time, for an unskippable spot, it is also the price per 1000 views. On the other hand, the CPT (cost per impression) for the skippable spots may be lower, but the average VTR (views of the entire spot) is around 15-30%.

For an example comparison with TV ad prices, we can use data from the Google Ads hit planner and for a sample monthly campaign targeting the entire adult population, using a non-skippable spot, we get a CPP of 6,000 CZK. That is, 2×-3× less than for TV advertising.

Difference in the perception of advertising

Price is only one factor when comparing video advertising options. Parameters related to the ability to effectively communicate the advertising message are important. One of the important arguments for preferring TV advertising in the past was that it was presented on large screens. Here TV has, at least partially and temporarily, an advantage. For example, the Track the Success CZ Edition study described a greater impact on recall for advertising for traditional TV advertising versus YouTube (recall ability + 18 p.p., recall of advertising messages + 9 p.p.). However, the difference is primarily due to the fact that TV is watched on a big screen (and Youtube in the study was watched on a mobile phone).

Sound is also related to the memorability, the recalling of the advertisements. This is obvious in a classic TV commercial. In the medium of online advertising, this may not be the case. Most video content within the context of smartphones is consumed without sound. However, this is where consumption on smart TVs is different, which is similar to traditional TV advertising - i.e. with sound.

Not only these, but other aspects need to be taken into account when deciding on channel choices. In any case, YouTube’s inferior results in terms of attention are fully compensated by the additional benefits that YouTube offers over traditional TV advertising, in addition to its significantly lower price.

Targeting and quality of the impact

The key advantage of online advertising and therefore video advertising is in the targeting possibilities. From socio-demographics, geography to detailed interests, including interest in buying. 

With traditional TV, targeting options are very limited and can only be addressed by selecting the appropriate programmes to air the ad. And even in this case we can narrow down targeting essentially only by age, gender and by basic interests. Moreover, for specific programmes aimed at specific groups, the audience is very limited. Geographical targeting is also out of the question.

The consequence of this is that TV advertising will almost always have a fairly wide reach and this then implies the need for a certain minimum budget for the campaign to be meaningful and even noticeable to the target group.

It can be said that for conventional advertising it does not make sense to consider campaigns below 1.5 million CZK per month. In contrast, with YouTube advertising, thanks to the possibility of targeting even a very small specific target group, it makes sense to implement campaigns in the range of thousands of CZK.

The evaluation of the impact is based on audience data from peoplemeters for TV. Based on this sample, the audience for the whole population is then calculated. Thus, some margin of error has to be taken into account. With YouTube, on the other hand, you know exactly who you have targeted and how they have reacted to your ad – whether they skipped it or watched it. With YouTube, the most you have to account for is the error in determining age and gender. 

Attention paid to the ads

This is partly indicated by the level of views. For TV it is around 20%. On YT it is more than that – but above all, any viewer who doesn’t skip your ad on YouTube is more valuable than a person who theoretically sees the ad on TV. Why? First of all, it directly indicates interest in the topic/​ad, but most importantly – on computers/​phones people pay much more attention to the content they are watching and the length of the ads doesn’t divert their attention elsewhere. Think about the 6-7 minutes long advertising blocks on the TV – these 7 minutes are the perfect time to be distracted and, for example, scroll on social media.

Measurability

On YouTube, all measurability metrics are much closer to reality - you know the number of unique reaches and the frequency of views. For TV, this is based on less than 2,000 peoplemeters in 4,000 households, which is less than 0.05% of the buying population.

Prestige and credibility

TV advertising has historically been associated with a certain premium status, which was and is linked to the cost of TV advertising (both spot production and media placement) - only the more powerful players in the market could afford TV advertising. Thus, if a company has TV advertising, it can still bring these positive aspects in the eyes of the audience.

Another important factor is the quality of the content. No matter how we subjectively evaluate TV production, it is still significantly higher in quality compared to most content on social media - so our advertising is generally shown next to quality content. A related chapter is brand safety, where for TV advertising you usually know exactly which shows your ad will be shown on within spotlists, and you can have spots on potentially inappropriate shows replaced if necessary.

It’s more complicated with online video advertising. On YouTube, however, there are a range of ways you can influence the display of ads. This can be done by excluding topics (e.g. politics), excluding thematic keywords (e.g. war), excluding specific channels or by setting the type of inverters/​label (e.g. family-friendly content).

Clear pros and cons

Conclusion

It is almost certain that deciding between these channels in an “either/​or” manner will always be a mistake. The decision must always be based on specific factors: what is the goal, who are your customers, what is the available budget, timing, competition and many others.

The two mediums can complement each other appropriately and deliver greater overall effectiveness than using one or the other.

Engaging TV makes sense for campaigns designed to reach broader target groups (e.g. food) - for general, shorter-term campaigns with the aim of maximising reach, given the increasingly significant daily, weekly reach of TV, using TV is likely to be more effective than trying to achieve the same with a pure YouTube campaign. It is possible to compare the cost of the required intervention within the data from the tools - Ads/​Youtube intervention planner vs. data from the analysis of a given TV campaign and make decisions on the choice of approach based on that data.

However, unless your target audience represents more than 70% of the population or you can invest a large amount of money, you can most likely do without TV. Ideally, your target audience is clearly defined and targeting options are easy to track. This must be your main tool for determining the appropriate budget allocation.