Proprietary & Confidential page | 1 On-Site Activation Research Report February 2012 ESPN

Proprietary & Confidentialpage | 1

On-Site Activation Research ReportFebruary 2012

ESPN


Background and Objectives

• ESPN XP is ESPN’s ongoing cross-media research initiative designed to count audiences of each ESPN platform, determine cross-platform audience dynamics, and measure advertiser/sponsor performance.

• One of the key areas of focus for ESPN currently is “Best Practices in Activation by ESPN Platform.” This year, in addition to ESPN’s five traditional media platforms (TV, Radio, Magazine, Internet and Mobile), ESPN wished to include On-Site Activation as an additional “Platform” it measures, with the goal of uncovering a few best practices for key sponsors.

• There is acceptance in the marketplace that leveraging a relationship with ESPN via on-site or event marketing adds credibility with sports fans, but ESPN would like to show sponsors what specific type of benefit or lift they are receiving from their on-site/event presence. Additionally, it would be useful to illustrate how that activation has a benefit that is either unique from, or synergistic with, traditional media. ESPN knows there is a perceived local-market benefit, as well, such as potential increased purchase or increase in shopping/store visits.

• ESPN Expectations• Determine incremental or unique value of ESPN On-Site Activation, compared to traditional TV media

promotion• Key findings at the individual sponsors level• Key findings at the aggregate level (for included sponsors and all other advertisers), i.e., best practices

for driving intent, best practices for driving favorability, best practices for creating interest• Assess overall lift to each focus brand within market targeted by on-site activation due to total XP spend

and isolate increment from on-site by comparing to market without on-site• Benchmarks, where applicable, to help establish levels of impact across all key metrics, i.e., awareness,

favorability, certain brand attributes, association with ESPN/college football, fit with college football, purchase consideration, product interest


Sponsors Evaluated

• ESPN has identified three sponsors whose promotional efforts offer a good example of each of the main ways of activating the on-site platform within ESPN XP – Cheez-It, Jeep and Dr. Pepper.

• Cheez-It• Year two (2) of college football sponsorship, but first year on site

• Sponsorship built around “the Real Fan”

• Sponsor recruits six-eight (6-8) brand ambassadors each week – one ambassador wins on-air interview at sponsor tent during College GameDay

• Sponsor-branded TV features and aerial coverage of campus during College GameDay programming

• Co-branded TV media running on TV with ESPN talent – potential question about value of same activation through eyes of TV viewers versus on-site participants/visitors

• Sponsor goals – To drive Facebook traffic to their page; brand favorability, product trial; brand fit with college football


Sponsors Evaluated

• Jeep• Custom ten-stop campus tour (not necessarily College GameDay markets); ran

ongoing traditional TV media promotion

• On-campus, fans have the opportunity to be the passenger on a test-track built to simulate the off-road driving experience

• Sponsor goals – Trial/purchase/favorability among college football fans; test-drive is considered action that may drive purchase intent for category

• Dr. Pepper• In-store presence at Spotlight Game of the Week (college football)

• Elaborate display of sponsorship-related trophy in local Walmart stores; fans may take photos with trophy

• Sponsor goals – Brand is the “official drink of the BCS” – driving association with college football and BCS is key; increased store traffic, product trial and purchase


Design Overview

On-site Fan Surveys (3)

Measure awareness of on-site activations by all sponsors versus focus brands, impact on brand opinion and purchase intent, and contrast to national Benchmark and Alabama/LSU data to show incremental impact of on-site activation. Surveys conducted by Lieberman Research Worldwide• Cheez-It; n=300 fans surveyed at Alabama/LSU game on 11/5

and Stanford/Oregon on 11/12• Jeep n=300 fans surveyed at USC/UCLA game on November 26

and Oklahoma State/Oklahoma game on December 3.• Dr. Pepper n=211 fans interviewed at Sugar Bowl Fan Fest on

January 1, 2012.

Dr. Pepper Retailer Exit Interviews Assess awareness and efficacy at driving traffic, brand engagement and sales. N=115 interviews at Kroger in Huntsville, AL on 1/13.

Alabama-LSU Fan National Pre/Post

Assess impact of XP promotion for each brand among fans of Alabama and LSU nationwide, before and after the most hyped game of the regular season. Demonstrate the additional impact on fans of the teams playing versus fans in general. Act as a second benchmark when looking at brand metrics in the on-site surveys of fans at the game.N=308 pre, 307 post with Alabama and LSU fans nationally. Conducted by Knowledge Networks online between November 1-3 and November 7-8.

Use national data on focus brands from current XP research among all college football fans to contrast to awareness, engagement metrics from on-site surveys.N=453, conducted by Knowledge Networks on their online KnowledgePanel October 31-Nov 8, 2011.

National Benchmark Survey


Executive Summary

• Awareness: Each sponsor generated good levels of unaided awareness among fans on-site in both absolute terms and relative to other sponsors on-site.

• On-Site Engagement; x’s engagement was a little disappointing – at least 50% versus the actual 40% should have engaged at some level and around 33% versus the actual 17% should have taken samples. Loren Ipsum

• Brand Image Impact; On-site exposure drives the impact of x’s sponsorship on brand opinion to three times our norm and four times fans nationally. Ipsum loren.

• Impact on purchase intent; X’s on-site experience generated almost three times our normal impact on purchase intent and almost four times the level among fans nationally. Loren ipsum.

• Impact of XP Usage• Multi-platform usage had a significant impact on most metrics for all three brands at a national level compared to those

using a single platform. However, with the exception of aided sponsorship recall, the impact on site was more sporadic in nature.


Conclusions and Recommendations

• It is clear from this data that ESPN can make a compelling case to its advertisers that adding an experiential component will deliver significant incremental value to those who engage on site. It is also clear that XP can play a major role in enhancing advance awareness of these experiences. The argument that XP enhances value that sponsors receive among fans while on site is xxx to make based on the data here.

• The typical counter to sponsors spending significantly on on-site experiences is CPM-based; if it costs me $100,000 to reach 10,000 people on-site, that is not very efficient compared to other media.

• There are some recommendations that we would make to overcome this objection. The first is to show the dramatic multiples of impact on brand opinion and purchase intent which are not achievable through traditional advertising alone. The second is to look at offering advertisers a pre-packaged, multi-venue program which incorporates the best practices here and which is able to take advantage of economies of scale.


Aided awareness of Cheez-It’s campaign was far higher in each group, but the on-site activation was still the most memorable

• Cheez-It’s campaign was clearly memorable to fans, but just did not have the weight needed to create unaided recall nationally in such a cluttered environment. On-site recall was still double national levels.

• Aided data showed more clearly that XP usage had a noticeable impact on recall, though the lower numbers for prompting with pictures of the Ultimate Fan Cam versus simple brand prompting suggest the promotion itself was less memorable than Cheez-It’s main ad campaign.

S5/S5a. Which of these companies or brands do you believe advertised in or sponsored College Football/ESPN College GameDay last Saturday? Please include any brands you mentioned earlier. S5b. Take a look at the following images of a promotion Cheez-It has been running around College GameDay on ESPN this season. Do you recall seeing this promotion?Base: Total Qualified Respondents – On-site (n=300), Pre-Wave (n=308), Post-Wave (n=307), XP (n=453); S5b Base: Did not mention Cheez-It; S6 Base: Aware of Cheez-ItLetters indicate significant difference at 90% level of confidence Caution: *Small Base Size, **Very Small Base Size

On-site

Pre-wave Total

Post-wave Total

National Benchmark

NA

0 20 40 60 80 100

Picture Aided Brand Aided

Unaided Recall

Correctly naming

Promotion Unaided

1 Platform

(A)

2+ Platforms

(B)Aided Advertising Recall


Cheez-It engagement was a little xxx given the nature of the experience

In our experience of similar experiential events where samples are given out, we normally look for more than x% of those aware of the brand’s presence to go into the booth and at least a third to take sample packs.

S8. Which of the following describes how you interacted with …..?Base: Aware of Cheez-It (n=167);

Saw booth, but did not go in x%

Took sample packs x%

Talked to staffers x%

Present when Fan Cam

panned crowd x%

Had photo taken x%

Tagged photo x%

Plan to redeem

photo x%

How Fans Aware of the Promotion Engaged with Cheez-It


We use a normative question in all of our studies to measure impact of sponsorship on overall brand opinion. We normally find that around xx% of fans say that a given sponsorship raises their opinion and the rest are indifferent. Almost all on-site experiences generate somewhat above average lift, but the usual impact is only xxpts.-y pts. In Cheez-It’s case, Loren Ipsum

T2B XPDelta %

+x% +x% +x%

On-site exposure drives the impact of Cheez-It’s sponsorship on brand opinion to x times our norm and y times that of fans nationally

rEvolution Norm On-Site Post-Wave National Benchmark

Raises it greatlyRaises it somewhat Has no effectLowers it somewhat

N=300 N=307 N=453S10. Does the fact that Cheez-It sponsors ESPN College GameDay raise, lower or have no effect on your overall opinion of Cheez-It?Base: Total Qualified Respondents

Impact of GameDay Sponsorship on Cheez-It Brand Opinion Delta is calculated T2B 2+ Platforms – T2B base

Note: Question not asked at pre-wave.


Jeep’s Net Promoter Score was far more positive on site than among fans nationally

Likelihood of Recommending Jeep to Others (Top 2 Box – Bottom 6 Box)

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0

1 Platform 2+ Platforms

(A) (B)

S26/Q9. How likely is it that you would recommend the Jeep brand to a friend or colleague? Please give your response on a scale from 1 to 10 with a ‘1’ being ‘Not likely at all’ and a ‘10’ being ‘Extremely likely.’

Base: Total Qualified Respondents – On-site (n=300), XP (n=453)Letters indicate significant difference at 90% level of confidenceCaution: ** Very Small Base Size ^Base too Small to Report

On-site

National Benchmark

Chrysler’s net promoter score is the ultimate measure they use to rate all of their events. It is intentionally designed to be a tough measure and is normally negative. To get to only -x% ranks the Ultimate Tailgate Experience among the best of the Chrysler events that we have measured.XP usage did not seem to have an impact on this measure.


rEvolution600 W Chicago Ave., Ste. 220Chicago, IL 60654312.529.5850

Darren MarshallExecutive VP, Consulting & [email protected]

Documents

Proprietary & Confidential page | 1 On-Site Activation Research Report February 2012 ESPN