Ads on Snapchat for $750K – is it worth it?

Hola Amigos

 

Recent news reckons that the starting price for ads on Snapchat is US$750,000, which is quite a sizeable chunk of cash – more than a TV spot during American Idol [USD 475,000], a YouTube homepage takeover [USD 40.5M per day] and, in NZ, many brands’ annual media spend.

http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/snapchat-asks-brands-750000-advertise-and-wont-budge-162359

 

So, is it actually worth it, bearing in mind:

Snapchat offers no ad targeting, a brand’s ad would go to everyone.

Proving ROI is damn near impossible as there are few analytics on Snapchat, you even have to manually count up your followers.

Apple tried the whole shit-loads of money to get a foot in the door for its iAd back in the day, which didn’t work out too well.

The ad only appears in recent updates and disappears at the end of the day.

 

It might be.

As youth audiences move away from TV, Facebook [allegedly] etc, then Snapchat could be the best way to reach them.

Brands like ASOS, McDonald’s and Universal Pictures continue to use Snapchat to reach younger audiences, so something must be working for them. Even in NZ, brands including ASB Bank are using it to target youth segments.

http://www.mad-daily.com/saatchis-asb-campaign-targets-uni-students/

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2015/01/26/asos-plots-further-snapchat-activity-despite-admitting-it-provides-virtually-no-data

Compared to Instagram sponsored posts that start at USD 350,000, the USD $750,000 doesn’t seem too ridiculous. Well, not extremely ridiculous.

Plus, how effective is one 30 sec spot during American Idol in reaching youth audiences?

 

IMHO, big brands that have $750,000 to put towards ‘experimental marketing’ will try it out, perhaps for the PR value of doing something cool on Snapchat. For Snapchat to become a regular line on the marketing spend excel sheet, then the Snapchat techies need to invest in some serious analytics so brands can try to measure effectiveness.

 

What do you think?