Name: Harry Grapenthin
Email:
Bio: I’ve been in sales for over 18 years, the last six of which in the communication solutions industry focusing on the media/entertainment market. Today, as the BurrellesLuce vice president for media/entertainment, I continue to work closely with media/entertainment conglomerates. If there is one thing that I am passionate about, professionally, it’s developing long-term relationships with my clients -- understanding their business and the industry in which it operates. The goal: offering the right solution to help them reach success. Personally, I am what you might call “a travel junkie.” I love to meet new people, experience different cultures, and try unique foods. My most recent travels include Tokyo; Kyoto; Madrid; Hong Kong; Buenos Aires; and Morocco. I enjoy independent and foreign films, books on philosophy, music, and Florida State football (my alma mater). I’ve been told that I remind people of Jerry Seinfeld (impersonations by request only). Twitter: HarryGrape; LinkedIn: Harry Grapenthin; Facebook: BurrellesLuce
Posts by Harry Grapenthin:
Did Pepsi Make The Right Choice In Skipping “The Big Game” For A Social Media Campaign?
February 10th, 2010The largest television audience ever watched Sunday’s Super Bowl as the New Orleans Saints defeated the Indianapolis Colts 31-17 according to Nielsen Co. The Saints weren’t the only ones who defied the odds by winning their first ever Super Bowl; CBS had no problem selling out their Super Bowl Ad inventory at a time when network ad spending has been in decline (down 13.9 percent the first nine months of 2009).
The Super Bowl telecast is considered the top advertising opportunity of the year, fetching as much as $3 million for a 30 second spot. So why would Pepsi’s executive team elect to forego advertising during the big game for the first time in 23 years, launching a social media ad campaign instead? Pepsi recently launched their “Pepsi Refresh” campaign where consumers are encouraged to submit and vote on ideas throughout the year that will have a positive impact on their communities, and have pledged to fund these ideas through grants from $5000 – $250,000. They’ve opted to use Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites to encourage consumers to participate and cast their votes.
“This is such a fundamental change from anything we’ve done in the past,” says Lauren Hobart, chief marketing officer for Pepsi Cola North American Beverages. “We explored different launch plans, and the Super Bowl just wasn’t the right venue, because we’re really trying to spark a full year movement from the ground up. The plan is to have much more two-way dialogue with our customers.” Pepsi however will run television ads for the “Refresh” campaign and also made it clear they are not abandoning future Super Bowl advertising.
“This is exactly where Pepsi needs to be,” says Sophie Ann Terrisse, founder and CEO of STC Associates, a brand-consulting firm. “These days, brands need to become a movement instead of just relying on good reviews for their Super Bowl commercials.”
There is no doubt media and marketing has changed dramatically over the last two or three years. We at BurrellesLuce recognize this shift in marketing mediums and recently launched a dedicated service to monitor and measure social media activity.
But despite an increasingly fragmented media world, the rise of viral marketing through social media, and the growing popularity of watching video online and on handheld devices, 106.5 million people sat in front of their TV’s for three hours on Sunday to watch the Super Bowl.
I’m sure Pepsi will generate quite a following for their “Refresh” campaign in the social media world and as they have already created quite a buzz by actually not having a 2010 Super Bowl ad. But it still must be difficult for the executives at Pepsi to hear the words “Super Bowl 2010, the most watched TV program ever.”
Landmark Entertainment Deals Ring in the New Year
January 11th, 2010
The drama that unfolded in the media and entertainment world the last week of 2009 and the first week of 2010 marks just the beginning of what should be a very interesting year. Entertainment content providers, mainly the networks and movie studios and subscription based services that distribute their content (e.g., pay-cable providers and DVD retailers) begin a year that may well be filled with much wheeling and dealing:
News Corp, Fox Networks parent company, and Time Warner struck a deal at the eleventh hour on Dec 31, settling a retransmission fee dispute that has been raging for months. Fox threatened to force cable TV providers Time Warner Cable and Brighthouse Network to drop their broadcast signal which would have prevented over 6 million cable subscribers from watching their programming including: NFL games, college football’s Sugar Bowl, and America’s most watched TV series, American Idol. The thought of having live sports blacked out on New Year’s Day, especially college football, was unimaginable to me in the not so distant past.
Early last week Warner Brothers struck a deal ending a spirited dispute with Netflix that began in August 2009. Warner Brothers requested that Netflix wait 28 days before releasing movies on their rental service so Warner Brothers could realize higher DVD sales. (On average 75 percent of total DVD sales occur in the first month of the release.) In exchange, Warner Brothers has agreed to make more of their titles available on Netflix streaming service. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/01/warner-bros-new-releases-to-stay-off-netflix-for-28-days.html
The News Corp. Time Warner deal is sure to precede several others coming from rival network providers CBS, ABC-Disney, and NBC looking to increase their fees. And the Warner Brothers Netflix deal should set a precedent for other studios to restructure current and future deals with DVD retailers. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-04/time-warner-cable-fox-deal-may-cost-cable-5-billion-update2-.html
Not all of these disputes ended happily, however. Scripps Network actually pulled the plug on the Food Network and HGTV affecting 3.1 million Cablevision subscribers after the two sides failed to reach an agreement over fees. http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/scripps-reports-progress-in-food-network-carriage-fight/
With executives unsure about how to monetize their web content or how they will adapt to multiple devices and platforms – the one thing they seem pretty certain of these days is that they are the ones producing the fuel that keeps this machine moving. Or Maybe we just took our entertainment for granted over the years and expected it to be within our constitutional rights to turn on channel 2 (CBS-New York) to watch the World Series or channel 5 (Fox-New York) to watch the Family Guy at no additional charge. We never thought twice about paying for a movie, whether at the box office, rental fees, or DVD purchases. And since its inception, we’ve always paid a premium for cable programming.
So maybe it’s time we view all content as equals regardless of whether we’re being entertained by Peter Griffin (Family Guy), George Clooney, or Derek Jeter. I would just like to watch what I want when I want – and for that I’m willing to pay a little more.
How are these recent negotiations affecting your PR and marketing efforts? On a personal level, are you willing to pay more for content if it means you get to access your favorite shows? Share your thoughts with the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.
A Watershed Moment in the Media World: Comcast- NBC Deal Changes TV Forever
December 4th, 2009
Image: www.ev1.pair.com
As a kid I remember hearing the voice-over announcement, that would precede NBC color television shows, “The following is brought to you in Living Color on NBC,” and watching the peacock spread its colorful feathers, thinking wow this is pretty cool.
This week the first step was taken into a new era of television. When Comcast and General Electric (GE) finalize their deal that will give Comcast a controlling 51 percent stake in NBC Universal (NBCU), it will spawn a media behemoth. As reported in the New York Times, Comcast is agreeing to pay GE $6.5 billion in cash and contribute its own cable channels, such as E! and Style, estimated at $7.25 billion for a total of $13.75 Billion. The new joint venture will be headed up by the current head of NBCU, Jeffrey Zucker.
The significance of this deal lies in the potential derived from combining a TV and movie content creator with a media distributor. Comcast will now offer its extensive customer base to cable channels such as Oxygen and Bravo, NBCU’s movie studio Universal Pictures and the NBC Network.
The integration of Comcast’s internet, mobile phones, and cable with their shiny new toy box filled with NBCU’s extensive library of movies and TV shows is unprecedented.
“In the next five years, more people will be seeing ‘The Tonight Show’ online than on their television sets,” says Paul Levinson, a media analyst at Fordham University in New York. “The convergence will be so extensive that in 10 or 15 years, we won’t be talking television screen versus online because they’ll all be the same screens.”
This deal still has several hurdles ahead; a long regulatory review by the FCC and anti-trust regulators is expected. Several unanswered questions remain, particularly “How does Comcast intend to provide their ‘exclusive’ content to its competitors, like Verizon and Dish Network.
How will this deal affect network TV from a consumer standpoint? Will this mark the beginning of the end of “free TV”? While we wait to see, one thing is certain though: the peacock is once again spreading its wings, only this time it’s to an audience of about 45 million Comcast customers.
Please share your thoughts with the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.
Media Giants Report Q3 Earnings: Cable TV and Movies Continue to Thrive
November 9th, 2009
Flickr Image: jjjohn
Media giants Time Warner, Viacom and Fox News Corp announced their Q3 earnings this week. If we look at these as a collective weather report, I would say the hurricane has definitely moved off shore and is giving way to partly sunny skies, with scattered showers in some regions. Compared to the abysmal Q2 earnings, resulting from a down economy and significant reductions in advertising spending, the Q3 numbers look encouraging, especially from the cable and theatrical divisions. However, DVD sales continue to suffer across the board with more people getting their movies online and increased competition from services like Netflix. Newspapers and network television continue to face many obstacles, mainly decreased ad spending… Read the rest of this entry “
Video Killed the Radio Star, But What Will It Do to the TV Star?
October 16th, 2009
Tuesday night I attended VideoSchmooze, a panel discussion loaded with heavyweights from within the television, cable, and video industry. We heard from executives at Hearst, Comcast, NBC and BlipTV – all of whom attempted to forecast the uncertain future of broadband/mobile video marketing and technology trends, paid vs. ad supported business models, and what the key broadband priorities are going forward for these companies.
Back in May I blogged about TV being at a crossroads as more people watch videos on mobile devices, PC’s, and laptops and what the new model for television might look like going forward.
Well here we are five months later and the question still remains: “What is the best way for video content providers to maximize profits from this explosion in online viewing?” The challenges that exist are many. If companies like Comcast are successful with the launch of “TV Everywhere” (providing content on multiple platforms for existing customers at no extra charge) by the first of the year, how will this “untethered content” be monetized? How do you prevent cannibalizing incumbent models that remain key revenue streams for media companies (DVD’s and syndication)? How do you accurately measure the viewership online and will the ads be more targeted to the viewer?
For any of this to be a viable option the panel agreed the viewers would first have to be authenticated as a paying satellite or cable subscriber; the content would have to be protected through some sort of DRM (digital rights management) to prevent the undermining of the existing revenue streams (DVD’s and syndication) and there has to be a way to attach an add value to this nascent technology.
The question I find most interesting is “Who will dictate this new model? Will it be the cable providers, content providers, or the consumers?” With all this background noise, one thing is for certain: content remains king at a time when consumption is coming from more “non linear” mediums (e.g., smart phones and laptops PC’s). I live in Manhattan where there is a choice of over 18,000 restaurants, and while I’m always game for trying a new place, I usually return to my tried-and-true – the place where the food is simply just better. I’m not sure how the content will be distributed in the future, but one thing I do know for sure is that whoever figures out how to get the premium content I want and in the way that I want it will earn my loyalty. I’ll continue to try the latest and greatest technology but will always return to the place serving the best content. And as they say, “where there is good content there is ad consumption.”
As a marketing and public relations professional, how do these trends affect you? Please share your thoughts with the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.
