Yesterday Siliconalleyinsider.com reported that MediaVest is going to be moving $100 million of some Client(s) money into Cinema Advertising. Their answer to the lower TV viewership.

I don’t know what kind of butter they are putting on their popcorn or what else could make them think this a good way to spend valued Clients’ money. More critically are their Client going to fall for this?

What Brand wouldn’t want to own an environment where they are positioned between an audience and what they have paid for: a movie? A movie that is 2 hours of content designed to ideally make an audience forget what happened right before it. And please don’t start the “what about previews” argument. They are not analogous to commercials. If they were people would call them movie commercials not previews or trailers.

For years media planners have known that Cinema Advertising is a low impact media vehicle to be used only to augment a huge campaign or to show off particularly “important” creative; think the American Express/Seinfeld spots of several years ago.

A fine medium within those parameters, but not the solution to the $100 million “What to do about TV” question. Cinema Advertising doesn’t solve the loss of “must see TV”, not even close.

What it could save is budgets; justifying the production expenses associated with video. Hey if you are going to be on the big screen you need to look good right? It could save jobs; creative departments, production departments – skill sets associated with making commercials. It could give Creative Directors places to run potentially award running ads. It may even maintain Award categories. It delivers the status quo for one more year.

It won’t save Client relationships, sell products or hold back the wave of the NEW for much longer than that, but then this is the movies.