Advertisers are often faced with a decision on whether to use mobile billboards or static billboards for their advertising. We will compare the two and hopefully lead you to an informed decision.
Mobile billboards are often placed on trucks and other large vehicles. Because they are regularly on the move they are able to get a very high impressions rate. This is in comparison to static billboards, which are advertisements that are placed in one location. Studies have shown that the impressions rate is considerably lower for this type of advertising. In fact, 96% of survey respondents agreed that mobile advertising was more effective than static advertising. This study was backed up by the fact that they have a 97% recall rate.
Mobile billboards are considered advantageous to static billboards as they can deliver the desired advertisement to a wide range of locations, whereas the static billboard is restricted to only one. This means that it may be restricted to a certain demographic which can negatively impact its success. On the other hand, mobile billboards are able to reach a wide demographic which will be beneficial to advertisers.
Additionally, static billboards are usually placed next to other advertisements. This can be harmful to a business since it can result in a direct line up with other competitors. Mobile billboards do not face this issue at all as the vehicle will be constantly moving. This will also mean that there is less clutter so a person is able to fully focus on the advertisement.
It is important to note that some local governments have accused mobile billboards of increasing traffic in already highly congested roads. This is largely down to the fact that mobile billboards are likely to be sent in to high density populations, which maximises the impression that the advertisement will get. This is something to consider carefully, as a static billboard will have no potential negative effects on other road users.
The cost per thousand impressions (CPM) for mobile billboards $.75 to $2. This is in contrast to the CPM of static billboard which is $3-5. Essentially, it calculates the value of each advertising medium and how costly it is for a person to see your advertisement. These figures are contributed to the fact that 70% of people drive using the exact same route to and from work every day. This means that the same customers will be reached time and time again. This is a clear waste of resources since it is rare that new people will be able to see the advertisement.
It has been shown that 82% of mobile board viewers will read the entire advertisement. This is a fairly high number when compared with static mobile boards. The number of viewers that see the whole advertisement for static boards proportionally decreases because while driving they may not have enough time to fully see the advertisement. However, on a mobile ad there is typically a sufficient amount of time for people to see the entire length of the advertisement. This is clearly very beneficial since not seeing the entirety of an advertisement can meaning missing out on crucial information
We have compared the two advertisement types and there is a clear winner. A far better value for money is achieved when using a mobile advertisement. It is clearly better in every aspect besides the issue that it could cause congestion. However, we believe this is a small factor when compared with the huge benefits there are to using this advertising medium.
We realize that these studies are American but it’s likely reasonable to assume similar stats would apply in Australia. It’s clear to us and it should be clear to you that mobile advertising needs to be a priority in your business marketing budget.
Transportation Advertising Council
Outdoor Advertising Magazine & Simmons Fall Study, 2002
Product Acceptance and Research, Inc
American Trucking Association & 3M