Marketing Effectiveness on a Budget

Summary

The Marketing Architects: Marketing Effectiveness on a Budget

Episode Release Date: June 3, 2025

---

Overview

In the episode titled "Marketing Effectiveness on a Budget," the Marketing Architects team—Alena Jasper, Angela Voss (CEO), and Rob Demar (Chief Product Architect of Misfits and Machines)—delve into strategies for implementing marketing effectiveness principles without a hefty budget. They explore research-backed methods, real-world examples, tactical advice, and innovative marketing hacks to help marketers maximize impact even with limited resources.

---

1. Introduction to Marketing on a Budget

Alena Jasper kicks off the episode by presenting a listener question that resonates with many marketers: "How can I implement marketing effectiveness principles when I don't have a huge budget?" She underscores that the episode aims to provide actionable insights regardless of the size of one's advertising budget.

Notable Quote:

"Even if you are flushed with advertising cash, this episode still might give you some ideas for your marketing strategy this year."
— Alena Jasper [00:33]

---

2. Research Foundations: Multiplier Effect in Marketing

Alena references Daniel Long's article, "Brand and Performance Ads Create Multiplier Effect for Business Growth," highlighting the Multiplier Effect. The key takeaway is that balanced spending between brand and performance marketing can significantly enhance ROI.

• Key Points:
  • Sole reliance on performance marketing can reduce ROI by 20-50%.
  • A balanced approach, allocating 40-60% to brand building, can boost ROI by up to 90%, sometimes doubling it.
  • Strategic allocation is crucial, even with smaller budgets.

Notable Quote:

"How you spend your marketing dollars often matters more than how much you spend."
— Alena Jasper [02:26]

---

3. Real-World Examples of Effective Low-Budget Marketing

The hosts cite several brands that achieved remarkable growth with limited budgets by focusing on distinctive and memorable marketing strategies.

• Dollar Shave Club:

  • Angela Voss [02:30]: Describes how a $4,500 YouTube video garnered 12,000 Razor subscriptions in 48 hours, leading to a $1 billion acquisition by Unilever.
  • Emphasis on clear value propositions and creating viral, repeatable assets.

• Cards Against Humanity:

  • Rob Demar [04:11]: Highlights their viral "bullshit" campaign on Black Friday, leveraging humor and simplicity to earn massive attention.

• GoPro and Red Bull:

  • Alena Jasper [04:34]: Discusses user-generated content and strategic partnerships with athletes to build brand presence without exorbitant spending.

Notable Quote:

"Distinctiveness plus broad reach, even reach that's earned, can bend the growth curve dramatically."
— Angela Voss [03:46]

---

4. Tactical Allocation: Balancing Brand and Performance

Angela Voss outlines a strategic budget split for a hypothetical $1 million annual media budget to optimize both brand building and performance marketing.

• Budget Breakdown:
  • 55-60% on Brand Building: Utilize broad channels like CTV, national streaming, audio networks, radio, and linear TV to maximize reach and mental availability.
  • 30-35% on Performance Marketing: Focus on capturing demand through paid search and other performance-driven tactics.
  • Remaining Budget for Measurement and Learning: Allocate funds to track effectiveness using tools like share of search, brand lift studies, and open-source MMM models.

Notable Quote:

"Our dollar works almost twice as hard when part of it builds demand before we harvest it."
— Angela Voss [07:29]

---

5. Choosing the Right Marketing Channels

The discussion emphasizes selecting channels that offer broad reach and cost-effectiveness, especially under budget constraints.

• Recommended Channels:

  • Streaming audio, host-read podcasts, linear TV, FAST TV, AVOD, CTV apps, broad YouTube pre-rolls, and out-of-home advertising.

• Channels to Avoid:

  • Hyper-targeted programmatic display, high-entry-fee influencer campaigns, splashy event sponsorships, and prime network TV, which offer less reach per dollar spent.

Notable Quote:

"Pick channels where each extra dollar buys incremental reach over kind of fancier targeting methods."
— Angela Voss [07:29]

---

6. Leveraging Tools and Technology for Efficiency

Rob Demar and Angela Voss discuss various tools and technological advancements that enable marketers to create high-quality assets cost-effectively.

• Key Tools Mentioned:
  • Generative AI Tools: VO tools, Runway, 11 Labs, ChatGPT for creative generation.
  • Open-Source Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM): Meta’s Robin, Google's Lightweight for budget simulations.
  • Share of Search Tracking: Utilizing free tools like Google Trends to monitor brand visibility and compare against competitors.

Notable Quote:

"It's just the headlines... Everything from your VO to Runway to 11 labs to ChatGPT, just introducing new models that continue to write even better."
— Rob Demar [08:54]

---

7. Common Mistakes in Budget-Constrained Marketing

The hosts identify frequent pitfalls marketers encounter when operating with limited budgets and offer strategies to avoid them.

• Key Mistakes:
  • Hyper-Targeting: Narrowing audiences excessively can inflate CPMs and limit reach to potential future buyers.
  • Regressing to Least Expensive Channels: Focusing solely on cheap channels may undermine overall effectiveness and brand presence.
  • Over-Investing in Retargeting: Excessive retargeting can lead to diminishing returns after initial touches.
  • Neglecting High-Frequency Channels: Reducing investment in channels with high frequency can impair first impressions.

Notable Quotes:

"Every extra filter can potentially inflate CPM... blocks the theoretical 95% of category shoppers who will buy later."
— Angela Voss [17:25]

"Stopping your marketing budget to save money is like stopping your watch to save time."
— Rob Demar [21:18]

---

8. Innovative Marketing Hacks and Strategies

The team shares creative, cost-effective hacks to maximize marketing impact without stretching the budget.

• Synthetic Control CTV Testing:

  • Angela Voss [22:01]: Explains a method akin to geolift testing where machine learning models create statistical doppelgangers for precise measurement of CTV campaigns' impact.

• Earned Media Exploitation:

  • Rob Demar [23:52]: Highlights campaigns like Poo Pourri's "Girls Don't Poop," showcasing how humorous and bold earned media can generate significant attention without direct spending.

• Content Marketing via Podcasts:

  • Alena Jasper [25:17]: Suggests creating podcasts as a cost-effective way to engage audiences uniquely, citing examples like Away's travel podcasts.

Notable Quote:

"Earned media is akin to measured performance. Nobody goes, that was a great earned media campaign, but it earned a dollar."
— Rob Demar [25:15]

---

9. Interactive Segment: "Would You Rather - Marketing Budget Showdown Edition"

The episode features a playful yet insightful "Would You Rather" game tailored for CMOs dealing with budget constraints, prompting both hosts to defend their choices.

• Sample Questions:

  1. Evergreen TV Ads vs. Super Bowl Airing:

     • Consensus: Favor spreading the budget throughout the year using cost-effective media rather than a single high-cost Super Bowl slot.

  2. Reach Light Buyers vs. Repeat Exposure:

     • Preference: Targeting a broader audience with more impressions over time rather than a narrow focus with high frequency.

  3. Perfect Brand Tracking vs. Perfect Sales Data:

     • Choice: Prioritize sales data over brand tracking to sustain business operations.

  4. Big Campaigns vs. Consistent Creative Output:

     • Decision: Opt for consistent, always-on creative strategies to maintain brand presence.

  5. Boring but Trustworthy vs. Bold and Polarizing:

     • Varied Opinions: Depending on brand status and category dynamics, with an inclination towards consistency and recognizability.

  6. Debating Marketing Philosophies:

     • Arguments Against: Choosing to argue against established marketers like Bob Hoffman or Byron Sharp, reflecting on loyalty programs and purpose marketing.

Notable Quote:

"If you're budget strapped... this feels like a bad move."
— Angela Voss [26:56]

---

10. Conclusion and Final Thoughts

The hosts wrap up the episode by encouraging listeners to connect on LinkedIn, leave reviews, and continue building effective marketing strategies despite budget limitations.

Notable Quote:

"Go forth and build great marketing."
— Alena Jasper [32:52]

---

Key Takeaways:

• Balanced Spending: Allocating an appropriate mix between brand building and performance marketing can significantly enhance ROI, even with limited budgets.

• Channel Selection: Prioritize broad-reach, cost-effective channels over hyper-targeted, expensive ones to maximize impact.

• Leverage Technology: Utilize generative AI and open-source tools to create high-quality marketing assets cost-efficiently.

• Avoid Common Pitfalls: Steer clear of over-targeting, excessive retargeting, and neglecting high-frequency channels to maintain effective reach.

• Innovative Strategies: Embrace earned media, synthetic control testing, and content marketing (like podcasts) as low-cost, high-impact tactics.

• Consistent Presence: Maintain a steady creative output and avoid drastic cuts to the marketing budget to ensure sustained brand visibility and growth.

---

By integrating these strategies, marketers can navigate budget constraints effectively, ensuring their efforts contribute meaningfully to business growth and brand strengthening.

Transcript

[Angela Voss]

Cutting brand today is like skipping plant maintenance or something. You know, you save this quarter, but you face a much bigger bill later in a time that you might not want it then as well Marketing Architects.

[Alena Jasper]

Hello and welcome to the Marketing Architects, a research first podcast dedicated to answering your toughest marketing questions. I'm Alena Jasper, I run the marketing team here at Marketing Architects and I'm joined by my co hosts Angela Voss, the CEO of Marketing Architects, and Rob Demar is the chief product architect of Misfits and machines.

[Rob Demar]

Hello hello.

[Alena Jasper]

We're back with our thoughts on some recent marketing news. Always trying to root our opinions and data research and what drives business results Today we're actually answering a listener question that has come up a few times and it was recently re asked in our YouTube comments. So we thought, hey, let's dedicate an episode to it. And that question is how can I implement marketing effectiveness principles when I don't have a huge budget? So even if you are flushed with advertising cash, this episode still might give you some ideas for your marketing strategy this year. I'll kick us off, as I always do, with some research and I think I found a good article to sort of ground us before we jump into the discussion. It's from Daniel Long for the Australian and it's titled Brand and Performance Ads Create Multiplier Effect for Business Growth Marketers might assume that a small budget limits your ability to grow, but that's not necessarily true. How you spend may matter more than how much. This article talks about the recent work report the Multiplier Effect, which makes a case that businesses that silo brand and performance marketing or lean too heavily into performance are leaving growth on the table. So the data shows that when brands over invest in short term performance marketing alone, they can cut their ROI by 20 to 50%. But when they shift to a balanced strategy, investing 40 to 60% of their budget into brand while maintaining their performance efforts, ROI jumps by an average of 90% and in some cases doubles. And you don't need a massive budget to achieve this effect. What you do need is a discipline to split your spend wisely even if it's small, and you should integrate brand building into your plan. It's tempting to go all in on performance when budgets are tight, but the research suggests that even with limited funds, neglecting brand is a costly mistake. Alright, so I said earlier that how you spend your marketing dollars often matters more than how much you spend. And that's how we often see brands with massive budgets underperform and small budget brands make Big waves. So let's start here. I'm sure we've all seen brands grow effectively on limited budgets. So what's your favorite example and kind of what stood out about their approach?

[Angela Voss]

I'll go first. Ready? You guys gotta guess who it is.

[Rob Demar]

All right, do it.

[Angela Voss]

Our blades are effing great. Dollar Shave club.

[Rob Demar]

Dollar Shave club. Dollar Shave Club.

[Angela Voss]

Yeah. Michael Dubin walking past forklifts, employees in bear suits.

[Rob Demar]

Grandpapa had polio.

[Angela Voss]

Had one blade in polio. Yeah. Apparently that one day shoot cost about $4,500, which is less than some brands spend on craft services at a TV shoot, at a spot shoot. So they dropped this video on YouTube and received 12,000 Razor subscriptions in the first 48 hours. And I think the spot had a really clear value prop. And it did three things at once. Helped build their instant mi mental availability, earned them a mountain of free press and created a repeatable asset. People still quote that line. You guys know it. So many years later. And five years later, Unilever buys the company for a billion in cash. So with a budget smaller than most brands, Coffee fund, maybe they. They proved Byron Sharp's point that distinctiveness plus broad reach, even reach that's earned, can bend the growth curve dramatically.

[Rob Demar]

Yeah, they are. That's such a great, great story. There's so many good stories out there. Like your liquid death. They've obviously done a ton of great work. Another one that comes to mind is cards against humanity. We're not a huge like games family, but the car. Have you guys played Cards against humanity? It's been passed around our house quite a bit. And they literally sold bullkaka. Can I say that?

[Alena Jasper]

I don't know what that was? So. Sure.

[Rob Demar]

Bullshit. Bleep me out. I guess. They literally sold that on Black Friday. They earned a ton of viral attention. They've just really leaned against what everyone else has done in their category for very little money. In fact, they were actually crowdfunded. But they used all that to their advantage and are highly memorable as a result.

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah, they're a great example. I was thinking about this and one of my favorites is GoPro. They do a lot of user generated content. You can see them. They partner with snowboarders. You see these gorgeous shots and you can always kind of tell when it's a GoPro camera and red Bull does something similar. They partner with triathletes and endurance athletes. And you'll see like in triathlon sometimes pros will have their helmet just looks like a Red Bull can not the shape of A can. But it's so branded out and you just think about that seeing that all the time. So I think those brands do a good job of really connecting with people that would already be using their products and then just monetizing that. But let's talk about tactics. I wanted to discuss kind of what does a balanced, effective plan actually look like for someone who has that limited spend? So ang say a CMO comes to you and they've got a million dollars in an annual media budget, how would you start to think about that mix of brand versus performance?

[Angela Voss]

Yeah, I always go back to the research. So if we think about marketing effectiveness, empirical data shows us one big principle growth comes from adding new buyers. And you add new buyers by making the brand easy to notice and easy to buy right from day one. And I think this is a big debate as people go like, you know, marketing effectiveness principles are for bigger brands, they're for massive brand. A lot of the research has been done with larger brands. That doesn't necessarily mean that the principles and the effectiveness research doesn't hold true. So if we had a million dollars, how do we mental availability and harvest demand without starving either side? I would break the budget into three buckets just to keep it simple. That brand building reach maybe 55 to 60% of that budget. Putting the brand in front of as many category buyers as we can. Perhaps using broad channels, you could look at a remnant strategy or not, but I think efficiency is important. Ctv, National Streaming Audio Network radio, Linear tv. I would really hone in on a distinctive asset with all of those impressions that can target these category buyers. Second would be that performance kind of activation budget would be like 30 to 35%. So capturing demand, the brand work stirs up and the ideal there is that we're mopping up easy wins. So paid search, we all know what the performance side of the world looks like. I don't think you need to go into that. And then are you reserving some dollars for measurement and learning so proving payback fast, you know and tune the split each quarter so to speak. So share of search tracking, you could look at YouTube meta brand lift studies. There's open source MMM models so there are some that won't cost you any. But just making sure that if we're going to put dollars out there, we need a way to measure it. So let's reserve a little to ensure we can do that.

[Alena Jasper]

So Angie mentioned a couple channels there. Are there any specific channels that you think are maybe more forgiving or go further or the opposite? They're more punishing when you have a limited marketing budget.

[Angela Voss]

Pick channels where each extra dollar buys incremental reach over kind of fancier targeting methods. Streaming audio, host read podcasts, linear TV, fast TV, AVOD, CTV apps, broad YouTube, pre roll, even classic out of home. They really let you blanket a wide swath of category buyers for single digit to maybe low teen CPMs, depending on the channel that you're looking with. Hopefully if we're doing it smart, kind of minimal creative overhead. I think the money pits are in the precision tools, Hyper targeted Programmatic display or ctv. Other areas like a list influencers, maybe splashy event sponsorships, prime only network tv. All these carry really high entry fees and deliver far less reach for each dollar. So those would be the areas to look out for.

[Alena Jasper]

That's a good point. And some channels too have more of an impact on others. So that seems like that's a good way to get your bang for your buck. Like TV kind of rises all boats, so to speak. Well, and you mentioned creative and that can get really expensive for certain channels, which makes me think about like tools and technology that can help us do things like creative more efficiently. So Rob, wanted to start with you. What are some kind of tools or tech that you like right now that maybe marketers could use to get more out of their marketing investments?

[Rob Demar]

This is the greatest time in history for marketers to not have money just full stop. When you think about all of the tools that just get. I mean it's just the headlines. It's over and over. Everything from your VO to Runway to 11 labs to ChatGPT, just introducing new models that continue to write even better. It's like the cost is going to zero when it comes to producing amazing assets. And so marketers should really be. This is preaching to the choir, I know, but marketers should be leaning in as fast and as hard as they can on all of this. And that's not just for the generative tools as it relates to creative. This also relates to strategy, relates to deep research, synthetic audiences. In terms of pre testing, all of these costs are going away quite honestly. And so again, there's never been a better time for marketers to have small budgets.

[Alena Jasper]

Ange, what do you think any like tech you're particularly excited about?

[Angela Voss]

Just open source marketing, mix modeling I think is a good thing to consider. So Meta's Robin, Google's got lightweight that let any analyst with Python spin up a Bayesian mmm. And simulate kind of budget reallocations. So that would be one. Another one that shocks me at times is how few folks are looking at share of search within Google trends is free. Lesbinette's work shows that a rising share of branded queries is a quick proxy for rising share of voice and eventually, hopefully market share. So all you need is to get in the tool, download that data into a spreadsheet and get a sense of you versus your competitors, what's going on.

[Alena Jasper]

Those are great, especially at mmm Share search. I think too that the use of synthetic audiences is something that you should consider, like if you're using any traditional market research tools. John Lombardo and Peter Reinberg, they have a new podcast lab, Grown Marketing, I think it's called. And they were talking today about the complaints about synthetic audiences. Like, oh, it can't come with. Up, up with anything unique. It's like, well, they were saying the point of market research is to get to actually the consensus. Like, you wouldn't necessarily want some crazy insight to come out of market research. Like, part of the point is to figure out what is the average, like, what's the average customer thinking? So I thought that was a great point.

[Rob Demar]

An even deeper point which kind of blew my mind. I was talking with a friend who has a colleague at a major packaged goods company. They're like, well, how are you studying your audiences today? And they're like, we're actually not even studying the audiences. We're studying how AI is interacting with our product. And because they're realizing AI is going to be determining so many of the buying decisions in the future, and they're trying to better understand how to connect their brand with the AI, it's like, geez, that's one level deeper into the matrix.

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah. When AI is making your purchase decisions for you, it's like, not how do you please the consumer, but how do you please the AI? That's tough to think about. Cool. Well, Rob, what about, like, specifically creative? How should marketers think about that when their budgets are tight? Because that can become a huge expense depending on the channels you're investing in.

[Rob Demar]

We've all been there and have said, gosh, you know, we just don't have the budget. Right. I got this great idea, but we just don't have the budget. And then do you really have the idea? I think is you always have to ask yourself that question, even in good times. Right. There is no correlation between cost and creativity. I think that's a invented reality, but it's not reality. Right. It's just that the biggest ideas can be a word on a billboard. Right? Or it could be an amazingly crafted PR stunt or a brilliant TV commercial that's just brutally simple or complex, but done in a simple manner. Just production value by no means should be a restriction in times of war.

[Alena Jasper]

And Ange made a good point earlier too about if you are going to invest in creative, how do you make sure you have clear, distinctive assets so that any investment you are making, anything you're producing, it is delivering the most for your brand and it's recognized. What do we call it? Ang, like taking full credit of your commercials or any creative that you.

[Angela Voss]

Yeah, absolutely. When we think about spot length and things like that, like how do you get full credit if you're going to be on air for 30 seconds? Let's not wait until the last couple of seconds to be like, oh, that was for dollar Shave Club right from the very beginning. You're like, we're talking about razor blades.

[Rob Demar]

Right? And Dollar Shave Club was shot for like $4,000. You know, so seriously, like it was. It's crazy. And I think the flip side of it now, even with AI, is it's kind of calling out us creative folks. It's like, okay, you said you needed a dragon flying over a castle for this spot to be okay, you've got it now. Now is it in an amazing spot or not? Like it's, it's kind of put up or shut up when it comes to how big is your idea really?

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah, and getting full credit too. I know we always talk about in terms of tv, but accounts for anything. How hard is it to recognize a brand sometimes from digital ads and yeah, just getting full credit of anything that you do makes a lot of sense. Let's just be honest here. Sometimes the hardest part of investing in marketing is actually convincing internal stakeholders, convincing them advertising is worth it, especially when you're in these times when budgets are tight. So Ange, what advice do we have for when you're convincing a stakeholder, maybe like a CFO that investing in brand is a worthy both like short term and long term investment?

[Angela Voss]

Well, I think first, are we leading with gut or is there something that we can point to in terms of effectiveness? So something like work's multiplier effect. Study brands that rebalance from performance only to an integrated mix lift overall ROI by a median of 90% while overfunding pure performance cuts returns by 20 to 50%. So our dollar works almost twice as hard when part of it builds demand before we harvest it. You know, something like that is backed by data I think is helpful for a CFO they're smart folks, they keep us in line. So are we able to show a payback window that the P and L can feel? So share of search moves within weeks and has been shown to predict market share about six months ahead. Can we say we'll watch this weekly? If it's flat after 60 days, we reallocate, just not going in. Leading that CFO to believe we have to burn a couple million before we recognize what's going on. And then I think to quantifying the cost of inaction. IPA data on excess share of voice shows that every 10 point deficit in share of voice eventually erodes half a point of share. So cutting brand today is like skipping plant maintenance or something. You know, you save this quarter but you face a much bigger bill later in a time you know that you might not want it then as well.

[Alena Jasper]

I saw some cool LinkedIn data the other day about cutting brand spend and like the immediate impact it has, but also the longer you cut it, the longer it takes to build back to where you are too. It's not like you can just turn it back on and all those positive effects you were seeing come back to baseline. It's like sometimes it can take 9, 11 months a year for you to get back to those impacts you were feeling when you were always on. And even if you cut for like a month, it's going to take longer to build back.

[Angela Voss]

Yep.

[Alena Jasper]

Which I thought was interesting. Well, speaking of proving how these things are working, you mentioned like share of search earlier. Mmm. What are some other metrics that we recommend marketers track if they want to prove the value of their spend? Even at like lower level. Oh my goodness. Even at lower levels.

[Angela Voss]

I knew what you were saying. Um, yeah, beyond some of what I've already mentioned, branded search volume and CPC, the more people searching your own name and lower CPCs to win them shows brand demand is making performance cheaper. Obviously we should be looking at direct to site visits, incremental sales lift from geo uplift. Studies have been interesting. Just hard currency proof comparing units revenue margins in exposed versus holdout markets. There's a lot, I mean I think attention adjusted CPM is something that we can look at. Ensures you're you're paying for eyeballs that are actually on the screen, not just impressions. So there are a lot of ways to get access to full funnel thinking related to measurements without having to put a lot of dollars out there.

[Alena Jasper]

I thought one fun question we could talk about is, is there a mistake, just one that we see marketers making again and Again, when it comes to trying to do more with less budget. And you're talking a lot. But we'll start with, we'll start with. I know 4 edge.

[Angela Voss]

I mean mine is the obvious one. I think you probably are gonna both be like you took mine. It's hyper targeting to squeeze short term efficiency is what they think. You know, when budgets tighten, marketers instinctively slice their audiences even finer. Let's only hit the core, core, core, core of the core. Believing that fewer wasted impressions is kind of a thrifting way to work, but in practice it does the opposite. Every extra filter can potentially inflate CPM depending on how you're doing. It caps the reach to those same heavy buyers and blocks the theoretical 95% of category shoppers who will buy later that aren't on your list today.

[Rob Demar]

Yeah, I would say the idea of regressing to the least expensive channels, it's an obvious temptation to be able to show that spreadsheet to the CFO and go look at the money saved. But are you doing that at the obvious detriment of the effectiveness?

[Alena Jasper]

Rob, Mine is kind of connected to that because I was thinking when marketers cut, they typically go towards performance channels, which can make sense. However, when you're doing that, you're typically taking away channels like video out of home ones where you can really display your brand stand out. And I think when you get stuck in those bottom of the funnel channels, you can sometimes disappear into the sea of sameness where now you're just competing, maybe in paid search, competing on Facebook. And I also think that same sea of sameness, I would say it's all the same mistake too. Marketing teams can become risk averse and stand out less, try less new ideas. We talked about the importance of your distinctive assets, especially when you have a limited budget. So you wouldn't want to be forced into just doing what everybody else is doing, disappearing. All right, if we had to cut something, let's say you have to, you've got a plan, it's already lean, but you want to try to maintain effectiveness. What would we cut and then what would we protect at all costs?

[Angela Voss]

We tend to see that brands sometimes over invest in retargeting. A lot of the sales visits that you end up driving there would have happened anyway. So I'm just going to call it nth round retargeting. It doesn't mean that no retargeting is the advice, but after a couple of touches, we tend to see the return falls off a cliff. So that would probably be the one that I would cut after one or once or twice. What I would keep, I don't know. I mean, I've already talked about distinctive assets. I guess another that I would keep is any, any internal cost or external marketing that you have focused on new buyer penetration view. So whether that's in your CRM, your panel data, whatever it might be, growth lives in that first time buyer, light buyer, influencer buyer. So drop that lens. And I just get worried about optimizing to the heavy users too great of a percent degree.

[Rob Demar]

I am going to go with my gut on this one. I have no data to support this, which I know is your favorite thing to hear, Elena, but I just think there's a lot of dumb money being thrown at influencer campaigns, you know, and you just go like, I'm super happy for the influencer. It sounds amazing, but great for them. Yeah, absolutely. But is that dollars well spent? And I just, I don't think we have that kind of cushion to be able to be doing those kinds of experiments in terms of what to protect at all cost. I guess I'll just go back to the marketing budget, period. I just think it's so easy to, to just go after marketing in times of recession. And you know, as we've said earlier in the old quote of stopping your marketing budget to save money is like stopping your watch to save time. And I always like that one. And it's just, it's so easy to go after what seems like a squishy line item, but it is your lifeblood.

[Alena Jasper]

No, I think that's great, Rob. And yeah, and one of the thoughts I had was similar to yours, which is any marketing channel that has very high frequency. Because we know your first impression is gonna be your most efficient. We had Jordan on the podcast last week to talk about this. Your second impression is gonna have to work twice as hard as the first. So if you have any channels in general that you have an extremely high frequency within, that might be something important to look at. And then I also thought paid search, things like display here all the time stories, oh, I cut my paid search and my marketing results didn't change. And those could be things to at least test if you're pulling spend.

[Angela Voss]

Absolutely. Those are great ones.

[Alena Jasper]

All right, how about this? What is our favorite cost effective quote unquote marketing hack right now?

[Angela Voss]

Okay, I'll go first. You already talked about synthetic research, so I won't talk about that one. But what we call synthetic control CTV testing. And I think there's a lot of different names for this. So I'll just describe it a little bit similar to a classic geolift test where you black out ads in certain markets and expose other markets. Synthetic control CTV testing is that same mentality. So start by ingesting impression logs, sales, macro trends, basically every signal you can grab for the entire country. A machine learning model then builds a statistical doppelganger for each of these either markets zips and then a weighted blend of all of the unexposed zips that pre campaign behaved almost identically to the outcome that you care about. So because the control is synthetic, we've got a situation in which we've got control groups and exposed groups that look very much like each other. And because we're not doing it on a geo basis, on a DMA basis, we can hack the amount of money we can spend against those audiences. Either zip based or whatever your statistical model is going to kick out, but allows you to get a really tight controlled exposed results on a macro level across your business versus just looking at, you know, immediate visits to a site or something, app downloads, et cetera. It allows you to see especially for top of funnel marketing, how is that marketing impacting all of your channels in those controlled spaces? So super great way to get a sense of what marketing does in that space.

[Alena Jasper]

Synthetic controls are super cool and so cool that we can use it now for something like tv.

[Rob Demar]

God, that was a smart answer for a marketing hack. Mine's equally as smart. It's poop.

[Angela Voss]

Oh geez.

[Rob Demar]

No. Well, I talked to you guys earlier about the use of earned media when it came to cards against humanity and the bull poop. And I immediately when I was thinking of marketing hacks, I also went to the Poo Pourri and the Girls Don't Poop campaign. And I go, there's just something out earned media that when you think about a marketing hack is near and dear to everyone. And maybe it's near and dear to the seventh grader in me, but it is just going how do we lean into something that can truly garner attention? You'd think we did earned media at Marketing Architects given how much I bring it up. But I do, I do love the idea of how do you become famous without spending a dollar? And again, it forces the creatives to get in a room and go, okay, let's do this. But what are we going to do that's truly going to show results? I think that's maybe the other thing is we're a marketing effectiveness agency. We've always been a marketing effectiveness agency. And Earned media is akin to that, right? It is truly measured performance. Nobody goes, that was a great earned media campaign, but it earned a dollar. No one in the history of marketing would ever say that. Right? So it kind of. It's another one of those put your money where your mouth is or no money where your mouth is. I guess.

[Angela Voss]

Think bold, think fame first. I love it.

[Rob Demar]

Yeah.

[Alena Jasper]

Okay, so obviously, synthetic audiences. I was thinking that one too. We already mentioned it for consumer research. So one other thing I was thinking was content like a podcast. Podcast, they do take your time sometimes, your heart and soul, but they are cost effective and could allow you to reach your audience in a different way. I know that a lot of B2B brands do podcasts, but we've also talked about brands like away. They do travel podcasts. Just a way to reach an audience in a new way. And now there's all these different tools for editing your podcast, for releasing. It could be a fun way to connect with your audience in a different way and reach people that maybe aren't reachable through other channels. All right, to wrap us up here, I have a game. It's called would you rather marketing budget showdown edition. So I'm going to give you a few would you rather questions tailored to a CMO making marketing decisions with a limited budget. And you can both pick and defend your choice. Sounds good.

[Angela Voss]

Love it.

[Alena Jasper]

Okay, first one. Number one, would you rather run $8 million Evergreen on TV all year round or spend it all for one super bowl airing?

[Angela Voss]

Well, I got my answer.

[Rob Demar]

Well, I mean, yes, I think we have our answer on that one, but you always go first, Ange, So I'll just say it. I'll just say we're both thinking, of course you'd rather spread our money around all year long on really awesomely cost effective media intersections and not blow it all in the toilet bowl that is the Super Bowl.

[Angela Voss]

You're really going after the super bowl there. Not to say it doesn't ever make sense, but if you're doing it, hey.

[Rob Demar]

If you're only doing money to burn, I'm all money.

[Angela Voss]

If we're budget strapped, my goodness, this feels like a bad.

[Rob Demar]

Absolutely.

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah, that was an easy one. Okay, number two, would you rather reach 5 million light buyers once with an average ad over four weeks or reach 1 million buyers five times with a great ad over four weeks?

[Rob Demar]

A. I'm still trying to understand.

[Alena Jasper]

You're still trying to follow Rob's like.

[Angela Voss]

I need a piece of paper and a pencil.

[Rob Demar]

I need a diagram, but I'm Going to go with A. Because I normally like cheat and look at the person's paper next to me. So I'm looking at Angela's and she says a and I'm going to A. But I do. I get where she's going with that.

[Angela Voss]

Light buyers, low frequency.

[Rob Demar]

Absolutely.

[Angela Voss]

Wide and broad. Yes.

[Alena Jasper]

Okay. Would you rather have perfect brand tracking but no sales data or perfect sales data and no brand tracking?

[Angela Voss]

Oh, my goodness. Perfect brand tracking and no sales data. Well, I'm gonna go out of business if I don't have.

[Rob Demar]

Right. I want sales data.

[Angela Voss]

Yeah, yeah.

[Alena Jasper]

It's tough. It'd be tough without that to do.

[Angela Voss]

It would be. In fact, it would be. Yeah.

[Alena Jasper]

Would you rather launch a big campaign once every two years with stunning creative and broad reach, or run ongoing always on creative that's consistent but never quite remarkable?

[Angela Voss]

Oh, my goodness.

[Rob Demar]

Wow. Say that one again.

[Alena Jasper]

Would you rather launch a big campaign once every two years with stunning creative and broad reach, or run ongoing always on creative that's consistent but never quite remarkable?

[Angela Voss]

Is the stunning creative every two years consistent or no?

[Alena Jasper]

Is it.

[Rob Demar]

No spending all year round or these or. It's like tent poled, like big burst and then you go quiet.

[Alena Jasper]

It's a tent pole.

[Rob Demar]

Well, I'm going with the other one. I'm going with with more consistent.

[Angela Voss]

Yeah, consistency is super important.

[Alena Jasper]

Would you rather be seen as boring but trustworthy, consistent and familiar, or seen as bold and exciting but polarizing and risky?

[Rob Demar]

Oh, polarizing for sure.

[Angela Voss]

That's a good one. I mean, am I known?

[Rob Demar]

Yeah, you know, I'd rather be anything but boring. That what Steve Jobs said.

[Angela Voss]

Well, this is sort of. This is sort of the debate over distinctive versus differentiated. Do we need distinction? It can help, but more we need to be easy to remember, easy to buy.

[Alena Jasper]

I think a lot of famous brands might not be considered exciting. You know, they're. They're trustworthy, they're consistent, still successful.

[Rob Demar]

It depends upon how big you are in the category too, and how much you need to differentiate yourself.

[Angela Voss]

True.

[Alena Jasper]

Are you like a late brand or a new.

[Rob Demar]

I always like that answer. It depends.

[Angela Voss]

How's that makes you write all the time.

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah, it's a classic marketer's answer. All right. Would you rather make the case for purpose marketing against Bob Hoffman or argue in favor of loyalty programs and retention efforts against Byron Sharp?

[Angela Voss]

Oh, gosh, I'd have to go which way?

[Alena Jasper]

Do you like to be yelled at? Yes, exactly.

[Angela Voss]

I. Yeah, I think I probably go up against Bob Hoffman.

[Rob Demar]

I'd go up against Byron Sharp.

[Angela Voss]

Okay.

[Rob Demar]

And only because I. And I agree with what he's saying, and it was really good for me to, you know, process his perspectives on loyalty marketing. But I do really like my delta point card. And so I just feel you just.

[Alena Jasper]

Focus on in on that.

[Rob Demar]

I just feel like there's still a little something there.

[Angela Voss]

I do feel like you, Rob, disproportionately love loyalty programs than the average person.

[Rob Demar]

I like really good ones.

[Angela Voss]

You have just.

[Rob Demar]

And it's not even. It's not even the value they deliver. It is. It's like an emotional thing. Like, I like my fandango too. You know, I like my. I like.

[Angela Voss]

But you exploit it more as well. Like, I don't know if you're the worst customer or the best, but, like, you have a Mr. Car Wash, and don't you go more than 20 days a month?

[Rob Demar]

I bathe in it myself.

[Alena Jasper]

Oh, my God.

[Rob Demar]

I get my value. I walk through it, come in there with my towel, and I say, all right, Mr. Car Wash.

[Angela Voss]

So I don't know if that makes you like their best customer or their worst because I'm sure they're losing money on you.

[Alena Jasper]

As a kid, did you ever, like, open the window in the car wash? My brother used to do that all the time. He'd like, wait for the perfect moment screaming, okay, okay. For that one. I don't know. I'd be terrified of both of them. So I don't know. Yes, I think I'd rather argue against Bob Hoffman than Byron Sharp, to be honest. Okay, this last one is a ChatGPT one that I thought was so funny that ChatGPT came up with this.

[Angela Voss]

Okay.

[Alena Jasper]

Would you rather have to rewrite Byron Sharp's How Brands Grow as a children's book or attend an ayahuasca retreat with Mark Ritson and your brand?

[Rob Demar]

Oh, my gosh, that's hilarious.

[Alena Jasper]

Isn't that crazy?

[Rob Demar]

That is hilarious.

[Angela Voss]

Oh, man. Probably the retreat. That sounds amazing. You know, that'd be a good time. Although I think the world could use the children's version of how brands grow, so.

[Rob Demar]

Yeah, I guess I would go with that one too. As long as we can make it like a pop up book version, I think that'd be really fun. But barfing alongside Mark Ritson in the middle of a jungle does not sound like a good time to me.

[Alena Jasper]

Yeah, agreed. I think the children's book would be fun.

[Angela Voss]

Yeah.

[Alena Jasper]

Isn't that funny? I'm like, man, chatgpt, I don't know what you're thinking.

[Rob Demar]

It's on a little ayahuasca update.

[Alena Jasper]

Yep. All right, we'll wrap it up. That's it for this episode of the Marketing Architects. We'd like to thank Taylor de Los Reyes for producing the show. You can connect with us on LinkedIn. And if you like the podcast, please leave us a review. Now go forth and build great marketing We.

[Angela Voss]

I'm describing this wrong.

[Alena Jasper]

That's okay. I couldn't stop thinking about the word doppelganger after you said it. I love that word. I haven't heard that word in so long. Great. We're thinking of brand names right now, Rob. We should consider that true Marketing Architects.