So I have been reading about Recency and am wondering if Ephron re-packaged what we already assumeâ€¦ Isnâ€™t the core principle of Recency really about buying based on weekly numbers instead of the four weeks that is the industry standard? Ephron himself says â€œThe exposure that triggers a response is not the first exposure, but the most recent of a series of exposures.â€ So frequency is still obviously important.
I use Ostrowâ€™s model to generate an effective frequency per four weeks and this typically works out to less than a frequency of three, which averages a frequency of 0.50-0.75 per week. As I see it, the application of Recency is really about setting the effective frequency in a logical way, i.e. using Ostrowâ€™s method, instead of randomly setting at 3+, then maximizing reach. What am I missing?
The essence of Recency, or “the most effective impression is the most recent impression” is about advertising being there when a purchase decision is made.
Chasing a 3+ effective reach often leads you to flighting so that when you are active, your plan delivers your reach goal at that 3+ level, but you must have a 4 week on, 4 week hiatus flighting pattern, for example.
Recency says you have missed all the purchase decisions made in the hiatuses.
Recency says a lower, but constant, level is more effective unless there is very strong seasonality or otherwise limited selling windows.
Your interpretation of Ostrow may also be off. Ostrow’s model is a way of setting the effective reach level, e.g. 3+ or 4+, etc. You seem to be thinking of average frequency, which can’t really be divided by # of weeks (nor can effective reach, for that matter).
And of course, frequency can never be less than 1. Effective reach is a focus on persons reached at least “X” times. Ordinary R&F is using the average number of time ALL the persons reached are exposed.