Earlier this week I wrote about a brand so profitable it helped fund advertising for the rest of its portfolio, while nobody advertised the brand itself. Its brand equity was fading, and with it, the money that funded everything else.
Here's how its comeback was actually made.
The first plan was a TV spot: three shoot days at three locations far apart, a top director and union talent.
The production budget was more than three times the media budget. Most of the money would go into making the spot, and very little into putting it in front of people. And at the end, the client would get one spot and a few cutdowns.
The client liked the idea but couldn't make the business case work, so they looked for a different approach.
My team got the work. The brief was to keep the framework of the idea, but give the campaign more longevity and more business impact. So I sat down with the creatives and rebuilt the plan.
We found a version of the idea where all three locations were close together. That cut the time spent on company moves between locations, which left more time for shooting. Three days became one.
And since the cast was already booked and the sets were already built, we added a second unit and a stills team. While the main crew set up the next scene, they shot social content and photography on the set we'd just wrapped.
None of this is rocket science for a producer. It's Production 101.
Instead of one spot and a few cutdowns, the client got 200 pieces of content and an entire ecosystem to work with: TV spots, cutdowns, social assets, stills, and versions for streaming and pre-roll.
The money saved went back into media, with a proper ratio of working to non-working spend.
The campaign had legs. It helped reinvent the brand and turned its sales around for the first time in decades.
When I look at a marketing operation, I put three things side by side: what you spend, what you make, and what it actually does for the business.
In this case, the original plan put most of the budget into making one piece, and left too little to run it. The rebuilt plan made far more with the same money, and put more of it in front of people.
Sometimes the idea really does need three days and a bigger budget. Often it doesn't. With all the production approaches available now, the plan can be as creative and as custom as the work needs, built around the client's budget and the media behind it.
For agencies: partners who bring that level of thinking build deep trust with their clients.
For brands: you should be demanding it from your partners.
The fix wasn't a bigger budget. It was a better plan for the budget they had.
Plan for it before the shoot. Choose locations close together to reduce time lost to company moves, and add a second unit or stills team to capture social content and photography on sets that are already built, with talent that is already booked.
A second unit is a smaller crew that shoots alongside the main crew. While the main unit sets up the next scene, the second unit can film additional material, such as social content, on a set that's already lit and built.
There's no fixed rule, but most of the money usually belongs in media, so the work is actually seen. If production costs several times more than the media behind it, the plan is worth revisiting.
Cut the time between setups rather than the time spent shooting. Grouping locations, planning company moves and building a detailed schedule in advance can leave more time for the camera, not less.
No. Some ideas need multiple days and a larger budget. Many don't. The right plan depends on the idea, the business goals and the media budget behind it.