A recent article by Advertising Age reports on the usage of mobile during the Superbowl to drive site visits for products advertised during the game. The article suggests that people used their mobile devices, phones and tablets to visit the websites of the brands advertised.
Here is the link to the article and my comment, which questions the method.
The article suggests that website visits to Superbowl advertiser sites, but is that the case? The charts indicate that total website visits increased, not visits to specific advertisers. Big difference. Could everyone have been on Twitter?
If Superbowl ads do drive direct site visits to those advertisers a company could easily calculate the ROI of a $4 million Superbowl ad (not counting production costs) and make a better decision on whether to make the big game purchase. Of course, this only works for brands that can monetize site visits or estimate the value of a visitor. This does not apply to some advertisers such as Pepsi or Doritos, since purchase is driven by in-store factors, but could be important to GM or GoDaddy.
So, is the Superbowl worth the expense for your brand?