Consider, for instance, how the brand gets a mention in the promos of the programme which works to its advantage though such ads are run at a higher cost than the others. “In any case, the premium is not all that much. And it has to be seen in relation to the value the brand gets,” says Krishnan.

The concept of branded programmes began when Zee channel was launched. Philips Top Ten, the first countdown show on the telly, was novelty both in terms of programme content and the idea of brand association. Besides the frequency of its commercials, the client gets the advantage of continued brand association in the viewers’ memory long after it (original sponsor) moves on. So lengthy was their association that even after Philips pulled out of countdown shows this year, viewers continued to refer to the show as Philips Top Ten. instead of Colgate Top Ten. Much to the latter’s advantage and to the misfortune of its new sponsors..

Remarks Patricia Virmani of Philips, India, “We branded Top Ten because we are basically connected with music. Music binds everybody and Hindi film songs are very popular with the youth. So, we thought it was the best way to promote the brand.” But why did they pull out? “We had established the equity and we wanted to move on,” she explains. Right now, Philips has picked up the naming rights of Out Of The Box on MTV.

Colgate has been left to devise a strategy to quickly wipe out the memory of Philips and to avoid picking up the tab for their predecessor’s ad campaign. What Colgate is counting on is that the popularity of the programme will still draw viewers and after a while, the appropriate mental switch will occur. After all, by branding a popular programme, the company can piggyback on the programme’s popularity.

MS Suku, senior media manager, Colgate-Palmolive India, elaborates, “Public memory is very short. Perhaps for sometime people will find it difficult to refer to the show as the

Colgate Top Ten but eventually it’ll happen.
fact, already people are begining to forget Philips and remember Colgate.”

According to Ashok Pandit of Filmi Chakkar, it is the vicious familiarity with regular props, such as VJs and anchors, that prevent the shift of association. “If the programme continues with the same anchors who have been anchoring it for four years, then it’s difficult for the viewers to identify the programme with any other name. But with Colgate Top Ten that’s not happened. Though Pankaj Kapoor and Satish Kaushik were anchoring just before Colgate took over it wasn’t for a very long time. Already my three-year-old son calls it the Colgate Top Ten.”

But Shrey Guleri, creative director, Bakeman’s Ooh La La, disagrees with this theory. Says he, “When you brand a programme the brand becomes a part of the title. That’s why if the brand pulls out mid-way the title loses its identity. To avoid that we have ensured that Ek Do Teen has a three years contract with Rin and Bakeman’s Ooh La La right now has been branded for five years. At the end of the contract we will discontinue the shows.” That could probably be because the companies are underwriting the cost of producing both these shows.

That way even the brand is assured of being identified with that programme forever. Which is after all, what the companies are aiming for and for which they pay a premium. Doordarshan charges one-and-a-half times over the telecast fee for naming rights while Zee charges a 25 per cent premium over the applicable rate for a minimum commitment of 26 weeks. In return, the brand gets a fixed amount of FCT for its spots. In short, the advertiser gets a commitment for a time period at a higher cost.

In most cases, it’s the channel that picks up programmes that are high on TRPs and approaches potential advertisers who also take into account the concept, content and the profile of the programme. Debashish of Hindustan Lever which has branded Antakshari as Close-Up Antakshari, explains, “Close-Up is a toothpaste brand for young Indians. It’s positioning is such that it gives you confidence in social situations. Antakshari is a social team game and the brand fits in perfectly.”

In fact, complementing the brand with the programme profile is a vital issue. Sujatha, senior media planner who handles the Marico products at Trikaya Grey, says that she will not brand horror shows or programmes with serious issues as it does not go with the product. Sainath Iyer, vice president, Zee, adds in a lighter vein, “Tara cannot be accounted by Krack. Krack Tara sounds funny. One has to be careful about such details while approaching advertisers or selecting programmes for branding.”

Sometimes, branding a programme that’s technically or qualitatively poor can also adversely may affect the brand’s popularity.

When a new programme is branded, advertisers are even more scrupulous. They consider the target audience, the time-slot, the channel it’s to be telecast on, the content and programme profile, the cost of branding and the potential popularity. In such cases the advertisers make a “judgement call” according to Krishnan. While deciding on a new programme “the inclination is towards film-based programmes,” says Sujatha who has branded Premier on Sony with Parachute.

Game-shows are a hot favourite for naming rights as far as channels are concerned. “The advertiser gets ample scope to display his brand," points out Iyer. Interestingly, although mythologicals are high on the popularity charts, they are not branded. Probably because producers prefer raking in as much money as possible by roping in more sponsors rather than have one company brand the money spinner for a fixed amount. Also, viewers might object to associating the mythological with a soap or a toothpaste. Imagine calling Ramayan, Lux Ramayan!

According to a source, Doordarshan is not very keen on promoting branded programmes because the advertiser will get enormous mileage out of DD’s massive reach. DD charges almost double the telecast fee for a branded programme. On the other hand satellite channels like Sony, Zee and STAR Plus carry out a lot of negotiations offering cost-effective package deals. However, all the channels claim that they have a proper rate card which in all probability is just for public consumption. Says Sujatha, “Branding a programme on Sony is cheaper compared to Zee.” And according to Krishnan, “Branding a programme on Doordarshan is economically more viable because it has an enormous reach and if you consider the cost vis-a-vis the reach DD turns out to be more cost-effective.”

Whichever channel a branded programme is aired on, one thing is for sure, the brand gets enormous reach/recall value. As Shrey Guleri puts it they get a retail outlet. A classic example of this is Bakemans. A year ago it was a little known brand. It was with Sony’s Mahayagya that the brand started getting noticed. And by the time it was associated with Ooh La La at the end of the year it had firmly established itself in the consumer psyche, something which the company couldn’t have dreamt of achieving if it had chosen to follow the time-worn routes of billboards, print advertising, radio and TV run-of-the mill ads.

Chaya R.B