I am one of the managers from ABC Company Illinois branch. Am writing this letter in regard to the advertisement of the launching of a spring campaign for your outdoor equipment which is scheduled to take place in May and June this year.
From the past performance of this popular radio station which we contracted to help in popularizing this campaign, the rating from the audiences has never been higher than 60 which is a good indication that your campaign will fetch the same rating. In reference to the past performance of the new radio presenter who has been scheduled to host the station by the month of May and June, the rating does not indicate that your campaign ads will have the rating as you anticipated. According to the last performance though not in connection to the service you want to be provided with, the rating has been up to 50 meaning that your advertisement ads will not have 50+.
Based on the reputation which our company has earned from you, it will be unfair to fail in getting results which will match or exceed the advertisement rating which you want. This advertising campaign is part of your means that should act as groundbreaking by covering more target customers in the market. In addition, you have committed a lot of resources to this campaign that you will not accept it to go waste by just earning you less rating.
My intention to write this letter to you is not limited to the creation of discouragement ground to airing your advertisement campaign using our popular radio station. My real focus here is to create an insight into having a consolidated understanding of what is likely to be realized after the advertisement has been made before the actual operation is put into action. Again am not underestimating the performance of the new radio presenter who will be airing by May and June. The new radio presenter has recorded impressive performance in other advertisements he has been involved in but there are possibilities that he will not attain the cut off which you are expecting from the audience.
Based on the last performance report of this new presenter, your ads are assured to earn up to 50 rating which are below your expectations. Going ahead with our first plan it will mean that there will need to incorporate another additional campaign which will emphasize the attraction from the market. This, therefore, will need your organization to schedule another similar or different campaign and this may affect your strategic budget plan for this year and this has higher chances to hit back on your profitability levels.
Conclusion
Considering all the indications above, we have two options that we will need to examine however the decision will be influenced by the possible impacts. The first option is that we reschedule the campaign date. The other is that you can give a go ahead while keeping in mind that the rating may be lower than what you expected. Maintaining the campaign to operationalize as per the previous plan that is to take place in the month of May and June, it will call for another customer mobilization immediately thereafter. Either of these options are still advantageous but it will depend on your financial plan for this financial year. Thanks in advance.
Yours sincerely (Name)
Account manager-Illinois branch
Cite this page
Advice to Ads Rating for May and June Campaign Letter Paper Example. (2022, Aug 18). Retrieved from https://proessays.net/essays/advice-to-ads-rating-for-may-and-june-campaign-letter-paper-example
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal:
- The Ronald McDonald Charity House - Paper Example
- Modernist and Neo-Modernist Organization Theory Paper Example
- Pfizer Current Requirements for Marketing Paper Example
- Cascade Camping Advertisement Ratings - Letter Example
- Essay Sample on IKEA: Strategies for a Low-Priced, Quality Supply Chain
- Preventive Maint.: Minimizing Asset Failure, Enhancing Performance - Essay Sample
- Essay Example on Global Business: Achieving Consistency with IFRS