|
I think there is also the developement of the entire concept of product placement and it's inherent value to consider. ngdawg mentioned a good older example of 'sponsorship' which I think was probably the predecessor to today's product placement agreements.
Seeing Coke cans, or Reese's Pieces in films isn't new, but the motivations behind the placements are much more organized. Many older product placements were done because a director/actor simply liked a prduct or, in some cases, it was probably what was on hand for the set props.
Today's product placement agreements not only lock-in the products, they lock-out others. In many cases, (like the Volkswagons mentioned before) the manufacturor wants to up the associative stock of their product by attaching it to the popular, oft-mimicked, hollywood scene. Why would anyone would invest 200 million into this type of agreement if there weren't concrete evidence of the associative effects that media has on our buying habits?
I seem to remember that BMW motorcycle sales nearly tripled for a time after their R1200C Cruiser was featured on the then-current Bond Film. BMW has been making motorcycles since the 1930's and a single prominent product placement in a popular movie had a huge impact on their sales. Kind of powerful...isn't it?
|