In this morning’s post ('Of the Bandh and the Peoplemeter'), I’ve obviously failed miserably in articulating my thoughts – hence the need for another one.
I have no issues with the methodology of the research or the quality of work that TAM churns out.
I do have issues with the industry being unable to fund more meters.
For example, there are any number of towns which are out of the purview of TAM which have grown exponentially since Peoplemeters were introduced.
A simple example would be Gurgaon. Another would be Noida. A third would be the entire area beyond Aundh, the limit of Pune.
These are areas with new populations, with purchasing power that moves products and services off shelves.
All of whom need to be measured.
I’m sure Gurgaon and Noida are being measured to some extent, but I’m reasonably certain Wakad and Hinjewadi are not.
And TAM cannot measure them unless new meters are funded.
That’s the crux of my gripe: that more meters are required in more cities (and towns and suburbs) for marketers to be targeting efficiently.
TAM can carry on what they’re doing, and doing well, but that’s it – unless more money is made available to them.
And if more and more towns and growing populations are outside of the ambit of TAM measurement, the relevance of the data that is available decreases in its importance and reliability. That makes the issue of funding the research far more pressing than the urgency that media houses, media agencies and marketers seem to decide that it is.
