1. Direct Marketing
Launch Plan
Presented to:
June 7, 2012 1

2. Agenda
 Background and Objectives
 Online Insurance Marketplace
‒ Competitive Landscape
 Key Considerations
‒ Target Insights
 Approach to Market
‒ Media Overview
‒ Creative Overview
‒ Data and Analytics Overview
 Next Steps
2

3. Background
We all agree that:
 Integrating new Direct Response media channels will lead to a successful
launch of 1800 Life Insurance
 Key performance metrics (CPQRF and CPARF) have been consistently
weakening over the past 24 months
 In conjunction with weakening performance, media spend and monthly
lead volume has also been in decline
3

4. Business Objectives
 Primary Objective:
̵ Introduce new media channels to launch 1800 Life Insurance.com to
drive direct term life insurance sales in US market
 Secondary Objective:
̵ Create brand awareness in support of brand/product launch
 Learning Objectives:
̵ Identify optimal mix for driving cost-effective sales at scale
̵ Increase overall lead volume
̵ Address Agent Attrition issue
4

5. Online Insurance Marketplace
Overview
5

6. Online Life Insurance Marketplace
Life Insurance Market:
Annual DRTV and Digital Advertising
 Insurance companies spent over
$18 million for DRTV advertising
Spend over the 2011 Calendar Year
 Insurance companies spent over
$10 million for online advertising
over the 2011 Calendar Year
 Select Quote leads the DRTV
category making up approximately
70% of the spend
 AccuQuote leads the Digital
category making up approximately
95% of the spend
Source: Kantar Media
6

7. Competitive Landscape
Established in
1985, the company pioneered the
direct marketing of Term Life
Insurance. Today Select Quote
claims to be America’s #1 Term Life
sales agency.
Founded in Since its
1995, Matrix Direct offers an inception in 1986, AccuQuote has
excellent selection of personalized established a leading position in the
life insurance quotes from highly- market. AccuQuote sells a variety
rated life insurance companies. of types of life insurance policies, as
well as selected annuities.
7

8. Competitive Landscape
Media Type Spend*
SelectQuote:
Broadcast
Radio
$4,249,500
$783,400
 Direct Response Ads:
– Offer:
Online $48,800
– Free insurance quote
Total Advertising Spend $5,081,700 – CTA:
* Spend is calculated from October 2011 – March 2012 – Easy to Understand
– Clearly Visible in Ad
– Not always a click through, sometimes
a phone number
 Ads emphasize:
– Need to protect family’s future
– Different stages of life
– Just Married
– New Baby
– New House
– Raise
– Lose your job
Source: Kantar Media
8

9. Competitive Landscape
AccuQuote:
 Direct Response Ads:
– Offer:
– 70% in savings
– Free quote
– Prominent CTA:
– Short and consistent
– Easy to Understand
– Clearly Visible in Ad
 Ads place a strong emphasis on
the need to protect your loved
ones in your absence
Media Type Spend*
Online $5,441,200
Print $325,200
Broadcast $295,700
Total Advertising Spend $6,062,100
* Spend is calculated from October 2011 – March 2012
Source: Kantar Media
9

10. Competitive Landscape
Matrix Direct:
 Direct Response Ads:
– Offer:
– 70% in savings
– Free quote
– Prominent CTA:
– Short
– Easy to Understand
– Clearly Visible in Ad
 Ads place a strong emphasis on
the need to protect your family’s
future
Media Type Spend*
Broadcast $1,007,800
Radio $173,300
Online $15,800
Total Advertising Spend $1,196,900
* Spend is calculated from October 2011 – March 2012
Source: Kantar Media
10

11. Key Considerations
Target Insight
11

12. One target, four distinct personas
Jared, 37 Diane, 47 Brian, 31 & Kim, 29 Charles, 52 & Maria, 50
 Minneapolis  City Suburb  Colorado Springs, CO  Austin, TX
 Married  Independent  Young Couple  Teenage Children
 Two young kids  Career Minded  Newborn  Real Estate Equity
 Professional  Commuter  Starter home  Second Generation
 Wife is homemaker  One Adult Child  Dual incomes  Upscale Dual Income
 Sports Family  Multi-generational Home
12

13. Commonalities are Identified
Charles (52) & Maria (50) Jared (37)
Diane (47)
Brian (31) & Kim (29)
13

14. Cross-channel
Communication is Considered
Following our prospect throughout their Day
Getting Dressed
Media: TV, Radio, Smartphone
AM
Commute
Media: Radio, Billboards, Transit Posters, Newspapers
Smartphone, iPad
Lunch
Media: Email, Web Browsing, Smartphone
Mail
PM
Media: TV, Magazines, Catalogs
Home
Media: TV, iPad, Smartphone
14

15. Approach to Market
Media Strategy
15

16. Optimizing Traditional Marketplaces…
Media Horizons’ long standing relationships with our media partners affords our clients
access to premium content and custom solutions at deeply discounted rates
 Up to 75% off published rate cards
 Premium media properties purchased at direct response rates
 “First look” access to new opportunities
 Custom solutions for “360” integration in cross-platform publications
 Maximize impressions with minimum investment
16

17. …in Tandem with Dynamic Marketplaces
Engines that learn over time where new consumers can be found
algorithmically and value impressions accordingly in a real-time bidding
environment
http://www.lumapartners.com/resource-center/lumascapes-2/
17

18. Moving Toward an Optimal Media Mix
 Strategy begins with a 2 week Phase I and rolls out over phases
 Goal: Create a cross-platform infrastructure for driving incremental orders
at scale
Week 1-2
Phase I
• Benchmark strategic
Stabilize & Optimize
and diagnostic +Week 3
measures
• Apply Phase I media tactics
Test and Learn
• Establish a
performance baseline to remainder of budget +Week 5
• Apply DR best • Eliminate wasteful inventory • Add/subtract channels, partners,
practices and heavy up in top price models DR
performing placements
Platform
• Apply operational • Leverage triggered/rules-based
best practices • Roll-out creative best messaging
practices (e.g. dynamic • Programs at maximum
creative) • Gain visibility into optimal media mix potential and scale
• Direct Customer Database
CRM initiatives
Phase I PHASE II PHASE III PHASE IV
18

19. Recommended 2013 Brand Launch Plan
Channel January February March April May June July - December
Paid Search
Spend $125,000 $100,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000
Cost Per Lead $110 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105
Leads 1,136 952 857 857 857 857
Digital Marketing
Spend $62,500 $75,000 $105,000 $105,000 $137,515 $172,000 Continually optimize mix to maximize performance
Cost Per Lead $95 $95 $85 $85 $85 $85 across all channels. As budget grows, possibly
Leads 658 789 1,235 1,235 1,618 2,024 incorporate DR Radio and DR Print
DRTV
Spend $62,500 $75,000 $90,000 $105,000 $122,500 $140,000
Cost Per Lead $125 $105 $100 $100 $100 $100
Leads 500 714 900 1,050 1,225 1,400
Total Budget Spend: $250,000 $250,000 $300,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 Continue to SCALE SPEND as results improve
Total Cost Per Lead: $108.97 $101.79 $100.25 $95.47 $94.60 $93.44 While DECRESING Cost Per Lead
Total Leads: 2,294 2,456 2,992 3,142 3,700 4,281 And INCREASING number of Leads
Total Spend Paid Search Only: $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000
Total Cost Per Lead Paid Search Only: $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110
Total Leads Paid Search Only 2,273 2,273 2,273 2,273 2,273 2,273
Difference Spend: $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000
Difference Cost Per Lead: -$1.03 -$8.21 -$9.75 -$14.53 -$15.40 -$16.56 This is a WINNING Scenario
Difference Leads: 22 183 720 870 1,427 2,008
Note: JFM scenario assumes no incremental budget to launch new channels
Would need to address natural Agent Attrition issue prior to ramping up spend

20. MHI Creative Overview
The Media Horizons design team concepts creative with direct response
principals in mind, incorporating best practices for eliciting response from
our clients’ target audiences
All new creative development projects include:
- Presentation of two concepts
- Three rounds of revisions on one selected concept
- Proofreading
- Coding (digital)
- Final file preparation and release to printer/publication (print)
 Rates do not include purchase of rights-managed talent, audio, artwork or photography
20

21. Brand Collateral Rate Card
Logo/Brand Identity Development
Strategic Brief: 5 Hours $975
Project Management: 20 Hours $2,250
Creative Development: 20 Hours $4,500
Graphics Production/Illustration: 16 Hours $2,000
Grand Total Logo Development: $9,725
DRTV Rate Card
Short Form Creative Development (:60 and :30 spots)
Creative Brief/Strategy Development: 10 Hours $2,000
Project Management: 40 Hours $4,500
Creative Development: 50 Hours $11,500
Producer (Pre-Production): 5 Hours $575
Grand Total SF Creative Development: $18,575
Short Form Creative Production (:60 and :30 spots)
TBD Based on Chosen Creative Concept: $85,000 - $150,000
21

22. Digital Rate Card
Flash Banners Email
Concept, client revisions and animated back up GIFS Copywriting, design, client revisions and coding
$1,800 per concept (HTML and text)
$2,000 per set (300 x 250, 160 x 600, and 728 x 90 units)
$175 for each resize thereafter
Landing Pages
Rich Media Copywriting, design, client revisions and coding.
Does not include form functionality
Created based on approved flash concept in one size
$2,800 per page
Starting at $2,500 per concept depending on functionality
Functionality menu: Revisions
- Product carousel General revisions to copy and/or artwork not requiring
- Video layout/format changes
- Social sharing (Facebook, Twitter, forward to a friend)
- Polling $175 per banner
- File download (coupon, PDF) $175 per email
- Data capture $175 per landing page
- Alerts (text, email price drop alerts)
- Calendar reminders
Examples include:
- Dynamic feeds (store locator, product selector)
- Promo code update
- Expandable (expands beyond the dimensions of the banner
- Price change
space upon user interaction)
- Call to action change
- Overlay (appears to “float” over web page content on a
- Product shot update
transparent background layer)
22

23. Pilot Approach: Digital
Strategies
 Intelligently target users who are in-market for term insurance
 Leverage data from trusted sources to connect ads with primary targets as
they surf the internet, creating targeted reach at direct response rates
 Identify incremental audience segments that look and behave like original
target audience defined by retargeting and/or 3rd party data sources
23

24. Pilot Approach: Digital (cont.)
Tactics
 Modeling & Targeting:
̵ Build lookalike models from existing High Value Customers to determine selects for online targeting in display, email and
lead-generation:
 Race/Ethnicity
 Profession
 Age
 Dwelling Type
 Education Level
 Credit Forecasting
 # of Children in HH
 Life stage: New Mortgage, New Parent, Newly Married, Recently Divorces
̵ Utilize abandoner and search retargeting
̵ Intersect users who have demonstrated an interest in specific product categories as measured by user’s online browsing,
search activity, and purchase activity (including activity at 1-800-Insurance.com)*
̵ Secure pay for performance media (where available)
̵ Utilize Dynamic creative to customize the conversation for a diverse target set
 Buying & Optimization:
̵ Predictive and real-time bidding: algorithmically optimizes audience design, budgets and bid pricing in real-time
̵ Dynamic optimization: Use of conversion, exclusion and retargeting pixels for immediate and on-going campaign
optimization based on a deduped order count*
*Assumes pixels can be dropped. 30 day view-through / click-through window recommended
24

25. Phase I Approach: SEM
Strategies
 Efficiently and effectively pace campaign spend over the course of the month
– Refine spend via a day-parting analysis
– Determine optimal use of budget
 Expand top-performing components while working to improve or eliminate
under-performing segments
 In addition to Google and Bing, PPC campaign can incorporate Facebook,
Yelp and other venues
 Maximize Search results through coordination with other marketing efforts
(digital and traditional)
 Ensure effective mobile campaign component with dedicated account and
budget
25

26. Phase I Approach: SEM (cont.)
Testing & Reporting:
 Test segmenting program spend via top-performing geographies and
markets
 Ongoing testing including A/B, ad copy, landing page
– Work with web designer to ensure landing pages are optimized for conversion
 Consider test campaigns in Spanish, Mandarin or other languages
 Content Targeting Test
– Placement could include sites catering to new parents, retirement planning, etc.
 Reporting:
– Get Call Center data to help monitor campaign success
– Consider implementation of Google Analytics
26

27. Phase I Approach: Broadcast
Competitive Analysis:
 Based on industry competitive research, Select Quote had control of the
advertising space for 2011, spending nearly 4 times the amount the next
competitor, Matrix Direct. Combined, the category spent more than $18
million in SF DRTV in 2011 for a placement of more than 25,000 spots.
 More than 90% of the spend focused on a :60 creative length spot, with the
balance split between :30’s and :120’s.
 The total category spend for 2011was split across Cable TV, Spot TV and
Syndication, with Cable TV accounting for 88% of the total spend.
 Full analysis completed, comparing the following categories for each
advertiser:
‒ Top 10 stations, based on frequency of air
‒ Local broadcast market selection
‒ Breakdown by daypart (cable & spot)
‒ Total units and airings by daypart
27

28. Phase I Approach: Broadcast
Approach to Market:
 Utilize :60 creative length spot for launch (with some testing of a :30 in
phase 2 of plan)
 Focus majority of spend on Cable TV category, targeting combination of
stations and markets with successful competitive usage but also testing into
niche “look-alike” stations and markets based on demographic profile of
current usage.
 Utilize competitive research to also do a deep-dive on creative executions of
all competitive ads during creative development process
 Phase 1 plan includes initial test flight of weeks 1 and 2, followed by initial
optimization in weeks 3 and 4. Full optimization of plan achieved by week 7
28

29. Approach to Market
Analytics & Attribution Strategy
29

30. Measurement Tools
 Proprietary HorizonView reporting and analytics system
̵ Order attribution
̵ Digital tracking
̵ Model development
̵ Lifetime Customer Value analysis (LTV) and CRM
̵ Mail delivery tracking
̵ Call center lead scoring and performance analysis
̵ Call center & financial forecasting
30

31. Measuring
Cross-Channel Convergence
 Challenge: channel attribution is
necessary but doesn’t work for
optimization. “The customer is channel
agnostic 1.”
 Risk: optimizing out of “contributing”
media exposures prior to a conversion
can adversely impact sales volume
 Solution: evolving attribution
methodology to include “assist
conversions” or fractional cross-channel
attribution
Source: Visual adaption of Impact Radius chart, October 2011
http://www.impactradius.com/blog/insight/marketing-challenges-in-2012-3-truly-integrating-online-and-offline-media.html
31

32. Appendix A:
Competitive Landscape
32

33. External Pressures:
Insurance Industry
MetLife Northwestern New York Life
ING Prudential
Source: Kantar Media
33

34. Life Insurance Marketplace
In 2011, life insurance sales reached the highest reported growth margins in
the past 30 years.
Other Notable Trends:
Mean Life Insurance Coverage*
 2008 financial crisis caused a large
$180,000 decline in life insurance sales
$160,000
 In 2010, insured individuals owned
$140,000 on average $154,000 of total life
$120,000 insurance coverage.
$100,000 Any**
 In 2010, the average amount of
$80,000 Individual*** individual insurance coverage
$60,000 Group decreased by two times that of group
$40,000 coverage – $12,0000 vs. $6,0000
$20,000
$-
1992 1998 2004 2010
* Coverage is in 2010 dollars.
** “Any” includes individual, group and service members’ coverage (SGLI/VGLI)
*** Includes life insurance sold face-to-face and through direct means.
Sources: PR Web & ORC International
34

35. Trends in the Life Insurance
Marketplace
 Shift from term to permanent insurance among insured adults – when a
period of a term policy ends people are less likely to extend/renew the
coverage
– Single men and women, husbands and wives are more likely to rely on permanent
insurance as their only individual life insurance
– Almost 2 in 3 insured adults have some permanent insurance as part of their individual life
portfolios
 Adults carry enough insurance to replace their personal incomes for an
average of 3.6 years
– High-income adults carry the most life insurance in terms of the lengths of time they can
replace their personal incomes
– Men with personal incomes of over $100,000 can replace their incomes for the longest
time
– Middle-income women with personal incomes of $50,000 to $99,999 carry the smallest
amounts of life insurance in relation to their personal incomes
 In 2010, only 1 in 10 insured adults owned both permanent and term
insurance
35

36. Customer Adoption
Recent shift among insured adults from buying term life insurance to
permanent life insurance; however term still represents 65% of coverage
Types of Individual Life Insurance (Insureds)
Single*
Total Adults Men Women Husbands Wives Single* Men
Women
2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010
Permanent Only 44% 53% 42% 52% 45% 54% 41% 49% 45% 52% 46% 68% 42% 70%
Term Only 37% 37% 37% 36% 37% 37% 35% 38% 37% 39% 40% 23% 41% 25%
Both 19% 10% 21% 12% 18% 9% 24% 13% 18% 9% 14% 9% 17% 5%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Any Permanent 63% 64% 63% 64% 63% 63% 65% 62% 63% 62% 60% 77% 59% 75%
Any Term 56% 47% 58% 48% 55% 46% 59% 51% 55% 48% 54% 32% 58% 30%
Other Notable Trends:
 Term life insurance sales trending down  Majority of term insurance purchased by 25 – 44
year olds
 Low rates for younger people, much higher rates for
 Sales have increased in the 55+ age group
older people
Source: ORC International & LIMRA Research
36

37. Competitive Landscape
2010 Top 10 Insurance Companies: 2010 Top 10 Insurance Companies:
Term Life Issued ($ 000s) Term Life in Force ($ 000s)
2010 Rank Company/Group Term Life Issued 2010 Rank Company/Group Term Life In Force
1 ING USA Life Group $87,007,767 1 RGA Group $1,522,897,986
2 Northwestern Mutual Group $86,438,585 2 Aegon USA Group $1,385,368,401
3 Metropolitan Life & Affiliated Cos $81,526,493 3 Swiss Reins Group $1,354,102,348
4 State Farm Life Group $65,878,257 4 Prudential of America Group $966,331,508
5 Primerica Group $64,995,079 5 Metropolitan Life & Affiliated Cos $931,059,999
6 NY Life Group $55,807,875 6 ING USA Life Group $886,667,849
7 Prudential of America Group $53,336,104 7 Munich Amer Reassurance Co $737,169,920
8 Aegon USA Group $50,878,605 8 Northwestern Mutual Group $714,869,453
9 SunAmerica Financial Group $40,852,125 9 Genworth Finl Group $708,049,456
10 Legal & Gen America Group $39,543,526 10 SunAmerica Financial Group $657,839,965
Source: ORC Inernational
37

38. Competitive Landscape
Top 10 Life Insurance Companies
Based on Overall Advertising Spend
Company Total Advertising Spend*
Metlife Inc. $75,993,600
New York Life $62,224,700
Northwestern Mutual $54,318,700
AARP $47,465,000
Mutual of Omaha $14,543,500
State Farm Mutual $13,386,500
Prudential Financial Inc. $10,337,200
Nestle SA (Gerber) $9,429,000
Allstate $9,247,600
Massachusetts Mutual $6,815,500
* Advertising Spend time period: March 2010 to March 2012
Source: Kantar Media
38

39. Competitive Landscape
Top 10 Insurance Companies Based Top 10 Insurance Companies Based
on Broadcast Advertising Spend on Online Advertising Spend
Company Term Life Issued Company Term Life Issued
MetLife $65,350,300 MetLife $8,174,000
AARP $43,818,600 AARP $3,402,800
Northwestern Mutual $38,085,500 Prudential $2,147,500
New York Life $17,105,100 Nestle SA (Gerber) $1,691,300
State Farm $12,882,800 Allstate $976,800
Lincoln Heritage $7,914,200 HSBC $845,300
Nestle SA (Gerber) $6,289,200 Mass Mutual $370,700
Allstate $3,589,500 USAA $365,400
Prudential $2,323,200 New York Life $323,100
Aviva $1,267,700 Aviva $295,400

40. Competitive Landscape
Media Type Spend*
Broadcast $65,350,300
Online $8,174,000 MetLife:
Print
Radio
$930,600
$143,300
 Direct Response Ads:
– Offer
Total Advertising Spend $74,598,200 – Rates as low as $14/month
* Spend is calculated from March 2010 – March 2012
 Ads emphasize:
– Protecting family
Source: Kantar Media
40

41. Competitive Landscape
Media Type Spend* New York Life:
Print
Broadcast
$41,618,100
$17,105,100
 Direct Response Ads:
– No offer
Radio $3,162,100 – Passive CTA:
Online $336,100 – “Learn how”
Total Advertising Spend $62,221,400 – “Click here for more information”
* Spend is calculated from March 2010 – March 2012  Ads emphasize:
– Low cost
– Industry reputation
– Securing your future
Source: Kantar Media
41

42. Competitive Landscape
Media Type Spend*
Broadcast
Print
$38,085,600
$16,196,600
Northwestern Mutual:
Online $33,500  Brand Awareness Ads:
Radio $3,600 – Click through but no clear CTA
Total Advertising Spend $  Ads emphasize:
* Spend is calculated from March 2010 – March 2012
– Building a foundation for the future
Source: Kantar Media
42

43. Competitive Landscape
ING – Life Insurance:
 Direct Response Ads:
Media Type Spend*
– No offer
Digital 36,700
– CTA:
* Spend is calculated from March 2010 – March 2012
– Easy to Understand
– Clearly Visible in Ad
– Passive
 Ads emphasize:
– Need to protect family’s future
 Flash ads speak to protecting
yourself at different stages of life
(See next slide)
– Marriage
– Education Costs
– Family
Source: Kantar Media
43

44. Competitive Landscape
ING: Digital Flash Creative
Source: Kantar Media
44

45. Competitive Landscape
Media Type Spend* Prudential:
Broadcast $2,323,200
 Direct Response Ads:
Print $2,253,100
– Offer:
Online $2,147,500 – Free insurance quote
Total Advertising Spend $6,723,800 – CTA:
* Spend is calculated from March 2010 – March 2012
– Easy to Understand
– Clearly Visible in Ad
 Ads emphasize:
– Need to protect family’s future
 Flash ads speak to protecting
yourself at different stages of
life (See next slide)
– New House
– Education Costs
– Family
Source: Kantar Media
45

46. Competitive Landscape
Prudential: Digital Flash Creative
Source: Kantar Media
46

47. Appendix B:
Digital References
47

48. What is a DSP?
A demand-side platform is a system that allows advertisers to manage
multiple ad exchange and data management accounts through one interface.
By utilizing a DSP, marketers can access and manage bids for banners via a
DSP’s “seat*” on an exchange, as well as the pricing for the data that they
are layering on to target their audiences.
Additionally, much like Paid Search, using a DSP allows marketers to
optimize based on set Key Performance Indicators.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-side_platform
*While Valueclick is not a DSP, they have their own exchange seats and competing optimization technology
48

49. What is a Dynamic CPM?
On every ad call, the Exchange holds an auction to find the highest paying
ad to serve. What sets this auction apart is the dynamic pricing option for
advertisers. Dynamic pricing ensures that the price an advertiser pays for an
impression is tied directly to the value of the impression to that advertiser.
The DSP’s ad server predicts the probability of a user’s response to a
particular ad, calculates a bid price tied to the value, and determines whether
the creative passes the test of ROI.
Source: http://www.adgile.com/dynamic-cpm-pricing/
49

50. Real-time Bidding: Example
Decision Tree
Data shows that consumers at this publisher and at this time of day are 3x
more likely to engage with the brand
Engine learns over time where new consumers can be found algorithmically
50

51. What is a Universal Smart Tag?
 Acts as a “container” and management tool for all adserved media
programs
 Provides real-time pixel “fire” based on deduped order count within a pre-
defined “look back” window
 Delivers cross-program path to conversion, exposure to conversion and
time lag to conversion insight
 Enables “enterprise level” reporting
 Reduces page load time
51

52. Appendix C:
Sample Audience Insight Reports
(Digital)
52

53. Attribute Importance
 Geographic location (DMA, region, and state) and connection
speed are the most important predictors of campaign
success. Nielsen NE (demographic variable) and browser are
also significant.
Connection Speed
DMA
Region
State
Nielsen NE
Browser
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
53

54. Audience Analysis:
High/Low Responders
High-Responder Audience Low-Responder Audience
• Connection Speed • Connection Speed
- Wireless - DSL
• DMA • DMA
- Seattle - Honolulu
• Region • Region
- Pacific Northwest - Pacific
• State • State
-Washington -Hawaii
• Nielsen NE • Nielsen NE
- Brite Lites, L’il City - Upward Bound
• Browser • Browser
- Chrome - Internet Explorer
54

55. Connection Speed
 Wireless is the best performing connection speed. This
makes sense: people who connect to the internet on a
wireless service as most likely to be eligible and
interested in the advertiser’s service.
800 45%
700 40%
35%
600
30%
500
25%
400
20%
300
15%
200
10%
100 5%
- 0%
Cable Broadband DSL Wireless Mobile T1 Other
Index % of Imps
55

56. By DMA
 The campaign is carefully targeted to a small number of major
market DMAs. Of these, Seattle is by far the best performing.
Honolulu, Raleigh, and Baltimore under-index.
180 40%
160 35%
140
30%
120
25%
100
20%
80 Index
15% % of Imps
60
10%
40
20 5%
0 0%
Houston, TX Baltimore, MD Seattle- Raleigh et al, NC Honolulu, HI
Tacoma, WA
DMAs with at least 1% of Imps
56

57. By Region
 Regional performance is determined by the
performance of the targeted DMA in that region.
Consequently Pacific Northwest (Seattle) is the best
performing region and Pacific (Hawaii) is the worst.
180 40%
160 35%
140
30%
120
25%
100
20%
80
15%
60
10%
40
20 5%
- 0%
South Central Mid Atlantic Pacific Northwest Southeast Pacific
Index % of Imps
57

58. By State
 As with region, performance of the states is driven by the
performance of the targeted DMAs.
180 40%
160 35%
140
30%
120
25%
100
20%
80
15%
60
10%
40
20 5%
0 0%
Texas Maryland Washington North Carolina Hawaii
Index % of Imps
58

59. By Browser Type
 Chrome is the standout, performing much better than the
other three browsers.
250 60%
50%
200
40%
150
30%
100
20%
50
10%
- 0%
IE Firefox Safari Chrome Other
Index % of Imps
59

60. By Operating System
 Windows 7 is the best performing OS. Older versions of
Windows do not perform well.
160 45%
140 40%
35%
120
30%
100
25%
80 Index
20%
% of Imps
60
15%
40
10%
20 5%
0 0%
Windows XP Windows Vista Windows 7 Macintosh Other
60

61. By Hour of Day
 Performance is best from 12 pm – 6 pm, and worst from
12 am – 9 am. This is typical for a B2C campaign.
160 18%
140 16%
14%
120
12%
100
10%
80
8%
60
6%
40
4%
20 2%
0 0%
12-2:59 am 3-3:59 am 6-8:59 am 9-11:59 am 12-2:59 pm 3-5:59 pm 6-8:59 pm 9-11:59 pm
Index % of Imps
61

62. By Day of Week
 Performance is substantially worse on the weekends.
140 15.20%
15.00%
120
14.80%
100 14.60%
14.40%
80
14.20%
14.00%
60
13.80%
40 13.60%
13.40%
20
13.20%
- 13.00%
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
Index % of Imps
62

63. By Employment Class
 Higher income employment groups generally perform better
(although the “management” group under-indexes).
160 35%
140 30%
120
25%
100
20%
80
15%
60
10%
40
20 5%
- 0%
Management Professional White Collar, Mix WC, Service, Mix BC, Service, Mix Mostly Retired
Index % of Imps
63

64. By Urbanicity Class
 Although this variable is strongly influenced by the model’s
geo-targeting it reveals an important fact: town/rural users do
not perform.
140 40%
120 35%
30%
100
25%
80
20% Index
60 % of Imps
15%
40
10%
20 5%
- 0%
Suburban Second City Urban Town/Rural Town Rural
64

65. By Nielsen Social Group
 Nielsen Social Group is a demographic variable
determined by income and location. The best Social
Groups are “Urban Uptown” and “Inner Suburbs”
200 16%
180 14%
160
12%
140
120 10%
100 8%
80 6%
60
4%
40
20 2%
- 0%
Index % of Imps
65

66. By Nielsen NE
 Nielsen NE is a demographic variable determined by
age, income, location, and family size. The best performing
groups are younger and wealthier, with families.
250 6%
5%
200
4%
150
3%
100
2% Index
% of Imps
50
1%
0 0%
66

67. Lifestage Group
 Lifestage Group is the final Nielsen variable.
It shows
Clearwire succeeding in young to middle aged groups.
140 18.00%
16.00%
120
14.00%
100
12.00%
80 10.00%
60 8.00%
6.00%
40
4.00%
20
2.00%
0 0.00%
Index % of Imps
67

68. Appendix
68

69. Bibliography
 Kantar Media. Copyright 2012.
 ORC International. Ref. 666107 April 24, 2012
 http://www.limra.com/newscenter/newsarchive/archivedetails.aspx?prid=229
 Person-Level Trends in U.S. Life Ownership
http://media.hbwinc.com/pdf/Person_Level_Trends_in_U.S._Life_Insurance_Ownership_2011.pdf
 Person-Level Trends in U.S. Life Ownership
http://media.hbwinc.com/pdf/Person_Level_Trends_in_U.S._Life_Insurance_Ownership_2011.pdf
 “Term Sales Seen Rebounding-Again,” National Underwriter Life/Health, July 9, 2002
 http://daniel-workman.suite101.com/average-term-life-premium-rates-for-men-and-women-age-
18-to-24-a343081
 http://www.insweb.com/life-insurance/life-stages-life-insurance.html
 Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. report based on research conducted by Mathew
Greenwald & Associates, November 2010
 “Intelliquote, and the Life Insurance Industry as a Whole, Experience Records Growth in 2011; a
Trend that is Expected to Continue,”
http://www.prweb.com/releases/intelliquote/life-insurance-sales/prweb9523564.htm
69