Whose money is it anyway?

"We're the envy of the world with our research funding method and single source survey," says Patterson. "The root of the current problem is a lack of clarity as to who owns the MIT money. Most media owners do understand that they are the MIT collection vehicles for research funds from the marketers, but others are conveniently convinced that the media owners pay the levy.

"Those of us who've been in the industry in the days where it was called the SAARF levy will remember that there was no confusion. It was the client's money and agencies collected it and paid it to SAARF. In hindsight the move to media owners collecting the funds and the more recent inclusion of the levy in media owner rates (rather than an add-on), could be considered a mistake.

"In the tough economic trading conditions in which we find ourselves, it seems that many media owners have been tempted to query and even withhold the MIT funds.

"A strong client marketing interest body such as ASOM from a few years ago would have challenged this growing amnesia and resolved matters promptly. From my own perspective I believe that the time has come for clients to stand up and assert themselves and take ownership of their funds. The media planning and buying industry should not be fighting his battle alone.

"Should a media owner feel that the current 1% is theirs then they should simply keep it and add on 1%. While this may seem inflationary the tough economic condition prevailing will resolve matters. This simple solution will resolve whose money it is.

"There are a number of issues to be considered in moving forward, not least of which is redefining SAARF's role and resolving the various concerns with the AMPS format. The research is far from perfect but without funding the issues cannot be addressed. The first steps should be to establish a proper audit based collection system, which is compulsory and levied on all forms of advertising including promotions and sponsorships. Then the industry could move forward in resolving the issues surrounding the content, format and delivery of the data as well as restructuring SAARF's Board."

"It would be tragic for the industry to loose AMPS, the only common currency research tool we have available. No matter what research media owners commissioned independently, collectively it would be more costly and would never have the same credibility as AMPS," concludes Patterson.