|
Well-funded Irvin being outspent on TV
Friday, Jun 3, 2022 - Posted by Rich Miller * Click the pic for a larger version of this document from the Irvin campaign…  $14 million down, $36 million of Ken Griffin money to go. Also, the spending doesn’t delineate between positive spots and negative ads.
|
 |
|
|
- vern - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:21 am:
Typically campaigns only share that they’re getting outspent if they need to boost their fundraising. Irvin has the opposite problem, he’s gotta figure out how to spend $10mil+ per week. Republican primary voters are gonna need bigger mailboxes.
- Just Another Anon - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:27 am:
So the DGA makes the difference in the spending. Interesting.
- Norseman - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:31 am:
1) Confident in victory, saving for the general? or
2) Confident in victory, spreading around for slate? or
3) Spending on organization? or
4) A combination of the above?
How’s this for lazy analysis?
- Richard Swervin' - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:41 am:
So a campaign that decided their path to victory was to spend large sums of money is now whining that others are spending large sums of money?
Maybe Team Irvin should pursue any other aspect of a successful campaign. Maybe meet with real voters, hold events and press conferences, or build a ground game.
Just a thought.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:49 am:
===How’s this for lazy analysis? ===
It occurs to me that they might possibly be trying to establish a narrative that they didn’t need all of that Griffin money to beat Bailey and several billionaires. But there’s quite a risk involved, if I’m right.
- vern - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 9:58 am:
=== trying to establish a narrative ===
I had that thought too, but if they lose by 1% with $20 million left in the bank Griffin’s never hiring any of them ever again. It’s a big risk like you said, but also a very minimal reward if it pans out.
The whole point of unlimited money is that you don’t have to find the silver lining in getting outspent.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:09 am:
===I had that thought too===
The other thing is there probably isn’t a whole lotta ad space left out there to buy.
- Watchful eye. - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:27 am:
The “slate” is losing every race per the recent polling. Arrogance never plays well with activist voters
- Watchful eye. - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:28 am:
Every contested race
- Lakefront - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:46 am:
Illinois airwaves - the billionaires new favorite playground
- New Day - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:48 am:
I don’t understand Irvin’s campaign. He has $50 million, is only spending $14 million and is likely losing or at least not winning. This makes no sense. Is this whole thing a grift?
- don the legend - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 10:50 am:
==The other thing is there probably isn’t a whole lotta ad space left out there to buy.==
Rich, I’ve wondered this as well. Do you have any idea of the theoretical amount needed to buy “all ad space” during this republican primary season?
Griffin might as well buy it all and insure the nomination.
- Cool Papa Bell - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 11:19 am:
=The other thing is there probably isn’t a whole lotta ad space left out there to buy.=
From a perspective of Broadcast TV you are probably right. I haven’t watched the TV news in a while but the inventory has be almost totally booked. (years ago when I was in that business I remember a few elections cycles like this and that was the case)
I know this post was about TV - but radio can kinda be limitless in ad time if they want. And I’m guessing that this doesn’t include streaming ads? That’s how I get most of my video content now and I can say the amount of political has increased significantly in the past few weeks.
As an aside - Rich do they break down “streaming” vs “broadcast” tv/video dollars? Are they accounted the same? Hulu and others usually only run a :90 break on my ad supported streams so I guess there is limited inventory there too - and I don’t know if those outfits are bound by the same political ad rates as the broadcast world.
- SaulGoodman - Friday, Jun 3, 22 @ 12:08 pm:
So Irvin’s claim is that he’s being outspent by the field? Good job, I guess?
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Jun 6, 22 @ 12:22 pm:
===It occurs to me that they might possibly be trying to establish a narrative that they didn’t need all of that Griffin money to beat Bailey and several billionaires. But there’s quite a risk involved, if I’m right. ===
Sullivan as a spoiler to split the right wing, crazy, religious vote even just a little bit is a fun idea too. At least that would explain why so much of his candidacy is so poorly thought out.