Presentation by Ed Keller, Keller Fay, and Julie Propper, ESPN at the 2010 WOMMA Summit

1. Quantifying the Economic Value of Word of Mouth Conversations Julie Propper, ESPN Ed Keller, Keller Fay Group WOMMA Summit November 17-19, 2010

2. Why is WOM Important to ESPN?

4. Sports Fans are a Growing Population that Consumes More Media Than Average Source: ESPN Sports Poll, 2009/Knowledge Networks/SRI Sports Fan Population P12+ (in millions) Media Hours per Day Fall 2009

5. Word Of Mouth Advertising

6. Marketing Plays a Big Role in Driving WOM ~ Half of consumer brand conversations refer to marketing or media … led by advertising (22%) Marketing and media are tools for encouraging WOM Source: TalkTrack®, January 2008 – January 2009

7. Ad-influenced word of mouth is 20% more likely to include a strong recommendation to buy or try a product + 20% Ad-Influenced WOM is More Powerful for Brands

8. Multiple Media Touch Points Contribute to WOM Base: Brand conversations across all categories (n=155,999) Source: TalkTrack ® , November 2007 – October 2008 (Top 5 advertising touch-points shown; % of word-of-mouth driven by media/marketing)

9. ESPN Viewers Are More Reliant on Advertising for WOM Topics (% of WOM conversations citing marketing or media) Base: Brand Conversations (All Categories, n=158,841; ESPN Male Viewers, n=20,968) Note: Respondents are able to select up to two media/marketing references. Source: Keller Fay Group's TalkTrack®, January 2008 – January 2009

12. ESPN Audience WOM: Contains Stronger Recommendations

13. Male ESPN Viewers Had 3 Billion More Conversational Mentions of NFL Advertisers than Non-Viewers (Projected total weekly brand conversations about 14 NFL advertisers) Base: Brand mentions among male respondents during average 4-week period (ESPN Male Viewers, n=6,487; Male Non-Viewers, n=2,699) *Estimate excludes alcoholic beverages Miller and Coors.. Source: TalkTrack®, August 2008 – January 2009 From late August to January, Male viewers of ESPN had an additional 3 billion mentions of NFL advertisers, as compared to non-viewers.

14. ESPN Viewers Show Greater Brand Advocacy; CFB Sponsor A Receives Stronger Advocacy From ESPN Fans ESPN Viewers College Football Advertisers (Net) Non-Viewers ESPN Viewers CFB Sponsor A* Non-Viewers Net Advocacy (Positive less mixed & negative) 35 18 72 58 Base: Brand Mentions among Males (ESPN Viewers/Non-Viewers Shown: College Football, n=853 / 385;, n=115 / 72) *Months of February – April 2009 were included in the analysis for Sponsor A, in an effort to provide stable base sizes. Source: TalkTrack®, CFB Advertisers Net August 2008 – January 2009; August 2008 – April 2009 Mixed Negative Positive

17. In-Depth WOM Analysis in 3 Categories Restaurants Men’s & Sports/ Athletic Apparel Technology/ Electronics

18. Key Findings

19. ESPN Audience: More Likely to Be WOM Influencers

20. Media Plays an Important Role in WOM Among ESPN Audience

21. Media Plays an Important Role in WOM Among ESPN Audience

22. ESPN Audience: More Apt To Be Early Adopters Within Social Circles

23. Following The Conversation From The ESPN Audience & Non-Audience to Their Peers… Person 1 receives email invitation and completes Survey A Person 2, 3, 4, etc., receives email invitation for Survey B Person 1 provides email address of Person 2, 3, 4, etc.

24. ESPN Audience: 23% Wider Reach for WOM ESPN Audience: 12.2 Average WOM Reach Non-Audience 9.9 Average WOM Reach Word of Mouth Reach: (Three Category Average) Generation 1: 3.6 people ESPN Audience: 1 person Generation 2: 8.6 people Word of Mouth Reach: (Three Category Average) Generation 1: 3.2 people Non- Audience: 1 person Generation 2: 6.7 people

25. ESPN Audience WOM Leads to Purchases

26. ESPN Audience’s Peers Spend More & Talk About More Expensive Items +23% +28% +80%

27. ESPN Audience and Their Peers: More Early Adopters

28. For ESPN Audience, Sports are Social, Commercials Drive Conversation

29. ECONOMIC VALUE OF INFLUENCERS STEMS FROM THE FOLLOWING: Calculating the Economic Value of WOM A) Probability of person to be affected by television ( Reliance on Television ) B) Number of conversations they have about products ( Volume of Conversation ) C) Persuasiveness of readers word of mouth ( Credibility & Persuasiveness ) D) Expected profitability of their friends ( Profitability ) Volume of Conversation Credibility & Persuasiveness Profitability Reliance on Television

30. 2.9 more WOM value to marketers: ESPN viewers vs. non-viewers ESPN Viewers Deliver More $$’s to the Bottom Line Volume of Conversation Reliance on Television Credibility & Persuasiveness Profitability

31. How Does That Translate to the Bottom Line? Average Male ESPN Males $100 $100 $100 $100

33. Thank you! Julie Propper [email_address] Ed Keller, [email_address]