Recommendations to club night promoters for smarter use of flyers

This post is based upon findings from the 2010 Leeds Clubber Survey, which had a particular focus upon attitudes towards, and usage of nightclub and club night flyers in Leeds by both promoters and clubbers alike. Along with this a literature review was carried out into best practice flyer design and distribution techniques, the culmination of both have contributed to the recommendations made below.


Club night promoters are largely aware that flyers are not as effective a promotional method as what word of mouth recommendation and social media are (although they don't always want to admit this). Word of mouth and social media come at very little cost, other than ensuring that the people who have visited club nights have had the most enjoyable of times. 

Promoters should capitalise on the fact that the majority of their customers are regular repeat visitors, by continuing to entice them back.  Whether it is the musical repertoire of a particular night, the quality of the venue, the price of drinks or the entry charge, whatever feature or combination of features that a particular club night has that is attractive to its customers should be maintained, and every now and again improved upon to reward those loyal repeat customers who keep coming back.  As many clubbers already know which club nights they are visiting, it is unnecessary to give them another flyer.

With that said, there is still a place for flyers, but their use could be smarter and certainly more efficient.  For mainstream club nights that attract a wider audience of clubbers and particularly student clubbers, on street flyer distribution will never be as efficient as it could be as long as a mass distribution to anyone and everyone is adopted.  Therefore the following recommendations are made:

·     target your existing customers with flyers as they leave the premises (exit flyering), only reward them with something better than a ‘paper’ flyer.  Re-usable flyers made of something that is more longer lasting than paper could further encourage repeat visitation.  For example a plastic credit card sized flyer that upon presentation gave the bearer something that other clubbers did not get in terms of reduced entry or a special offer could be an attractive proposition to customers.  Such a flyer should include clear information about what it entitles the bearer to, as well as terms and conditions;

·     encourage earlier nightclub attendance by providing flyers with special offers for those who arrive earlier;

·     if flyers made of paper and card are to be used, then use them more efficiently by making them last for a prolonged period of time, and making their presentation upon arrival at a club entitle the bearer to a special offer or discount that non-flyer bearers are not entitled to.  Flyers could be collected by door staff, and then exit flyered back to customers as they leave;

·     flyer content needs to adhere closely to what is suggested in this post, and this needs to be more consistently applied by promoters to all of their flyers;

·     capitalise upon the fact that clubbing is a social activity, and allow just one flyer to entitle a group of clubbers to a discount;

·     do not employ people to distribute flyers that are not friendly and chatty, consider the quality of the flyer transaction rather than the quantity of flyers that are given.  Flyers taken by clubbers for the ‘wrong’ reasons (often pity and guilt) are realistically of very little worth;

·     other than special offers consider ways by which flyers might contribute to the atmosphere of a club night, by giving them a purpose for a ‘fun’ activity that takes place during the club night, this might encourage clubbers to keep hold of them and not throw them away;

·     and be conscious of an ageing population, which will mean an increase in older clubbers. Older clubbers are less likely to pick up flyers so promoters should begin to consider alternative ways to promote to them.

Flyers for club nights that feature ‘niche’ and specialist music genres certainly have a place, particularly as their audiences are interested in reading more about them.  Flyers for these type of club nights that are distributed by friendly people who are passionate about the music are likely to have a greater efficiency than flyers that are left static to be collected or are distributed by people who do not represent the ‘scene’.  It is therefore a recommendation that flyers for ‘niche’ and specialist music nights are distributed by fans of the music, in the places that are frequented by their target market, and that conversation forms part of the flyer transaction.

All letterbox flyering should immediately cease, it fuels ill feeling amongst clubbers to flyers, promoters and their club nights.  It is potentially damaging, and risks souring the relationship between clubber and promoter.  The only possible exception to this rule is if flyers are used in a friendly ‘door-knocking’ manner and given by hand along with conversation.  This is what some specialist dub-step promoters do in halls of residence, knock on a door, ask the occupants if they are fans of dub-step music, if they are not, they apologise for bothering them and move on.  If they are fans, they give them a flyer into their hands and tell them about the club night.  For this to be carried out effectively it needs to be done by people who are genuine fans of the music.

Club night promoters need to acknowledge that clubbers are overall an environmentally aware group, and that needless waste created by flyers enforces a negative perception of the promoter and club night.  In addition to what has already been stated above about reusable flyers, the following initiatives should be considered:

·     promoters should be seen to be more active in picking up discarded flyers;

·     have clearly marked ‘flyer bins’ along the street where distributors are so that those who do not want to keep flyers dispose of them in a way that allows them to be used again;

·     make greater use of posters and lesser use of paper flyers;

·     produce fewer flyers that are valid for more people, thereby encouraging group visits;

·     concentrate more on social media and online promotions.  It would be relatively simple for promoters to distribute a link to their customers that took them to a page of flyers that contained special offers that could be printed by clubbers or even saved onto mobile smart phones and shown upon entry to gain a discount.

It is a recommendation to all club night promoters to be honest with themselves about the use of flyers, do they really represent true value as a promotional medium? To really be able to gauge this, promoters should attempt to survey those entering clubs (particularly in queues) to gain a clearer understanding of the impact that flyers really have upon their customers choice of club night. Promoters should consider experimenting with club nights that are not promoted at all by flyers - and if any of you are 'brave' enough to do this, I'd be very interested to hear your results!

Results of the Leeds Clubber Survey 2010

The Leeds Clubber Survey 2010 was placed online for one month in July 2010, it was completed by 295 respondents. The survey was intended to gather information from clubbers in Leeds with relation to their clubbing habits including: their nightclub preferences; frequency of visitation; influences on their visitation to nightclubs; reactions towards club night promotional materials; and attitudes towards flyers. The survey was promoted to clubbers by several Leeds based club night promotion companies, each of whom sent a link to the online survey to their e-mail lists and social media groups.

74% of respondents indicated that they went clubbing in Leeds, therefore the target audience of Leeds clubbers was reached with this survey. The key findings of the survey are listed below, for further information, please contact Stuart Moss at the email address at the top of this page, or through Twitter @ents_leeds_met .

Respondent demographics

In terms of age, the respondents represented the age range of under 18 up to 55, with the largest single segment being the 18-23 age group at 51% of respondents.  24-29 year olds made up 19% of respondents, 30-35% year old made up 13%, 36-40 year olds made up 10%, and out of the remaining 7%, 6% were aged 41-55, and 1% were aged under 18.

With regards to student status, 46% of respondents indicated that they were a student.  With the largest single group of these being full-time university students (39%), with the remaining 7% of students being either part-time or at further education institutions.  47% of respondents indicated that they were not students, which was a higher than anticipated figure, however this is feasible considering the spread of ages of respondents.  7% of respondents indicated ‘other’ or did not respond to this question, out of the ‘other’ responses answers were mainly: ‘on a gap year’; ‘just graduated’; and ‘on a work placement’.

In terms of employment, 49% of respondents indicated that they were full-time employed, with 23% indicating that they were employed part-time, 20% of respondents indicated that they were unemployed, and the remaining 8% indicated ‘other’ or declined to answer the question.  Out of the ‘other’ responses, the predominant answers were ‘home-maker’; ‘self-employed’; and ‘work voluntarily’.  By definition ‘unemployed’ refers to people who have stated that they do not have jobs, it does not mean ‘unemployed and claiming benefits’, it is entirely feasible to assume that a proportion of those labelled unemployed may also be full-time students.

Where respondents go clubbing

74% of respondents indicated that they go clubbing in Leeds, this was followed by Manchester (18%), London and Sheffield (11.5% each), Barnsley 10%, Wakefield 9%, Birmingham 7%, Newcastle 6%, Liverpool 5%, Bradford, Huddersfield, Nottingham and Preston (3% each).  37% of respondents also indicated that they went clubbing in other UK towns and cities, and 6% stated that they went clubbing in non-UK towns and cities.  It should be noted that the majority of respondents stated that they went clubbing in more than one town / city.

Clubbing frequency

In terms of frequency of visitation, 41% of respondents indicated that they visited a nightclub at least once per week, with 8% stating that they visited a club three or more times per week.  15% of respondents indicated that they visit a club every two weeks, and 23% indicated that they visited a club every 3 - 4 weeks.  21% of respondents indicated that they visited nightclubs less than monthly. 

55% of students go clubbing every week or more, this compares with only 30% of non-students.  35% of employed people also go clubbing at least weekly, but this compares with 62% of unemployed respondents.  20% of students go clubbing once per month or less, compared with 51% of non-students.  41% of employed respondents go clubbing once per month or less, compared with only 15% of those respondents who are unemployed.

Club preferences

In terms of preferred club types visited by respondents, the most popular club type was mainstream high street clubs, which typically have an offering of commercial chart music and ‘classics’.  This was followed by niche music clubs that specialise in a particular music genre, and live music clubs and superclubs (large clubs with numerous rooms and several DJs).  Mainstream commercial music nights were slightly more popular amongst students (28%) and the 18-26 age group (27%).  The least popular types of club were gay clubs, strip clubs and supper clubs.  In terms of status i.e. students, non-students, the employed and unemployed, all categories of respondents had very similar preferences, with the only marked difference being that strip clubs were twice as popular amongst non-students, as they were to students. 

95% of respondents indicated that they tend to visit the same nightclubs.

Musically, respondents preferred nights that involved mainstream and commercial music, which involves ‘pop’ music, music in the charts and previous chart ‘classics’, this was closely followed by specialist dance music nights, which mainly includes commercial dance, house, techno, drum and base, dub step, basslines and their associated musical sub-genres.  The least popular music nights identified by clubbers were hip hop / RnB and ‘other’ which included: previously unmentioned genres of dance music; jazz; ska; northern soul; acoustic; bhangra and Asian music.

89% of respondents stated that music was either a strong influence or a very strong influence as to their choice of club night, with only 5% of respondents stating that music had little or no influence upon their choice of club night.

The reputation of club nights in the minds of clubbers is important in their decision making process with 60% stating that reputation was either a strong or very strong influence in their decision making process.  31% of respondents stated that reputation was of some influence, and 9% stated that reputation was of little or no influence in their decision to visit a particular club night. 

When clubbers go clubbing

The clear majority of clubbers tend to go clubbing on the same nights of the week with 72% stating that they visit clubs on the same night either all of the time or most of the time.  Only 9% of respondents indicated that they rarely or never went clubbing on the same night of the week.

The most popular nights for clubbing are clearly Friday and Saturday, with the least popular night being Sunday, which is followed by a steady increase through the week until the weekend.

Clubber finance

62% of respondents stated that entry charge was very important or important in their decision making process, with a further 26% of respondents stating that entry charge was of some importance, 12% of respondents considered entry charge to be not important or of no importance.  Demographically, students (71%) and the unemployed (70%) were the two single largest groups that were concerned with door entry price.  A similar pattern to this followed with the importance of drink prices within clubs, with 61% of clubbers stating that drink prices were very important or important, 27% of respondents stating that drink prices were of some importance, and 12% stating that drink prices were not important or of no importance.  71% of student clubbers stated that drink prices were either important or very important to them.

Clubbing as a social activity

98% of respondents indicated that clubbing was for them a social activity, by either going with a friend or friends to clubs, or meeting a friend or friends at clubs.  47% of respondents indicated that friends had either a lot or complete influence on their decision as to whether to visit a club or not, 45% indicated that friends played some influence on their decision making process, and 8% claimed that friends had little or no influence as to their decision to visit a club.  In terms of the influence of friends upon which night(s) of the week to go clubbing, respondents indicated in similar levels with 49% stating that friends had a lot or complete influence, 37% stated that friends had some influence, and 14% stated that friends had little or no influence as to which night(s) of the week to go clubbing.

Research by clubbers

When respondents were asked how they find out information about club nights, word of mouth was the most popular response and stated by 88% of respondents, followed by social media websites (68%), and nightclub flyers (59%).  The least popular responses were: advertisements on radio and television; by directly contacting clubs and promoters; and other, which included: through working in the nightclub industry; using Internet search engines; and through visiting online bulletin boards and discussion forums about club nights. 93% of students and 97% of the unemployed indicated that word of mouth was a major way from which they found out information on club nights.  Social media websites were similarly popular amongst all demographic categories, with only a very slight standard deviation of 6 on the overall average of 68%.  The 18 – 26 age group were the single largest demographic group to use social media websites at 76%.  There was a wider dispersal of flyer usage for finding out information about club nights, with a standard deviation of 14 on the overall average of 59%.  Students were the single largest demographic group to use flyers (72%), those aged 27 – 35 were the least likely to use flyers (40%).

From the above list of methods by which clubbers might find out information about club nights, respondents again deemed word of mouth as being the single largest influence, followed by social media and flyers.  Respondents considered text messages from club promoters, and radio and television advertisements as being the least influential methods in their choice of club night.

With regards to how active respondents are in terms of searching for information about club nights, 26% of respondents always or regularly search for information about club nights, 35% stated that they sometimes look for information about club nights, with 38% stating that they rarely or never look for information about club nights.  Further analysis of this reveals that student clubbers (21%) are less likely to always or regularly search for information about club nights than non-student clubbers (30%), there is less difference between the employed (26%) and the unemployed (23%), but larger differences are apparent when looking at age.  As the age of respondents increases, there is a steady increase in the number of those who always or regularly search for information about club nights, from those aged 18-26 (23%) to those aged 46-55 (46%).  Further analysis of age and always and regularly searching for information reveals a correlation of 0.97, which is a very strong positive correlation demonstrating that as respondents age their propensity to search for information increases.  This is also enforced by looking at the ages of respondents who rarely or never look for information about club nights, here where age increases there is a slight increase before a decrease in the percentage of respondents who look for information about club nights, with a moderate negative correlation of -0.78.

Clubbers and flyers

Clubbers were asked how often that they themselves chose to pick up and collect flyers, there was quite an even spread of responses given, 32% of respondents indicated that they picked up flyers at least weekly, 28% of respondents picked up flyers between weekly and monthly, 23% of respondents picked up flyers less than once per month and 17% stated that they never picked up flyers.

Further demographic breakdown of respondents propensity to pick up and take club night flyers, reveals the following: students are much more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly (43%) compared to non-students (23%); the unemployed are more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly (43%) than the employed (27%); younger people are much more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly; and those aged 46+ do not pick up and collect club night flyers more often than monthly (16% monthly, 58% less than monthly and 25% never). When correlating age against the percentage of respondents who pick up and collect flyers at least weekly the resulting figure of -0.93 indicates a strong negative correlation between the two variables, which enforces the point that as clubbers age, they are less likely to pick up and take flyers.

Of those who picked up flyers, those most likely to do so regularly were also regular nightclub visitors, and those who were least likely to do so, or never did so were those who visited nightclubs less than once per month. Respondents were most likely to pick up and take flyers from nightclubs, followed by pubs and bars, and service industry retailers such as hairdressers, coffee shops, launderettes and takeaways.

When asked what aspect of a statically placed flyer might influence respondents to pick it up and take it away, 66% of respondents stated that special offer(s) promoted on the flyer was the main influence to respondents in picking up and taking a flyer with them, followed by information about a club night contained on the flyer (58%) and the design (colour, images and wording) (53%).  Other answers respondents gave in relation to this question included: special events being promoted on the flyer; mention of musicians, DJs or celebrities of interest to the respondent; interest in the music genre being promoted; and if the nightclub the flyer is for, is one that the respondent already likes.  Students (77%) and the unemployed (71%) are most enticed by special offers, as were younger respondents (18 – 26 year olds 73%) compared to older respondents (46 – 55 year olds 42%).

81% of respondents stated that they took nightclub flyers from people in the street.  The largest influence upon respondents for taking flyers from people in the street was the appearance of the person giving the flyer (42%), followed by a feeling by the respondent that they should take the flyer (41%), and then special offer(s) promoted on the flyer (40%).  Aspects of design and the information contained on the flyer were considered of a lesser importance to these. When respondents were given the opportunity to elaborate upon their response to this question numerous reasons were given, they have been categorised as follows: a feeling of pity for the distributor; flyer content; friendly sales technique by distributors; physical attractiveness of the distributor; flyering taking place in relevant locations; forceful distribution by distributors; respondents going through the motions of taking flyers; out of politeness; friendly appearance of the distributor; out of guilt; feeling under pressure to take one; a shared musical interest with the distributor; and the distributor appearing representative of the club night.

A number of respondents left negative comments in relation to on-street flyering, along with reasons for not accepting flyers from distributors.  These have been listed and categorised as follows: respondent annoyance; respondents being in the wrong target market; invasiveness of distributors; distributor overkill; discrimination of flyer distributors; poor sales technique of distributors; and respondent apathy.

A minority of respondents (32%) stated that they received nightclub flyers through their letterbox, of those 74% were students.  The comments made by respondents in relation to flyers that have been placed through their letterboxes are all negative.

Flyers that were picked up and taken by respondents were more likely to be kept for a period of days than those given in the street or posted through letterboxes.  Those flyers that were posted through letterboxes were most likely to be disposed of within seconds with an overall downward trend in terms of length of time that the flyers would be kept.  Those flyers that were given in the street were most likely to be kept for seconds or minutes before disposal, with an overall downward trend after minutes, in terms of time that the flyers would be kept.  For those flyers that were picked up and taken, the pattern is less clear, with the majorative answer being days, but with a second placed answer of minutes.

In total, respondents did not indicate that they would keep nightclub flyers for very long periods of time, with 54% of respondents indicating that they would dispose of flyers within seconds or minutes, 16% indicated they would keep flyers for a number of hours, and 21% indicated that they would keep flyers for days.  Only 9% of respondents indicated that they would keep flyers for over a week.

In terms of flyer design, some respondents revealed that aspects relating to special offers, flyer design, information being of interest, and flyers containing information about favoured artists may cause them to keep flyers for longer.  This section also highlights respondent annoyance at flyers containing information deemed by them as being irrelevant, which includes the names of ‘unknown’ DJs being listed on flyers.

When questioned qualitatively where else respondents come into the possession of club night flyers from, the answers given were as follows: friends (16%); from the floor (12%); in magazines and newspapers (12%); in promotional flyer packs (12%); under car windscreen wipers (8%); by email (8%); in shopping bags (8%); on tables outside bars (8%); in bar toilets (4%); with CDs (4%); given with change when buying drinks (4%); and printed on till receipts (4%).

Many respondents raised environmental concerns about the use of paper flyers, these were around: the litter caused by discarded flyers; and the opinion that the use of paper flyers is wasteful.

As a result of this survey recommendations have been made to nightclubs and club night promoters in Leeds, these will be featured in a future blog post.

Event Flyers: Classification, Conent, Design and Distribution

‘The purpose of a flyer is to convey information within a limited time-span’ (Lapow Toor, 1998, p.111).  Flyers are commonly used for announcing events, products and services, they can be used as a means of generating consumer footfall and sales (Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez, 2009).  They are one of many mass-communication marketing tools used by marketers and promoters, mass-communication indicates that flyers are a form of ‘push-promotion’ that are not specifically targeted at individuals personally (Moss, S, 2009).  A flyer should ‘draw attention to itself and capture’s people’s interest.  It gives them a reason to act immediately on that interest.  And it gives them the information they need to do so’ (Peterson and Vactor, 2002).  According to Crandall (2002), flyer’s are the cheapest form of written promotional materials.

Rutherford Silvers (2003) state that flyers ‘create awareness and provide information’ (p.97), they are ‘an introduction, an ice-breaker and first step’ (Levinson and Godin, 1996, p.79).  Flyers can be used as part of a combined promotional campaign that is intended to create ‘buzz’ before an event takes place (Locicero, 2007).  In terms of event promotion the useful life-span of the flyer is mainly until the event takes place.  The majority of flyers are quickly disposed of by recipients of them, although retention of flyers up to and beyond events taking place may lead to brand reinforcement amongst customers, particularly if similar future events are held.  Sloane (2007) notes that flyers are often disposed of quickly by recipients due to poor design or them being distributed to the wrong target market.

Flyers can also be used to gather consumer information, they may have a section, upon which customers may record personal details, such as contact details, which may be used by the flyer distributor to target the customer with specific marketing materials.  In such scenarios, providing this information is often incentivised and in return for this, the customer may be eligible for a gratuity such as a monetary discount or a free gift (Lipe, 2002).

Classification

There is no universally recognised industry standard classification for flyer types, and the interpretation of what actually constitutes being a flyer varies, ‘terms such as catalogue, free sheet, circular or shopper can be found as synonyms for flyers’ (Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez, 2009, p.3).  Lapow Toor (1998), Peterson and Vactor (2002), Whitbread (2001) and Yadin (2002) state that a flyer is a single or double sided sheet of paper, where as Christiansen and Bjerre (2001) cited in (Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez, 2009) and Gagliardi (2006) state that a flyer should have a minimum of four pages. 

Flyers are often typically classified by size, for example Lapow Toor (1998) classifies flyers by size using the following dimensions: 8 1/2” x 11”; 8 1/2” x 14”; and 11” x 17” (p.111).  Sources within the print industry use weight, size, paper finish and sometimes folds as a means of classifying flyers, however this mainly applies to those flyers that are printed upon paper.  Weight is given using the term gsm or gm, which stands for grams per square metre.  For example E-Printing (2010) classify flyers by their weight with the following classifications: 130gsm; 170gsm; 200gsm; 250gsm; and 300gsm – the higher the gsm, the better quality and more expensive is the paper.  E-Printing (2010) also use size as a way by which to classify flyer types, their sizes include: A3 (297 x 420mm); A4 (210 x 297mm); A5 (210 x 148mm); A6 (148 x 105mm); A7 (105 x 74mm) and DL (210 x 98mm).  Taking into account the fact that any size flyer can be printed on any gsm paper, there are 25 variants of flyer type just from what has been stated above.  This does not take into account the other formats that E-Printing produce such as folded leaflets and postcards (e-Printing offer five different formats of each), which from a promotional perspective could also be considered flyers.  In terms of paper finish, the most common types are ‘gloss’ and ‘silk’, the difference being that gloss has a high sheen finish giving it a more ‘shiny’ appearance.

By searching the websites of other printers, similar results can be found.  Wales Print (2010) offer flyers in A4, A5, A6 and DL sizes, but only on 130 gsm paper.  They also offer A5 and A6 postcards on 350 gsm paper; four-page leaflets on A4, A5 and A6 130 gsm paper; and 6 page DL leaflets on 130 gsm paper.  Wales Print also offer A3 sizes, however they classify these as posters and not flyers.  Labcreation (2010) classify flyers and leaflets together, they offer folded leaflets in the following sizes: 3 x A4 folder three times to A4 size; A3 folded to A4; A4 folded to A5; and A4 folded to six-sided DL size.  In addition to this they offer A3, A4, A5, A6 and DL sized leaflets on a choice of 135, 170 and 250 gsm paper.  This demonstrates differences in classification by printers as to what is a flyer, leaflet or poster, and differences in paper weight used by printers, but at the same time it demonstrates similarities in standard paper sizes.  The lack of a universally recognised and industry standard typology for flyers is all too apparent.

Content and Design

Flyers should be written in a typeface that is easily readable such as Sans Serif or Arial fonts as they are often skim-read (Lapow Toor, 1998).  Flyers should be catchy (Peterson and Vactor, 2002), colourful flyers are often eye-catching (Locicero, 2007).  Flyers should be designed with an attention seeking headline placed prominently, followed by a small amount of text containing essential information and a visual such as a photograph (Lapow Toor, 1998).  Levinson and Godin (1996) state that the headline on a flyer is one of the most important aspects to it, they also state that wording should be brief, including lists and bullet points, suggesting that the main information contained on a flyer should be: the headline; a positioning statement; an illustration or photo; a small amount of company information; and brief names and descriptions of products and services (p.78).  Peterson and Vactor (2002) state that a flyer should be a ‘one-subject announcement’ (p.84), and that event flyers should contain the following essential information: a logo; the event name and description; the location; contact details; time and date; a brief benefit statement; and a call to action (p.85).  Sloane (2007) states that flyers should contain a web address where interested parties may then search for further information about what the flyer is promoting.

The theme of flyers including logos, design and wording should match other promotional mediums that are being used to highlight what it is the flyer is promoting, this helps to enforce brand awareness by promoting a consistent identity, thus creating a cohesive promotional campaign (Carter, 2007).  The presence of high-profile and recognisable brands on flyers can make them more appealing to consumers (Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez, 2009).  Spending large amounts of money on flyer design, including the material upon which it is printed, may not necessarily lead to improved sales, but it may convey a more successful image of the company using the flyer (Lipe, 2002).  Sloane (2007) suggests the use of thick high quality paper for flyers, although this does bring expense implications, Hayden (2006) states that if flyers look home-made or unprofessional, potential customers may view what the flyers are promoting in the same way.

Levinson and Codin (1996) state that the use of humour on flyers can be effective in encouraging people to take them, although this may not be universally correct or appropriate.  Masterman and Wood (2005) suggest that flyer designs should be tested amongst audiences prior to production, including: concept tests, where focus groups made up of target audiences, may be used to discuss which words, colours and images best promote a theme; and rough tests, where rough drafts of flyer designs are put before members of the target audience for their reaction (p.32).  Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez (2009) recognise the difficulties in attempting to ascertain how effective flyers are.  ‘If the message has been developed with the target audiences’ specific characteristics in mind then it will use a frame of reference which they can relate to and will be understood and interpreted as intended’ (Masterman and Wood, 2005, p.  69).  Therefore it is perfectly natural for flyers aimed at one specific target market e.g.  teenagers, to be perfectly understandable to them, but not to another market, e.g.  their parents.  This also highlights the phenomenon of ‘culture gaps’, which are ‘a difference in values, behaviour, or customs between two cultures or groups of people, esp.  as a hindrance to mutual understanding and communication’ (OED, 2010).  It is therefore essential that when testing flyers designs, to do so with participants who are also a part of the target audience (Peterson and Vactor, 2002).

Distribution

Flyers are distributed by hand, door-to-door, inserted into newspapers and magazines, and handed out in areas where there are high volumes of passers-by such as exhibitions and street corners (Yadin, 2002).  Masterman and Wood (2005) concur, stating that once ‘attention has been gained they are more willing to accept the flyer’ (p.203).  Frazier (2008) states that flyers can be effectively distributed within magazines and newspapers that have the same target market as the flyer, meaning that flyers will be read in a leisurely way, possibly being more successful through being of interest to the reader.  Advertising alone ‘is not an effective way to gain a prospective client’s trust’ (Hayden, 2006, p.169), so personal distribution of flyers into the hands of potential customers may be advantageous, in that it allows for the additional element of dialogue between promoter and target audience.  Dialogue may help to enforce the message of the flyer, as well as building trust.

Static flyers displayed in public places have the advantage of reaching a lot of people, if they are displayed in the right places (Lapow Toor, 1998).  Campion Devney (1991) additionally state that flyers placed in a variety of locations including museums, launderettes, gyms and supermarkets are useful for event promotion.  Debelak (2000) concurs, and states that flyers for events should also be used as part of the décor at events.  Flyers that are placed statically need to give people a reason to take the trouble to pick them up, special offers and discounts promoted on the flyer are one way of ensuring this (Hayden, 2006; Locicero, 2007).  This relates to the AIDA sales principle of attention, interest, desire and action (Carter, 2007).  Masterman and Wood (2005) concur, stating that once ‘attention has been gained they are more willing to accept the flyer’ (p.203), as well as the message it conveys.  Peterson and Vactor (2002) discuss how flyers should ‘funnel’ the attention of those who read them, this is very similar to the AIDA sales principle, and is known as a sales funnel.  Those consumers that are actively engaged in searching for discounts and special offers are more likely to be interested in reading flyers, and those who are not price-sensitive are least likely to be attracted by flyers (Gazquez-Abad and Sanchez-Perez, 2009).  Statically placed flyers have the disadvantage of not allowing for relational links to be established between promoter and potential customer.  ‘If the brand chooses to have only a purely commercial discourse, it denies itself the opportunity to form a more affective relational link’ (Lehu, 2007, p.224).  The power of such relational links, generated by positive word-of-mouth enforcement, along with promotion being portrayed as a genuine customer service offering can build trust amongst potential customers leading to an increased likelihood of sales being made (Semprini, 2005), and the flyer being a more successful promotional tool.

Kumar (2003) suggests the use of eflyers as an alternative to physical paper flyers – in other words an electronic document of the printer flyer, such as an Adobe portable document format (PDF), to be emailed to interested parties.

A contemporary issue with regards to flyer distribution (both statically placed flyers and flyers handed out in the street), is nuisance flyer distribution.  This is where flyer distribution may directly annoy those who are subjected to it, or where flyers may be contributing to litter.  If potential customers are annoyed by flyers, their annoyance may put them off what it is that the flyer is promoting (Feltenstein, 2005).  Flyer distributors causing large amounts of street litter, placing flyers under car windscreen wipers and attaching flyers to publicly used infrastructure such as bus shelters have lead to the introduction of legislation to combat this problem.  In the UK, this process is managed at ‘local’ level, often by councils.

Bibliography

Campion Devney, D.  (1991) Organizing special events and conferences: A practical guide for busy volunteers and staff.  Sarasota, Florida, Pineapple Press.

Carter, L.  (2007) Event planning.  Bloomington, Indianna, AuthorHouse.

Crandall, R.  (2002) Marketing your services for people who hate to sell.  New York, McGraw-Hill.

Debelak, D.  (2000) Streetwise marketing plan.  Avon, Massachusetts, Adams Media.

E-Printing.  (2010) Full colour flyer printing / poster printing services.  [Internet] Nottingham, E-Printing.  URL available from: Accessed 31^st August, 2010.

Feltenstein, T.  (2005) 401 killer marketing tactics to increase sales, maximise profits, and stomp your competition.  New York, McGraw-Hill.

Frazier, S.G.  (2008) Marketing strategies for the home-based business.  Guilford, Connecticut, Globe Pequot Press.

Gagliardi, G.  (2006) Making money by speaking: The spokesperson strategy for marketing your expertise.  Seattle, Clearbridge Publishing.

Gazquez-Abad, J.C.  and Sanchez-Perez, M.  (2009) How store flyers affect consumer choice behaviour: National brands V store brands.  European Retail Research.  Vol.  23, Issue 1, pp.  1 – 20.

Hayden, C.J.  (2006) Get clients now: A 28 day marketing program for professionals, consultants and coaches.  New York, AMACOM.

Kumar, B.  Run against media violence: Entertainment violence against children.  Don’t buy.  Don’t support.  Lincoln, Nebraska, iUniverse.

Labcreation.  (2010) Labcreation full colour printing.  [Internet] Manchester, Labcreation.  URL available from: Accessed 31^st August, 2010.

Lapow Toor, M.  (1998) Graphic design on the desktop: A guide for the non-designer.  2^nd edition.  New York, John Wiley and Sons. 

Lehu, J.M.  (2007) Branded entertainment.  London, Kogan Page.

Levinson, J.C.  and Godin, S.  (1996) Guerrilla marketing for the home-based business.  Boston, Houghton Mifflin.

Lipe, J.B.  (2002) The marketing toolkit for growing businesses.  Minneapolis, Chammerson Press.

Locicero, J.  (2007) Streetwise meeting and event planning: From tradeshows to conventions, fundraisers to galas, everything you need for a successful business event.  Avon, Massachusetts, Adams Media.

Masterman, G.  and Wood, E.  (2005) Innovative marketing communications: Strategies for the event industry.  Oxford, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Moss, S.  ed.  (2009) The entertainment industry: An introduction.  Wallingford, CAB International.

Oxford English Dictionary.  (2010) Oxford English Dictionary.  [Internet] Oxford, Oxford University.  URL available from: Accessed 5^th August, 2010.

Peterson, S.L.  and Vactor, K.  (2002) Starting and running your own martial arts school.  Boston, Tuttle Publishing.

Rutherford Silvers, J.  (2003) Professional event coordination.  Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley and Sons.

Semprini, A.  (2005) La marque, une puissance fragile.  Paris, Vuibert.

Sloane, R.  (2007) 121 marketing ideas to grow your small business.  St.  Albans, Hertfordshire, Ecademy Press.

Wales Print.  (2010) Online colour print.  [Internet] Port Talbot, Wales Print.  URL available from: Accessed 31^st August, 2010.

Whitbread, D.  (2001) The Design Manual.  Sydney, University of New South Wales.

Yadin, D.  (2002) The international dictionary of marketing: Over 1000 professional terms and techniques.  London, Kogan Page.

Nightclub Promotion and Competition

Promotion is the sum of ‘activities that communicate the product or service and its merits to target customers and persuade them to buy’ (Kotler, 1994, p.1007).  Hackley and Tiwaskul (2006) discuss the concept of entertainment marketing and promotion as being one that leads to experiential consumption.  Nightclub promotion may be carried out by venues themselves, or by specialist third-party organisations and individuals who are brought in to promote themed nights within the nightclub to potential consumers.  Themed nights are known as club nights, and the organisations and individuals that undertake the task of promoting them to potential consumers are known as promoters (Moss, S, 2009).  KBA (1994) stated that promoters were a very important entity in the nightclub scene, they often set trends and are responsible for generating ideas for events, usually involving some form of entertainment, and often at their own expense.  Moss (2009) identified that promoters were often used where competition between nightclubs was fierce.  So called ‘student-cities’ (those cities that experience a boost in population during ‘term-time’ from college and university students), are one such example where a large demographic of residents of nightclub age are often heavily promoted to by nightclub promoters keen to attract custom.

The nightclub industry is a saturated and highly competitive marketplace (Skinner, Moss, G and Parfitt , 2005), effective target market segmentation, is therefore very important (Dibb, Stern and Wensley, 2002).  Within student cities competition is the most fierce at the beginning of the academic year (in the UK this is usually September), and at the beginning of new terms after vacation periods such as Christmas and Easter.  During this time, promoters are highly active, with many forms of visible promotion in key locations around student cities, such as: outside universities; within halls of residence; and on footpath areas where there are a large number of students passing by.  Such promotion is designed to entice new customers, and to reinforce brand awareness amongst existing customers (Moss, S, 2009).

When promoting products, organisations and events to students, it is important to target new students when they first arrive (Fakharzadeh and Todd, 2010).  This gives the opportunity to develop brand awareness before students form relationships with rival entities.  Useful locations to target students with flyers include ‘dorm halls, dining halls…and next to vending machines’ (Campion Devney, 1991, p.59).  Hayden (2006) additionally suggests student resource centres such as libraries, and university literature racks.

Nightclubs often portray a fun and ‘sexy’ image, which has been capitalised upon by nightclub promoters in their promotional materials, this is demonstrated in the figure below.  This has also been capitalised upon by third party companies who have used nightclubs to showcase their products, some examples include Applebelly and Lycos, who went in to partnership to promote the online dating service Love@Lycos within nightclubs (Anon, 2001).  Sepe, Ling and Glantz (2002) concur, and in their research into tobacco promotions in nightclubs, they found that promoters used ‘very attractive’ dancing girls, and ‘provocative games’ designed to entice young potential smokers, (p.415).  In research by Moss, G, Parfitt and Skinner (2008) into gender and nightclub visitation ‘men identified the opposite sex as the critical factor in the decision to select a venue…in this research one male focus group respondent suggested that the number of women…was important ‘for single lads definitely’’ (p.69).  Shapiro (2006) identified that nightclubs were promiscuous venues where young people would often meet to form sexual unions.  Haralambos and Holborn (2004) identified that the demographic of young people who visit nightclubs as being at an experimental stage in their lives, where risk-taking and adventure form a central part of their behaviour.

Examples of nightclub promotional materials that use sexual imagery.  Source: Santana, (2010).

Nightclubs compete against their rivals on a number of levels, any of the products they have may form the basis of competition.  Refurbishment and reinvention of popular nightclubs is commonplace, this is to maintain interest amongst client groups whose tastes change over time (Haussman, 2008). Keeping repeat customers is especially challenging for nightclubs, particularly with their young adult target market (Nancarrow, Nancarrow and Page, 2002), although continual re-invention is not realistic for many venues, and therefore other means of competing including those related to pricing and promotion are the norm (Moss, G, Parfitt and Skinner, 2008).  However, it has also been found that regular nightclub patrons who are highly involved with a particular club, brand or organisation are less likely to be swayed into visiting competitor venues on the basis of price or drinks promotions (Beatty and Kahle, 1988).  Nightclubs are a service industry, and there is a great deal of service industry marketing literature on the importance of service quality (Skinner, Moss, G and Parfitt , 2005).

The methods by which promoters communicate with potential customers varies from traditional paper based media such as posters and flyers, to electronic media such as social networking websites and email (Moss, S, 2009).  In 2006, London nightclub owner Mint Group shifted its promotional focus from traditional flyers to email marketing, and in doing so appointed a specialist e-marketing company to be responsible for sending out 60,000 emails per week to the Mint group’s customer database (Anon, 2006).  ‘Brand management and communication are evolving at lightning speed’ (Lehu, 2007, p.3), this is exemplified by the relatively recent uptake of online social media (particularly Facebook) by club promoters to build brands based around their club nights and to use social media as a cost-effective and relatively easy way to reach a potential audience with a promotional message.  Those aged 35 and under are the primary target segment of social media marketers (Tiltman, 2009), many of this demographic are also the primary target segment of club promoters, making online social media an ideal promotional medium.  The adoption of such technological marketing mediums gives a modern image, and can lead to increased sales (Anon, 1996).  ‘Kids are interested in the same things they’ve always been interested in, they’re just expressing it via different channels.  Chances are that if you don’t understand today’s consumer, you didn’t really understand yesterday’s’ (Tiltman, 2009).

It is clear that in a highly competitive marketplace a strong promotional strategy is essential for the survival of both nightclubs and club nights, in what has become a buyers-market, where consumers are presented with many choices, by which to spend their leisure pound.  Not only do nightclubs need to compete as physical venues against other venues, promoters need to compete against other promoters in promoting their particular club nights.  Promotional materials are often the primary means by which potential customers may learn of club nights, so therefore adopting a strategy that targets the correct people, using appropriate promotional media is an essential aspect in the business of nightclub and club night promotion.

Bibliography

Anon.  (1996) Tech marketing increases sales for two companies.  Marketing News.  14^th March, 1996, p.2.

Anon.  (2001) Marketing latest.  Marketing.  5^th March, 2001, p.10.

Anon.  (2006) Mint group to ditch flyers for email strategy.  Precision Marketing.  27^th January, 2006, p.3.

Campion Devney, D.  (1991) Organizing special events and conferences: A practical guide for busy volunteers and staff.  Sarasota, Florida, Pineapple Press.

Dibb, S., Stern, P.  and Wensley, R.  (2002) Marketing knowledge and the value of segmentation.  Marketing Intelligence and Planning.  Volume 20, Issue 2, pp.  113 – 119.

Fakharzadeh, C.  and Todd, M.  (2010) Student organization leadership.  Infinity Publications.

Hackley, C.  and Tiwaskul, R.  (2006) Entertainment marketing and experiential consumption.  Journal of Marketing Communications.  Volume 12, Issue 1, pp.  63 – 75.

Haralambos, M.  and Holborn, M.  (2004) Sociology themes and perspectives.  6^th ed.  London, Collins.

Haussman, G.  (2008) New Vegas nightlife: The hottest of the hot spots.  TravelAgent.  27^th October, 2008, pp.50 -  52.

Hayden, C.J.  (2006) Get clients now: A 28 day marketing program for professionals, consultants and coaches.  New York, AMACOM.

KBA.  Trend influence marketing program.  April 14, 1994.  cited in Sepe, E., Ling, P.  and Glantz, S.  (2002) Smooth moves: Bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that target young adults.  American Journal of Public Health.  March 2002, Vol.  92, No.3, pp.  414 – 419.

Kotler, P.  (1994) Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation and control.  8^th Edition.  Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Lehu, J.M.  (2007) Branded entertainment.  London, Kogan Page.

Moss, G., Parfitt, S.  and Skinner, H.  (2008) Men and women: Do they value the same things in mainstream nightclubs and bars? Tourism and Hospitality Research.  Volume 9, Issue 1, pp.  61 – 79.

Moss, S.  ed.  (2009) The entertainment industry: An introduction.  Wallingford, CAB International.

Nancarrow, C., Nancarrow, J.  and Page, J.  (2002) An analysis of the concept of cool and its marketing implications.  Journal of Consumer Behaviour.  Volume 1, Issue 4, pp.  311 – 322.

Santana, D.  (2010) DJ Emir design services.  [Internet] Englewood, Colorado, DJ Emir.  URL available from: Accessed 20^th August, 2010.

Sepe, E., Ling, P.  and Glantz, S.  (2002) Smooth moves: Bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that target young adults.  American Journal of Public Health.  March 2002, Vol.  92, No.3, pp.  414 – 419.

Shapiro, P.  (2005) Turn the beat around: The secret history of disco.  New York, Faber and Faber.

Skinner, H., Moss, G.  and Parfitt, S.  (2005) Nightclubs and bars: What do customers really want?.  International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.  Vol.  17, Issue 2, pp.  114 – 124.

Tiltman, D.  (2009) Why there’s more to digital than skinny jeans and trips to nightclubs.  Media.  19^th November, 2009, p.7.