On breakfast cereals

Following the musings at reference 1 and to enliven this morning's Horton Clockwise, it being a rather drear day, my thoughts turned to the possibility of giving away breakfast cereals in large advertisement emblazoned boxes. They could then sit on family breakfast tables, providing the family something to read during trough, something more convenient than conversation, rather cheaper than a morning newspaper and less intrusive than breakfast television. Captive family audiences, who would be pleased to have something new to look at, something which might change from week to week. Have story lines. Almost a 'Sun' on a box.

First thought was that the cereals' people would need the distribution services of the supermarket chains, who would need to be paid.

Second thought was that free would probably result in a lot of unseemly waste, so some sort of charge would be appropriate.

Combining the two thoughts takes us a fair way back to where we are now, with breakfast cereals being checked out through the supermarket tills in the same way as they are now, but with the change that the they would be a lot cheaper than they might otherwise be.

The manufacturers of these important products would then sell the advertising space to the highest decent and sensible bidder. They would probably change the format a bit from simple boxes to provide more square feet on which to print advertisements. Perhaps they could open out like a medieval triptych?

A third thought would be to work a collectible angle into the boxes. Prizes dished out for people collecting a set - with the probability of this happening being the subject of especial care.

So what are the arguments against?

Maybe only poor people chomp through a lot of breakfast cereal, poor people who are unlikely to be buying a lot of whatever it was that was being advertised.

And then you get a poor return from the big eaters: you have had to lay out a lot of cereal to reach the same people time after time. People who only eat cereals once a week might be a much more cost-effective target.

A difficulty one might get around by having premium brands, not eaten by poor people. But then you are into niche marketing, so maybe not so good.

How does all this compare with the economics of, for example, free newspapers. Not forgetting the litter processing charges dumped on the public purse.

What about the downward pressure on quality?

Clearly a suitable topic for a class discussion in the advertising department of our University of Creation. See reference 2.

Reference 1: http://psmv3.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/yesterday-7th-november-guardian-ran.html.

Reference 2: http://www.uca.ac.uk/.