Advertising firm MPG disputes the ratings figures of the Romanian Ratings Audit Bureau (BRAT)

• MPG refuses to make the payment it owes the BRAT, as it is unhappy with its services

• The Romanian Ratings Audit Bureau has filed a lawsuit against Media Planning Group (MPG)

• The Court rejected the lawsuit filed by BRAT, causing the latter to file an appeal

• The head of the newspaper "Monitorul de Botoşani" considers that "the National Ratings Study (SNA) is a major fraud and money down the drain"

Several beneficiaries (publications and advertising firms) dispute the ratings numbers published by the Romanian Ratings Audit Bureau (BRAT), as they feel that the data of the National Ratings Study (SNA Focus) - a study conducted by the BRAT which measures both the ratings and the profiles of print publications, as well as the consumption of products and services - is "subjective" and does not reflect the reality in the market.

• MPG broke the ratings auditing contract it had with the BRAT

Advertising firm MPG has expressed its discontent at the ratings data provided by BRAT, which is why, in August 2010, the agency broke the contract with "SNA Focus", which was initially signed in January 2006 and extended through addendums, until November 2009. After that date, "the contract will automatically be extended by 1 one year, unless either party informs the other about its intention to no longer continue within three months from the beginning of the new year of the SNA study", according to the documents filed by MPG with the court of District 1, in a lawsuit filed by BRAT against the advertising firm, whereby it demands that MPG pay the unpaid invoices.

One of these documents presents the letter by which MPG informs BRAT, in October 2009, about its intention to abandon the SNA, as follows:

"Following some internal audits of the results delivered by the SNA study concerning the readership figures of several publications, we have repeatedly found that the numbers delivered by this study can not be construed as consistent and sustainable when compared to the realities of the media consumption patterns in Romania. This was also confirmed by our clients, which have repeatedly expressed doubts over the accuracy of these figures (the average number of readers per copy). Moreover, following the talks we had these days via email, concerning this aspect, I was surprised to find a confirmation from yourselves that these numbers don't always reflect the truth, and that it is eventually possible to apply a good < correction > to these indexes by the media agencies.

(Ed. note: according to the document, MPG is discussing here a message which it previously received from the BRAT, in which the representative of the BRAT states: < (...) in general, the ranking is accurate and the same measuring manner influences everybody to a certain degree. The titles which benefit from other media channels/TV shows with the same name are placed at an advantage by this method. In general, the agencies know that, and the planning software allows discounting the title to a plausible level >).

Given these circumstances, we consider that the method for harvesting and processing information in the SNA study is subjective to say the least, if not downright flawed, and therefore, we want to suspend the cooperation with the BRAT until all of these things will have seen a convincing level of improvement.

We will remain participants and members of the SATI project".

Dinu Teretean, the general manager of MPG, declined to comment on the matter for now.

George Lazăr, the CEO of the newspaper "Monitorul de Botoşani", is a party in the lawsuit which the BRAT has filed against "Media Planning Group"

According to data from the case, which the BURSA newspaper obtained following a request submitted to the Court of District 1 of Bucharest, he makes the following statements, in an exchange of messages with the BRAT in February 2009: "This is the third consecutive quarter that the audit numbers of < < Monitorul de Botoşani > > are dropping, even though the print run (according to the BRAT) has increased slightly, and the competitors and the market in general have not seen any changes. (...) I think that (...) the SNA is just a huge fraud and money down the drain which needs to be urgently stopped, at least until serious audit procedures will be implemented".

• George Lazăr, Monitorul de Botoşani: "SNA is nothing but a money drain"

George Lazăr, the head of the newspaper "Monitorul de Botoşani", said that he has abandoned the SNA a few years back, because he thought that the system "was nothing but a money drain" and that the data it publishes "has no relevance, especially for local publications". He said: "I do not dispute the information which the BRAT has concerning print runs, but rather the manner in which the SNA ratings data is presented, which has no connection to reality whatsoever, even though they are concealed by the appearance of professionalism. I dispute both the procedure, as well as the form in which the entire ratings research is conducted".

George Lazăr explained that in Botoşani, the sample for conducting that study is 80 people, whereas "the minimum sample for Botoşani is 126 people".

He claims: "Research spans 1 year, as it is divided into quarters, which means that every quarter 20 people are polled. At least, a few years ago, when we still had contractual relations with BRAT concerning our ratings, the study in question involved questionnaires which had over 100 A4 pages, being the size of a book. It would seem that the people who were polled were only assisted by an operator in the beginning, and then the < questionnaires > were left to them to fill out by the next day. The questionnaires included a large number of names of products imposed by the advertising agencies, such as 30-40 types of chocolate. At a certain time, some of the products which were mentioned in the questionnaires did not even exist anymore".

George Lazăr said that he abandoned the SNA after the ratings of his newspaper dropped by half, "even though the only thing that happened that year was that it changed its operator".

"Before our ratings dropped by half, one of the two operators in Botoşani had applied for a job with us and had been rejected", Mr. Lazăr also said, and he emphasized that at the time, the error margin of this research could go as high as 25%.

In his opinion, the costs of the BRAT studies were too high: "We would pay 1,500 Euros for the SNA alone, as well as the costs of SATI (ed. note: a study conducted by the BRAT which measures ratings, traffic and the socio-demographic profiles of websites) and for the audit of print runs, in total about 10,000 RON, which is a expensive for a local newspaper".

• "Media Shop" publications abandoned the SNA

The publications of "Media Shop" have also abandoned the SNA, as proven by a notification sent by the media group to the BRAT, in March 2011, as included in the file, which states the following: "Following the results of the latest SNA study, more specifically the ratings numbers for the < Zile şi Nopţi > (ed. note: "Days and Nights" magazine and < Nopţi Bucureşti > (ed. note: "Bucharest Nights"), we have decided to withdraw from the SNA. (...)

Compared to this audience compared to the print run logged and certified by the BRAT for the Bucharest Edition mean an average number of 0.1 readers per copy. (...)

From our point our view, there are two possible explanations for that:

- Either the SNA is a tool which favors other publications

- Either it is a badly conducted and implemented research study, which gives huge errors in delivering ratings data".

• The court has thrown out the lawsuit of the Romanian Ratings Audit Bureau (BRAT)

The BRAT has filed a lawsuit against MPG demanding the payment of two invoices which the latter refused to pay. MPG claims that it did not pay the two invoices because the BRAT did not deliver the services in question.

According to the civil ruling issued by the Court of District 1 on October 5th, 2012, "the plaintiff (ed. note: BRAT) stated that the debt (ed. note: amounting to a total of 48,016.14 lei) is owed according to the contract between the parties and which the plaintiff (ed. note: MPG) refused to pay. (...) The plaintiff requested the rejection of the lawsuit claiming it was without merit, stating that the plaintiff did not meet its contractual obligations".

The court threw out the lawsuit filed by the BRAT, and the latter appealed the ruling, and the case will be tried by the Court of Bucharest.

By the closing of the edition, the representatives of the BRAT did not send us the their opinions concerning the claims made by MPG and the aforementioned publications which were included in this case, even though we had asked for their position of the BRAT in the beginning of the week. We still await the answers of the BRAT to our questions, which we are willing to publish in the BURSA newspaper.