The campaign rarely buys cable ad time, focusing overwhelmingly on broadcast television. Mitt's unusual in-house ad strategy

Voters in Columbus, Ohio, saw 30-second television ads for both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney while watching “Wheel of Fortune” on their CBS affiliate over three days in September. For Obama’s team, the order per spot cost $500. For Romney’s, the price tag on the order was more than five times steeper at $2,800 per ad.

That gap – found in data filed with the Federal Communications Commission — is an outgrowth of an unusual TV-buying strategy by the Romney campaign. Media strategists on both sides of the political aisle, along with station managers who handle ad placement, expressed puzzlement to POLITICO about the way Romney’s TV operation does business.


Unlike other presidential campaigns, which typically outsource their ad reservations and placement to specialized firms with large teams that know how to make the most of the complicated FCC payment procedures, Romney does all his TV buying in-house through a lean operation headed by a single chief buyer.

( Also on POLITICO: Inside the campaign: The Romney rebellion)

The campaign rarely buys cable ad time, focusing overwhelmingly on broadcast television. Romney places his commercials on a week-to-week basis, rather than booking time well in advance, and typically pays more so that his ads don’t get preempted and to spare his campaign the hassle of haggling over time as prices rise.

For those “Wheel of Fortune” ads in Columbus, for example, Obama bought the airtime on Aug. 29, according to the FCC data. Romney bought the time on Sept. 11, the day before his ads aired.

( See also: POLITICO's swing state map)

The Romney media operation is organized under the umbrella of a firm called American Rambler, which includes top Romney advisers Stuart Stevens and Russ Schriefer, the campaign’s chief media consultants, as well as Stephanie Kincaid, the campaign’s top buyer and a longtime employee of the Stevens and Schriefer Group. Press accounts have also named senior Romney campaign aide Eric Fehrnstrom as a Rambler partner, and Romney aides said other top officials’ work is handled through the firm.

The most recent Federal Election Commission data showed that the Romney campaign paid $85,258,006 to Rambler this cycle through August 2012, much of which represents ad buys with primary-election dollars.

Romney’s fall television strategy has drawn increased scrutiny amid Republican concern that the Obama campaign has, for much of the cycle, outmaneuvered Romney on the air. Many Republicans have said privately that Romney must improve his ad strategy in the next four weeks or risk wasting the lifeline he got from his strong debate performance.

The Romney campaign defended its approach, while acknowledging that it has played the air war in a “different” way. For starters, Romney officials said its media consultants are being paid at a flat rate, rather than by taking a percentage of the total TV buy, as other presidential-level TV ad makers have done previously.

“The campaign brought the ad buying in-house, just as we do other aspects of the campaign, including our in-house editing facilities,” Romney campaign manager Matt Rhoades said in a statement to POLITICO. “By using salaried employees rather than paying a consultant a commission, we have saved the campaign a great deal of money.”

A Romney campaign aide estimated that cost savings at $7 million during the general election, though Romney aides did not respond to a request for backup on that figure.

Romney advisers conceded that they pay more per spot than Obama in some instances, but said that’s not always the case. When the campaign does pay more per spot, Romney advisers said, there are reasons for it.

One reason: Political candidates are entitled to special, discounted rates for fall airtime — the lowest unit charged — but can elect to pay more in order to prevent their ads from getting preempted by other commercials. Romney aides said they place a premium on getting their ads to run at exactly the right time, even if that means shelling out more money to run them.

A second reason: The Romney campaign, which buys its ads closer to to the time when they’re going to run, tends to shift its strategy week to week. Obama, on the other hand, with his larger team of buyers familiar with the dozens of stations across the presidential map, has tended to book time earlier, and then adjust targeting and prices upward as the pricing increases.

Other times, the prices are the same. Romney aides and a number of unaffiliated media buyers said that when the campaign books airtime of the same quality — preemptible time or non-preemptible time — stations are ultimately required to charge them the same amount as Obama under FCC regulations governing the general election period. And the lowest unit rate is subjective per station and per program, sometimes rising as the time the campaigns’ reserved draws near, requiring adjustments.

Explaining the Romney campaign approach, one source said: “There is more flexibility in the budget — if the campaign wants to allocate dollars elsewhere in a given week there is no obligation to pay for media schedules that were placed months ago — media schedules that may not reflect the current needs of the campaign.”

“For instance, if in one week [Romney is] having problems with men and the situation improves the next week, [Kincaid doesn’t] spend as much on shows targeted to men. That flexibility does not exist when placing months in advance.”

And, even if the Romney campaign reserves the airtime later and pays more up front, it can expect rebates or additional, discounted airtime later on to compensate during the general election window (although not in the time prior to that, when the Obama campaign was the air in a far heavier way). While FCC data is supposed to reflect the actual prices campaigns pay for their ads, the Romney camp insisted that much of the data is an inaccurate reflection of how many ads run — often not reflecting true prices until the stations’ books are reconciled after the election.

However, POLITICO contacted station managers in the markets mentioned in this piece; those interviewed said the prices in the FCC file reflected accurately what each campaign paid per spot.

The campaign also said it takes rebates from spots that get bumped in real time, to try to put it back into the buy, instead of waiting for credits after the cycle.

But with 28 days left in the election, there’s relatively little time left for stations to offset any excess spending by Romney. And even if they do, that doesn’t change the reality that Romney has typically been outspent on the air in terms of dollars, and even more dramatically overshadowed in terms of the number of commercials airing by each campaign.

POLITICO reviewed roughly 35 examples of ad buys for the same time slots on local affiliates in key swing states, all through information in the FCC database.

According to available data, during the Emmy Awards on Sept. 23, both Obama and Romney purchased a 30-second ad during the 8-11 p.m. time block on WCPO, the ABC affiliate in Cincinnati, Ohio. Obama’s team paid $1,200 for its 30-second ad; Romney’s team paid $3,600 for its ad in the same time slot. The Obama team booked the ad on Sept. 11; Romney’s team booked it on Sept. 18.

On WEWS, the ABC affiliate in Cleveland, Ohio, Obama’s campaign paid $175 per 30-second spot on Good Morning America, during the 7-9 a.m. time slot, for the week of Sept. 12 to Sept. 18. Romney’s team paid $500 for an ad on GMA during the same time slot on the same dates. And on the local 6 p.m. news that week, Obama paid $400 for a 30-second spot; Romney paid $1,100. Obama’s ads were part of a month-long buy, from Sept. 4 to Oct. 1, while Romney’s were for Sept. 12 to Sept. 18.

On ABC7/WJLA, which covers the Washington D.C. and some Virginia markets (WJLA is owned by Allbritton Communications Company, an affiliate of POLITICO), on the 9 a.m. show “Live! With Michael and Kelly” from Sept. 12 to Sept. 14, Romney paid $1,200 for 30-second ads.

Obama’s team paid $600 per ad, starting Sept. 4 and ending Sept. 14. On “The View,” at 11 a.m., Romney paid $1,400 per 30-second ad, compared with $1,000 for Obama. And on the noon WJLA news, Romney paid $1,200 per ad, compared with $800 for Romney. Obama’s ads were purchased on Aug. 30, compared with Sept. 11 for Romney.

Obama paid higher rates than Romney on some WJLA ad flights: that appears to be because Obama’s team added to its initial buy later on. For example, for “Wheel of Fortune” from Sept. 12 to Sept. 14, Romney’s team paid $2,000 per 30-second window, while Obama’s team — which purchased the additional WJLA airtime on Sept. 12 — paid $3,000 for the same window.

American Rambler — a nod to the signature vehicle of the American Motors Corporation, which Romney’s father headed — also includes ad director Ashley O’Connor and Vinny Minchillo, another member of the creative team. One Romney aide said the in-house buying structure is based on the George H.W. Bush 1988 model.

On every Romney TV order reviewed by POLITICO, Kincaid was listed as the buyer. The names attached to Obama’s TV buys vary from market to market, though all appear linked to the Democratic firm GMMB, an outside Democratic firm that has handled the president’s ad-buying in 2008 and in 2012.

Romney aides said that Kincaid is not the only employee in the buying operation and that about half-a-dozen assistant buyers work with her. But Kincaid has ultimate discretion to sign off on buys in a shop that — including clerical staff and analysts — runs to about a dozen staffers.

A Romney source familiar with the buying strategy said the week-to-week approach, including its higher expenses on the front end, allows Kincaid to “tailor the buy given the most recent activity and information available to the campaign,” adding that she can “make buy decisions with the most up-to- date information such as polling, activity in the political realm.”

A Romney aide pointed to an example at a Denver station, KCNC, where the campaign appeared to have spent nearly $90,000 but realistically had $30,000 rebated. The aide said that’s not a one-off occurrence, and that such flexibility lets them plow money back into other areas of their buy. The aide argued that just looking at raw-dollar figures doesn’t accurately reflect how charges per station can increase, even when people reserve time earlier.

That’s a level of flexibility other 2012 entities haven’t appeared to need. The Obama campaign reserved tens of millions of dollars in general-election airtime at the beginning of August. Both the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA and the pro-Republican Crossroads groups booked huge swaths of general-election TV over the summer, too (the outside groups pay higher rates than campaigns do, so they get less bang for the buck).

Priorities, based on buying patterns, appears to have targeted its spending to fill gaps or messaging holes in the Obama effort. That’s not an option for groups on the right, since Romney’s reservations rarely come in more than a few days before his campaign wants the ads to run, and only last month ramped up to full general-election strength.

Romney reserved approximately $5 million for the week after the Democratic convention, raising the ante to $7.7 million for the week of Sept. 11 and only cracking the $10 and $11 million mark starting on Sept. 18, according to a media-tracking source. Romney’s camp has increased its media placement noticeably this week, according to strategists tracking the air war — one source said this is the first time the Republican has spent more than Obama for a week of air time (although based on how much each campaign pays in different markets, it’s tougher to assess from raw dollars how many times, and where, ads are airing).

New Hampshire-based Republican strategist Dave Carney, speaking about the TV-buying industry generally rather than the Romney campaign specfically, emphasized the scale and sophistication of paid-media strategy demanded by a presidential election.

“Buying the TV and media today is one of the most (complex) aspects of the campaign in terms of having dollars spent effectively and getting the eyeballs you want to watch. Cable and radio and online — that’s a massive undertaking. It takes experience and a lot of technology and a lot of people,” he said. “You can’t be doing it off the back of an envelope.”

Managing a dynamic landscape of ad reservations and doing it cost-effectively, Carney said, “takes a lot of follow-through. It’s a lot of detail, grunt-work.”

Tim Kay, director of political strategy for the cable-focused firm NCC Media, said that for the great majority of the 2012 race, Romney has been putting his ads on a far smaller segment of the TV spectrum than Obama.

“The number of networks being used and the audiences they’re reaching, compared to the Obama campaign, it’s about half,” Kay said.

Obama’s TV buys, he elaborated, look “much deeper” and target narrower slices of the electorate with ads on local cable news stations and networks watched primarily by women. “It looks like a lot of research and thought has come behind it, as opposed to buying our top-tier or core networks, which is the feel you get from the Romney campaign.”

Some outside media consultants called it a plausible tactical choice for Romney to lean heavily on broadcast television for his messaging, even if Obama has made a different bet. Cable can be a more specific targeting choice, but reaches fewer people and, depending on the station, can be pricey.

But to a person, every consultant voiced puzzlement — or glee, in the case of many Democrats — at Romney’s practice of buying airtime at the 11th hour, when you may not get the same bang for your buck.

Democratic strategist Tad Devine argued that “typically you’d have an awful lot of people involved (in presidential ad buying), people who have some kind of research background … making these decision. … They’re constantly driven by data as opposed to just simply buying news shows.”