Tag Archives: Direct Mail

1988-2014 TSI: AdDept: System Structure

Posted on by
2

A complicated system. Continue reading →

People who have not worked in retail advertising will probably have trouble understanding this entry. Nevertheless, because the AdDept system was the focus of my life for so many years, I feel obliged to document as much of its structure as I can remember. It did not occur to me that I might want to undertake such a task until very recently. Consequently, when I closed down TSI in 2014 I discarded almost all of the system’s documentation. The few computer files that I have subsequently found are mostly PageMaker documents. I don’t have that software on my computer, and the files are too large for the services that will convert them to pdf files online. So, I must rely on my memory, which is not as reliable as it once was.

AdDept was designed for and implemented in OS/400, the operating system of the AS/400 and its follow-on hardware. Some of the important and unique features of this operating system are described here. Every line of code that we wrote in 1988 still worked in 2014, and I have no reason to expect the code to stop working any time soon.

All programs were originally written in BASIC. Around the turn of the century IBM stopped supporting BASIC, but TSI was authorized to install the product (a compiler, and interpreters of both BASIC commands and BASIC procedures) on any system that use our software. This only caused one major problem, which is documented here. However, Denise Bessette did not like this arrangement and undertook to convert the programs to ILE RPG. I never appreciated the value of that idea, and I never took the time to learn that language, which is supported on no other system.

All data tables and the major programs in AdDept began with the letter D, which stood for department. This was for TSI’s benefit. The ad agency system used a similar structure, but no files or programs began with D. The second letter in AdDept tables was usually A, I, M, or P, which stood for accounting, (loan room) inventory, media, and production. Programs that were used for cleanup, copying, and other miscellaneous tasks began with DX.

All AdDept programs were stored in the same library1. It was usually named TSIPROG. The data was in a library named TSIDATA. A few clients had additional data libraries for additional companies. At these installations we created a separate library called COMMON or TSIDATACOM to hold the tables that were used for both companies. For example, both companies probably used the same ad types and expense classes (major media). The tables used by both were moved from TSIDATA to the common library. A new data library was created for the data files for the second company. In the beginning it contained empty copies of all of the remaining files in TSIDATA.

No two instances of AdDept were the same, but each had the same TSIPROG library. The settings for each installation were designated in two ways: 1) A set of empty one-byte files, the existence of which activated certain features; 2) a file called DASPECS that contained a very large number of switches, descriptions, and system values. The program to maintain the system values was not on a menu, and users were not allowed to run it.

Everyone needed a user ID to sign on to the system. Those connecting through a network could have any number of simultaneous sessions open.

AdDept’s user table, which was also on no menu and could be run only by the AdDept liaison, limited the programs to which the user had access. If the same employee worked with two different data libraries, a second user ID was required. The two user ID’s would have different library lists.This arrangement may sound cumbersome to people who are used to managing hundreds or even thousands of nested folders, but it did not seem strange to the users of a multi-user system. Furthermore, it was absolutely critical that changes not be made on files in the wrong library. All TSI menus displayed the name of the data library to help eliminate confusion.

The retail calendar was accommodated by the season table. The key was a three-digit number. The first two digits were the fiscal year. The third digit was 0, 1, or 2. 0 meant that a standard twelve-month calendar was used. 1 and 2 were used for 4-5-4 retail calendars, which are described here. This table contained the name of the season, the starting date, and the number of weeks in the season.

Ads were classified by three separate codes:

  1. The one-digit insertion code determined which set of screens was used for data entry. This was a fixed set, but more codes could be added for additional media.
  2. The one-digit expense class identified how the ads were categorized for accounting purposes. Later a sub-class code (blank default) was added for one client.
  3. The two-digit ad type was specified when an ad was created. This table held the insertion code and expense class. It also had a binary field to identify whether color charges were applicable.

Media vehicles, such as newspapers, magazines, and broadcast stations and networks (called pubs in AdDept), were identified by a five character codes combined with a two-digit number (usually 0). For newspapers at least one number was reserved for inserts (usually 10). The users specified the days on which the paper published, whether it was AM, PM, or a combo2 and the paper’s depth (maximum number of inches vertically on a page). For direct mail the pubs were usually geographic markets.

Stores could be identified by a five-digit number.

Every pub had a list of stores that were associated with it. There was also a date-sensitive pub-store allocation table that contained the percentages allocated to each store associated with the pub. The key to this table included an effective date. Less than half the AdDept retailers allocated costs to stores, but the ability to do so was very important to those that did.

AdDept users almost never paid the published rates.

Rates for ROP and inserts were date-sensitive. For ROP separate rates could be entered for black-and-white and several different color choices. There were also tables for linage-based discounts and premiums for things like special positioning such as “back of main”—the last page on the first section of a paper. For inserts a table of usual quantities (thousands of copies) could be created, with rates for each.

The system needed to be able to find the right rate to apply whenever an ad was changed or moved. Costs could also be recalculated en masse when a new contract had been negotiated. These were attractive features.

Probably the best idea that I had when designing the system was to allow the definition of pub groups (identified by five-character codes) to specify sets of pubs in which the same ads often ran. Clients could have hundreds of these or none. When a new ad was created, one pub group could be specified. A schedule could automatically be created with all the pubs in the group.

The hierarchy of participating merchants had five levels in AdDept. The lowest (most detailed) was the department. The system called the other four ADMGP, GRPVP, SENVP, and GRSEN to match Macy’s East’s designations. Most retailers had only two: DMM’s and GMM’s. The May company used “CCN numbers” to group related departments. For each level each client determined the descriptions used on screens and reports.

Employees were identified by three-character codes. Employees could be assigned to production jobs. So, an employee could see a list of all of his open assignments.

The traffic system allowed specification of a code for each production job that determined the job’s production schedule. So, black-and-white ROP ads might have a three-week production schedule with eight steps. The number of days for each step could be specified. Then the system would count backwards from the release date to build a schedule of due dates that accounted for weekends and holidays. The completion dates of each could also be entered (an X meant “today”).

This seemed important to several clients, and we built it precisely the way it was described to us. However, the production employees did not like it. For one thing, most of them used Macs for working on the ads, and they found a text-based system clumsy. I don’t honestly think that they would have liked it much better with a GUI (graphical user interface) as the front end.

The accounting tables were similar to those in the GrandAd System (described here) or any other system. They were designed to be consistent with whatever system was used by the accounting department, but AdDept users did not need to memorize the very long codes that were common in those systems. In AdDept the main entity was the sub-account, which was identified by a five-character code. One corporate G/L account was specified for each sub-account.

The vendor table also had a five-character key. The corporate vendor number was specified there. This table was used for merchandise, media, production, and other vendors.

Categories of production costs were identified by three-digit codes, just as in the GrandAd system.

The Ad Files

The system had one major header file for ads of all types and a number of lists that were associated with it. The ads file3 was identified by the season, a five-digit ad number (usually generated by the system using client-specific rules), and a one character version code (usually blank). The ad number could either be entered or generated by the system. Data entry began with the specification of the run date and ad type. A large amount of information was deduced from those two values. The headline and size4 of the ad were then entered on the header screen, which also contained many other fields.

The second step for ads of all types was the media schedule. If the pub group was accurate, nothing had to be entered here for ROP and inserts. For direct mail the quantities by market were entered.

The third step was the list of participants with percentages and co-op commitments.

Expected production costs could either be entered as one lump sum or detailed by category.

Audit Trails

History records were created for any activity that affected planned, committed, or actual costs or income. Reports and screens were written for viewing them. A few custom reports were also written for clients.

Planning

New ads were ordinarily assigned a status of P, which stood for “planned”. When the plan was completely approved, a program could be run to change the status of all status P ads to A (active). At the same time records of the detail of the costs of those ads at that time were recorded in separate files named DAPLAN (by department or group) and DAPLANST (by store).

Changes could still be made to any aspect of any ad, of course. Those values were considered “committed”. The actual costs were based on the measurements and the invoices from the media and production vendors. Actual co-op was based on the “claims” that had been processed.

In subsequent years several AdDept users let the system build the entire schedule based on the previous year. Thus season 951 could be built based on the ads run in 941. This process was called “anniversarying”.

Cost Accounting

What I called “cost accounting” was commonly called BI later.

Most advertising departments were keenly interested in comparing planned, committed, and actual costs by merchant or by store. AdDept had programs that would create detailed records every night by store and/or merchant for all ads in the current season. The merchant records were stored in DACOMMD (committed) and DAPANDL (actual). The records by store were in DACMDST and DAACTST.

Numerous reports were written to allow comparison of planned, committed, and actual costs and income (from co-op). Some users also queried these files on a regular basis using IBM’s Query/400 product.

Interfaces

Broadcast ads could be fed into the system from Doner, the May Company’s ad agency, and from Media Management + files created either internally or by an agency. There may have been one or two others of these.

A couple of clients used ad agencies for their newspaper ads. TSI constructed interfaces to receive the ad schedules from the papers.

Several interfaces were created to send files to feed corporate Accounts Payable and General Ledger systems.

Sales at the department level could be downloaded from the mainframe. Customized reports helped gauge the effectiveness of ads in comparison with the costs.

Backup

It was easy to schedule a backup nightly and to schedule the cost accounting programs to start when the backup was done. The backup would not save files that had record locks. Any time that a record was read from a program that could update that file (as often occurred), the record was locked to prevent one user from accidentally overwriting the work of another. It was sometimes difficult to persuade users either to make sure that everyone had signed off every night or to shut down the interactive subsystem before backing up and restarting it later.

TSI recognized this problem and warned the users about the possibility of lost data if files were not backed up routinely and correctly. We even offered (for a modest fee) to check their backups every day and notify them by telephone if the backup for the previous nights did not complete correctly. Only one client took advantage of this service.

The failure to check backups resulted in one ugly mess that was described here.

Cleanup

By the standards of the day the cost accounting and history files often became extremely large. A menu of programs that permanently deleted records from old seasons was provided.

Other Modules

The Loan Room inventory system was successfully used by Macy’s East for approximately twenty years.

A Photo Shoots system was also designed for Macy’s East, but it was never implemented. I don’t remember why they lost interest in managing the activities of their studio. The location of the studio in Newark may have been a factor.

Many modules were developed for Belk. One that I remember calculated the store’s use tax liability for direct mail pieces for each jurisdiction.

Saks Inc. in 1999 wanted TSI to design a very complicated system for collecting data from the systems of each of its divisions and, eventually, to produce reports that compared divisions. I was very happy that nothing came of this idea.

A special module was created for Radio Shack to manage its advertisements in magazines.

I suspect that there must have been a dozen more of these modules that I cannot recall. We delivered hundreds of custom programs over the years and quoted a similar number that were never approved.

AdDept was a fabulous system. Because it contained so many features, it was somewhat difficult to demo. The screens and most of the reports were ugly. Nevertheless, as soon as prospective clients understood its potential, it was easy to sell to anyone with a budget.

Unfortunately by the time of the Bush-era Great Recession in 2008, Tarot card readings for most major retailers—especially the ones that did a lot of advertising—began with the thirteenth trump card: Death.

1. “Libraries” were a type of object on the AS/400. They were places to store other objects in the same way that folders or directories are used on PC’s. However, it was not possible to build a “tree” of libraries. All other libraries resided in the QUSR library.

2. Yes, a few papers still published two editions per day in the nineties.

3. As far as the OS/400 was concerned, DMADS, the ads file, and the files that contained all of the lists were equivalent to the tables. However, TSI’s organization and documentation drew a useful distinction between the relatively stable tables that were defined at the beginning of the installation and the much more volatile ad files and transaction files.

4. The size for ROP ads was entered in columns and inches. A full-page broadsheet ad was entered as 6×21. The program knew to adjust the inches to match the paper’s depth. The size for inserts was entered in terms of thousands of copies. The size for broadcast ads was the length of the spot in seconds, usually 15 or 30.

1988-2014 TSI: The Nature of Retail Advertising

Posted on by
1

A different world. Continue reading →

For retailers that sell a wide array of products and also have stores in a fairly large number of markets, advertising has long been both extremely valuable and very complicated. In the two and a half decades that TSI concentrated its work on the advertising departments of these retailers advertising was expensive. Newspapers in major markets charged over $100 per column-inch for ads, and the department stores and big-box retailers bought their ads1 by the page (126-132 column inches), not the column inch. Therefore, the advertising departments were charged by the management of these retailers with 1) negotiating the best rates possible, 2) using the mix of media that provided the most bang for the buck, and 3) designing and producing the ads that produced the most sales.

Most large retail advertising departments were divided into roughly the same areas with which we had become familiar at advertising agencies: media, production, and finance. The years that we had spent working with advertising agencies helped us understand some of their issues. However, the differences were many and complicated:

  • A primary difference was that retail advertising was event-based rather than campaign-based. Most retail events were the same from one one year to the next: Presidents Day, Easter, Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, etc. The dates might change a little, but the approaches were usually similar.
  • Another fundamental difference was the calendar. Most retailers organized their finances and advertising using a 4-5-4 retail calendar2. The first month of the year was usually February. Most retailers divided the year into two “seasons”, spring and fall. Fall began in August.
  • The large organizations had a separate manager for each major media: newspapers, direct mail, and broadcast. A few also had a magazine manager. Inserts (the pull-out flyers in newspapers) were usually treated like direct mail in the production area, but were ordered by the newspaper area.
  • Newspapers were much more important for retailers than for other types of businesses, especially in the nineties when potential customers still started their day by reading the local newspaper.
    • Each retailer negotiated an annual contract with each paper. The contracts often provided significant discounts for the quantity (column-inches) or nature of the advertising. For example, one retailer got some of its full-page ads in one of its major papers free if it met established criteria for other ads! On the other hand, if a retailer ran too little advertising for the contract period, the penalties could be staggering.
    • Not all newspapers were the same dimensions. There were two basic sizes, tabloid and broadsheet, but the actual dimensions varied somewhat. Sometimes ads were just photo-reduced to fit, sometimes different versions were necessary.
    • Inserts were included in the contract, but the rules as to how they were counted varied.
    • Some ads (called “spreads”) covered two full pages and the marginal area in the middle (“the gutter”).
  • Merchandise suppliers often paid for part of the cost of ads that featured their products. This was called “co-op”.
  • Most large retailers needed to know the net (of co-op) cost of ads for each merchandise area. The bonuses for the merchandise managers depended upon their sales markups less net advertising expenses.
  • Many retailers with a large number of stores needed to know the net (of co-op) cost of ads for each store. This was tricky for markets that included multiple stores.
  • Many chains had more than one logo (name on the front of the store). They required different versions for production purposes.
  • A few chains had more than one financial entity. This was challenging.
  • The financial books absolutely had to be closed within a few days of the end of the month. In some cases, especially in the May Company divisions, a set of corporate reports in specified formats were required every month.
  • No agency that TSI had dealt with had a photo studio, but many of the retailers did.
  • The production area of most of these retailers borrowed merchandise from the selling departments. The merchandise was sent to a photo studio, either in the department or outside. After the shoot the merchandise needed to be returned or at least accounted for. A special area called the “loan room” or “merch room” managed this activity.
  • Most retailers did a high percentage of their business in the second half of November and December. Many of them froze their computer systems (no purchases, no upgrades, no testing) during this period, which might extend in either direction.
  • No law specified that every retailer must follow every tenet listed above. Every AdDept installation required some custom code.

The sales pitch: After only two or three installations I had felt comfortable talking with ad agency executives. They generally knew nothing about computers. For the most part they cared little about efficiency; we could almost never point to a position that could be eliminated. It was therefore difficult to persuade them that the computer would save them money. I generally focused on three things: 1) how careful record-keeping could help them locate which clients were unprofitable; 2) how the GrandAd media system would allow improved cash flow; and 3) how a computer system could help if they got a chance to win a big client. I called the last one of these the “reaching for the brass ring” argument.

These arguments did not translate well when we tried to persuade retail advertisers. Usually the retailer had already decided whether or not to get a system for reasons that we could not control. Something had happened that made the current method of handling the work no longer feasible. Macy’s acquisition of the Gimbles stores overwhelmed the system that the advertising department had been using. Hecht’s was in a similar situation after it acquired John Wanamaker. Belk desperately needed help when they consolidated five divisions into one in Charlotte.

Although this phrase is now popular, I had never heard it before I started using it in the ’90s.

Often I would not be acquainted with the circumstances that motivated the important players. I always emphasized the value of having one central set of data to which everyone could contribute and from which everyone could draw. I called this approach “one version of the truth” by which “everyone could benefit from the work done by others.” Everyone could appreciate these notions, but placing a dollar value on the idea of shared data was difficult. Fairly often I would find something in my talks with employees that was horrendously inefficient or even dangerous or illegal, but I could not count on it.

An equally difficult problem was trying to figure out which individual(s) needed to be convinced. In some cases the IT department might not even participate in the software search, but they may have veto power over the final decision. Finding out where the sale stood often required someone from TSI who was willing and able to spend a great deal of time communicating by mail and phone. This was something that I was definitely loathe to do. Fortunately, I found someone, Doug Pease, who was quite good at it. Much more about him is posted here.

One thing that we did not need to worry about was competition. No other software company was crazy enough to attempt to address this market. A few retailers tried to develop something in-house. They all ended up spending millions of dollars or giving up or both.

Difficulties after the installation: I disliked two things about dealing with advertising agencies as clients: 1) It was sometimes difficult to get them to pay their bills; 2) they tended to go out of business or merge with competitors without warning.

We had no problems with retailers paying their bills except when they declared bankruptcy. The first time that this happened I was totally unprepared. A few smaller clients later closed down entirely, but none of these events was catastrophic to TSI.

An equally vexing problem was when one chain of stores acquired another. If the other chain had no system, this usually worked in our favor. If they both used AdDept (TSI’s administrative system for large retail advertising departments described here), we lost one client, but the remaining one usually became more dependent on our support and services. They often also asked us to help with the transition as well.

In the end, however, most of our biggest clients were acquired by Macy’s. The advertising was all managed by one department in New York. That process spelled doom for AdDept because by the time that it happened, Macy’s no longer used AdDept.

One other trend usually produced a little work on the AdDept side, the outsourcing of newspaper buying. We were usually asked to design and implement interfaces with the company that bought the ads. Unfortunately, this same process had a dire effect on AxN, TSI’s method of delivering and managing insertion orders online. When Dick’s Sporting Goods announced in 2014 that it was outsourcing its buying of newspaper space, we decided to shut down TSI.

Decision-making: The ways that decisions were made in retail advertising departments differed fundamentally differed from the way that entrepreneurs like advertising agency executives did. If I could talk to one of the principals at the agency, I could explain why the GrandAd system could produce positive results that could affect 1) the agency’s bottom line, and 2) the agency’s reputation. The situation was totally different in the advertising departments of large retailers.

The department either had a budget for a system or it did not. These were two entirely different cases. If the department had a budget, it was probably because of some huge external factor involving a merger or a takeover. In that case, the eventual purchase was almost a foregone conclusion. The challenge was to fashion a proposal that was within the budget, but not by much.

If the department was not in that position, the process was completely different. The first step was to find a person who had enough authority to requisition funds. This was usually the advertising director. However, advertising directors seldom requested information from us. Our contacts were generally much lower on the totem pole, usually the manager of the business office in the advertising department. So, we would first need to convince our contact and then convince the advertising director either directly, if possible, or indirectly.

We then depended upon the advertising director to requisition the funds. We might not have any idea who would evaluate the request. Sometimes it was someone in corporate finance, sometimes it was someone in the IT department, and in the large organizations approval might be necessary by a holding company such as the May Company, Federated, or Tandy.

At this point it was important for us to recognize which was the case. I was poor at this part of the job, but Doug Pease was much better. If he could connect me with the right person, I could usually frame the arguments for him or her. If no money was available, of course, we probably would not get the sale anyway. During some periods retailers were all tightening their belts. In tough times nobody in retail considered any capital purchase that did not generate sales.

If the final decision needed approval from the holding company, it was extremely difficult for us to influence them directly. In some cases like the May Company and Tandy, it worked out amazingly well for us. TSI’s problems with Federated are documented in detail here.

I began to appreciate the complexity of the situation when one customer told me that “Christmas only comes once.” He meant that the department had a budget at that point, but it had to spend the entire amount in that fiscal year. After that they would be strapped for cash. In general, that was how things worked.

However, some advertising departments had figured out a way around this. They charged the merchandise managers more than the ads cost. I do not know how they accounted for the difference, but they were sometimes had accumulated enough money in this fashion to circumvent the decision-makers in finance and IT. I know for a fact that the AdDept system was financed this way in a couple of cases.

The finance people generally were not upset when they found out about the unauthorized purchase. It was usually easy to determine that AdDept reducee administrative costs fairly rapidly. The IT department, however, might be more upset, especially if the AS/400 was not on their list of approved hardware systems.

Ancillary expenses: For entrepreneurs like ad agencies all expenses came out of the same checking account. The retail advertising departments had a different perspective. Sales tax and travel expenses probably did not hit the advertising department’s line on the income statement. No one ever complained about either type of billing, and they were always paid promptly.

However, the company may have had some rules about travel expenses. I was once grilled about flying first class for a training session. I had to provide proof that I purchased an economy fare and was upgraded by the airline. Some retailers insisted that I stay at a hotel at which they had a special rate. This was usually folly on their part. I liked to stay at Hampton Inns because of the free breakfast and the Hilton Honors points. Hampton’s rates were almost always lower than the “special rate” of the designated hotel.

1. Display ads in newspapers are always called ROP. It is not an acronym; the three letters, which stand for “run of press”, are always pronounced individually.

2. Every week starts with a Sunday. Every month has four or five weeks (twenty-eight or thirty-five days). The purpose of this arrangement and many examples are provided here.