Has performance marketing quietly destroyed brand marketing, or did brand marketers make themselves too easy to ignore?
— Former CMO, now advising media startups
Quietly? No.
Performance marketing walked into the room wearing a Patagonia vest, carrying a dashboard, and loudly declared brand marketing “unmeasurable.” Then everyone nodded because the spreadsheet looked official.
What performance marketing really destroyed wasn’t brand marketing. It destroyed executive patience.
Brand marketing used to be allowed to work the way brand marketing actually works: slowly, cumulatively, emotionally, and annoyingly hard to attribute. You put meaning into the market. You built memory. You created preference before the customer had a promo code, a retargeting pixel, or a free trial countdown timer shoved in their face.
Then performance marketing came along and offered the thing every CFO dreams about: the illusion of certainty.
Spend a dollar. Track the click. Attribute the conversion. Optimize the funnel. Fire the agency. Repeat until the creative looks like a hostage note and the customer has been chased around the internet by the same six-frame ad for three weeks.
In streaming, this has been especially toxic.
The industry got addicted to subscriber acquisition metrics during the “streaming wars” years. Every service wanted sign-ups, trials, installs, upgrades, reactivations, and “efficient acquisition.” Fine. That made sense when the market was underpenetrated and Wall Street was rewarding growth like a lab rat hitting a cocaine lever.
The game changed.
The problem is no longer just getting someone to click. It is getting someone to care.
And that is where performance marketing starts sweating through its quarter-zip.
You cannot performance-market your way into cultural relevance. You cannot A/B test your way into trust. You cannot retarget someone into loving your service. You can annoy them into remembering you, sure, but that is not brand equity. That is a restraining order with CPMs.
Brand marketing creates the conditions that make performance marketing cheaper. That is the part everyone conveniently forgets. When people know what you stand for, understand why you matter, and feel something before they see the offer, your conversion machine works better. The click costs less. The churn risk drops. The promo does not have to do all the heavy lifting.
Performance marketing did not replace brand marketing. It started freeloading on it.
The damage came when companies mistook attribution for value. Just because performance gets the last click does not mean it created the demand. That is like the cashier taking credit for the restaurant.
Brand marketing is demand creation. Performance marketing is demand harvesting.
Both matter. But if all you do is harvest, eventually you are standing in an empty field holding a very sophisticated rake.
The streaming business is now learning this the hard way. Services spent years training consumers to respond to discounts, bundles, free trials, and content drops. Then executives acted shocked when those same consumers became promiscuous, price-sensitive, and completely disloyal.
Congrats. You optimized the customer into having no emotional attachment to you.
The best companies will stop treating brand and performance as frenemies. They’ll use brand to build distinctiveness and memory, then use performance to capture demand intelligently. Not desperately. Not with 47 versions of the same “watch now” ad. Not by pretending every impression needs to justify its existence by Friday.
The worst companies will keep over-indexing on short-term measurable activity because it makes quarterly meetings easier. They’ll call it discipline. It will actually be slow-motion erosion.
Performance marketing didn’t destroy brand marketing. Execs who wanted easy answers did.
Skip Says
Brand marketing builds the reason someone should care before they are ready to buy. It creates memory, meaning, preference, and trust, all the soft-sounding things that somehow make the hard numbers work better.
Performance marketing captures the moment someone is ready to act. It is useful, necessary, and wildly overcredited because it gets to stand at the finish line holding the clipboard.
The mistake was treating the last click like the whole story. That gave companies permission to starve the very thing creating demand in the first place.
Confuse harvesting with growing, and you do not get a more efficient business. You get a cheaper funnel, a weaker brand, more promo dependency, and customers who leave the second someone else offers them three months for $1.
Ask Me Anything
Whether you’re fed up, fired up, or just want the truth behind the trends, send me your questions using this form. Anonymity guaranteed. Bullshit not included.
The Streaming Wars is intentionally ad-free
We don’t run display ads. Not because we can’t, but because we don’t believe in them.
They interrupt the reading experience. They cheapen the work. And they burn advertisers’ money on impressions nobody actually wants.
So we chose a different model.
We say the things people in this industry are already thinking but don’t say out loud. We connect the dots beyond the headline and focus on explaining why things matter to the people working in this business.
If you believe industry coverage can exist without clutter and interruption, you can support it here → SUPPORT TSW.
Support is optional. But it directly funds research and continued coverage — and helps prove this model can work.
Support TSW →
