06 CTOC_Transit Asset Advertising Power Point Presentation Feb 2022

Transit Asset Advertising
CTOC – February 3, 2022

Discussion Points
2
•Discuss response(s) from Request 
for Information (RFI)
•Determine if City should move 
forward with Transit Advertising 
Program
•If moving forward, determine best 
option to implement (RFP, 
Piggyback)

Advertising Media Categories
3
• Static - Posters in a display case (most 
common)
– Recommend “General Market” and “Location-based” advertising
• Based on Neighborhood amenities, high foot traffic and/or traffic 
counts, and major intersections connecting key 
neighborhoods/districts
• Bus Advertising – Bus Wrap
• Recommendation is to test market with shelter advertising first and 
revisit bus advertising at a later date
– If City decides to move forward with Bus advertisement, 
recommendation is to only advertise on Gus Buses

New Logo Gus Bus
4

Old Logo Gus Bus
5

Advertising Media Categories
Continued
6
• Digital & LED – Video type display
– Market potential is there for this type of advertising at Bus Stops
• Upfront Infrastructure costs - $40K-$45K per location (fiber 
optics/power)
• Return-On-Investment
• Audio – Recorded message at shelters or on 
buses (least common)
– Not a strong market for audio advertising either at shelters or on 
buses
• Passengers not there long enough to absorb audio
• Without consistency & regularity of reach, hard to sell advertising
• On buses, small audience – not best utilization of advertising 
dollars

More Feedback Received 
7
• Highest ad revenue potential lies with large 
wraps on larger size buses (Valley Metro buses)
• At this time, no market for “Ticker Tape” 
advertising displays on interior or exterior of 
buses
• No minimum size requirements for advertising 
at Bus Stops
–Most advantageous to sell full panels or wraps to maximize 
revenues
• Ads changed based on term of advertising 
contract

More Feedback Received
Continued
8
• Prefer to defer maintenance of ad stops to City
–Agency responsible for cleaning plexiglass, repairing and/or 
replacing damaged advertisements
• Desirable for ad panel to be visible to both 
vehicular traffic and pedestrians
–Visibility unimpeded by trash receptacles, trees or other 
signage
–Consider traffic counts, foot traffic, location and utilization 
when placing kiosks and selling advertising

City Comparisons
9
Chandler
Mesa
Peoria
Phoenix
           # of Bus Stops:
260
100
38
1,100
Contract term:
11 yrs
10 yrs
10 yrs
5 yrs
Maintenance done by:
City
X
X
X
Ad Agency
X
X
X
Type of Advertising:
Digital
X
Static
X
X
X
X
Audio
Bus wraps
X
Cooperative Contract:
X
X
X
Annual revenue: $158,500
$25,000
$60,000
$3.5M

Advertising Examples
10
Full Wrap
Partial Wrap

Advertising Examples
11

Advertising Examples
12

Advertising Examples
13

Glendale Rendering
14

Glendale Rendering
15

Advertising Options
16
• Prepare and release our own Request for 
Proposal (RFP)
• Piggyback off an existing contract in the Region
–Mesa (OutFront Media – options available through 2029)
–Chandler (StreetMedia Group, LLC – options available through 
December 2026)
–Peoria (OutFront Media – options available through July 2031)

Staff Recommendation
17
• Implement Static Advertising Program at 
Bus Stops
–Forego advertising on buses for now; revisit at 
a later date
–Table digital advertising at stops due to 
infrastructure costs and low return on 
investment

Transit Asset Advertising
18
Discussion/Questions?