2 Contrarian Nuggets To Start The Year

By Sandeep Joseph

#1 Outdoor works better when it isn’t animated, unless you’re at a traffic junction

Digital out-of-home (DOOH) advertising in Malaysia is experiencing notable growth as brands increasingly embrace dynamic outdoor formats that combine the reach of traditional out-of-home with the flexibility of digital media.

The Malaysian OOH and DOOH market is projected to expand steadily, with the overall market estimated at around USD 210 million in 2025 and anticipated to grow at a compound annual growth rate of about 6 % through 2030 (Mordor Intelligence). In fact, data suggests that Malaysian advertisers now spend more on outdoor ads in aggregate compared to what they spend on TV.

Within outdoor, DOOH itself has been a key growth driver, delivering double-digit gains thanks to falling LED costs that make digital screens more accessible to advertisers. Other factors helping its growth are programmatic buying, and better audience engagement. Clients like the flexibility of DOOH because they can come in for any duration and exit, and they don’t need to produce expensive vinyl prints like they require for the more rigid static outdoor.

This growth reflects broader industry dynamics: post-pandemic footfall rebound in transit and lifestyle spaces, the rise of real-time, contextual content that can be updated based on location, time of day, or audience behaviour. Traditional static billboards cannot match this. Advertisers are deploying DOOH in high-traffic areas such as malls, airports, and transit hubs to capture attention where audiences are highly present and receptive.

When it comes to memorability, digital ads are remembered more, because the eye is attracted to movement and so on.

However, while investment in DOOH offers strong visibility and creative flexibility, advertisers face a huge risk if they over-allocate to digital outdoor alone, while sacrificing static ads. In the same 10 seconds it take you to pass a billboard, your static outdoor ads have a 100% opportunity to be seen, as opposed to 12.5% for a digital signage (where 8 advertisers are sharing the 2 minute time slot rotation).

We have analysed data for various clients, and the probability of being seen can vary by a factor 10 x or more, with static ads 10 x more likely to be seen than a digital ad. Especially on highways and arterial roads, short messages with 3-7 words on static billboards can make an impact. At traffic junctions, where cars are waiting for 2-3 minutes, thus increasing the chances of being spotted, then digital boards with animated, interesting messages have a better chance to win share of mind.

Malaysia’s OOH landscape has shifted from static dominance to demand-led planning. Says Dzylia Damhuri, Managing Partner of Regal Channel, “While static still makes up ~91% of total panels, DOOH now attracts ~57% of total OOH spends, despite representing only ~9% of inventory. (SOURCE: Malaysian OOH Landscape, AIMS Research).

This imbalance reflects rising demand for dynamic formats, while static continues to deliver scale, continuity and 100% share of voice.

The market has not replaced static — it has redefined the role of both formats. As supply grows, effectiveness will come from role clarity — not more screens. It is a supply-and-demand story — and the strongest outcomes come when both formats are planned together.”

This mismatch between number of sites (statics) and where the money is going (increasingly to DOOH) will result in media owners struggling to balance their portfolio of assets, and will inevitably lead to falling revenues and business consolidation with all its attendant pains.

But from a client point of view, the thorny question that advertisers should be thinking about more, is whether to do static or digital, of if they can afford it, do both. And our contrarian view is that while DOOH has its virtues, you should not drop statics, which have a higher probability of being seen.

#2 Influencers are not influencing

Influencers are increasingly an immovable part of ad campaigns. They could command anywhere from 5% to 30% or more of the total budget of a campaign, and Unilever’s CEO, Fernando Fernandez is a major proponent of influencer marketing.

He is shifting to an “influencer-first” strategy to combat consumer skepticism towards traditional ads, aiming to work with 20x more creators, move 50% of media spend to social, and leverage micro/nano-influencers for authentic, hyper-local connections, especially in growth markets like India.

Many brands in Malaysia are shifting from expensive giant influencers to mid-sized and nano influencers, who are seen as more credible, authentic and crucially, more affordable. These folks, with followers typically ranging from a few thousand to fifty thousand or so, are also more open to tweaking their content to suit the brand, or to receiving feedback, and on the whole might be easier to work with compared to more diva-like mega influencers.

A big challenge remains: how to measure the business impact of influencers? Because they form a part of campaign, it is hard to attribute their impact.

And the situation also begs the question: how influential are these mega influencers, if they cannot be trusted and other influencers are required to do the work of influencing? Or does it mean that some influencers are already not influencers, but serve the function of vague awareness creation? Our contrarian view is large influencers are generally not influencing, but there should be a detailed case by case approach to this new emerging and confusing territory.

Sandeep Joseph is the CEO and cofounder of Ampersand Advisory, a leading company specialising in media, creative, data and PR. The agency has won over 470 awards, with 200 awards and 9 Agency of the Year titles in 2025 alone. He can be reached at sandeep@ampersand-advisory.com