Case study: Fanatics — ready-made videos get a separate distribution task

Campaign Figures

Cut-off 03.09.2026. CPV = CPM ÷ 1,000. These are rates with admission terms and limits; the fund is not equal to expenses, and CPV does not show the full cost of the campaign. Views are a total counter, not unique reach. Approvals are counted separately. Views are not equal to unique reach or sales. Conclusions about marketing mechanics — editorial analysis; the presence of a campaign around a brand does not necessarily mean its direct placement.

Producing a video and introducing it to a new audience are two independent tasks. In the campaign around Fanatics, participants were offered to publish already prepared branded content. The starting point was a bank of ready-made materials, with which one could start working without their own filming. The open card describes exactly the distribution: it cannot be concluded from it what scenes were in the videos or whether the authors needed to additionally edit long source materials.

For a marketer, the transition from production to further use of content is interesting here. The ready-made material maintains the general subject of conversation, and the campaign is dedicated to its new publications. Video clipping can precede such a stage if the brand first decides to turn a long video into cuts; in the case of Fanatics, this production step is not disclosed. The published metrics reflect the available statistical slice. The practical lesson lies in the organization itself: already created videos can have a separate distribution plan and introduction to a new audience.

Do you already have ready-made videos that are worth showing to new viewers? Launch a campaign on VibeVO, starting with an approved bank of materials and a clear task for their distribution.