This year’s upfront is quickly wrapping up as the strongest in history, defying the grim forecasts of just weeks ago, when the weak economy, tumbling broadcast ratings and the increasing strength of new media all seemed to forebode a lousy ad market.

The broadcast networks pulled in some $9.2 billion, up from $9 billion last year. Cable TV will likely wrap up at $8 billion, up from $7.7 billion. Spanish-language TV will likely be up 6 percent, to $1.6 billion. Syndication will be up from last year's $2.5 billion. Only kids will not show gains, probably coming in flat at $950 million.

The question now, with the upfront mostly done, is: Why has the market been so strong?

There are a few reasons, and the most significant rests in the inherent strength of the upfront process itself as a fast-paced auction of TV ad time for the coming season.

It works to the benefit of both buyers and sellers, and it works particularly well in times of uncertainty over the economy, which is to say times like these.

So much for talk in recent years that the upfront process was outdated and would be phased out.

The broadcast networks sold more inventory than in typical years, about 82 percent of the coming year’s commercial time, to ensure they won’t be sitting on unsold inventory if demand wanes later in the scatter market.

Buyers benefited by being able to lock in prices, protecting themselves in the event prices shoot up in the scatter market, where ad inventory not sold at the upfront is auctioned off through the year.

“There were a lot of legitimate reasons for advertisers and agencies to put money into the upfront to protect themselves,” says Jack Myers of the Myers Media Business Report.

“There’s a real wariness about where scatter will be. The economic conditions are creating legitimate concerns, so I think the agencies and advertisers came together on [pricing] that they can both be comfortable with.”

The strength of the upfront also affirms the value of TV among advertisers.

As one buyer early in this year's upfront explained to Media Life Magazine, the computer programs used to evaluate various media's ability to influence consumers invariably affirm the effectiveness of TV over all others.

Another big factor behind this year's strong upfront was the greater caution among advertisers over the economy.

One might think that in tough times advertisers would be looking to put their dollars in less expensive media. But exactly the opposite happened. Advertisers pulled back from those less expensive options, sticking with what they were most comfortable with, television but notably broadcast.

“Advertisers and agencies tend to stick to tried-and-true methods during difficult economic times,” says media consultant Julio Rumbaut. “Television’s effectiveness is more proven than internet’s.”

Yet another reason for the strong upfront is the vast reach of television. It remains the only outlet that can reach many millions of consumers in one shot, even as ratings slide and that audience gets smaller.

As attractive as many alternatives to television may be, they can never come close to duplicating that reach. So while advertisers may talk up these other media, they're only going to budget so much money for them, with the bulk of their spending going to TV.

“Despite [broadcast] viewing being down due to the writers’ strike and the consumer usage of DVRs and time spent with other media, broadcast and cable networks are still a relatively efficient way for many advertisers to reach the biggest audience possible,” says David Joyce, an analyst with Miller Tabak.

Says Myers: “In terms of being able to influence large numbers of people in a short time, there are a limited number of options. A lot of advertisers and agencies still don’t see alternatives for their core marketing and communications tool: the 30-second commercial.”

Rather than being a competitor to television, the internet in this upfront in particular was seen as a complement, thanks to smart packaging of new media with traditional TV buys by the networks. Buyers came away believing they were getting the best of both.