effectiveness

Effectiveness of B2B Online Display Advertising Questioned

Source: http://www.addon.tv/media-news/effectiveness-of-b2b-online-display-advertising-questioned.html

Effectiveness of B2B Online Display Advertising Questioned


According to a new report from Forrester, summarized by MarketingProfs, only 13% of B2B interactive marketers say they have increased online display budgets in 2011 relative to 2010 levels, in large part due to perceptions of ineffectiveness.

71% of B2B marketers surveyed say they used display advertising during the fourth quarter of 2010, whereas 86% of B2C marketers reported doing so.

Attitudes toward online display are negative, particularly toward ad exchanges, DSPs (demand-side platforms), and ad networks:

  • 27% of B2B marketers say they anticipate increased effectiveness of display advertising via exchanges over the next three years
  • 21% expect increased effectiveness of display media via DSPs over the next three years
  • 16% expect increased effectiveness of display ads via ad networks over the next three years

Given lengthy and complex purchase cycles, says the report, most B2B marketers focus display efforts on increasing brand awareness, lead generation, reaching key target audiences, and driving direct sales.

Only 20% of marketers focus display efforts on increasing site visits (e.g., using campaigns to drive clicks to lead-securing and nurturing opportunities such as webinars, whitepapers, and virtual events). Still fewer marketers focus display efforts on driving brand favorability (17%) and customer lifetime value (14%), observes the report.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, July 18th, 2012 news No Comments

This GM Ad Cancellation Is Big, Bad News (FB)

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/attention-facebook-investors-this-gm-ad-cancellation-is-big-bad-news-2012-5

chart of the day, facebook revenue growth ahead of ipo, april 2012

In what should come as a shock to potential investors, one of the world’s biggest advertisers, GM, has announced that it is pulling a $10 million campaign from Facebook…because the ads don’t work.

The effectiveness of Facebook ads has always been a big question-mark, with some data suggesting that the ads just don’t perform well.

According to Sharon Terlep, Shayndi Rice, and Suzanne Vranica of the Wall Street Journal, GM decided to pull the ads after meeting with Facebook executives and coming away unconvinced that they were effective.

GM currently spends $40 million a year on its Facebook presence.

Importantly, however, only $10 million of that spending goes went to Facebook.

The other $30 million goes to pay ad agencies and others to create content for Facebook and maintain GM’s pages and presence on Facebook.

In other words, GM has just killed the only part of its Facebook advertising presence that it was paying Facebook for.

Here’s the key section of the WSJ article:

Asked about the move, GM marketing chief Joel Ewanick said the auto maker, “is definitely reassessing our advertising on Facebook, although the content is effective and important.” Content refers to the unpaid Facebook pages many companies use to promote their products.

GM, started to re-evaluate its Facebook strategy earlier this year after its marketing team began to question the effectiveness of the ads. GM marketing executives, including Mr. Ewanick, met with Facebook managers to address concerns about the site’s effectiveness and left unconvinced advertising on the website made sense, according to people familiar with GM’s thinking.

Importantly, GM’s skepticism about Facebook is not due to a skepticism about digital advertising overall. GM spends about $300 million a year on digital brand advertising–just not on Facebook.

The growth of Facebook’s advertising business has slowed sharply in recent quarters, and the business achieved growth of only 37% year over year in Q1.

Advertiser skepticism may be one reason for this.

facebook google yahoo revenueAlthough some people are convinced that Facebook will eventually be a bigger company than Google, there is very little evidence to support this contention. At the same time, there is much to suggest that this conclusion is simply unwarranted:

  • Facebook is growing significantly more slowly than Google was at this stage of its development
  • Advertising on Facebook, however well-targeted, is like advertising on walls at a party (people are there to socialize, not buy stuff). Advertising on Google, meanwhile, is advertising to people who have explicitly expressed interest in your product (See: “Like Hell Facebook Is Killing Google“)

Facebook just rolled out a suite of new impressive-looking ad products, which will include large ads in users’ news feeds. These new units seemed to be well-received by advertisers, at least to the extent that they were excited about hearing more about them.

But GM appears to have gone to the trouble to hear a lot about them–and still came away unimpressed.

The loss of a $10 million deal obviously won’t dent the ~$5 billion of revenue Facebook is expected to generate this year. But the loss of lots of clients like GM will begin to dent it. And for a company whose growth rate is already decelerating, there’s no way this can be construed as good news.

SEE ALSO: Sorry, Facebook Fans, These Numbers Just Aren’t That Impressive

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, May 15th, 2012 news No Comments

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5882648/purify-your-water-with-a-burnt-stick

Purify Your Water With a Burnt StickIt uses the same principle as your Brita filter to purify water, but Black+Blum’s Eau Good bottle does it with way more style using a stick of charcoal that’s always visible through the bottle’s lovely curves.

Known as Binchotan, the black stick is a type of carbon made from tree branches, which the Japanese have been using to soften and purify water for centuries. It can even reduce the amount of chlorine in your H2O, though the passive process does require quite a few hours to work its magic. So it’s recommended you leave the Eau Good bottle sitting overnight before drinking. We recommend staring at the bottle while it works.

To prevent the charcoal from floating to the surface, the $20 plastic bottle has been designed with a slight bulge on the side, keeping the $4 Binchotan stick submerged at all times. It’s promised to work for up to 6 months before it needs to be replaced, while a quick 10 minute boil at the 3 month mark will help ensure its effectiveness. And when it does stop working, you can of course just toss the charcoal stick in your garden, where mother nature will recycle it for you. [Black+Blum via bookofjoe]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 6th, 2012 Uncategorized No Comments

Here Are The Winners And Losers

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/super-bowl-ads-2012-here-are-the-winners-and-losers-2012-2


clint eastwood

There’s fascinating disconnect between which advertisers the media thinks did well on last night’s Super Bowl and what the research says was effective.

To hear the business press tell it, Clint Eastwood’s “Halftime in America” spot rocked the house. It was indeed a great spot from a creative point of view.

But it didn’t even show up in the Ace Metrix Top 10. Ace Metrix measures a panel of 500 consumers who watch ads and rate them for effectiveness. That research says Doritos’ sling baby ad won the night.

It was also a big night for dogs. Volkswagen’s much anticipated follow-up to its little Darth Vader spot from last year used an obese dog getting in shape to gets its revenge on a VW it wanted to chase down the street (and then somehow ended up in the Star Wars cantina scene).

Skechers used a dog — Mr. Quiggly — in a greyhound race.

As did Bud Light, whose appeal with Weego, a rescue dog, was heartwarming.

So did Doritos, in another comedic appeal revolving around the whole Dogs v. Cats war.

There weren’t any total disasters — last year both Groupon and HomeAway had to apologize for their ads — but there were some failures in the sense that clients ads bored people or went unnoticed.

Chase ran an ad that for the life of me I can’t recall even though I am paid to remember these things. And TaxACT’s ad, featuring a kid who urinates in a swmming pool, was disgusting.

Later today — much later — we’ll take a look at how B.I.’s readers judged the ads with the results of our Super Bowl ad readers’ poll. Vote early, and often!

Please follow Advertising on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 6th, 2012 news No Comments

More and more tools to block ads and other “distractions”

As more and more users adopt tools to de-clutter web pages and remove all distractions (such as ads) the effectiveness of display ads will continue to decline, despite innovations and advancements in targeting technologies.

Source: http://lifehacker.com/5568752/add-safari-reader+like-powers-to-firefox-and-chrome

Add Safari Reader-Like Powers to Firefox and ChromeThe Safari 5 feature that’s caught the web’s attention is the Reader button, which strips down articles and blog posts into an ad-free, highly readable format. Two add-ons for Firefox and Chrome do a good job of recreating that convenience.

Add Safari Reader-Like Powers to Firefox and ChromeIf you missed our round-up of what’s new in Safari 5, the short explanation of Reader is that, while many bookmarklets have come along to offer a simplified, less-cluttered reading experience, Safari is the first major browser to go ahead and offer that kind of feature by default, as an address bar button. If you’re a fan of bookmarklets, and your bookmarks aren’t too cluttered to lose them in, we recommend the tools from arc90’s Readability, the Instapaper Text bookmarklet, and the Readable app for highly customized formatting.

But maybe you want your Firefox or Chrome rig to offer that kind of button-click functionality. You’re in luck. First off, here’s the Top 10 feature we’ll try our reading tools out on—click the image for a larger view:

Add Safari Reader-Like Powers to Firefox and Chrome

Now here are two add-ons for Firefox and Chrome, and a look at how they do at getting all minimalist with the text and pics. Click any of the images below, too, for a larger view

Readability (Firefox)

Add Safari Reader-Like Powers to Firefox and Chrome
Baris Derin rolled the Readability bookmarklet into a full-fledged add-on for Firefox, but also added in a pretty neat auto-scrolling feature for the true lean-back-and-read experience. Readability tends to keep more of the text and formatting in and around the page, but strips out all the marketing and navigation material. It places an “R” button in the lower-right status area of Firefox, which isn’t the most convenient spot for our use, but some may prefer having it hidden away until needed. Notice the transparent icons, too, that provide printing, email, and refresh functions for live-updating posts.

iReader (Chrome)

Add Safari Reader-Like Powers to Firefox and ChromeMhd Hejazi’s iReader is directly inspired by Safari’s Reader function, offering the same kind of pop-out white box that darkens the rest of the page, a button right in the address bar, and very, very minimal decoration—as you can see, it pared down our Top 10 feature quite a bit. There are also keyboard shortcuts for Windows and Mac to activate iReader, and options to change the background opacity, font and formatting, and add a “Send with Gmail” link to your articles. Neat stuff.


Both add-ons are free downloads. Know of another reading/simplifying extension that gets the job done? Tell us about it in the comments. Thanks to emmikkelsen for the inspiration!

Readability [Add-ons for Firefox]
iReader [Google Chrome extension gallery]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 21st, 2010 news No Comments

The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing(tm) – Digital String Theory

UPDATED:  March 2014

Grand Unified Theory of Marketing by Augustine Fou 2014 Update from Dr Augustine Fou

 

UPDATED:  September 21, 2011

Most people use the term integrated marketing now and it has come to mean loose “integration” or interrelationships between marketing channels, like putting a web address on a TV ad, a QR code on a print ad, etc.

I am adding the following slide called “Unified Marketing – ecosystem of touchpoints” to put forth the concept of unified marketing.  This starts by putting the customer in the “middle” and wrapping their purchase funnel around them. Then we add the 3 concentric circles: 1) on-site, 2) off-site, and 3) third party to represent the types of channels at the disposal of the marketer/advertiser.

Then all tactics can be plotted on this single, unified marketing chart to reveal whether there are any gaps (not enough activity) or redundancies (too much spend).

Unified Marketing – ecosystem of touchpoints

Additional Reading:  Digital is a Philosophy

 

ORIGINAL POST

Just as physicists and mathematicians have been searching for the grand unified theory of the universe, I have been looking for a way to tie together the disparate disciplines of marketing and advertising, a way to correlate metrics from different industries that interrelate with marketing (e.g. market research, Nielsen, etc.), a way to put all past theories in context and perspective (Michael Porter’s Five Forces, Net Promoter, etc.), and a way to explain marketing successes and failures — all in one.

My method is the scientific method – which is simply put doing experiments and making observations that either support or refute hypotheses.

A grand unified theory will also need to be able to take into account phenomena such as social networks, etc. What are the organizing principles of such; what is the value?

Why now?

Using digital tools — such as search volume trends — we can start to correlate marketing spend effectiveness across different forms of media and also different advertising and marketing techniques.  The example below compares eTrade and @Drobo. What is most embarrassing is that eTrade, a well known brand from the first dot-com heyday, spent lots of money creating and airing TV ads which it hoped would go viral. They even paid for Superbowl ads for the last 2 years to promote the “eTrade talking babies” as you see from the 2 spikes in search volume during February of 2008 and 2009.  However, when compared to Drobo (a startup company that developed a very easily upgradeable back up hard drive array), it is shocking to note that Drobo spent NOTHING on advertising and relied entirely on word of mouth and an awesome product. And their search volume is not only larger than eTrade but also sustainably larger despite zero advertising and media cost.  The “totals” even suggest that the volume under the curve of Drobo is 8X (EIGHT TIMES) that of eTrade.

So if you consider that eTrade spent millions of dollars to create the TV ads and even more millions of dollars to air them on TV in order to drive interest, demand, and hopefully new customers, then Drobo can be considered to have gotten the equivalent of 8X more dollars in advertising and media – for FREE using techniques and channels other than TV advertising. So what does that say about the relative value of TV advertising compared to these other, newer techniques?

etrade-drobo-search-volume

godaddy vs megan fox

megan-fox-godaddy-search-volume

Grand Unified Theory of Marketing - Digital String Theory

Grand Unified Theory of Marketing – Digital String Theory

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, October 29th, 2009 digital strategy No Comments

the overall advertising pie will shrink

the greater efficiencies of “digital” mean that the same amount of “advertising” can be achieved with fewer dollars because more waste can be eliminated. The decreases in ad spending in traditional media channels like newspapers will only be partially replaced by ad spending online.

For example, the dollars that used to fund newspaper classified advertising has been replaced by free online classifieds through Craigslist. While newspapers had incremental costs due to materials, printing, labor, and distribution, online classifieds have virtually no incremental cost.

Similarly print advertising, which was based on targeting ads to specific demographics of readerships are being replaced by online ads which can be more finely targeted to even more niche readerships — e.g. contextual advertising. And the revenue models based around cost per click are inherently more efficient (and thus lower cost) than the impression-based revenue models of magazines. Again for every dollar taken out of print advertising, only a few cents are needed to replace it in “digital.”

100544-ad-spending-by-media

Agree with me or tell me I’m stupid @acfou

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CCA – cost of customer acquisition

how do we judge the relative merit and effectiveness of different types of advertising? By finding a common parameter that can be used to compare “apples to apples.” We argue that cost of customer acquisition is a great candidate for such a parameter.

For example, if television advertising cost $50 million to produce and air, and 1,000 people came to the acquisition website, and 10 people applied for and received credit cards then the CCA — cost of customer acquisition would be $5 million ($50 million / 10 people who got the credit card). Of course television advertisers would claim that the “impressions” from TV would have “branded” millions more people and they would eventually get a credit card from the company. That’s possible. But for the purposes of this exercise, if there is no absolute end-to-end tracking, we don’t count it. Because, for example, many other possible scenarios can also occur, like the person saw this ad for a credit card but ended up getting a card from a different bank, they saw and remembered the ad but they already had several credit cards from the company, etc.

With “online” we can easily see lift in search activity around the time that brand/awareness advertising is in-flight. This is one of the best indicators of interest — the person saw the TV ad, and was inspired enough to go online to do more research to inform their own purchase decision. Modern consumers will typically search and then click through. In rare instances, they will type the URL, but it is usually the domain name, not the special URL — domain_name.com/special_url — just because of pure laziness or simply because they forgot the /special_url portion.

Now let’s look at a print example: a print ad cost $5 million to produce and traffic in targeted magazines. About 1,000 people came to the website and 10 people ended up purchasing the advertised product. So the CCA is $500,000 per customer acquired.  There may be more people who saw the ad and eventually came in to buy a product. But again, there is a problem of attribution.

Now a final example from “online” marketing.  Search ads were run using Google Adwords and a $1 CPC (cost per click) was paid. Of those people who clicked through 1 in 20 purchased a product. So it took 20 clicks at $1 each to achieve 1 sale – so the cost of customer acquisition is $20.

OK, so what about prodycts not sold online? We can use a proxy which has a known conversion to sales. For example, once a coupon is printed from the website, from historic data the advertiser knows that 30% end up using the coupon – i.e. redeeming with a purchase. So, again, if we used a $1 CPC and 1 in 20 ended up printing the coupon and 30% of those “converted” to an offline sale, the CCA would be $66.67  ($20/0.30).

So to recap

Television – $5 million CCA

Print – $500,000 CCA

Paid Search – $20 CCA

Paid Search + Offline Sale – $67 CCA

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, February 21st, 2009 digital, integrated marketing, marketing No Comments

Dr. Augustine Fou is Digital Consigliere to marketing executives, advising them on digital strategy and Unified Marketing(tm). Dr Fou has over 17 years of in-the-trenches, hands-on experience, which enables him to provide objective, in-depth assessments of their current marketing programs and recommendations for improving business impact and ROI using digital insights.

Augustine Fou portrait
http://twitter.com/acfou
Send Tips: tips@go-digital.net
Digital Strategy Consulting
Dr. Augustine Fou LinkedIn Bio
Digital Marketing Slideshares
The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing