Archive for the Advertising Category
Written on March 17, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book
B2B companies crave leads. Good leads. Quality leads.
At the right price.
Both Pay Per Click Advertising (PPC) and Buyer Hubs/Lead Generation sites offer opportunities to cap the Cost Per Lead and gain some control (which is not as easy in other media, save Direct Response.)
In this case, when I am referring to “Buyer Hubs”, I am not [...]
*** Read the full post by clicking on the headline above or, in Facebook, by clicking on the “View Original Post” link below. ***
See the rest here:
B2B Hubs Or PPC? Are All Leads Created Equal?
Tags: a-lot-lately ,Advertising ,buyer-hubs ,case ,changes-ahead ,companies-crave ,cost ,full ,inhouse-search ,into-the-new ,original-post ,search-marketer ,sites-offer ,strictly business ,will-it-look
No Comments
Written on March 17, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, marketing
Display ads in the Internet space are always an area of lively discussion. Do they work? How should their effectiveness be measured? What is the real value of a display ad? You can insert your question here.
One tried and true measurement for the medium though is just how much is being spent on display ads especially when held up against historical numbers. A press release about a report from Kantar Media and shared with us by TechCrunch shows that the world of display ads vs. it’s competition is doing alright overall.
The curious number is why there was a slip in the 4th quarter spending because it is the biggest buying season in every year no matter how far the economy has slid down the crapper. Maybe there was a shift to more search at that point? I don’t know.
This next chart though takes an interesting look at particular sectors and their overall advertising spend.
Looking at the only sectors of this report to show an uptick in spending, I would have to conclude that during bad economic times people talk on the phone while taking alternate mouthfuls of Doritos, Milk Duds and Prozac. That last bit of data was extremely unscientific in its analysis but I stand by the observation nonetheless.
So now, that we have an idea of what has happened what do you think will happen with the rest of advertising for the year? Will this year see a rebound? Will traditional channels continue to decline? Where will the display ad number be for 2010? Let’s hear it.
More:
Display Ad Spend Up in 2009 Despite Q4 Dip
Written on March 16, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book
During an investor and financial analyst webcast yesterday Google’s Vic Gundotra said that an “increasingly large” number of advertisers were doing mobile campaigns and that there was a “dramatic amount of interest” in mobile among those not yet advertising in mobile. Much of the webcast was devoted to demonstrating Google mobile products and initiatives and [...]
*** Read the full post by clicking on the headline above or, in Facebook, by clicking on the “View Original Post” link below. ***
Read the original here:
Google: Mobile Query Growth “Dramatically Higher” Than PC
Written on March 15, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book
The “Business of Making Money” (is there any other kind of business, really?) Local Online Advertising conference held by Borrell Associates in NYC a few weeks ago represented, for me, a turning point in my own understanding of the “local opportunity” and how it will bear fruit. First, a disclaimer: in my experience, novel concepts [...]
*** Read the full post by clicking on the headline above or, in Facebook, by clicking on the “View Original Post” link below. ***
More:
Redefining The Local Opportunity – Key Highlights & Takeaways From Borrell’s Local Online Advertising Conference
Written on March 14, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, marketing
There are certain things that anyone can hear and automatically say “I don’t think that’ll work very well” without doing any real research. You hear something and you have a visceral reaction that just makes you go with your gut because it makes sense. Even in those kind of no-brainer situations it helps when your “gut” is validated by a reputable source who actually did a little research.
The latest case of this occurrence comes from the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. As reported over at ars technica the prestigious group has done the research to help us all say that our collective gut is right on the money when it comes to paywalls for news: the idea pretty well sucks.
Advertising remains the primary means of support for online news outlets, and there’s a long uphill battle facing anyone trying to forge new business models, at least according to a report produced by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. The extensive report on the State of the Media examines numerous aspects of the media world, but emphasizes that, when it comes to online news, getting people to pay for content they otherwise value is “like trying to force butterflies back into their cocoons.”
Ouch. Last I heard, butterflies never go back into their cocoons. Boy it would be just like some mean old news guy like Rupert Murdoch to force a butterfly to do something so unnatural.
Some of the numbers that support this claim are that 81 percent of Internet users say they are fine with online ads of it keeps the content free. A surprising number of people click on these ads as well with 21 percent saying they do and the numbers going up to 39 percent when the level of someone’s Internet usage is high. On the downside, however, is the admission by these folks that they actually like ads because they “find them easy to ignore”. Ouch again.
The combined effect of lower ad impact and revenue has led many news sites to look for new ways to make some money, but the Pew report is not very optimistic on the prospects for other business models. Only seven percent of Americans said they would consider paying for news content and most said they would simply look for content elsewhere if their favorite site put up a pay wall.
The likelihood of hybrid offerings is increasing because the first company of any relevance that fails while trying a paywall only approach rather than the traditional free approach will get beat up pretty bad. Although the pressure for revenue is severe the downside of actually acting on all this paywall talk could be keeping folks away from it.
With only 7% of Americans saying that they would pay for content is seems hard to believe that there is any room for this model moving forward. What’s your take? Please be sure to comment in our new “pay per comment” section. You’d pay for that opportunity wouldn’t you?
See the original post here:
Pew Study Affirms Paywalls a Bad Move
Tags: a-long-uphill ,a-pay-wall- ,a-pretty-well ,Advertising ,business ,internet ,journalism- ,marketing ,media ,money ,project ,research ,research-center ,traditional
No Comments
Written on March 12, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing
comScore released a new study today examining the effects of display advertising in the European market—and it’s pretty dang impressive. The study (well, actually, report based on more than 20 studies) indicates that, despite minimal clicks on the ads themselves, “those exposed to online ad campaigns in Europe were 72 percent more likely to visit the advertiser’s website and 94 percent more likely to conduct a trademark search query on the advertiser’s brand, compared to a control group of similar Internet users who were not exposed to the campaigns.”
These figures are pretty staggering—especially when compared to US figures, which comScore reports as “an average lift of 49 percent in site visitation and 40 percent in trademark search queries across hundreds of ad effectiveness studies.” The European lift effects were most significant during the first week after exposure, but didn’t drop off dramatically.
comScore Director of Marketing Solutions Mike Shaw said in the press release,
These results help illustrate how online advertising works. Despite the long-held obsession with using clicks to measure campaign performance – which reflect only the immediate impact of an ad — the comScore studies demonstrate that the Internet is clearly effective as a latent brand-building medium. Europeans appear to be particularly receptive to online advertising, and whether it’s due to better creative, less ad clutter, or greater receptivity to online ads, the implication for brand advertisers is clear: ignore online as a brand-building channel at your own peril.
And I guess it also shows that it pays to know before you go . . . ad shopping.
What do you think? Why might Europeans be so influenced by display ads?
Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community
See more here:
Marketing in Europe? Display Works
Tags: advertiser ,Advertising ,book ,campaigns ,community ,display ,european ,immediate ,implication ,marketing ,research ,site-visitation
No Comments
Written on March 12, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing
Reuters has sat somewhat silently in the background of all the hub bub surrounding whether Google should be able to index stories and make money off that content through advertising. That has been an AP fight for the most part. The strategy has helped Reuters, at least in my eyes, because by staying out of the fray they are implying that they are about journalism first. That’s my take and yours may differ which is fine.
What the news organization has not done until yesterday is put out an official social media policy but that’s now complete. Mashable reports
Last night, Reuters released their social media policy, which includes instructing journalists to avoid exposing bias online and tells them specifically not to “scoop the wire” by breaking stories on Twitter.
The strict instruction makes it clear that even though news continually breaks on Twitter first — especially in disaster scenarios — Reuters journalists are to break their stories first via the wire and not on Twitter.
The social media policy in question also addresses a number of other Twitter, Facebook, and online concerns, offering up instructions and recommendations whenever possible.
The relationship between breaking news, social media and traditional news outlets is difficult to define. In one way you never want to limit the ability to gather and report news but the integrity of the news has to be kept in place.
Hence the rub. While social media may allow for someone to get a “scoop” there is the real danger that it ends up being a scoop of crap versus the truth or a clearer picture of a circumstance. Seeing something happen live is very visceral and exciting but it may only be one small portion of the truth and, in fact, could be completely unrepresentative of the totality of a situation. As a result people are shaping opinions and digesting the news based on a “gut reaction”. That’s important but so is gathering all of the facts and then forming a complete picture of a situation, not just a snapshot opinion. Waiting for a wire version of an event at least allows for some more time to gather data and tell fact from fiction.
So having said all of that I think that Reuters and any other hard news outlet is doing something that is essential as we move forward in the new world order of content creation and reality. The integrity of the news has to be preserved and just because social media outlets make it happen quickly in no way makes it more accurate. In fact, it will likely be less so.
Since there will be no way to stop the Twitter journalism that is evolving I hope that the main news reporting entities realize that they could be even MORE important in the future if they still take the time to vet information and then tell the whole story behind the pictures and events that are reported “on the scene”. While I know this is a conservative approach I think it will be critical moving forward for consumers to be able to judge what is fantastic against what is really happening and why it happened.
Maybe that’s going to be the real purpose of traditional news organizations going forward. To present a truly informed version of events and to help us put together the pieces of situations that are always much more complicated than 140 characters or a photo can convey. I think that is necessary and vital.
How does Reuters plan to do this? Through telling journalists to keep their personal stuff personal and to not display any bias that could boomerang on them. Also, having tweets looked at by someone else to ensure everything is above board is discussed. Read the policy if for nothing else to be informed 
.
So what do you think? Is the scoop more important than the whole truth? Is there danger in 140 character versions of events that are often far more complex? How can traditional news organizations maintain the balance that protects integrity but remains timely in the new world order of “report as you go”?
More here:
Reuters Tells Its Journalists That Twitter Does Not Trump the Wire
Written on March 11, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, marketing
Now here’s a great way to gather totally, completely unbiased information about a potential merger: ask the companies’ competitors. Okay, so the FTC isn’t completely crazy—of course other companies in the market would have a pretty good idea what the industry looks like and what a big merger might do. But still, we can only hope the FTC will remember to take their opinions with a grain of competitive salt.
AdMob, the popular mobile advertising company, and Google, the wanna-be-popular mobile advertising company, announced the deal in November. Google gave AdMob $750M in stock in the deal. The next month, consumer groups began lobbying against the deal. Now the FTC wants both advertisers and rivals to make sworn statements about the pending merger.
The probe isn’t public, but sources say the commission is “investigating whether Google’s proposed purchase of AdMob would reduce competition in the market for Internet advertising on mobile phones.” (Kind of a duh.) Google says it’s continuing to talk with the FTC and cooperate with requests for information.
Bloomberg consulted Thomas Ensign, an antitrust lawyer, on the matter. He said, “It’s difficult to envision a scenario where this development, if true, is positive for Google-AdMob, but it doesn’t necessarily mean the agency is going to challenge the deal.”
Just over a year ago, the US Department of Justice was hours from filing anti-trust charges against the search giant over another major advertising deal (with Yahoo). Is Google pushing their luck with this merger? Will GoogleMob hurt the mobile ad industry? Will the FTC stop the deal?
Go here to read the rest:
FTC Still Examining GoogleMob—Wants Feedback from Rivals
Written on March 11, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing
Google does what Google does and it has now opened the doors on an apps marketplace that is designed for Google Apps customers. Don’t think the overlap in terminology with the other app guys is coincidence either. The difference with this form of app though is the fundamental difference that separates Google from Apple. Google provides apps that are fundamental business needs and this strategy is where the search giant appears to be hanging its hat moving forward relating to search, advertising and more.
Yesterday the Official Google blog reported:
Every day, thousands of businesses choose the cloud. More than 2 million businesses have adopted Google Apps over the last three years, eliminating the hassles associated with purchasing, installing and maintaining hardware and software themselves.
We’ve found that when businesses begin to experience the benefits of cloud computing, they want more. We’re often asked when we’ll offer a wider variety of business applications — from accounting and project management to travel planning and human resources management. But we certainly can’t and won’t do it all, and there are hundreds of business applications for which we have no particular expertise.
First of all, having 2 million businesses using Google Apps is pretty impressive. While most are the SMB’s of the world, Google has shown the world the ability to penetrate enterprise accounts as well. Of course, this hits at another of the biggest competitors against the Goog: Microsoft.
Some apps that are part of the roll out are Intuit Online payroll, Manymoon project management, PS Connect and JIRA Studio for development to manage flow between various apps.
Watching this strategy unfold is pretty interesting. There is an awful lot riding on it and it would appear that Google has more of the pieces under their roof than any other competitor does. How this plays out should be fascinating. One of the final paragraphs of the post tells the real story:
For more information on the benefits of the Google Apps Marketplace to businesses, check out our Enterprise Blog post. Developers interested in learning how to integrate with Google Apps can check out our post on the Google Code Blog. Or, you can explore the Google Apps Marketplace directly at http://google.com/appsmarketplace.
Notice the order of how these are written. What it seems to be saying is that Google wants the enterprise and is daring everyone else to find a way to stop them.
Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community
Read more:
Google Hangs Out a Shingle for Its Apps Marketplace
Tags: a-little-more ,a-wider-variety ,Advertising ,apple ,book ,marketing ,marketplace ,search ,strategy ,using-different ,world
No Comments
Written on March 11, 2010 by admin
Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book
Beyond the iPhone one could convincingly argue that the best thing to happen to mobile advertising in the past year was Google’s announced acquisition of AdMob. It got everyone’s attention — especially the $750 million (stock) price tag.
It also single-handedly boosted the profile of all of AdMob’s competitors. As an almost direct response Apple, which [...]
*** Read the full post by clicking on the headline above or, in Facebook, by clicking on the “View Original Post” link below. ***
More:
US Regulators May Be Gearing Up For Google-AdMob Challenge
Tags: Advertising ,almost-direct ,apple ,book ,boosted-the ,facebook ,google: critics ,google: mobile ,headline ,past ,the-past
No Comments
