Comments on: Online Advertising is too Stupid http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/ Ramblings about online advertising, ad networks & other techie randomness Wed, 28 May 2014 09:36:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: recover corrupt zip http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-147338 recover corrupt zip Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:00:00 +0000 http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/#comment-147338 Nice info and articles .Thank you. Nice info and articles .Thank you.

]]>
By: Justin Hitt http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-5233 Justin Hitt Wed, 05 Sep 2007 01:28:46 +0000 http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/#comment-5233 We don't have more relevant ad-context-matching because many involved in advertising only see a campaign from a single prospective. I've been working with clients to look at advertising on-line as a navigational tool, like direct response advertising is off-line. An ads purpose goes from "look at me" to "use me to get what you want." An advertising network I manage maintains a strong 0.5% to 1.0% CTR -- but that means turning away many advertising dollars. A client's network pushing 25 million impressions a day with only a 0.01% to 0.02% CTR -- they accept anyone who will ante up. (As an advertiser, I want the CTR! As a publisher, I want the CPM money without the CPA risk!) Publishers can get more relevant ads by focusing their sites and being more selective with advertisers to choose them around customers interests. This means being a guardian of the visitors experience, rather than the upfront gain of accepting who ever can pay. With higher CTR, you'll find you can make the same money with fewer resources than a high impression network. Plus, users won't consider your ads as advertising because they will better serve their interests. Best, Justin We don’t have more relevant ad-context-matching because many involved in advertising only see a campaign from a single prospective.

I’ve been working with clients to look at advertising on-line as a navigational tool, like direct response advertising is off-line. An ads purpose goes from “look at me” to “use me to get what you want.”

An advertising network I manage maintains a strong 0.5% to 1.0% CTR — but that means turning away many advertising dollars. A client’s network pushing 25 million impressions a day with only a 0.01% to 0.02% CTR — they accept anyone who will ante up.

(As an advertiser, I want the CTR! As a publisher, I want the CPM money without the CPA risk!)

Publishers can get more relevant ads by focusing their sites and being more selective with advertisers to choose them around customers interests. This means being a guardian of the visitors experience, rather than the upfront gain of accepting who ever can pay.

With higher CTR, you’ll find you can make the same money with fewer resources than a high impression network. Plus, users won’t consider your ads as advertising because they will better serve their interests.

Best,

Justin

]]>
By: Mike http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-4142 Mike Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:08:04 +0000 http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/#comment-4142 That's very true, I feel very behind :) That’s very true, I feel very behind :)

]]>
By: Cam http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/comment-page-1/#comment-4141 Cam Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:07:06 +0000 http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/08/14/online-advertising-is-too-stupid/#comment-4141 First time on Pandora!? You work too much dude. First time on Pandora!? You work too much dude.

]]>