Lately, I have been able to explain to customers why online advertising can be misleading to the advertiser when it is based on “traditional” models of CPM (cost per thousand), where the advertiser allegedly pays for “visualization” of the ad.

http://vitormagalhaes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/0930261.gif

According to the recent study “ The Eyetools/MarketingSherpa eye tracking study “, about 60% of site visitors Web see ads in the immediate visibility zone (typically, top half of the page). In the non-visible area (part of the page that requires Scroll) the situation worsens... although ads in these areas are visible to up to 75% of users, only about 25% actually sees the ads.

Assuming that about 50% of the ads are in the non-visible area (conservative hypothesis!), using the data submitted by eMarketer for the American market, this represents a waste of about one billion dollars! It's not the right way to say it, but... 1 billion (I, I know! I know!:)) dollars wasted on advertising that is paid but is not “visualized” by users!

And the situation worsens when we talk about confidence levels. Second a 2007 study by Nielsen, only 26% of consumers “trust” online advertising based on banners. That is, even if the ads are seen, they do not catch the attention of most of the audience. Which means the rate of recall and effectiveness of campaigns is minimal!

We are told the market and the media that online advertising is positive for the brand. These numbers tell me it's not like that. What these numbers tell us is that actually, in the American market alone, there are many millions of dollars spent (literally!) on online advertising are, from the advertiser's perspective, thrown to waste. I mean, I value anything. Euro or Dollar, be it mine or customers, this is totally unsustainable!

Returning to the model based on “CPM”, I always found the term “visualizations” misleading and disguised. In fact, the advertiser does not pay for every 1000 page views, pays yes for every 1000 times that the ad is loaded what, let's face it, is very different.

For online media networks, of course this is a friendly revenue management model since given the growth of online advertising and the fact that they easily get 100% occupancy rates, the model guarantees fixed revenue.

In fact, we watch online an ancient history of the world of Advertising: no matter what the advertiser realizes the real return on advertising investment.

And that's why all of a sudden, a basic model like Google's AdWords, supported by a giant consumer universe, can be disruptive and shake up conventional advertising models, offering the market ** ONLY**, which this one long, long ago:

  • a segmentation model presented to those with potential interest in the announcement, offered by the research context;

  • a successful pay model, where the advertiser only pays the direct “consumption” of advertising, in this case by clicking the ad, and the ability to fully measure the effectiveness of the campaign!

As much as media groups want to preserve traditional models, if there is one thing this phase 2.0 of the Internet has taught us, it is the market that defines the rules of operation (see the example of the music industry).

Although I cannot predict the “When”, I have no doubt that it will only be a matter of time for all advertising models to go through a pure logic of Lead, in which you pay for direct contact with the customer, or Conversion, in which you pay for the business generated.

In this future, which despite the efforts of advertising lobbies, I believe is close, the cost of advertising will be indexed to the interactions generated, and the value of qualifying these interactions, making the current GRP metrics and such obsolete.

If we look at traditional means, we can easily predict what will happen:

  • Television: with the appearance of interactive models, with IPTV and WebTV, interaction with the user becomes possible, allowing the ad not to be issued in undifferentiated “broadcast” but presented according to the user profile and measuring the result of that interaction;

  • Media: paper advertising already today allows you to create interaction models, leading the user to interact by SMS or phone. If we associate with each medium a differentiated number, we can measure the results, publish the publication, and perceive the respective returns;

  • Radio: Probably the hardest way... the future of radio is hard to predict. If you go through online radio, we have the levels of targeting and interaction of any online media. The big question is to understand the future of conventional radio;

  • Outdoor: already presents possibilities for interaction. There are several experiences (despite yet incipient) of Bluetooth and RFID interactivity. On the other hand, interactive Outdoor models begin to appear that create new interfaces and create immersive experiences;

In the BySide project, we enter the market creating a disruptive online advertising model, paid for by Lead, when in the Internet banner, more than generate a click, we generate a voice call directly to the advertiser's Call Center. Or when we allow it, measure Lead generation on paper media.

Information on these services can be found, in particular Pub2Call, in our BySide website.