101–110 of 156 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For better results, have that intern gather the email addresses of those 12,000 pre-approved sites, and email them a personal ad placement buy offer, or request a media kit. You'll find all sorts of personalization opportunities and you get to cut out the middle-man.
and now have 12000 billing portals to manage? 12000 different sites to update every time you update your ads?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For better results, have that intern gather the email addresses of those 12,000 pre-approved sites, and email them a personal ad placement buy offer, or request a media kit. You'll find all sorts of personalization opportunities and you get to cut out the middle-man.
and now have 12000 billing portals to manage? 12000 different sites to update every time you update your ads?
Billing is a solved problem too, no?
The fix to online ad fraud is obvious: CPA (Cost per action). If a signup occurs, then you pay for the ads. If a user pays for the service, then you pay for the ads. It would align the incentives of the advertisers (people paying for ads) and the ad networks (google). Currently it is the ad networks incentive to use CPC and to hide fraud by not releasing traceable ids, allowing clicks from bots/proxies/adsense holder…
The question arrises when you have to start from scratch. They would also have to start with an open targeting to learn what performs for them.
More terrible tech reporting from NYT, why are they being spammed here so much now? Can it stop? Tired of the clickbait and paywall. I thought HN was against both.
Go back and read old articles though and holy heck they were good. I feel like an old friend is gone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a major sports apparel company sponsors a famous athlete to wear their gear on televised events, they are getting no activity beyond an impression. Doesn't mean the sporting event is trash. It's up to the advertiser to determine whether or not those impressions have value.
Isn't that the thrust of the article though? They narrowed their ad spend to whitelisted sites and have not seen a drop in sales. If the major sports apparel company stopped paying for endorsements and saw no drop in sales, you might be tempted to conclude that those endorsements are not good investments.
A company moved endorsement money from lots of lesser-known teams to a few better-known teams and their sales stayed the same.
So, they run their campaigns with an open targeting and then they trimed the websites to the ones users clicked, and then, selected which ones had better brand value for them. That's simple optimization and they should have always been doing that. The question arrises when you have to start from scratch. They would also have to start with an open targeting to learn what performs for them.
It's crazy how many apologists there are for Big Web Advertising! So many commenters are giving the customer a hard time for realizing, "99% of my budget is spent on zero value, i.e. fraud." The biggest lie the online advertising industry has sold is aggregate statistics. Of course a handful of traffic sources convert massively while the supermajority (99%) don't convert at all. Advertising intermediaries rely on the…
The reason a Chase ad ends up on 400K sites is not because all of those sites are contextually relevant, it's because of retargeting. A user goes to chase.com, gets pixeled, and then shown retargeting ads on what ever websites they happen to visit that are hooked up to the exchanges. This could be either a good or bad thing.