Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, at least cat food is something consumable and that your cat'll use up and you'll need to order more of. Unlike say, consumer grade CPUs or specific video games.
I bought a TV on Amazon a while back, they knew I looked it up and they knew I paid money for it and they knew I received it and I even left a review so they knew I used it. I got ads to buy that same TV that they knew I already bought for months after I bought it.
Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
41–50 of 239 posts
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#42My friend in commercial real estate said something I thought was interesting: the cost per acquisition in a mall can often beat the online CPA. I had assumed malls would have much higher CPA. It'd seem low-priced point retailers like Bonobos lend creedance to her claim.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly what I am saying. It’s much easier to block Google ads than Facebook or Amazon ads. Facebook ads are seen on thier site and in their apps as is Amazon’s. Google is not a “destination site” aside from YouTube.
When I perform a google search for something with no adblocker on, 'sponsored results' show up -- google ads, on google's website. Adblockers hide these. How is this different from fb or amazon aads?
The majority of users are using FB on mobile and the FB app is one of the most popular. Ad Blockers that most people are using on mobile - either via the built in content blocking framework on iOS or by using another browser on Android, don’t work on FB.
FB uses “native ads” and “boosted content” that are indistinguishable from regular posts.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook has terrible targeting. They might collect lots of data but they truly suck at utilizing it. It is pathetic. Google is fairly mediocre. Literally nothing in the quality of online advertising has changed since 1999. Sidenote, adblockers work with Amazon and Facebook.
Facebook has better interest based targeting than anyone else on the web. Google is the king of intent based targeting. Source: I've managed and tested $10 million+ of ad spend that needed provable ROI across a wide variety of platforms.
I'm curious about your experience here. In my experience Digital folks come with a lot of smoke and mirrors that crumble under standard statistical analysis.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, at least cat food is something consumable and that your cat'll use up and you'll need to order more of. Unlike say, consumer grade CPUs or specific video games.
I bought a TV on Amazon a while back, they knew I looked it up and they knew I paid money for it and they knew I received it and I even left a review so they knew I used it. I got ads to buy that same TV that they knew I already bought for months after I bought it.
The most predictable purchase for someone who has purchased one TV and reviewed it positively is the exact same TV for another room.
They are just following the money, it might not make sense to an individual, but product recommendations are optimised for sales based on historical data.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#46This is my bear case for Google. Google offers the least precise targeting compared to Facebook and Amazon. Facebook knows more about its users because users tell it about themselves and Amazon knows more about purchasing habits of its users because of thier purchase and search history. If I’m searching for something with the intention on buying it, I am going to go to the specific site - like Priceline, hotels.com,…
Absolutely not the case. The Google machine includes:
Google Analytics, Adwords/Adsense, Doubleclick network, Android and store, Chrome Browser, Chrome OS, Maps/Streetview, Gmail, G-Suite, Youtube, Google Play, Google Fiber, Google Fi, Public DNS, all the various websites with 1st party cookies, connections to Salesforce CRM, and the recently announced Mastercard purchase data.
Facebook and Amazon are nowhere close this level of exposure from hardware devices to internet protocols to the biggest websites around, and anyone with experience in adtech will tell you the same thing. Also adblockers can trivially block any network request or DOM component on a page, including Facebook and Amazon ads.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#47This is my bear case for Google. Google offers the least precise targeting compared to Facebook and Amazon. Facebook knows more about its users because users tell it about themselves and Amazon knows more about purchasing habits of its users because of thier purchase and search history. If I’m searching for something with the intention on buying it, I am going to go to the specific site - like Priceline, hotels.com,…
Google and Mastercard Cut a Secret Ad Deal to Track Retail Sales https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-an...
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#48This is my bear case for Google. Google offers the least precise targeting compared to Facebook and Amazon. Facebook knows more about its users because users tell it about themselves and Amazon knows more about purchasing habits of its users because of thier purchase and search history. If I’m searching for something with the intention on buying it, I am going to go to the specific site - like Priceline, hotels.com,…
Google has a lot more data than Facebook and Amazon combined. The targeting is not just based on your current search query. It forms a model of your behavior using your entire search history and browsing history which contains significantly more personal details about you and isn't limited to what you're willing to share in the public eye of Facebook. They also track your browsing history through every site you visit…
All true, but as a potential advertiser you don't really get to use all that targeting when placing ads. Although to be fair that's mostly based on my experience with AdWords.
On Facebook I can advertise to people in a well-defined geographical area, who are interested in a scarily well-defined set of things.
On Google it's more of a just-in-time approach; catching people who are searching for something in a certain place etc.
My business doesn't lend itself to Amazon ads, but I can totally see how it'd generate an ROI far exceeding Google or Facebook for product businesses that sell on Amazon.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#49This is my bear case for Google. Google offers the least precise targeting compared to Facebook and Amazon. Facebook knows more about its users because users tell it about themselves and Amazon knows more about purchasing habits of its users because of thier purchase and search history. If I’m searching for something with the intention on buying it, I am going to go to the specific site - like Priceline, hotels.com,…
Facebook is dialing back the targeting you can use, it can take days to get your ad approved and I had an account for an insurance agency not be able to use the FB lead form capability because FB said it would be used by third parties. Fb might not be aligned to use their own strengths.
Re: Amazon Sets Its Sights on the $88B Online Ad Market
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook has better interest based targeting than anyone else on the web. Google is the king of intent based targeting. Source: I've managed and tested $10 million+ of ad spend that needed provable ROI across a wide variety of platforms.
I'm curious about your experience here. In my experience Digital folks come with a lot of smoke and mirrors that crumble under standard statistical analysis.
I mean, you don't need too many stat techniques for basic tracking:
1) Set up Facebook pixel on your checkout thank you page + collect referral into into a database.
2) Spend $1,000
3) See how many purchases Facebook reports came from Facebook, check out how many sales you get recently have the Facebook referrer.
4) Repeat if sales revenue > $1,000.
This is obviously the simplest use case possible, but there you are. It's pretty reliable.