21–30 of 323 posts
I assumed this would be the case and removed ads from my web game about a year ago. But didn't see a difference with traffic or retention (granted, I didn't A/B test it! I removed them 100%). Which was disappointing. The only difference I noticed is that I lost that revenue (5 figures). But probably depends on volume and/or type of ads? [EDIT] Clarified re: traffic
That would make sense. Ads are designed to be visible and clicked on, but on the other hand you can't go too far without annoying the users. It's a fine line to walk so it's not surprising you'd lose some users as a result. The unblockable ads they had on Facebook at some point is what finally pushed me to close my account.
but on the other hand you can't go too far without annoying the users Back in the ancient history before Google and search engines, a web site I built was submitted for inclusion in DMOZ. At the time, all web sites were hand-approved by an editor who also wrote a description of the site. The site was included, but the description noted that it was "covered with too many ads" or something similar. The site had one 468…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have troubles with the concept of a "non-intrusive" ad - If you don't notice it to any degree, it's not doing its job, and if you DO notice it to any degree, it's intrusive and disruptive (to a matching degree) I think you mean "Nobody cares ENOUGH" rather than "Nobody cares", and that's a big distinction.
Intrusiveness depends on the ad's relevance and value: An ad for a product you don't care about is disruptive. A 30% off promotion for a rarely discounted product you've wanted for a few years is amazing.
Not all intrusions are unwelcome, but they remain intrusions.
More detailed discussion of the 4 other datapoints: https://www.gwern.net/Ads#replication (I added McCoy et al 2007 just last night, so now it's 5 total: me, Pandora, Mozilla, LinkedIn, and McCoy et al 2007.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, I'd have different concerns about ads that I didn't consciously notice.
Good point - while I'd still lump that in as "disruptive", it's more accurate to be a bit more granular. One of the things that I think got completely overlooked in the recent Cambridge Analytica (and related) scandal was the idea that microtargeting actually WORKED to some degree. (Granted, it's easy to be manipulative when you aren't accountable for anything, but still - the idea went from vague promise to actual i…
Every-time I go for groceries in one of the Costco equivalent here, they have an alley to funnel you into the self-service machines area. This path has on both sides sweets and at the very end the bakery stuff before you are free to do your checkout.
Every single time, despite being well aware of the trap, I can't help but grab either some muffins or cookies.
More detailed discussion of the 4 other datapoints: https://www.gwern.net/Ads#replication (I added McCoy et al 2007 just last night, so now it's 5 total: me, Pandora, Mozilla, LinkedIn, and McCoy et al 2007.)
- https://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/gordon_b/files/...
- https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/...
- https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/130/4/1941/191...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but on the other hand you can't go too far without annoying the users Back in the ancient history before Google and search engines, a web site I built was submitted for inclusion in DMOZ. At the time, all web sites were hand-approved by an editor who also wrote a description of the site. The site was included, but the description noted that it was "covered with too many ads" or something similar. The site had one 468…
I believe Adsense policies allow only up to 3 ad units in a page. And after all ads below the fold do not perform that well. I see a lot of ads in long form content/news websites though, which do not receive a lot of pageviews. It's a tradeoff for most
I assumed this would be the case and removed ads from my web game about a year ago. But didn't see a difference with traffic or retention (granted, I didn't A/B test it! I removed them 100%). Which was disappointing. The only difference I noticed is that I lost that revenue (5 figures). But probably depends on volume and/or type of ads? [EDIT] Clarified re: traffic
I mean, he's not making a prediction on revenue. Gwern is making a statement about traffic. Did your traffic increase ~10%? From the Pandora paper, (which showed that as more ads were played during pandora sessions, subscriptions were boosted but free users left) it sounds like there's an "optimal advertisement" rate for revenue. Enough to not push away users, but not too much to deter users altogether.
It followed the same pattern as I've seen for years.
> Enough to not push away users, but not too much to deter users altogether.
That could be. I might've had a goldilocks amount.
That would make sense. Ads are designed to be visible and clicked on, but on the other hand you can't go too far without annoying the users. It's a fine line to walk so it's not surprising you'd lose some users as a result. The unblockable ads they had on Facebook at some point is what finally pushed me to close my account.
Also, at the risk of stating the obvious: clicking on the ads takes you off the site in question. Some of the people who would have been clicking around your site more are now at someone else's site.