Live data from Hacker News

What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

thecorrespondent.com

201–210 of 372 posts

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#201

A very easy way to break this argument is to not look at huge known companies like eBay and Amazon, but brand new companies 1-2 years old that have grown almost entirely by online ads. Eventually word of mouth kicks in, but there are plenty of smart operators that built their entire brand and revenue off of ads. Works best in online direct to consumer brands.

Another thing marketers in US and to a certain extent Europe fail to see is how digital has evolved in Asia and think through what it means for their own work. The same marketing giants which spend 90% of the hundreds of millions of dollars per brand per year on TV in the US spend 90% in digital in China and are increasingly shifting in other Asia markets. This reflects shifting consumer time spent on vehicle.

Now big company marketers are used to thinking of US as a homogeneous market for efficiency reasons and so TV still works in US if your target audience claims a broad demographic. However, they're beginning to learn that you'll simply not reach enough consumers if your target demographic is say young adults in the West coast if you do a TV heavy plan. US in general lags China in media landscape shift but the media behavior of the more valuable demographics are actually much closer to China than averages tell you.

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#202
post #99

This is a rather unimpressive article. Yes, brand advertising is a disaster, just like it has always been. But to say that all digital advertising has unknown ROI is ridiculous. Digital direct response advertising allows very accurate ROI calculations. (Admittedly, a lot of advertisers are not applying the tools to their advantage. They call that the "Google stupid tax". Ditto these days on Facebook.) And direct resp…

Hi this is the author of the article. You're just making the exact mistake this article is about: you assume people who click on your ad and then buy something, bought something BECAUSE of your ad. From the article: "Suppose Luigi’s Pizzeria hires three teenagers to hand out coupons to passersby. After a few weeks of flyering, one of the three turns out to be a marketing genius. Customers keep showing up with coupons…

That's what conversion lift studies are for. Deliberately don't show ads to a holdout group of eligible users, and measure the difference.

e.g., https://www.facebook.com/business/help/688346554927374

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#203
post #148

I’m skeptical about one of the main premises of the article: that brand keywords don’t have a positive ROI. Background: I took part in running millions of dollars of brand keywords for multiple companies. This is not what my business sells anymore. I’ll explain my counterargument in two different ways: with an analogy, and with data from a project that I was tasked with figuring out whether branding ads had an ROI. I…

Honest question here...

I thought analogies were supposed to be simplified to ease understanding. This one is complex and hard to follow -- is that because the underlying idea is so complex that even the simplified form is complicated?

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#204

Maybe this is just a generational thing, but I still have never clicked on an ad. I hate ads. I don't know anyone who likes them. I don't know anyone who has intentionally clicked on them. I have literally never met anyone who places any value in advertising at all. Everyone hates it with 100% of their being. It is the garbage we all just sort of accept exposure to as some sort of fee for existing online. Who are all…

I have never clicked on an ad, and I can't imagine anything that would get me to be willing to click on an ad.

But I don't hate ads. I only hate the tracking that comes with them.

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#205
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a defense strategy. And it's necessary.

"Nice organic customer flow you've got there. It'd be a shame if it all went away because you didn't pay us." --Google

"It's not our fault that our ads look entirely identical to our search results"

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reliably someone comes along every few months to question digital ads. I always come back to analyses of incrementality as the real proof. Take an audience of X people. Divide them in two. Show ads to your test group, don't show to control. Watch your business grow and gauge the lift between the two audiences. The companies that know how to advertise at scale do this constantly and can gauge the real effect of their…

How do you separate "people who haven't seen an ad" into a group in Google analytics? I don't believe "organic" source does that, because that means they weren't targeted by the ad in the first place, creating a bias.

Off the top of my head, you could do geographic bucketing. Take say 100 cities, and only run ads in 50 of them.

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#207
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also have a way to beat adblockers that I'm afraid of bringing to light Proxying ads through as first-party content? If you really are invested in making them work ethically, consider these ground rules: https://bostik.iki.fi/aivoituksia/random/no-stalking.html

I find, as a consumer, I disagree with the text only requirement. Videos are certainly off limits as a nuisance. However images convey a lot of information very quickly, and can be visually "skipped" in a way text cannot. When presented an ad for protein powder alongside my workout diets article, I want to see what it looks like. The presentation of the product is an important factor in whether or not I pursue it. It…

[deleted]

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#208
Where companies have investment, they can afford to place ads that are unprofitable. Though LV (Lifetime Value) can make an unprofitable ad profitable eventually, I question any measure of "effectiveness" other than profitability.

That said, by every measure that we make, Facebook ads for our local events have been profitable for us.

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#209

Maybe this is just a generational thing, but I still have never clicked on an ad. I hate ads. I don't know anyone who likes them. I don't know anyone who has intentionally clicked on them. I have literally never met anyone who places any value in advertising at all. Everyone hates it with 100% of their being. It is the garbage we all just sort of accept exposure to as some sort of fee for existing online. Who are all…

I have clicked on ads. I wish ads were better or more relevant, I find myself spending unreasonable amounts of time looking for things which should be more easily found - a problem which could be solved with better advertising. You could advertise books/shows/movies to me (based on your current search, your wish list, your past purchases, you might be interested in ...) because I'm certain there are plenty of books I…

> I wish ads were better or more relevant

I honestly don't. I actively don't want ads to be tailored to me, and not just because doing that requires spying on me.

In the past, most of the value that ads have given me have been as indicators of the target audience for content. For instance, I can leaf through a magazine I've never heard of and know, based on the ads, whether its a magazine I'm likely to enjoy.

Targeted ads completely destroy this value proposition, leaving ads without much value to me at all.

Re: What do we really know about the effectiveness of digital advertising?

#210

Maybe this is just a generational thing, but I still have never clicked on an ad. I hate ads. I don't know anyone who likes them. I don't know anyone who has intentionally clicked on them. I have literally never met anyone who places any value in advertising at all. Everyone hates it with 100% of their being. It is the garbage we all just sort of accept exposure to as some sort of fee for existing online. Who are all…

The kind of person who clicks on ads also buys stuff. The negative, "if you don't click on ads, you don't buy stuff," may not be true in the strictest sense, but may be true for so many ways that matter. Facebook is full of ads, you know Facebook users. Instagram has the most effective ads on the planet, maybe the only inventory on Earth where brand advertising works. You know plenty of Instagram users. YouTube's ad…

Yeah I think Facebook and Instagram ads work great because people are there trying to fill empty time. They don't mind where it leads them. Whereas on YouTube they often want to watch that particular video and they will view advertising as a greater annoyance.

In my experience (helping a family member with a small niche e-commerce store) FB advertising works. To the point that if the ads stop, the revenue stops almost entirely. We tried it last month when stock ran low and sales dried up until the supplier came through and the ads started again.

Post reply on HN