Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No one is willing to run the experiments necessary The people that would have the power to run this experiment have their entire careers depending on things staying as-is. Running the experiment carries a significant risk of exposing that the advertising operations they're responsible for provide much less ROI than they pretend it does. The unwillingness of anyone to run such an experiment is already an answer. Why…
I work in the field. Incrementality testing is a big part of marketing measurement at any reputable agency. Any claims to the contrary are FUD. That said, companies like P&G, Airbnb, and Uber, which are oft-cited as examples of digital not being worth it, fail to understand their own brand recognition and organic power, built through prior marketing efforts, as key to their current standing. Sure, TODAY, it doesn’t h…
Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
211–220 of 933 posts
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#212Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#213Back in the early 2010s I worked in ad tech on a data science team, and one of the things we were pushing for was causal A/B testing; basically turn off a campaign's advertising to a % of people and correlate it with sales to measure ROI. As we were kicking this off I was at a conference chatting with an executive at another ad tech company. His response: "oh yeah I know a guy who tried that, he's not in the industry…
Did they leave the industry because they realized their product wasn't providing a positive ROI, or were they fired for pointing that out to other people? I think the former is probably what you mean, I just want to be sure.
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#214There was a freakonomics podcast recently about advertising (online and traditional). No one can actually prove it has any ROI at all. No one is willing to run the experiments necessary. In the few cases of natural experiments, where ads got turned off for some people by accident, there was no change in buying behavior. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-1/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-…
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/09/19/business/corpor...
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fortune 500 is a cesspool of insane inefficiency balanced by equally ~~insane rent seeking~~ insanely secure revenue. The sooner everyone understands this, the better.
How is Coca Cola rent seeking? How about Apple? I suspect you aren’t using that term correctly but maybe I’m missing something.
Both are propped up - actually maintained - by huge and vastly expensive brand management strategies.
The criticisms of individual campaigns here are missing the point. It's not about micro ad spend, but the perception of value and manipulation of behaviour created by the combined effect of multiple PR and advertising efforts - which include traditional print and TV/radio ad campaigns, guided advertorials disguised as news in the MSM, interviews with prominent figures, political campaigns of more or less obvious relevance to the core business activity, state, national, and international political lobbying, direct political campaign donations, advertorials masquerading as "freelance" journalism and blogging, managed astroturfing on social media, shareholder relationship management, product placements in movies and music promo videos, articles about commercial visual design elements in trade journals. And on and on.
That perception of value is - unsurprisingly - extremely valuable. And it's very much a US way of doing business. Instead of producing products that are inherently superior, produce something that is functional but glossily packaged, brand it as a premium lifestyle commodity, and charge exorbitant prices for it.,
The prices are traditionally far out of proportion to its actual utility. In fact real utility may well be negative - see also diabetes and any number of other health issues, depression associated with social media use, debt-driven spending on lifestyle products. Etc.
So the rent seeking comes from a kind of cultural squatting. There is value in dominating discourse in all of these different ways, because discourse and narrative define markets and ultimately control behaviour. And while this is happening other kinds of discourse - which may well have more real utility - are diminished at best and crowded out at worst.
So in this case it doesn't matter if Uber "wasted" their money. Uber have their own branding thing going, and explicit ad spend is a tiny part of that.
And even if all online ad spending ended tomorrow, a small number of corporations would have a difficult time for a while, but the marketing industry as a whole would inevitably interpret the change as minor damage and route around it.
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#216Back in the early 2010s I worked in ad tech on a data science team, and one of the things we were pushing for was causal A/B testing; basically turn off a campaign's advertising to a % of people and correlate it with sales to measure ROI. As we were kicking this off I was at a conference chatting with an executive at another ad tech company. His response: "oh yeah I know a guy who tried that, he's not in the industry…
That was the era of the ad-exchange DSP bubble. After that I went to work at another company that was on the other side of the exchange pipeline and I could see all these DSPs just plugging away doing their thing and none of it looked (to me) like it was accomplishing much. It was all bottomfeeding off of lower quality inventory but I suspect making big promises to investors.
That startup eventually pivoted a couple more times and sold to a bigger player a few years later, making some money for the founder but I suspect no value to the buyer.
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you actually read the linked tweets?! Uber turns off a shitload of ad spending, nothing bad happens to new user acquisitions. I'd say there are about a million better uses of a million dollars than just pissing them away on a scam.
There’s an interesting question there about when this form of advertising becomes obsolete. Uber is in a very different position than many other companies. Anyone who browses the internet with regularity is already aware of their existence and probably just needs the right set of circumstances to come together to make Uber useful to them. I suspect the results would be different if Uber were earlier in their adoption…
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#218One of Uber’s advertising partners created numerous apps that did things like auto-click on their ads and install apps in the background, collecting the commission for themselves on customers who didn’t actually click the ad or intentionally install the app.
They discovered it when they turned off those ads and didn’t see a drop in signups, which is something that normally happens when they turn of legitimate ads.
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#219It'd seem to me that this is relatively thin, and likely wouldn't have any impact for some time.
Uber is already well known - their spend in most cases boils down to brand advertising and nothing else.
Marketing is hard, and anyone just throwing money at something isn't going to win hard.
For an established brand, user acquisition is going to obviously have to be more targeted. Putting ads on 'Breitbart' was never going to drive new customers.
In fact - I don't think 'banner ads' will drive any new customers for Uber.
Re: Uber discovered they’d been defrauded out of 2/3 of their ad spend
#220You can A/B test ads pretty easily, and this is quite common. With some degree of statistical certainty, you can tell how one ad performs to another. You don't have control over your SEO results as well - but you can also measure against SEO traffic with a high degree of certainty. All big companies do this. Sure, you're never going to know exactly how many people you advertised to would have organically, eventually…
A/B testing is... not a state of the art scientific research technique. Moreover the companies that provide the tools to do A/B testing are the same companies that sell you access to advertising space. I'm not saying that it's a common practice to defraud A/B tests, I'm saying that the fact that adtech companies have chosen to enable that research methodology out of the set of all methodologies they could offer suggests that we should expect, before seeing the results of any A/B trial, that the results will tend to favor the adtech narrative.
I don't think that people in the adtech space believe they're selling a bogus product, but I do think they wouldn't want to know if they were — they have a good thing going.
If you're employed in adtech you're mostly fine, skills transfer. If you're invested in adtech, do what you can to diversify away. Advertising is overvalued to some extent and that bubble will burst at some point or other. The question is just how much actual value advertising provides, how much will remain when the bubble bursts.