131–140 of 162 posts
Just because something cannot be quantified DOES not mean it does not work....Marketing is often UNQUANTIFYABLE...but almost always effective.
That last part is the part you can't say definitively unless you have a lot of data, which is the point of the article.
I remember reading the tobacco industry was actually secretly grateful when the EU banned them from advertising. As I remember it, they were in a stale-mate. The market was pretty much divided up. Most people were loyal to their brand and that was that. Despite that, they were spending a massive amount of money on advertising even though their market shares remained unchanged. The reason was that if one of them stopp…
NB, while tobacco ads are banned from TV, they are still everywhere on outdoor advertising, at least here in Germany. Actually, I went on a "street art tour" that turned out to be sponsored by a cigarette company, and they were handing out free cigarettes . So: tobacco advertising is alive and well in Germany.
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/0...
Germany also unsuccessfully tried to disarm the ban itself:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&docid=66366&p...
This reminds me of a fascinating article in The New Yorker called "Twilight of the Brands." [0] The author's basic argument is that brands have historically filled an information gap. Before the Internet, when consumers didn't have tons of on-demand info about products, brands were a compass that pointed them in the right direction. If the last Sylvania TV you bought worked well, you might buy another one without hun…
I understand the point he is making, and I agree that the importance of advertising is declining. However, I wouldn't be able to explain Samsung's success without looking at advertising.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't mean that Apple doesn't make good products. They make pretty damn good products. But the products are only part of Apple's marketing strategy. Much of what has made Apple successful is the idea of what a Mac, an iPod, or an iPhone is. For most of the iPod's lifespan it was not the best product on the market, it was just the best marketed. In the case of macbooks, the hardware has been roughly on par with equ…
For most of the iPod's lifespan it was not the best product on the market, it was just the best marketed. I wouldn't say it was just better marketed, although that is true. It was also better designed, both in its hardware and software. An iPod in your hands felt and looked great and the scroll wheel made it intuitive to use. Anyone could easily pick it up and check out what you had in your library. Before I had one,…
It was only 'intuitive' if someone showed you how to use it, which means... it wasn't intuitive.
They dropped that interface element quickly enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am aware of the significant attention this paper got about a year ago. In my filter bubble (and I am in a massive filter bubble with regards to this kind of thing) the attention was similar to the rest of your comment - focusing on ebays failures of execution rather than the failure of measurement. Other advertisers do not make the same mistakes as ebay with regards to landing pages, adverts or keywords selection b…
The paper sure is interesting and should add value to the debate and approaches to SEM. To discard it by scoffing at eBay's execution would indeed be your own loss. My biggest take-away is the saturation of advertisements and the effects it can have on running ad campaigns. Yours seem to focus on the common correlation-causation misinterpretation, and faulty measurement approaches. I do think there are enough problem…
Your aside comment is really interesting. I'm not sure what the solution here is - more accurate systems of measurement lose the tight feedback loop that make online ads so successful, but simpler measurement is wrong. Some sort of combination of the two is the answer, but how that exactly works in practice I have no idea!
There are ads and then there are ads. One of the things that the company I work for, Qubit, does is to validate that the tracking tags that vendors put on people's websites drive an uplift. We talk about one of our clients doing it here [1] While blindly targeting people using search engine "promoted searches" may not work for every impression, this does not take into account the ads that you see on other 3rd party s…
People like useful recommender engines (e.g. Amazon.com).
But not so personalized smart ads that follow them on every website the visit. What's wrong with the static ads that fit the targeted website category?
As someone who leads an analytics team in the advertising industry I have to say this title and the studies they are referencing are not accurate to the entire industry at all. Advertising absolutely works when done right. The effect on brand consideration, shopping behavior, and incremental purchase value can be quantified. The most sophisticated advertisers spend a lot of money to accurately track and ensure their…
I remember reading the tobacco industry was actually secretly grateful when the EU banned them from advertising. As I remember it, they were in a stale-mate. The market was pretty much divided up. Most people were loyal to their brand and that was that. Despite that, they were spending a massive amount of money on advertising even though their market shares remained unchanged. The reason was that if one of them stopp…
NB, while tobacco ads are banned from TV, they are still everywhere on outdoor advertising, at least here in Germany. Actually, I went on a "street art tour" that turned out to be sponsored by a cigarette company, and they were handing out free cigarettes . So: tobacco advertising is alive and well in Germany.
As someone who leads an analytics team in the advertising industry I have to say this title and the studies they are referencing are not accurate to the entire industry at all. Advertising absolutely works when done right. The effect on brand consideration, shopping behavior, and incremental purchase value can be quantified. The most sophisticated advertisers spend a lot of money to accurately track and ensure their…
I bought a new bicycle and religiously researched this topic and consumed a ton of cycling videos. What ads do I see on YouTube? Cars. I don't have a driver's license.
I once bought a NI Maschine Midi Controller. YouTube then showed me video ads for the NI Maschine Midi Controller for over a year after the purchase. Great business for Google, not so much for Native Instruments.
During a vacation in South Korea, I had logged into Facebook to post a picture. Facebook then showed me Korean ads in Hangul for over a month after my return. They have all the info on me, where I was born, what language I speak, where I live, where I work. Hilariously bad.
And so on.
As someone who leads an analytics team in the advertising industry I have to say this title and the studies they are referencing are not accurate to the entire industry at all. Advertising absolutely works when done right. The effect on brand consideration, shopping behavior, and incremental purchase value can be quantified. The most sophisticated advertisers spend a lot of money to accurately track and ensure their…
I've said this before on here, but online advertising is incredibly dumb. If you consider all the info Google and Facebook have on me, it's a really sad state of affairs. I bought a new bicycle and religiously researched this topic and consumed a ton of cycling videos. What ads do I see on YouTube? Cars. I don't have a driver's license. I once bought a NI Maschine Midi Controller. YouTube then showed me video ads for…
Sure there's a lot of errors in advert targeting, but they don't need 100% accuracy to see results, and on a scale from "just chuck adverts at everyone, some will be relevant" to "let's have people manually look into every user to profile them and know exactly what to target them with" there has to be a point where it's not cost-effective to make things even more accurate.
