Most people I know block ads on Facebook. It's hard to sell a product (eyeballs) when the eyeballs circumvent the tech!
GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
191–200 of 267 posts
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook could has something better than Google intent in that they should be able to predict what you intend to search for before you go looking for it. You could say that Google responds to your demand while Facebook (at least in potential) creates new demands.
If we're still going with the given example, Facebook didn't create anything except a forum where a mom posted a status update. There's no reason for an advertiser to pay to serve an ad for that. The ad was just given away for free. Unless you want to watch the show right at that moment, you wouldn't click it anyway. So, I'm missing the part where Facebook can monetize the "new demands."
I was going with the example of Facebook using their knowledge my tastes, as well as the tastes of millions of people who are somewhat like me, to introduce me to things that I would have a legitimate interest in, even if I'm not searching for them.
Example: Subject is a coffee-drinking, Vespa-riding, snappy-dressing, backyard chicken-farming, photo-snapping, game-playing father of two small children. He's not looking for bluetooth cuff links, but we know that once he sees them, he'll be likely to buy because that's what other people in his micro-niche tend to buy.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#193I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story. Search can broadly be broken up into at least two categories: 1. Navigational eg typing "b and h" into the browser; and 2. Informational eg "cheap flights to jamaica". I don't know what the make up…
"There is nothing preventing Facebook from being the next Myspace when something newer, cooler and hipper comes along and the users move on." I would argue that things like the massive photo collections people have made provide a large level of lock-in. I also suspect that Timeline is the first play in a "all your history, here" move that would make moving to another service very difficult.
as Path, instagram and other photosharing networks are proving your social connections and photos aren't really a compelling enough reason to leave.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#194I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story. Search can broadly be broken up into at least two categories: 1. Navigational eg typing "b and h" into the browser; and 2. Informational eg "cheap flights to jamaica". I don't know what the make up…
"There is nothing preventing Facebook from being the next Myspace when something newer, cooler and hipper comes along and the users move on." I would argue that things like the massive photo collections people have made provide a large level of lock-in. I also suspect that Timeline is the first play in a "all your history, here" move that would make moving to another service very difficult.
YouTube has an unrivalled collection of videos. I used to listen to most of my music on YouTube, and built many hours of playlists.
But I don't use YouTube any more. The level of advertising got to beyond tolerable.
And that is the problem these sites have. I might spend four hours on the weekend with music videos on, but I just could not increase that, there is not enough hours in the day. To grow, the site has to increase the proportion of ads, and then it starts to lose users based on their level of tolerance for crappy, repetitive advertising.
So anyone buying Facebook and suchlike for growth potential should also consider that there really is a practical upper limit to the revenue it can pull in before it becomes annoying and starts losing users. IMHO, YouTube is beyond that limit now, Google is pretty close, Facebook has a little room, but not that much.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#195Maybe the problem is with GM and their cars and not Facebook
Bingo.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#196I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story. Search can broadly be broken up into at least two categories: 1. Navigational eg typing "b and h" into the browser; and 2. Informational eg "cheap flights to jamaica". I don't know what the make up…
"I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story." As a Google employee, what do you think of Google as an investment? If you look forward 5+ years, everyone is doing much of their internetting via their phone (certainly some or all of that will…
"If you look forward 5+ years, everyone is doing much of their internetting via their phone"
Not true. People spend a significant amount of time in front of a computer "at work". Those people are still going to be sitting in front of a "desktop" in 5 years and still have the same behavior. There will be more mobile, but there will always (especially in only 5 years) be people "at the office" doing their job looking for information.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#197I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story. Search can broadly be broken up into at least two categories: 1. Navigational eg typing "b and h" into the browser; and 2. Informational eg "cheap flights to jamaica". I don't know what the make up…
I think you have left out the brand advertising, advertising that needs to hit the customer much before he is looking for something and do so repeatedly. That is the segment where Facebook seems to have a clear edge.
Google can get into action when the intention finally surfaces in form of a search. Facebook can help you to create the association between a brand and that intent in the stage before that manifestation. For example, when you are thinking of buying a smart phone, you will search for the "cheap smart phone" and restrict yourself to 4-5 top brands in your head. Or how when looking for "cheap flights", I have preference for certain airlines. Brand Advertising can help you get into that top group in people's head.
If that pie of the advertising is big enough, I have no idea.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story." As a Google employee, what do you think of Google as an investment? If you look forward 5+ years, everyone is doing much of their internetting via their phone (certainly some or all of that will…
I don't think that any Google employee is going to reply to your comment with advice. "As a Google employee, I say invest!" is not going to get you on the good side of the lawyercats. What I think is interesting about Google is how much voting power the founders retain. Things like a campus of solar panels, space elevators, and self driving cars (not to mention Chrome and Android) make a lot more sense when you reali…
"is not going to get you on the good side of the lawyercats."
I don't know of anything in particular that would prevent an employee of a company from posting a comment here or in a blog reply anywhere simply saying they thought it was a good idea to buy the stock that would warrant any action.
But lets say (since I don't have time to fully research this I'm basing my answer on many years in business and dealing with the Federal Government, lawyers etc.) that there is some law that makes this "illegal". The chance of the federal government, SEC or anybody caring about a comment like this is nil.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#199I think everyone I know uses, checks, updates, posts to Facebook using their mobile phone or iPad/Android tablet. Almost no one I know actually visits the website.
It's been a while, but last I checked the clients for these devices don't even have ads in them. If this is the case, I would wager that no one is seeing these advertisements even if it is one of the largest most visited sites in the world.
Re: GM Says Facebook Ads Don't Work, Pulls $10 Million Account
#200I've said this repeatedly: Facebook is a high-risk proposition, particularly as an investment (disclaimer: I work for Google). "Intent" as other commenters have noted is a big part of the story but it's not the only story. Search can broadly be broken up into at least two categories: 1. Navigational eg typing "b and h" into the browser; and 2. Informational eg "cheap flights to jamaica". I don't know what the make up…
You make it sound like search is the be all and end all reason why people use the Internet. It's not.
It's obvious that a Google employee would believe this, and believe me, I think Google ads are amazingly effective when used with Google search. I've just started using Adwords and it's great.
But Facebook is entirely different from Google search, and there is no reason why their monetization techniques need to be the same way that Google monetizes their users.
Facebook is more akin to TV in that people use it to browse content based on what their friends are doing. They aren't searching for things, they are browsing, which is different. So Google search and the techniques you use to monetize your users are completely orthogonal to how Facebook should monetize their users.
Facebook is more akin to a TV station, and if I had to make a choice, I would go for things like "sponsoring" of ads or items in the newsfeed. And the way Facebook could analyze the users is completely different. You could probably do an analysis on the types of articles or links that a user it clicking on, and then sponsoring items in the user's newsfeed that they might be interested in. "This news article was brought to you by the Ford Fusion" or "Your friend Janet went to Jamaica, there's a flight leaving for Mexico next Friday for $500 for 4 days, all inclusive, brought to you by Travelocity".
Right now, they are making something like $4/user/year in revenues, based on really terribly performing ads. I know this personally because I tried using it and it was terrible, even worse than Bing ad CTRs. In order to get to GOOG's revenues, they'll need to bring that up to $40/user/year. Depending on the growth rate, that would make FB worth even more than GOOG, so I don't think it's necessarily a bad investment at all. It all depends on how effectively and how quickly they can ramp up the monetization of their users.