Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 282 posts

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#71

Post by sgt101 »

nostromo wrote: post #45
michaelvoz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps rather anecdotal, but this is why I joined Uber, and did not take my Facebook or Google offers. It feels nice to work on tech that directly impacts lives and how a persons day flows. As opposed to, as you correctly put it, optimizing click bait.

If Google or Facebook were gone tomorrow, I'd definitely notice. If Uber was gone tomorrow, I'd use Lyft.

My point would be that if Uber vanished Uber drivers wouldn't, and very rapidly they would be providing their services via alternatives. My feeling is that no one would lose if this happened, apart from Uber's investors.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#72

Post by sgt101 »

nostromo wrote: post #45
michaelvoz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps rather anecdotal, but this is why I joined Uber, and did not take my Facebook or Google offers. It feels nice to work on tech that directly impacts lives and how a persons day flows. As opposed to, as you correctly put it, optimizing click bait.

If Google or Facebook were gone tomorrow, I'd definitely notice. If Uber was gone tomorrow, I'd use Lyft.

My point would be that if Uber vanished Uber drivers wouldn't, and very rapidly they would be providing their services via alternatives. My feeling is that no one would lose if this happened, apart from Uber's investors.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#73

Post by sgt101 »

red_admiral wrote: post #57
0xbear wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but it's not like traditional advertising is free of fraud either. You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. And there's much more money in it.

> You can't even really pretend to measure the effectiveness of campaigns there. I disagree - for something at the scale of P&G, you can bet that they're doing a LOT of measuring for every campaign they run. The article reads to me as if they're applying the same metrics to their online ads that they use already for traditional campaigns, and finding little impact.

Agree that they are measuring, but determining the cause and effect of each campaign is very hard. Sometimes ads have a clear impact, but those are cases that no one argues with. Mostly advertisers simply say (in effect) we got your message out, and there was an impact. If the low/high uptake was due to the ad or to the quality of the product or to the weakness of competitors - well no one can say.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#74

Post by Symbiote »

rorykoehler wrote: post #44
tomjen3 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My algorithm for that kind of stuff is what is cheapest in the store I am in? I think that is what a lot of people do.

Often it's a false economy. Dish detergent for example... the more expensive stuff is often far thicker concentrate and lasts many times longer than the cheap stuff.

I assumed they meant the cheapest among similar products, e.g. choose the standard brand on the BOGOF offer this week.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#75

Post by riffraff »

elorant wrote: post #66

I have to admit that at a deeper lever I'd love if advertisers get the fuck off of the web. I don't have a problem with advertising per se but the way it's used today hurts the medium in so many ways. Sites are bloated with ads, journalism is riffled with native advertising articles, malware is mainly spread through infected ads and on top of that we have a legion of companies out there which are collecting every kin…

The trouble is: given how much of the web relies on advertising, how would things fare once ads are gone?

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#76

Post by Symbiote »

nikanj wrote: post #63
csomar wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too. I think my reasoning goes "if they didn't care about the packaging, why would they care about what it is inside?"

Oh they care about the packaging, they care very much. They're doing price discrimination in stages: The fancy toothpaste with the beautiful box comes from the same conglomerate as the cheaper one does. If you consider yourself hot stuff, you pick the fancy brand with the shiniest box. The middle class, humble folk pick the same product sans color whirl and foil insets on the box, but it's still Colgate brand shaving…

Except, sometimes the cheaper product is worse. It's easy to dilute something, or make other small changes to the composition.

Tesco hard surface cleaner is watery compared to Cif.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#77

Post by albertgoeswoof »

riffraff wrote: post #75
elorant wrote: post #66

I have to admit that at a deeper lever I'd love if advertisers get the fuck off of the web. I don't have a problem with advertising per se but the way it's used today hurts the medium in so many ways. Sites are bloated with ads, journalism is riffled with native advertising articles, malware is mainly spread through infected ads and on top of that we have a legion of companies out there which are collecting every kin…

The trouble is: given how much of the web relies on advertising, how would things fare once ads are gone?

All the click bait bullshit would disappear pretty fast that's for sure.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#78

Post by toyg »

riffraff wrote: post #75
elorant wrote: post #66

I have to admit that at a deeper lever I'd love if advertisers get the fuck off of the web. I don't have a problem with advertising per se but the way it's used today hurts the medium in so many ways. Sites are bloated with ads, journalism is riffled with native advertising articles, malware is mainly spread through infected ads and on top of that we have a legion of companies out there which are collecting every kin…

The trouble is: given how much of the web relies on advertising, how would things fare once ads are gone?

Well, the Internet existed before web ads were a thing, and it was a better place in many ways. I wouldn't mind losing a lot of the current noise (twitter, facebook...) to end up with a network of public services, subscription-supported businesses, and fan/volunteer-powered resources.

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#79

Post by inimino »

disiplus wrote: post #50
jsemrau wrote: post #32

This reminds me of my experience with Google Adwords. My target was to increase signups for travellers to selected cities looking for 'events nearby'. So, I selected my cities and customer segments and had a limit set of 30 Dollars / day. Regularly, I paid for 2-5 Dollar more per day than my max price. I reduced the price to actually match my max price, but this would as a result out-price me of the relevant keywords…

inside google adwords you have a invalid click rate, right now i have cca 13% per search campaign and 70% display from the start of this month till now, im sure thats not everything because for some time i tracked those invalid clicks from my side and those where bigger then what google reported. its frustrating but i can hardly do anything.

How did you identify the invalid clicks?

Re: P&G Cuts More Than $100M in ‘Largely Ineffective’ Digital Ads

#80

Post by petra »

riffraff wrote: post #75
elorant wrote: post #66

I have to admit that at a deeper lever I'd love if advertisers get the fuck off of the web. I don't have a problem with advertising per se but the way it's used today hurts the medium in so many ways. Sites are bloated with ads, journalism is riffled with native advertising articles, malware is mainly spread through infected ads and on top of that we have a legion of companies out there which are collecting every kin…

The trouble is: given how much of the web relies on advertising, how would things fare once ads are gone?

When i use Google news , there's so much waste in web journalism: a million journalists rewriting the same article, and often a useless and low quality article, at that.

So maybe there's a better way.

Post reply on HN