Web Pricing Poll

If your clients could buy out all of the display ad (banner) space on 971TheFan.com for an entire day (streaming pre-roll and web players not included), what do you believe a reasonable price would be for this sort of exclusivity?

Please use the poll below to choose one of the preset prices, or enter a price of your own...



Your participation will help as we create web sales strategy for the coming year. Watch for more of these quick and simple polls in the future.

Thanks for sharing your opinion!

The Silent Click

Interesting stats about the marketing value a banner delivers beyond just the "click." Take the information with a grain of salt -- after all, the study was commissioned by the OPA (Online Publishers Association) an organization whose best interest is to promote the sale of banner ads.

The OPA's position is that, just because a web visitor didn't click on your banner doesn't mean your money was wasted. Study findings include...

• One in five conduct related searches and one in three visit the brands’ sites
• Users spent over 50% more time than the average visitor to these sites and consumed more pages
• Users spent about 10% more money online overall, and significantly more on product categories related to the advertised brands
• Higher income audiences visited the advertisers sites

The study was conducted by comScore–and assessed 80 of the biggest branding campaigns across 200 of the most trafficked sites. Here's a link to the OPA press release about the study.

Social network ads are tough sell to Gen-Y

Seeking to grab the attention of Gen Y's on social networks? Better put away the old online display ads if you're seeking to grab the attention of Gen Y's on social networks. A new study by the Participatory Marketing Network and Pace University shows traditional banner ads to be ineffective to young adults aged 18-24.

Researchers asked a group of Gen Y's if they notice ads at all when navigating through a social community, and if they approve of them. While 84% said they notice ads on social networks, only 19% said they find them "relevant."

Researchers also found that 74% of the young consumers in the study click on social network ads "infrequently," and 36% don't click on the ads at all.

There were a few signs of hope in the results --
62% of the respondents said they have "visited a brand or fan page on a social network" and 48% said they have "become a fan or friend of the company or organization" showcased on a brand or fan page.

The top three reasons respondents cited for joining a brand or fan group were: get product updates ( 67%), view promotions (64%) and view or download music videos (41%).

Read full article: http://www.internetretailer.com/dailyNews.asp?id=29703

Do Ads Work?

A great post to kick-off the new year for anyone buying (or selling!) advertising. Forward this post to your favorite media salesperson or buyer.

Do ads work?
by Seth Godin

If the local bank were offering a sale on dollar bills, ninety cents each, how many would you buy?
Most rational people would say, "I'll take them all please." Especially if you had thirty days to pay for them.

So, why, precisely, do you have an ad budget?
If your ads work, if you can measure them and they return more profit than they cost, why not keep buying them until they stop working?

And if they don't work, why are you running them?

The time-tested response is that you're not sure, that ads are risky, that you can't tell. And for some sorts of products and some sorts of ads, you'll get no argument from me.

Digital ads are different (or they should be). You should know cost per click and revenue per click and be able to make a smart guess about lifetime value of a click. And if that's positive, buy, buy, buy.

And if you don't know those things, why are you buying digital ads?

When Amazon was at its key growth peak, the mantra there was $33. They would buy unlimited ads, of any kind, as long as they generated new customers for $33 or less each. There was a risk that $33 was too high a number for the business to sustain, but the ads were no risk at all. As long as they came in under that number, there was unlimited money to buy them.
How often do year the marketing person say, "that's a neat idea, but we don't have the budget this year"?

Shouldn't she say, "We have an unlimited budget for ads that work"...

If You MUST Use Banners...

...at least try and use them more effectively.

In his article "The X Factor: Why banners fail" Sean X. Cummings shares some valid theories on why our sidebar 160x600 ads get better click-through rates than the 728x90 located at the top of the page.

From the article:

One of the greatest failings of the banner format is that it is peripheral to the content and not interruptive.

We all evolved as predators. Why is that relevant? Predators evolved with peripheral vision that picks up movement better than what's right in front of you. Their peripheral vision picks up ticks in movement and changes in speed better than smooth, clean movement.

Ah, now you're starting to get it --
Have.
The.
Banner…….[pause]
React.
[pause]
[pause]
[pause] Move. [pounce] Like it's stalking prey.

The consumer's eye will instinctively glance to see what it is. Don't be impressed with your smooth, animated banner approved in isolation of the consumer. It looks nicer but will not achieve your main objective: the attention of the consumer.

The technique won't work for every business or every campaign. Sean adds "It's a very effective strategy depending on your business model. An impression does not mean that the consumer ever saw the ad, it just means that the ad server delivered the 'opportunity' to see an ad. Aim for peripheral focus in your ad creation and increase the effectiveness of your campaigns."

He ends the article with line -- which is valuable advise no matter which media you're using. "Don't create ads that annoy us."