Re: Respectable Click-through Rate?

From: Michael Martinez <Michael_at_xenite.org>
Date: Wed 20 Sep 2000 12:13:36 -0500

DARCY ELLIOTT <elliottdp_at_home.com> WROTE:
> I'm wondering what people consider a respectable
> click-through rate?

The last time I looked for numbers on industry CTRs I
found something like .39% as the average (see the
first WilsonWeb citation below). CTRs have been in
serious decline for over a year, and of course everyone
has a theory about why.

One campaign which has reportedly experienced high CTRs
is that crazy "Punch the monkey" campaign. I've
discussed it with several Webmasters who all said they
had somewhere in the neighborhood of 10% (that is TEN
PER CENT) CTRs. That's a simply incredible rate by
any measure.

I've found that in promoting my own Web pages on my
domain (I run more than 60 Web sites) I average 1-2.5%
CTRs, especially on new campaigns. I get dismal CTRs
when I advertise for other domains.

I think that the two most important factors in
designing and running a campaign are 1) relevancy to
the content which carries the advertisement and 2) the
motivation that the advertisement offers the reader.

Serious research into the effectiveness of banner ads
shows some surprising results. You'd think the
marketing industry would pay close attention to these
surveys, but so far I haven't seen any interest in
them. So either someone else has done some research I
haven't found which contradicts THIS research, or else
the people who design banner display contracts
seriously need to be clued in.

Here are some links to research published on the Web.
Some of these sites will seem more credible to the
reader than others. But one particular item stands
out (in my mind): the last place you want to put a
banner ad is the top of the page. And where is the
most valuable real estate for banner ads considered to
be? Yup.

I provide these links in no real order. The only one I
endorse as much as I can endorse any of these sites is
Jacob Nielsen's. His knowledge and expertise, to me
(an outsider), are most impressive.

http://www.webreference.com/dev/banners/
(research paper -- Banner ad placement study)

http://www.wilsonweb.com/articles/bannerad.htm
(a commercial page)

http://www.bannertips.com/banneradvertising.shtml
(just links to resources)

http://sbaxdm.usc.edu/Publications/eye.html
(research paper: Banner ads -- Is anybody watching?)

http://www.mixed-plate.com/THESIS/thesis.html
(senior thesis)

http://www.webct.ulpgc.es/docs/mail/jun99/0700.html
(archived message citing a usability study review in
a newsletter)

http://world.std.com/~uieweb/
(Current web site for the user interface engineering
firm that produced the study cited in the previous
link)

http://www.webtechniques.com/archives/1997/04/helinski/
(Web site usability engineering -- apparently a
semi-commercial resource)

http://www.gwu.edu/~220i2i/unit2_print.htm
(Lecture on designing for usability at George
Washington University -- briefly touches on banners)

http://scrubtheweb.com/advertise/cyberatlas/10tips.html
(Ten fairly common tips you'll find on most banner
design sites, although the placement advice is
contradicted by the research cited above)

http://www.wilsonweb.com/webmarket/banner-design.htm
(WilsonWeb was cited above -- this is a roundup of
links to articles about banner design and effectiveness
-- mostly surrogate marketing commentary from
consultants and experts)

http://webword.com/moving/banners.html
(Usability perspective on banner ads -- roundup of
research on banner usability issues)

http://interactive.wsj.com/public/current/articles/SB912725900291457000.htm
(Overview of a Wall Street Journal article from
1998 -- touches on banner ads)

http://www.useit.com/
(Jacon Nielsen's Web usability resource -- probably one
of the best overall resources paroviding hard research
mixed in with general commentary and advice)


What works? They don't all agree. But the general
trend I'm getting from the research is that banners are
more effective as branding tools in that they impress
upon viewers specific images or word combinations which
they will remember if they see them often enough. This
actually adapts some very old psychological research:
the more often you see an assertion, the more
believable it becomes.

A lot of these people don't believe in measuring ad
effectiveness with CTRs, and they do seem to agree that
you need to frame the ads with good, relevant content.

There is disagreement on where ads should be placed,
but I think all the usability studies show that Web
surfers instinctively LOOK AWAY FROM THE BANNER ADS.
So you're rarely going to find something which enjoys
the success of the "Punch the monkey" campaign (which
most likely is drawing people in with two factors: the
annoying animation and the promise of a quick and
apparently easy $20.00 US).

Compelling banner ads ask questions and try to draw the
viewer in. But they must also fit in with the real
estate. An ad that doesn't blend in with the Web page,
to put it bluntly, sucks. The ads I run which have
proven most effective make use a non-hype text. The
ads I have been most likely to click on (and have often
found myself clicking on them before I realized they
were ads) LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE PART OF THE WEB PAGE.

Take that for what it's worth, and I hope it's of some
help. And, no, I haven't had time to read all the
usability studies. I wish I did, but I have other
things to attend to. I tried to weed out the most
hypey, marketing-oriented Web sites in the above
selections, but some of them are obviously intended to
sell services or products. I'm a bit open-minded in
that department. Sometimes a shrewd business person
will offer real, solid information to entice people
into subscribing to their services.

Science Fiction and Fantasy
info_at_xenite.org
New and expanded discussion forums!
Over 20 topics!
http://www.xenite.org/forums/
XENITE.org





Received on Wed Sep 20 2000 - 12:13:36 CDT