Re: Salon.com and taller ads

From: Rob Frankel <rob_at_robfrankel.com>
Date: Tue 03 Apr 2001 09:37:16 -0600

BRANDI JASMINE <brandi_at_brandijasmine.com> WROTE:

>On my site I will be happy to place ads of any non-
>standard size - within reason. For the right long-term
>sponsor, provided the match was good, heck, I'd
>redesign the entire site. BTW speaking of "standards"
>I finally saw one of those "big box" ads today. Yuk.
>Ick. Pooey! It was an ugly, unappealing Flash kludge
>hawking some expensive database. Enough to make you
>close the window out or hit the "back" button with all
>due haste. Earth to the big guys: make these things
>interesting, entertaining, funny! Then they will turn
>positively viral. If not, they will merely get tuned
>out just like the banners. I put a coffee mug in front
>of this ad so I could read the article.


I totally agree. But I have to say that the inventors
of these larger ads are the same weenies who run around
the locker room making jokes about how bigger is better.
Anyone wanna bet that this latest goof is the product of
marketing geniuses who pulled it out of focus group?

I can hear it now...."On a scale of one to ten, which
ad do you think is easier to read -- this 40 x 40 pixel
button or this 800 x 1000 pixel box?"

Duh.

Then you can hear them running through the halls to
their clients,"Hey! The research is in and it DEFINITELY
confirms all our initial theories. Consumers react much
more strongly to the big box ads!"

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at these dopes.


Rob Frankel, "Yes, I really do turn users into evangelists
for your brand." Big Time Branding
   http://www.RobFrankel.com
The Book: http://www.RevengeOfBrandX.com
The Frankel Tapes: Volume One:
   http://www.RobFrankel.com/store.html
Subscribe to FrankelBiz for FREE at:
   http://www.FrankelBiz.com



Received on Tue Apr 03 2001 - 10:37:16 CDT