RE: CPA vs. CPM the issue? "The Meat"

From: Janet Attard <attard_at_businessknowhow.com>
Date: Mon 16 Jul 2001 12:13:57 -0500

JOHN GASKILL <jg_at_info-central-usa.com> WROTE:

> No physical magazine I have encountered ever had a
> single ad on the page which "refreshed" after thirty seconds
> and became a different ad. No printed, physical magazine
> I have seen had full motion video ads or ads which "jumped"
> across the copy I was trying to read on that page.

> Web sites are not magazines or newspapers.

And not all web sites are alike. Not all web sites HAVE
ads that refresh every thirty seconds or run videos.

> Magazines and newspapers offer demographics and
> audited circulation figures. Do you provide a copy of your
> site log to all advertisers for the period they advertise?

We do not provide access to our site logs to advertisers.
We consider some of the information in the logs to be
trade secrets (it's no one's business other than ours
which article in our management section gets the most
page views, for instance.) However, we do provide access
to the ad tracking program that so the advertiser can
see for themselves on a day by day basis if they want,
which of their ads got how many impressions. They can
also access click detail to check on IP numbers, if
they want.

> I can't answer these questions any better than you can.
> At least in the physical publishing world, an advertiser
> can "test copy" or include a "redemption offer" to see if
> an ad pulls. The click through is the closest corollary.

Not unless there IS an offer in the ad! And one that is
a real offer. We had one company not long ago run an ad
on our site that offered free shipping. I mentioned it
to someone who hadn't seen the ad, and they told me that
was the company's standard policy whether you ordered
from their web site or any place else.

Frankly, I think web publishers are often penalized for
really bad ads.

JANET ATTARD WROTE:

>In direct mail, any company that stays in business will
>test one thing at a time to find out what works. You can't
>test "one thing" at a time on the web when you have an ad
>agency place an ad on a network of differnet sites. In
>fact, you can't test anything, IMHO, since there are too
>many variables.. everything from slight - or big -
>differences in the audience to how long the page takes to
>load, to whether the color of the ad is so bland or so
>similar to any page it shows up on that it just fades
>into the background.

TO WHICH JOHN GASKILL REPLIED:

>BANG! You hit the nail on the head... there are TOO MANY
>VARIABLES for the client or advertiser to control with many
>of the existing delivery models, and the publisher is the
>lowest rung on the ladder at the present time.

>To offer advertisers true advertising utility you probably need to
>deliver your own ads and probably need to work with advertisers
>on an individual basis to find out what works and what doesn't.

THEN JANET ATTARD WROTE:

>Advertisers might find it preferable for the online world
>to develop their own in-house agencies. They'd pay less
>and the small publishers would get more, and if they took
>the effort to clue the small publishers in on how to sell their
>product, the advertiser would get more out of their ad
>dollars, too.

TO WHICH JOHN GASKILL REPLIED:

>I don't think it is the job of advertisers to teach
>publishers how to charge more for their advertising.

That is not what I was saying. What I was saying is that
advertisers would save money and get better results if they
worked more closely with publishers. Web site publishers
often have more interaction with their subscribers and
visitors than a magazine has with its readers.

JOHN GASKILL THEN WROTE:

>... It seems more
>equitable to me in the short and long run that publishers
>interested in getting more for their advertising space have
>to understand what they are selling, find the right buyers
>and make a package that works for both parties. If that
>requires learning new things on the publisher's part, so
>be it.

Advertisers and their agencies- as much, or maybe more
than publishers - need to understand what they are selling
and how it can best be sold on the web. But in either
case, just sending out ad tags an half day before a
campaign will start, and hoping they'll get up and work
right and attract lots of click throughs - when they may
load so slowly going through third party ad servers that
reader is long gone before the banner image even shows
up, isn't going to do either advertiser or publisher
any good.

--Janet Attard
Business Know-How(sm)
Content, community, and tools for small and home businesses
http://www.businessknowhow.com
Phone 888-862-4605
email: attard_at_businessknowhow.com



Received on Mon Jul 16 2001 - 12:13:57 CDT