>
> Subject: RE: Excite
> From: Ivan Weltman <ivan_at_tudogs.com>
> Date: Sat 13 Oct 2001 09:58:01 +0200
>>
> Rob Frankel is wrong. CPM is not the traditional
> offline measurement. Indeed the offline situation is
> the very reverse of the online CPM method.
That's not true at all..
Look at your example:
> Online CPM (Cost per Thousand) is based on number of
> impressions. Offline CPM is based on number of readers.
> For example, take a print publication that averages 3
> readers per copy. For each 1000 impressions there are
> 3000 readers - and thus 3000 opportunities to be seen
> by a unique individual.
That's where your analogy falls apart.
With a print magazine, assuming it IS passed along (and
not all are), you have a publication in 3000 hands which
may or may not look at any one page. The advertiser has
no measure of whether any of those 3000 advertisers
opened the publication to a page that had their ad.
On the web, 3,000 impressions meanss that the ad was
displayed 3000 times. So the difference here is the
advertiser is guaranteed that their ad is displayed. In
print, the advertiser is only guaranteed that their ad
is carried in the publication.
And so even if the ad on the web is displayed to only
1000 unique people out of 3,000 impressions you have to
remember that all of those impressions are leading
towards the cumulative total it takes to make people
actually AWARE of the ads on the page and make any one
ad/and product surface above the noise. Web advertising
is no different from any other in that respect.
--Janet Attard
Business Know-How(r). Home to microsized businesses.
http://www.businessknowhow.com
http://www.careerknowhow.com
Received on Fri Oct 19 2001 - 22:59:24 CDT
