Re: What is fair? Clicks or 'Conversion'
FRED SHOWKER <DTGNews_at_aol.com> WROTE:
<snip>
>Is the online advertising industry doing itself a grave
>injustice in "promising" advertisers conversion to sales.
>
>Consider the New York Times.
>How many here have advertised in the New York Times?
>
>Their ad fees are certainly based on subscription base.
>However, once they've "served" the ad in the issue of the paper,
>isn't their job done???
>
>I've never seen a rate card from any media that would
>even mention converting pairs of eyes to sales...
>much less guaranteeing it.
><SNIP>
Is the online ad industry doing itself a disservice?
Quite possibly... but what's new about that?
Let's go back a few years and look at the reality
of what happened. Web site operators in cahoots
with ad network operators told advertisers (in order
to get their attention away from conventional media
they were already familiar with), "Hey, we've got this
great new game and you can even count results as
they come it!!! Give us your money..."
Advertisers did that and found that by and large the
ads did not work as promised and, being smart
enough to know not to continue the folly, stopped
spending willy nilly with networks and web sites.
In order to get them to come back, web sites changed
their tunes and said, "Wait! Come back! We'll make
you an offer you can't refuse." and they did.
What advertiser in its right mind would pay for something
it can get free or can get on a per action basis?
None I know of.
Ask yourself this question before clicking away in disgust:
How many NEW YORK TIMES are there?
I submit that when the average web publisher produces
a product as excellent as the NYT, s/he will have no
difficulty finding advertisers willing to pay to put their ads
next to the site masthead.
John Gaskill
jg_at_Info-Central-USA.com
Want more advertising for your site?
http://Info-Central-USA.com/site-ads.htm
Received on Mon Oct 22 2001 - 16:28:13 CDT
