Re: CPM isn't dead, it's just sick

From: Mauricio Macedo <mauricio_at_iron.com.br>
Date: Tue 20 Nov 2001 21:09:19 -0500

ROB FRANKEL <Rob_at_RobFrankel.com> WROTE:
>I'm just saying that since the advertisers pay the piper,
>you can tout any other system you like, but they're
>going to want to see performance. Why not just give them
>that?

I've heard more than once that 50% of advertising expenses
go down the tubes (in the advertiser's perspective),
but at the same time they are very important to the
publishers. The measurement of performance and ability
to make good choices is responsability of the ad agency.

What CPA does is use the power of technology (detailed
accountability) in advantage of the advertiser. It is for
sure great for the advertiser, but, like human cloning and
the possibility of creating always-blond-blue-eyed-
perfect-babies, there are some "innovations" that are
killer of today's market formats. For example the risks of
freedom given by the mp3/internet dua for the music
industry model.

I think that if the online advertising market wants to
continue its growth, we need to a) stick to the standard
media measurements and reinforce the importance of branding,
develop new formats of online advertising and attract big
fishes like P&G and Coke, or b) find a new model that can
afford the growth of websites meanwhile allowing the greater
measurement that technology brings to our medium.

>That depends on how you build your operation. If you're
>built for CPM, yeah, you're going to hate CPA. But if
>you're built for CPA, you have nothing to worry about.

I can't imagine an operation built from the ground up
with CPA. How can it be profitable with, say 10k visitors
and 50k pageviews monthly? Or even 500k pageviews montly?
In my opinion today's CPA model is based on a situation
where stablished publishers have an inventory of millions
of unsold pageviews, and CPA advertisers know that.

Best regards,
Mauricio Macedo
Sales Manager
http://www.netmmercial.com - full browser banners made easy





Received on Tue Nov 20 2001 - 20:09:19 CST