Re: Pop-Ups/Unders Dilemma

From: Bob Stewart <rstewart_at_vmirror.com>
Date: Wed 02 Oct 2002 13:29:32 -0500

Harsha,

I have been on the Web since 1994 and the most important
lesson I have learned is to not waste too much time
trying to predict what the future holds. People have
historically tried to measure the usefulness of these new
ad formats way too early to be meaningful. Back in 1994,
the click-through rate on an ad at HotWired.com was
probably 25%, just because it was so neat to click on an
ad. And there were people that thought that with more
specific targeting, they could INCREASE that rate. Then
the animated GIF was the novel ad with the higher click-
through, etc., etc.

I can't say for sure whether the popup will survive long,
but I wouldn't count on studies being able to offer much
insight at this point.

Here is my prediction of the future of Web advertising.
Commercial sites will generally break down into two groups.
The first will be those that have unique content or
features, or at least content and features that are not
easily replicated. These are the sites that will be able
to garner some "fee" from users, which will be paid for
either in cash subscriptions or endurance of annoying ads.
For instance, I tolerate the popups at the NYTimes.com
because their content is valuable. Perhaps I would pay $$
to avoid the annoyance, but either way I am paying.

The other sites will be those that exist totally on
advertising and/or commissions, they will look a lot like
euniverse.com, or excite.com--where the content itself is
often just an ad.

The dichotomy between these two groups will continue to
grow and I believe eventually the higher quality ones will
be able to move to subscriptions of some form and will forgo
the annoyance ads, which paying subscribers simply won't put
up with. This will force advertisers to be a little more
imaginative in formats, etc., to reach the still growing
number of Web users on these premium properties.

The second group will continue to be profitable, in the same
way infomercials, the shopping channel, etc., continue to
thrive. For these sites, annoyance is practically part of the
product and the popup, or something like it, will probably
always be part of the ad mix.

What will be interesting to see is where the various sites
will end up. Any Web publisher will have to be very careful
to avoid getting pushed into the low end. The New York Times
can afford to annoy me today with a popup because it is the
New York Times. But a secondary site that exists solely on
the Web might not have that luxury. For that reason, I do not
inflict popups on my users. My Web site IS my brand. The fact
that a popup might get .5% click-through vs. .2% for a banner
just isn't very meaningful in the long run. Especially now,
where the payout is next-to-nothing vs. nothing. ;-)


  Bob Stewart

  The Virtual Mirror
 





Received on Wed Oct 02 2002 - 13:29:32 CDT