NONE: ONLINE-ADS>> Re: Modem Media's Proposed New Ad Model
ONLINE-ADS>> Re: Modem Media's Proposed New Ad Model
S. Alles (allmedia_at_cris.com)
Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:14:11 -0400 (EDT)
At 07:44 AM 10/4/96 -0700, Donna Dolezal Zelzer wrote in part:
>If an advertiser places an ad in a media -- any media -- it's not the
>media's fault if the ad gets no responses.
>
>The media provides the audience. It's up to the advertiser to decide if
>that audience includes a reasonable number of potential customers and to
>design ads that present the product or service in a way that appeals to
>that group of customers.
>
>If an ad doesn't work, change it. If a particular web page (or magazine or
>whatever) isn't bringing in responses (of whatever kind you're measuring),
>drop it. But don't *not* expect to pay the media for your testing.
>
-----------------------------
I didn't really understand the direct relationship of above reply with the
quoted portions of Sean's msg. But anyway, regarding above......
Perhaps it's the limitations of this email medium, but the whole tone of the
msg came across to me as "advertiser beware". Not at all the
marketing-partner approach that typifies the most productive media
seller/buyer relationships.
The disavowing of media's contribution to advertising success or failure is
inaccurate and also doesn't recognize that per-inquiry and sales-based media
buys have a long history. (I'm not unilaterally for or against them but they
do have their place in the mix).
An analogy to saying "it's not the media's fault" is saying that a
salesperson is never responsible for their achievement. So if things go
south, it's always either the product or the prepared sales pitch that
should be blamed. Just isn't so.
Media impact communications; they're not just the Fed-Ex of audience
delivery. And any marketing or advertising element, including the medium,
can be the weak link.
There's a partial truth in saying that the medium's responsibility is
supplying the audience and the buyer's is in determining if the target is
right or not.
But the statement ignores the fact that the medium may have control over
supplying the audience research and the historical response rates that the
buyer needs to determine if there's enough potential customers.
The medium also can control how they want to package their buys (different
positions, rotations, etc.). That's been discussed quite a lot here
recently. And it definitely can impact on response.
Also not recognized is the context of a buy. Individual vehicles are chosen
usually after evaluating a number of options (candidates if you will).
During that process, the seller is giving the buyer reasons why their
vehicle is better than others.
So most buys become more of a mutual agreement for the benefit of the
advertiser than a "take it or leave it" type of transaction.
Sum total, to me all of this task assignment comes across as adversarial and
not consistent with a flexible industry that has one ultimate goal. The
simple truth is that the advertiser has to win first or everyone loses in
the long run.
Sylvia Alles
AMS Advertising Media Planning/Buying/Consulting
email: allmedia_at_cris.com . url: http://www.cris.com/~Allmedia
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
>>>>>>>>Announcing the 1996 CyberAtlas Web Advertising Roadmap<<<<<<<<
Need quick answers? Get a copy of the Roadmap and find your way around
click-through, banner design, and much more: http://www.cyberatlas.com
----------------------------------------------------
======================== AD JUGGLER ========================
Advanced management system that makes maintaining banner ads a
breeze 100% web based, full stats & reports. more:
http://www.adjuggler.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
