NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> another thing about "Ad flipping" II
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> another thing about "Ad flipping" II
Alan Ferguson (alan_at_5line.com)
Mon, 16 Jun 1997 16:46:21 -0700
Craig Swerdloff,cswerdloff_at_cliqnow.com wrote on 6/13/97 3:19 PM:
<snip>
>>I think it is fair to assume that these rotating scorer table ads are very
>>similar to a banner ad being rotated on a Web site. So lets compare: Both
>>ads are being viewed by a fairly large audience. The difference being the
>>audience viewing the banner ad can be targeted and measured more
>>effectively. Both ads are creating a branding effect for the product being
>>advertised. The banner ad, if used effectively, can offer an advertiser
>>many other benefits; including leads, sales, promotions, and most
>>importantly valuable information about the viewer. The scorer's table ads
>>do not offer any of these.
<snip>
And Mark Dolley <mark_at_zapworks.com> replied (in part):
>My guess as to the difference between web and sportsground is that the
>big advertisers have yet to be persuaded of the branding potential of
>486x60. How many Nike / Calvin Klein / Coke banners have *you* seen?
Could it be that these large corporate marketing machines don't value all
"impressions", especially via banner advertising, as "good" or "favorable"?
Are they also suspicious of the "valuable user information"?
While I have been pointing out on this list that IMHO, banners are ugly,
intrusive, annoying, and now, suspect of being tools for big brother, it's
still subjective. The cookie issue is another matter. The recent (and
prior) studies done on almost 60,000 internet users by the University of
Michigan, http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sgupta/hermes/ indicates that over
81% felt cookies (when they knew what they did) were undesirable. From
Inter_at_active Week, June 16, 1997, an article by Will Rodger includes this:
"A survey presented by Privacy and American Business Magazine outlined how
deep the mistrust runs. Of 1009 surveyed:
87% said Web sites should not use personal data files, called "cookies"
without first getting permission.
85% deemed it important to tell visitors how Web sites use cookies."
If one enables the "alert when setting cookies" feature of more recent
browsers, the problem is annoyingly clear; many sites set multiple cookies,
5, 10, 15, etc., that would seem to indicate that they are counting
"impressions" without actually showing anything. It's no wonder why the
technique is suspect and getting worse. And this was *before* the issue
went mainstream the week of June 6, when major media, including The LA
Times and NBC in the SF area, decided it was necessary to warn consumers in
a big way. And now thanks to that and more to come, banners and cookies
are, well, linked permanently together. Am I the only one that suspects
this attention by mainstream media is an attempt to slow down the dollars
being poured into Net advertising?
>And I'm not convinced that full-page interstitials are the answer either,
>being too intrusive. How about some graphics-lite, half-page ads with
>*nothing* to click ion? All those guffawing should now stop and ask
>themselves:
>
>How was it we got so conservative and went so far down the banner and
>site model route that we now have trouble envisaging working with
>anything else? And how did we develop a closed mindset to quickly?
Glad you asked, my guess is easy money and vested interest, a brokers dream
and a site owners nightmare. Snake oil abounds, Interstitials are the next
"big thing". Care to wait for another unasked for ad that slows your
progress out there? In the name of Commerce? Not hardly.
My take on the next big thing on Web sites will be: We Don't Use Cookies
Here! It will probably be in the 60x468 format banners, and they'll FLASH.
Estimated time frame to adoption = <90 days.
Have an enlightening week.
Alan
________________________________________________________
Alan Ferguson -- designer - photographer - webslave
5line Communications \ http://5line.com / 510 988 9393
SF East Bay area business directory http://creekwalk.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsor:
With 312 million page views a month, we have more reach
than your toothbrush. (Probably more frequency, too.)
http://www.geocities.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
