NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Offline Advertising in an Online World
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Offline Advertising in an Online World
Leo Sheiner (leo_at_netcomuk.co.uk)
Sat, 19 Sep 1998 14:21:46 -0500 (CDT)
"David Scott Carlick" <carlick_at_eyegive.com> writes:
>This is wonderful for 'considered purchase' products, but
>harder to fathom for 'low involvement' products. I think too
>much energy is being devoted to figuring out how to make the
>web like TV so it can sell low involvement products. This
>just misses the point. It has grown because it is not like
>TV, and because it is all about high involvement.
>
I have long argued that the web is completely unlike TV and
*always* will be. Indeed that fact will finally be generally
recognised when the bandwidth issue is resolved and it
will still be impossible to treat surfers on the web the same
as viewers of TV. David is right when he says the web is all
about high involvement. Surfers have discovered their power
to know and to choose. Knowledge has always been power.
Consumers have become truly empowered because they
now have volumes of information available from third parties
at the click of a mouse. That shift in relationship is a massive
one and unless your thinking encompasses the implications
of that shift you will get it all wrong.
"David Scott Carlick" <carlick_at_eyegive.com> also wrote:
>We see advertising models being completely bypassed by
>affiliate deals. Instead of even having an argument over Per
>Inquiry or Per Click deals (who controls the creative? who
>guarantees a minimum to the publisher?) there is a large and
>rapidly growing faction of the marketplace that is just
>saying, 'here is a commission on a product sale. You do the
>merchandising. The better you merchandise, the more you
>make.'
>
>This is a truly wonderful new economic approach that the
>Internet enables, and which truly obviates a whole lot of
>the old discussion about awareness versus Per Click deals,
>because the new model of affiliate deals means the
>advertiser 'loses' the old, cost/thousand * CTR * conversion
>rate = cost per customer, and just moves to a fixed cost per
>customer, shifting the risk out the network to the
>individual site or even to the individual. Brilliant!
I agree it is brilliant for the vendor but consider that it takes
two to make a deal. The Vendor's ideal business model
is the cost per sale because it is a fixed cost directly related
to a profit. Similarly the ideal business model for the content
site is CPM because it is a profit directly related to their
quantifiable and predictable inventory.
I argued two years ago (and it was a lonely voice in the
wilderness) that not only was the web an ideal platform for
cost per action and cost per sale but that for a large part of
Web advertising it must prevail. My rationale then and still
now is that there will always be an excess of supply of
inventory over demand. That is simply because there are
very small capital costs involved in acquiring traffic
compared to publishing or TV broadcast. The low barrier to
entry means we now have something like three million new
sites a year on the web and it is still climbing.
Because hardly any one agreed with me (and I guess I am
a bit of a maverick) I set up Safe Audit as the first result
oriented banner network. However it has taken two years
for my view to gain more acceptance and only now are
affiliate deals really beginning to grow. It is just as well
that in the meantime we grew into one the largest pay per
click networks. It is well to consider why affiliate deals are
hard to get off the ground. From the vantage point of a
content site, their three main questions are:
How do I know how often the sale/lead generation/action on
which my payment is based will happen?
How do I know whether the vendor will accurately report
sales/actions to me (since that is under his sole control)?
How can I be sure the vendor will pay me (many don't)?
Unfortunately the net is awash with scams. Most content
sites have been ripped off by someone along the way.
Even worse there are a lot of businesses who believe their
gizmo/service is going to set the web alight and at $9.95
is going to sell in the hundreds of thousands. They also
believe that because it is going to sell in such large volume,
a dollar a sale is an excellent reward for a referral.
Unsurprisingly, for every affilliate deal that works there are
hundreds that do not. As someone who has always been
an advocate for pay per action, I do not believe it is
realistic or appropriate for the content site to prove whether
an affiliate deal is viable. In my view the vendor has to prove
that first. If he doesn't then content sites will rightly reject
most such schemes. At Safe-Audit we ask most vendors
who wish to set up a pay per action/sale to start with a pay
per click campaign (while we monitor actions/sales). That
enables us to refine our strategy together (what creative
and which type of content sites) that produce a viable model
for payment by result. Once that learning curve has been
processed we also know what is the right reward to offer
one that is equitable to both parties. Only a deal that works
for both parties is viable in the long term.
By the time an affilliate basis is offered on Safe-Audit, not
only is the vendor known to our members, but we can add
our credibility by recommending the campaign to them.
And of course we guarantee third party audit and our
members know that come what may, payment will be
effected.
The vendor has to understand that this learning curve will
cost him money but he will be buying experience and
eventually credibility. Occasionally he will also learn that
his pricing, or his web site, or his product/service need
adjustment.
Leo Sheiner <leo_at_netcomuk.co.uk>
Buy into 334 million pageviews p.m. on 10,575 host sites to gain
the results you want. Free consultancy and animated banners
Why advertise using Safe? http://safe-audit.com/adpromo.html
Why host banners for Safe? http://safe-audit.com/hostpromo.html
mailto:leo_at_global-m.com Telephone +44181 346 0770 Leo
========================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
CLIQNOW!/The 24/7 Network, The Mining Co. and AdKnowledge
CLIQNOW! Networks & The 24/7 Network. Buy reach & powerful brands:
*Reuters News, Wall St. Sports, NetRadio, All Apartments*
Get these sites on your next buy. http://www.247media.com/umbrella.html
---
QUESTION: What has 5,000 fingers and has grown 44% since April? It's been
called "a Yahoo! on steroids," and it's spreading fast across the web.
ANSWER: The 500 Expert Guides at http://MiningCo.com
---
7 out of 15 top agencies know that AdKnowledge improves web advertising
effectiveness. What are YOU waiting for? AdKnowledge. We make web
advertising work. http://ads01.adknowledge.com/SmartBanner/page/9751.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================================================
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
