Re: Interesting Twist to BANNER ADVERTISING

From: William Henning <bhenning_at_door2net.com>
Date: Tue 28 Dec 1999 23:29:52 -0800

Hi Fred,

Season's Greetings.

In the spirit of Christmas I will assume that you
simply did not consider the implications of your
proposal and did not intend any harm to web sites.

FRED WROTE:
> You may remember my comments recently about a "Robot
> that Clicks" on banner ads for you. Well, during that

No, I don't, but I will probably look them up now.

> development we've come upon another interesting bit of
> coding genious that we just had to jump on right away.
> I'm posting it here to see if anyone on this list
> thinks it's interesting or worth the trouble to code.

I think it would cause you far more difficulty than any
possible gain. Why? Read below...

> For the past three years I've been saying the whole
> advertising landscape on the web would change
> dramatically. At some point people will become more
> interested in local ads than remote ones.

I happen to disagree with you; the ideal way of
attracting local advertising dollars is to build a
local content site people will want to visit.

> I don't know about you, but the advertisers around here
> are more interested in attracting customers who will
> purchase something. The concept is to serve ads that
> will appeal to shoppers on a LOCAL basis. After all, a
> car buyer in Virginia is probably NOT going to buy a
> car online from a seller in Texas.

True, but he would be interested in GM / Ford / etc.
ads. He would also want to know prices everywhere to
make sure he is not being taken for a ride locally.

> Local advertisers can't buy ads on the big web sites,

Not true; geo-targeting is available; and if they can
pay for expensive TV and print ads they should not balk
at paying for geo-targeted advertising from the
reputable agencies.

> and really don't want to rely on the hit-or-miss
> structure of the various "blackmail" banner
> advertising schemes.

Not blackmail, the big ad networks can do an OK job of
geo-targeting based on IP addresses assigned to users.

If someone wants to put ads on MY site, they will have
to pay me for the priviledge. Period.

You could always do what AllAdvantage does and give
your dialup users a special browser that displays an
additional ad outside of the browser area; as long as
no attempt is made to make it look like part of the
site being displayed you would probably be OK.

> So I said: "How about we come up with code that TRAPS
> the banner ads on ANY web page being surfed by anyone
> on our private (dial-up subscriber) WAN, and replace
> it with an ad for a local business?" They liked the
> idea, so they built the code.

Well, there are a number of things wrong with this
idea; allow me to list them:

1) Copyright violation

The ad code embedded in the web pages is part of the
copyrighted work, by replacing it you are violating the
copyright of the web site owner.

2) Theft from websites

Such a scheme would be usurping revenue from ad
supported web sites; replacing ads will result in a
drop in CTR rates for the web sites; which will cause
them to lose advertisers; therefore lose revenue.

3) Immoral & Unethical

See (1) and (2). This would piggyback on top of the
hard work of other people to make a quick buck.

4) Self defeating

Enough people do this, most content sites will shut
down as they won't have the revenue stream they need to
build content. Their ad space could no longer be
stolen, and the ad space abductors will no longer make
money. Fewer interesting web sites; people will surf
less. ISP's lose out. People lose out. Everyone loses.

> For instance: say any of the 60,000 dial up customers
> log on and surf to any site with BANNER EXCHANGE, VALUE
> CLICK or other banners purveyors on the target page...
> rather than seeing some ad for some web site they're
> not interested in, they'll be greeted ads for business
> right in their neighborhood. Local business they'd
> rather support. (Think about how many you'd rack up
> with Yahoo alone!)

Bad idea, illegal, unethical, anyone doing this would
get sued by the ad networks, and a class action suit on
behalf of web sites would also be a strong possibility.

> The nice part about it is ALL of those banner views are
> now logged to our ad demographic statistics as opposed
> to someone elses... and suddenly the "views" increase
> a thousand-fold, and the local advertisers get many
> more exposures to customers more likely to come and
> shop at their business! Sort of like "Think Globally
> -- Act Locally".

And web sites lose revenue and close down, meanwhile ad
network lawyers are chasing you.

> So I told my head tech guy, "WHOA... what if the Post
> Office captures every incoming issue of NEWSWEEK and
> replaces all the ads with local ads before delivery to
> the subscribers' mailboxes!"

EXACTLY! You hit the nail on the head.

Newsweek would go after the post office. There are
actually federal laws dealing with tampering with mail
that may also be applicable with such web site
tampering.

> Except it's actually better because there's no
> down-time for the web page to go out and retrieve the
> banner from the remote banner provider -- it's
> instantaneous because all the banners are right here on
> the server, and probably cached.

Worse. Much worse. Terrible idea; you should abandon it.

> Now, we're wondering if this is the same thing as the
> local cable operator who replaces network feed ads with
> locally sold ads? Or the movie theater owner who sells

No, because they pay for that right.

> ads to air during the preview trailers of movies?

No, because that does not modify the content of the
movie.

Would you like an idea?

Have a home page for your subscribers, you are more
than welcome to sell advertising there!

> I've noticed attending the movies over the holidays,
> more and more local advertising up on the big screen,
> from Pepsi to the corner car wash.

But it does not modify the content. Paramount, Sony
Pictures etc. would come down like a ton of bricks on
any movie house silly enough to modify their rented
print of the movie.

Fred, I hope I've been able to show you how terrible
the idea is.

You seem to have some techs, and appear willing to
spend time on development. Why don't you create a nice
local portal / news site for your subscribers? Then you
could sell advertising space on it for local
advertisers!

That would be perfectly ethical, legal, and would
contribute more content to the web!

In case you haven't guessed by now, I run a fairly
large content site. The site pays my mortage payments
and puts food on my table - via ad revenues. If I found
someone violating the copyright of my content (by
copying it OR modifying my ad codes to divert ad
revenue from my site) I would have to explore all of my
options in seeking redress.

Regards,

Bill





Received on Wed Dec 29 1999 - 01:29:52 CST