John Wanamaker, the founder of Macy's said, "I know half my advertising is wasted, I just don't know which half."
Big advertising agencies use very sophisticated math models and software to plan, execute and manage their ad buys for their clients. They can track the effectiveness of every ad in every media with a great deal of accuracy and precision. And yet and ad with an old lady saying "where's the beef," or a bunch of young urban men saying, "wassup" can capture the attention of the audience and blow all those metrics out of the water. As Internet advertising came online, a concomitant push for performance-measured advertising also developed. Advertisers got hard-nosed and wanted a proven ROI for every dollar spent. Well, where's the beef and wassup? Advertising is an art and a science. Get your head too buried in the statistics and you miss the point that really good creative execution can make those metrics meaningless. Ignore the numbers and you end up with wonderful art that sells nothing. -David "The Captain Humphreys Project: A Man Alone. Around The World. The Smallest Boat. A World Record." http://www.captainhumphreys.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In [email protected], "Enric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > With time shifting, I would think the value (or more the lack of > value) of not only the content changes but also the ad, probably more > so. A company can go out of business, change hands, change products, > and would probably have a new version of the product at a later date. > If the ad was generic enough it may have longer pertinence. But I > would think the ad would be less meaningful and valuable to the > company paying for it in time. > > -- Enric > -======- > http://www.cirne.com > > --- In [email protected], robert a/k/a r > <robert.videoblogging@> wrote: > > > > Adam, correct, the time-shift thing is very true, I'm thinking the > > pricing of the forward commodity, the advert, are and time- shifting are > > both in that equation some where. In the past, when calculating CPM and > > such the time-shift was not as significant because the media was better > > controlled. And today, when you lose control of the media you can't > > control first-run vs re-run pricing in the same way, if at all. > > > > Further, continuing with the RB example, they chose to sell a weeks > > worth, which bundles mondays, tuesdays, etc and makes a unit. They > > could have auctioned just next monday and separately next tuesday, but > > they didn't. They made a conscious decision to sell a strip, which > > homogenises the price. Is a friday worth more than a tuesday? Who > > knows. If you watch the RB episode manufactured on tuesday time- shifted > > to friday is it worth more? If you watch it a year from now what is > > that advert worth? > > > > And they chose the length of the strip as a risk / reward decision. > > What if RB had sold a months worth of adverts as a block. If they had, > > RB would have had less risk, though they may have received a lower > > price. Risk/reward at work there too. > > > > Seems like there's a lot of blending going on in new media pricing. > > This is not totally new science, however it is good to think about in > > the context of vlog economics. > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Adam Quirk wrote: > > > > > On 2/15/06, robert a/k/a r <robert.videoblogging@> wrote: > > >> > > >> Obviously such variable pricing works because the number of seats in > > >> the theatre is limited and they have a half life. It's not > dissimilar > > >> to the freshness of vegetables on the shelf at the grocer which > > >> expire > > >> or the freshness of media. If a seat in the theatre goes unsold it's > > >> not recoverable. If a bunch of carrots go unsold they are not > > >> recoverable. > > >> > > >> What happens to the price for a "show" on the Internet once it is no > > >> longer fresh, can it still be sold as "new"? Can a secondary market > > >> develop and, if so, how will it work? > > > One of the things that internet distribution has going for it is the > > > ability to time-shift the media, which cuts into this theory a little > > > bit. Although for shows like Rocketboom that deal with current > > > events, or news shows, I guess the carrot analogy holds true. > > > Most stuff I watch doesn't necessarily lose value as time goes by. > > > > > > Sites like the NYtimes charge people for archive diving. Maybe > > > there's something there. The latest week's worth of media is freely > > > distributable by all the available means, but anything older than a > > > week costs X, where X is a reasonable price for a short video that > > > someone wants to watch. > > > > > > AQ > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
