Re: [projectvrm] Mobile is hitting the nuclear reset button

[Don Marti < >]

Datar, you have summed up the conventional wisdom on
online advertising very nicely.

And you won't find any trouble finding plenty of people
to agree with you:
  http://www.lumapartners.com/lumascapes/marketing-technology-lumascape/

But if this consensus is right, today, then Sanford
Wallace was right about email spam almost 20 years
ago.  So what happened to email spam?

  http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/where-is-all-the-spam/

(Before I was on the Internet, I kept my ad-filled
magazines and my Yellow Pages, but recycled my direct
mail -- even though the last one was the most
personalized.  Same goes for online.  Anyway, long
version here:
http://zgp.org/targeted-advertising-considered-harmful/
)


begin Datar Sahi quotation of Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 03:15:07PM -0700:
> 
> Hi Don,
> 
> Personalized ads make impressions (audiences) more valuable.
> 
> Example1: CNN.com has an ad on their homepage for home mortgage loan. Only 
> .001% of folks that day are interested in a home loan.
>       - Data aggregators inform CNN based on behaviors, credit scores etc 
> that they should only target 1000 visitors (impressions) to that site for 
> that day. This frees up all other impressions (visitors) so they can 
> receive different ads personalized to their data
> Example2: Mazda knows you are in-market for a mid-size sedan. They know you 
> are graduate degree educated and have high HHI and visit engineering 
> blogs/content. They also know you are an environmentally friendly person.
>       - They serve you an ad that highlights the gas mileage
>       - They serve me an ad that highlights horsepower and cool factor 
> based on my data
>       - They serve Doc an ad that highlights easy financing and local 
> dealer (value and ease of purchase)
> Each of the sub bullets above is a personalized ad for the same exact car 
> and the advertising community exists to show value in the above.
> 
> The biggest cliche in the advertising: Show the right ad to the right 
> person at the right time = Personalization.
> 
> Incidentally, all of the above can be done at scale and is already 
> happening.
> 
> Datar
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 9, 2014, at 10:18 AM, Don Marti 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
> 
> > I'd split the categories into three, not two --
> > normally I'm a lumper not a splitter, but I think
> > it's important here.
> > 
> > Category      Offline example              Online example
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > Search        Yellow Pages                 Google AdWords
> > 
> > Signaling     magazine ad, TV spot         Nobody (!)
> > 
> > Direct        direct mail, telemarketing   Everybody (!)
> > 
> > (Personalizing ads makes them less valuable, so
> > predicting that every ad will be personalized is the
> > same as predicting a collapse of the ad business.)
> > 
> > Don
> > 
> > 
> > begin Datar Sahi quotation of Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:00:43AM -0700:
> >> 
> >> 2 categories of ads here:
> >> 
> >> 1 mass reach upper funnel: more content and awareness driven. No call to 
> >> action and just reinforcing a brand.
> >> 2 personalized, refined targeting and stronger call to action
> >> 
> >> Marketers (businesses) need both. Without awareness, you can't achieve 
> >> efficient actions.
> >> 
> >> There are very few mass reach plays today all of the fragmentation 
> >> (consumption habits). Every ad in the future will be personalized.
> >> 
> >> Datar
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On Apr 9, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Don Marti 
> >>> <
 >
> >>>  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Sure, but the Super Bowl as an ad medium was always
> >>> the most regulated, high-end, and "curated".  Yes,
> >>> the budgets and production values have gone up and up,
> >>> but there was never a time when Super Bowl ads were
> >>> as low-class as say, email spam, or the Facebook ads
> >>> that older women seem to get:
> >>> http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/facebook-ads/
> >>> 
> >>> "Times Square outdoor advertising" is a category that
> >>> has gone from skeevy to high-class, but it seems like
> >>> a rare exception (that wouldn't have been possible
> >>> without the economic and legal changes in the whole
> >>> neighborhood, even the whole city).
> >>> 
> >>> Don
> >>> 
> >>> begin Doc Searls quotation of Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:57:04AM -0400:
> >>>> 
> >>>> There are many distinctions to be made in the advertising business. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> As for Times Square... I dunno. It might be a cultural attainment of 
> >>>> some kind, but it's also an exceptions (bold and flashy electronic 
> >>>> billboards) that don't generalize well to the whole category. Another 
> >>>> is Super Bowl ads. People go to both so they can witness the best 
> >>>> exemples of a category they otherwise ignore or avoid.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Doc
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2014, at 10:46 AM, Jim Bursch 
> >>>>> <
 >
> >>>>>  wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Some might argue that billboard advertising has attained a higher 
> >>>>> value as it has evolved with technology (Times Square comes to mind 
> >>>>> as another cultural attainment of advertising). And I suspect that 
> >>>>> billboards are the closest thing to a pure "ad medium" -- as opposed 
> >>>>> to some other medium to which ads are added. A distinction needs to 
> >>>>> be made between an "ad medium" and an "advertising-supported medium."
> >>>>> Jim Bursch
> >>>>> 310-869-5340
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> @jimbursch
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> On 4/9/2014 7:28 AM, Doc Searls wrote:
> >>>>>> I agree, though Vogue may be in a tie with other fashion/specialty 
> >>>>>> magazines. The point is that the advertising itself is a kind of 
> >>>>>> editorial, and adds value to the whole thing. Brand advertising at 
> >>>>>> its best does that.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Still don't have an answer for Don's question, though.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Doc
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> On Apr 9, 2014, at 10:22 AM, Jim Bursch 
> >>>>>> <
 >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> I think of Vogue magazine as the highest cultural attainment of 
> >>>>>>> advertising.
> >>>>>>> Jim Bursch
> >>>>>>> 310-869-5340
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
 
> >>>>>>> http://mymindshare.com
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> @jimbursch
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> On 4/8/2014 11:44 AM, Don Marti wrote:
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> begin Doc Searls quotation of Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 11:36:20AM 
> >>>>>>>> -0400:
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> A fun find in the comments:
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> <http://crappy-mobile-ads.tumblr.com>
> >>>>>>>> Yes, that's great.  (My favorite is the clippable
> >>>>>>>> coupon. Yes, just a second while I take a pair of
> >>>>>>>> bolt cutters to my phone...)
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Advertising history question: has there
> >>>>>>>> ever been an ad medium that has gone from
> >>>>>>>> crappy/spammy/disreputable to higher value?  Or do
> >>>>>>>> ad media get burned through never to recover?
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> -----
> >>>>>> No virus found in this message.
> >>>>>> Checked by AVG - 
> >>>>>> www.avg.com
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3882/7320 - Release Date: 
> >>>>>> 04/09/14
> >>> 
> >>> -- 
> >>> Don Marti                    
> >>> http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
> >>> 
 
> >> 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Don Marti                    
> > http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
> > 
 
> 

-- 
Don Marti                    
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/