Re: [projectvrm] Peak ads, from the advertiser POV

[Don Marti < >]

begin Alan Mitchell quotation of Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 06:45:22AM +0000:

> I agree with you that signalling is important, but I don't think it's the
> whole answer. From behavioural economics we now know that familiarity is
> important - people are more likely to buy a brand that is familiar versus
> one that is unfamiliar. So 'brand fame' is another reason to advertise.
> Then, in magazines like Vogue the ads are 'part of the service' - part of
> why the buyer buys the product: looking for inspiration.

And you know that others are seeing the same ad,
as Mary points out.  For many brands, it's not just
what signal is the brand sending to you, it's what
signal can you send using the brand?

> The trouble with the word advertising is that like the word 'colour' it's
> a blanket term covering a myriad of different processes and functions that
> work in different ways.

True back in the day when all ad media were sold
differently and had different levels of targeting.
Still true offline.

But the available technology is moving away from
giving advertisers a choice between direct marketing
and signalful branding ads -- on the web, it's almost
all targetable, and in mobile, it's highly targeted
or nothing.

If you want to do branding and reach an audience,
not a set of database records, you have to do TV,
radio, or print.  Which is why those media keep their
value.  Meanwhile...

  "The problem with mobile media is that it's near
  impossible to monetize via adverts that earn
  one-tenth that of desktop ads, which earn one-tenth
  of print ads. From dollars, to dimes, to pennies."

  
http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2015/03/new_media_disrupted_g.php

> We need to understand this in order to understand where and how VRM can
> make a positive impact. For example, intent casting will have marginal
> effect on display advertising precisely because of signalling, fame, and
> other factors. On the other hand, it could have a dramatic impact on
> various forms of direct marketing driven by theories of 'relevance' Š

Yes, such as the retail beacons problem.

   Shoppers conflicted on data sharing 
   
http://www.warc.com/Content/News/Shoppers_conflicted_on_data_sharing.content?ID=8628cb5a-afdb-4dde-935b-53b7995a9c32

("conflicted" is a little mild)


> Alan Mitchell, Strategy Director
> Ctrl-Shift Ltd
> West Wing, Somerset House
> Strand
> London
> WC2R1LA
> 
> Mobile: +44(0)7711 899784
> Office: +44 (0)207 759 1056
> www.ctrl-shift.co.uk
> Skype: alansmitchell
> Twitter: 321CtrlShift
> 
> 
> For up to the minute market insight register for our weekly Market Watch
> <https://www.ctrl-shift.co.uk/join>. It's free :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/03/2015 04:48, "Don Marti" 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
> 
> >Doc cited this when it came out in 2013...
> >  THE THEORY OF PEAK ADVERTISING
> >  AND THE FUTURE OF THE WEB
> >  http://peakads.org/images/Peak_Ads.pdf
> >
> >Now here are many of the same points, from a
> >marketer's point of view:
> >  The Law of Shitty Clickthroughs
> >  http://andrewchen.co/the-law-of-shitty-clickthroughs/
> >
> >  "First it works and then it doesn't."
> >
> >Why do some ad media get depleted while others don't?
> >
> >Why are banner ads "slash and burn" while magazine ads
> >are "permaculture"?
> >
> >IMHO it comes down to signaling. If the medium
> >provides for an exchange of information (attention
> >from buyer traded for signal from seller) it stays
> >useful.  As soon as either side figures out the other
> >is trying to get something for nothing, the medium
> >declines from its "peak".
> >
> >-- 
> >Don Marti         
> >http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
> >
 
> 

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