New Microsoft Ad Campaign

There was a lot of people who blogged about how bad the new ad campaign from Microsoft looked with this first commercial.

Now, obviously they have to set it up if it is going to be a campaign, like the Apple ads, and this was obviously supposed to be about nothing to start with, hello, can you say Seinfeld? It’s like all people do nowadays is use their blogs to bitch about stuff, but I guess that’s the way it’s always been. I thought the first one was funny and the second one below is pretty good too. Here’s to many more.

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Advertising, Funny, Microsoft 1 Comment » September 2008

Annoying TV Ads

If you have watched any shows on TNT lately, you know exactly what kind of ads this article from the NYTimes is talking about, the ad industry calls them a snipe, but they are annoying as hell when you are actually watching the TV show. The ones with noise are really disruptive and annoying, and I hope they do not become some form of industry standard, as many networks plan on running them, backlash or not. ABC has already tested some in July, sans sound, thank God, and are planning on using them more and more this fall. Oh joy.

Snipes are just the latest effort by network executives to cram promotions onto television screens in the age of channel surfing, ad skipping and screen-based multitasking. At first, viewers may feel a slight jolt of pleasure at the sight of a new visual effect, they say, but over time the intrusions contribute to the sense that the screen is far more cluttered — not just with ads, but with news crawls and other streams of information.

That may be so, network executives say, but the extra content is here to stay. The snipes — not to be confused with bugs, those network logos that pop up in screen corners during shows — are important enough to the beleaguered television industry that the networks plan to tolerate the backlash.

ABC tested the icons in July and will introduce them gradually this fall to get viewers familiar with the shorthand. To minimize complaints, ABC will keep the icons and all similar visuals silent.

Viewers say that snipes and bugs are degrading their experience of watching television. Even some performers seem to resent the assaults on their work’s integrity. At last week’s Emmy Awards, the comedian Lewis Black delivered a blow against screen clutter, yelling, “We don’t care about the next show. We’re watching this show.” Source: As the Fall Season Arrives, TV Screens Get More Cluttered

I can see Lewis Black saying that right now, and he is right, we want to see the show we are watching, not stupid little ads interrupting it. Who gives a shit about what is coming on next if the ad interrupts what is on now. All it is going to do is end up making people more and more resistant to ads anywhere, I know it will me.

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Ad Injection, Advertising, Branding Mistakes, TV 3 Comments » September 2007

Funny Ad

Here is an ad for woot.com I just saw on Google. I’d like to know how many people actually click on it.

Filthy rich? We’ll help.
Throw away your newfound cash
at Woot. You’re welcome.
woot.com

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Advertising, Funny, Rambling No Comments » August 2007

Nice Ad About European Films

Nice!

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Advertising No Comments » July 2007

Google’s CPA, or PPA, Network

Lots and lots of talk about Google’s entry into the CPA realm with their Pay per action beta test, it’s big news for affiliates, advertising agencies, merchants but especially, affiliate networks like CJ, Linkshare and Shareasale.

Pay-per-action advertising is a new pricing model that allows you to pay only for completed actions that you define, such as a lead, a sale, or a pageview, after a user has clicked on your ad on a publisher’s site. You’ll define an action, set up conversion tracking, and create ads that publishers in the Google content network can then choose to place in new ad units on their site. Source: Pay-per-action beta test

Lots of coverage by many well respected people:
Andy Beal of Marketing Pilgrim says,

To me, it sounds like a clear threat to the likes of Commission Junction or LinkShare – or any other affiliate marketing network. Google, for all intents and purposes, has just entered the affiliate marketing arena, with the battle cry that they can do affiliate marketing better than the affiliate networks can.

Now, I feel obliged to inform you that when I posed this suggestion to Rob Kniaz, product manager for Google’s advertising products, he was very quick to deny any intention to compete in the affiliate network space. “We think this is different from the traditional affiliate marketing industry”, said Kniaz. “[It’s an] extension of the current AdWords product”. Oh really? Kind of like how Google doesn’t see itself competing with Microsoft’s office suite. Source: Google Launches Pay-Per-Action; a Threat to Affiliate Networks?

Google never sees itself competing with anything as they always feel their products are better, a spokesman said they will offer more automation, more options, more control than affiliate networks. You believe that right? Google will offer us more control? They are adding text links, something I have been asking for for a long time, but it is still going to be JavaScript, so you won’t be able to change the anchor text to something that fits in good with your website, so unless they offer text links with just the product names, this will still not be much of a help. I just hope they do the same with the Google Pack referrals.

Michael Arrington of Techcrunch says,

Affiliate marketing networks like Commission Junction and LinkShare are screwed. These networks also operate on a cost-per-action basis, mostly with online retailers. Even though some of them have scale, they will not have the ability to compete with Google on sheer size of network. Advertisers flock to volume, which drives average pricing up. When prices increase, publishers flock to the new platform because they’ll earn more. Look for serious publisher leakage from the big affiliate networks over time as this new product scales up. If you want to argue this point, note what happened to the stock price of Commission Junction’s parent company, ValueClick, today. And that’s even though the market has largely adjusted for this news already - this move to add PPA ads has been rumored for some time. Source: Digesting Google’s New PPA Advertising Product

I don’t think Michael could be more wrong on this point, while advertisers do want the numbers, and Google certainly has the numbers, they also need more support than adsense publishers or adwords cpc campaigns do. Lots of merchants operate with the seasons, so there will be lots of ads being created and used by them, through in coupons and you have some more complexity, the affiliate networks like CJ, et al, are already setup and cranking out the creatives and coupons, and offer much more support than Google ever will. There won’t be serious publisher leakage, but many of the same affiliates will sign up for the Google network, as all affiliates look for the highest paying offers, but you won’t see a mass exodus of affiliates. You probably won’t see a mass exodus of merchants either, although the most movement will be from the smaller merchants, and those merchants who can adapt quickly.

The thing that will make or break Google are the creatives, CJ, Shareasale, Linkshare all allow you to change the anchor text on the creatives to fit your “spin”, Google only uses JavaScript, something that slows down the page, especially as more and more are added, and it doesn’t allow you to change the text, which is huge. I guarantee anyone at Google I could double our profits on the Google referrals if I only had straight text links for the products, JavaScript is great because you don’t have to change anything, but it hampers your flexibility and it slows down your page, something none of us want.

Scott Jangro agrees with me, or I agree with him, however you want to look at it, and probably puts it better than I do when he says,

Affiliate marketing involves traditional advertising methods like banner ads and text link ads but most of the really successful affiliates are not merely ad-pushing publishers. While there are plenty of affiliates who use affiliate marketing to show ads, the majority of top affiliate marketers form close partnerships and integrate with the merchants they promote. They use tools like promotions, coupons, and product data that get tightly integrated into the affiliate’s offering. They communicate with the merchants on IM, email and even the telephone. An example is a niche price comparison shopping engine. A single page on that site may have 20 different products from 15 different merchants, each with a “buy” link going through an affiliate network.

Will this cut into some of the publishers that currently operate in affiliate networks? Definitely, but one could argue that Adsense already did that damage. There’s a 95-5 rule that’s talked about in Affiliate Marketing. 95% of the revenues are driven by 5% of the affiliates. This 5% of affiliates cannot be serviced by an “advertising” model. Source: Will Google CPA Eat CJ and Linkshare Alive?

And Scott should know, he worked for Befree for years and is now a successful affiliate himself. Another super affiliate, Vinny Langham aggrees,

I’m not going to rehash my previous post on this topic (still highly applicable - I highly recommend reading it before continuing with this post), but Google has finally launched Pay Per Action across their Adwords Network for US advertisers onto Adsense (not Search Network yet). I still believe that there are severe problems with the model, and Google will discover that it is not sustainable. Source: Google Launches Pay Per Action (CPA)

We shall see what happens when it is finally released, but me, I’m predicting another Froogle, which was never really any competition for anyone.

Added: Wayne Porter, as always, weighs in with his own thoughts, where he talks about the Attention engine and how attention = revenue.

Some of these services are fossil fuels that will burn out and be replaced, some are windmills, solar collectors, fusion engines…it is all about sustainable fuel for the Attention Engine. The engine’s byproducts are not waste either- the byproduct is revenue. Revenue generated by selling what advertiser’s have never really had- not only a highly efficient targeting system that ensures the right placement no matter the medium, but what is coming down the pipe, what decision is a good one or a bad one. The Attention Engine will know. Source: Attention- What Google CPA Really Means…

If Google has anything, it is loads of user data, search habits, browsing habits, purchasing habits, you name it, they can tie it back to people, even if they have changed their privacy habits recently, I guarantee you they still have the means to tie it back to each and every user. I agree with some of the thoughts of others, whatever they do, it will feed them more data, and help them pull in more money and users, for now.

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Advertising, Google 1 Comment » March 2007

Google Doing Electronic Billboards

I’ve said it before and I will say it again, Google wants to control all advertising, and, according to some patent filings, it looks like they are definitely moving in that direction. According to an article from Clickz, a patent filing from Google on technology to let local stores tie their stock computers to a Google powered ad network, means they are definitely thinking beyond newspapers and radio advertising. This filing covers systems and methods to allocate advertising space in a “network of electronic display devices.” So, this could cover billboards, ATM machines, kiosks in malls, about any digital display, heck why not TV’s in some stores where companies could show ads for some of their stock currently in the store.

If patent filings are anything to go by, contextual advertising powered by Google will start appearing on digital billboards in a shopping mall near you.

The idea is to tie billboard advertising in local malls to actual products for sale nearby, much like the company’s flagship Google AdWords/AdSense network that handles contextual advertising on the Internet.
The patent filing, first reported by New Scientist magazine, describes a way for retailers to put categories of products up for purchase in the vicinity of a display device.

If the filing is a sign of things to come from Google, kiosk-type billboards, ATM machines and other digital displays in malls and hotel lobbies could start hawking products directly from a nearby retailer’s inventory.
Nowadays, advertising in these screens are limited to looped, poster-type advertisements of movie promotions and other nearby events but, in Google’s eye, the ads could be pulled directly from a merchant’s stock control system. Source: Google Patent Filing Hints at Digital Billboard Ad Network

We are currently being flooded with advertising everywhere, my current broadband Suddenlink, formerly Charter Communications, has started placing banner ads alongside the web mail interface. This really pisses me off, I am already paying for this service, I don’t want to be shown ads because they can, if it was free I wouldn’t mind it, but not when I pay for the service. If Google had already rolled out the ability for everyone to pull in all their email from POP accounts, I wouldn’t be using the web mail interface at all. I will be dropping that email address and I will tell them where to stick when they make me move to the Suddenlink address. I called a customer service rep and he said our marketing guys said we should, so they did and they can’t remove them, so they can shove them where the sun don’t currently shine.

The ATM ad make me mad to, charge me for withdrawals from non-network ATM’s, charge me fees for using their own ATM’s and now they want me to look at ads after I get my money out? What kind of crap is that, just gimme me card back and my receipt, and stop ruining my life. Chase can shove those ads as well, I haven’t called them yet to let them know I will be switching banks, but I will when it happens.

Posted by Jimmy Daniels Posted in: Advertising, Annoying Websites, Google No Comments » January 2007