Thursday, September 13, 2007
Mis-sizing Ad Banners
Those that know me, know that one of my major concerns with display advertising is the functional failures introduced through the ad network as it relates to the serving bad code. Bad code in the form of failed redirects, java script errors and serving the wrong banner size. Today I found a great example of a publisher and advertiser deciding that they would purposefully create a mis-sized 'looking' banner that as it turns out contains a hidden expansion. A banking ad on PGATour.com, placed in the masthead, which typically contains a standard banner or leader board. The ad buy is actually a custom expansion ad that seems to be about 800x600, where the expansion state is open and empty. The visible element is a wide skyscraper, 160x600, with a delayed mouse over putting game. Since the banner is isolated in so much empty space, it just looks like a bad placement. If it takes me 5 sentences to describe the visual, you can guess its not going to end well.
In this case, both the publisher and advertiser (agency) are at fault for subjecting 100% of the audience to such a poor advertising integration. In fact, the custom size is so big, that many people will not even see the actual PGATour.com masthead without scrolling down. The expansion did not shrink down after a certain amount of time. Did I say this ad had no close button and was open for everyone? The worst part is that the 'pay-off' is a putt that goes outside of the skyscraper and into the expansion area. A 'cool' effect at the cost of everyones experience and thousands of extra media dollars.
So, who was the advertiser? My screen shots will not reveal the answer as the company logo is not displayed until after a completed putt and messaging animation. So, this branding banner, placed at an extravagant premium, does not even display the bank name and logo until after the user engages the ad for an extended time period to get the putt going and a delayed messaging animation. I'm repeating myself because I'm so stunned at how bad this execution is as I type it. Do I want to move my company banking to UBS?
In this case, both the publisher and advertiser (agency) are at fault for subjecting 100% of the audience to such a poor advertising integration. In fact, the custom size is so big, that many people will not even see the actual PGATour.com masthead without scrolling down. The expansion did not shrink down after a certain amount of time. Did I say this ad had no close button and was open for everyone? The worst part is that the 'pay-off' is a putt that goes outside of the skyscraper and into the expansion area. A 'cool' effect at the cost of everyones experience and thousands of extra media dollars.
So, who was the advertiser? My screen shots will not reveal the answer as the company logo is not displayed until after a completed putt and messaging animation. So, this branding banner, placed at an extravagant premium, does not even display the bank name and logo until after the user engages the ad for an extended time period to get the putt going and a delayed messaging animation. I'm repeating myself because I'm so stunned at how bad this execution is as I type it. Do I want to move my company banking to UBS?
Labels: advertising 2.0, Internet Secured Application Technology, ISAT, online advertising, Online Marketing, Performance Communications Group
