Thursday, October 18, 2007
Predictive Banners
During the last week I've had several conversations about behavioral and predictive banner serving. I've come to realize there are two specific areas or players that can attempt to deliver predictive banners: The ad network and the advertiser. The idea is difficult to execute yet based on the simple concept that past behavior trends across a critical mass of users can be used to predict future success.
The ad network is in the position to collect the broad data required to reach a critical mass of users. Since the ad network touches viewers across multiple sites and can track previous 'successes' for each viewer, the ad network is also in the position to deliver 'the next' banner from their stable of diverse advertisers. Therefore, the goal is to build a data processing system that can decide to serve, at run time, one banner over another. The problem, however, is not, in my opinion, the data system, although this is a big hurtle, it is rather the constant variable changes that occur between past successes and current presentations. Specifically, banner creative, context of publisher site, relationship between the brand and the viewer and the motivating factor for past success. And because these variables are more controlled from within a single advertiser, the advertiser may actually be in a better position to execute a predictive banner system.
I'll detail each of these areas in my next submissions and follow-up with a look at predictive banners from an Advertiser's standpoint.
1. How Banner Creative effects results
2. How viewers' "Viewing Goals" effect results
3. How "Viewer-Brand" relationship effect results
4. How the viewer's motivation or "Immediacy Factor" effect results
The ad network is in the position to collect the broad data required to reach a critical mass of users. Since the ad network touches viewers across multiple sites and can track previous 'successes' for each viewer, the ad network is also in the position to deliver 'the next' banner from their stable of diverse advertisers. Therefore, the goal is to build a data processing system that can decide to serve, at run time, one banner over another. The problem, however, is not, in my opinion, the data system, although this is a big hurtle, it is rather the constant variable changes that occur between past successes and current presentations. Specifically, banner creative, context of publisher site, relationship between the brand and the viewer and the motivating factor for past success. And because these variables are more controlled from within a single advertiser, the advertiser may actually be in a better position to execute a predictive banner system.
I'll detail each of these areas in my next submissions and follow-up with a look at predictive banners from an Advertiser's standpoint.
1. How Banner Creative effects results
2. How viewers' "Viewing Goals" effect results
3. How "Viewer-Brand" relationship effect results
4. How the viewer's motivation or "Immediacy Factor" effect results
Labels: advertising 2.0, Internet Secured Application Technology, ISAT, online advertising, Online Marketing, Performance Communications Group, predictive advertising
Friday, October 12, 2007
What are the benefits and drawbacks of using video in e-mails?
As published in BtoB Magazine's Special E-mail Marketer's Issue, Sept 24, 2007.
http://ctstage.sv.publicus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061019/FREE/610190702
Answer: Including video in e-mail can yield several key benefits, such as a higher response rates, longer interaction times, lower distribution costs and more engaging presentations. The ultimate advantage is to determine if there are more “actions”—registrations, sales, log-ins, etc.—than nonvideo e-mail within a given list.
While the advantages are great, viewing multimedia e-mail can be complicated. Some e-mail clients support multimedia while others do not. Plus, even if the e-mail software supports it, variations in settings may prevent multimedia from playing. For example, browser-based e-mail services should support multimedia because the e-mail client is the browser; however, most services remove the multimedia before the e-mail is delivered with no recipient notice that the e-mail has been altered.
Similar to the transition from text e-mail to HTML e-mail in the 1990s, there are delivery issues that will prevent some users from seeing the video while enhancing the presentation for those that can. Creating a series of “step-down” methods increases the number of people who can see the best presentation:
Always have an image behind the video presentation indicating there is supposed to be video.
Use granular tracking to build a solid understanding of who can and who cannot receive video in their e-mail. Most people will not know their own capabilities, so user surveys are not much help.
Surround the video with links to view the content in a browser and use full text links instead of "Click here" or image links.
Finally, with many people viewing e-mail with images off, the delivery gap between users with HTML but without multimedia is shrinking. To the extent that the gap still exists, these step-down strategies are good advice for all HTML campaigns.
Scott Madlener is exec VP-interactive strategy for Performance Communications Group (www.performcom.com), a developer of rich media sales and marketing solutions.
http://ctstage.sv.publicus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061019/FREE/610190702
Answer: Including video in e-mail can yield several key benefits, such as a higher response rates, longer interaction times, lower distribution costs and more engaging presentations. The ultimate advantage is to determine if there are more “actions”—registrations, sales, log-ins, etc.—than nonvideo e-mail within a given list.
While the advantages are great, viewing multimedia e-mail can be complicated. Some e-mail clients support multimedia while others do not. Plus, even if the e-mail software supports it, variations in settings may prevent multimedia from playing. For example, browser-based e-mail services should support multimedia because the e-mail client is the browser; however, most services remove the multimedia before the e-mail is delivered with no recipient notice that the e-mail has been altered.
Similar to the transition from text e-mail to HTML e-mail in the 1990s, there are delivery issues that will prevent some users from seeing the video while enhancing the presentation for those that can. Creating a series of “step-down” methods increases the number of people who can see the best presentation:
Always have an image behind the video presentation indicating there is supposed to be video.
Use granular tracking to build a solid understanding of who can and who cannot receive video in their e-mail. Most people will not know their own capabilities, so user surveys are not much help.
Surround the video with links to view the content in a browser and use full text links instead of "Click here" or image links.
Finally, with many people viewing e-mail with images off, the delivery gap between users with HTML but without multimedia is shrinking. To the extent that the gap still exists, these step-down strategies are good advice for all HTML campaigns.
Scott Madlener is exec VP-interactive strategy for Performance Communications Group (www.performcom.com), a developer of rich media sales and marketing solutions.
Labels: advertising 2.0, Internet Secured Application Technology, ISAT, online advertising, Online Marketing, Performance Communications Group
