PDA

View Full Version : A look at web ads today



someone else
June 2nd, 2001, 18:05
Size does matter!

I mean ads, of course. ;)

Let's see what we're dealing with here:

1)Popups: Some of you may be going "I got popup ads on my site and I'm making lots of money off of them!" Guess what? A few months down the road, you won't be. This is just the current wave. It'll soon be going the way of the banner, which anyone reading this forum knows is some pretty impossible advertising.

Popups are starting to show up more and more. Think about this: How many of them do you actually see before you close 'em faster than you can load? How many of you are running popup-killer programs? Both of these will be the death of popups.

The more sites that use them, the less valuable they become as an advertising tool. And then they only serve to irritate your site viewer in the end.


2)Banner ads: 468x60. I speak at internet marketing conferences in Europe and the States. During a Stockholm conference, a woman did a presentation on how the average surfer completely ignores any graphic that particular 468x60 size. They used eye-tracking devices and showed what the person looked at. The testees looked at almost everything, but not once did they focus on the banner.

Of course, there's obviously a few people out there that click these. Very few. And they're still trying to figure out what the heck an "internet" is. Probably clicked the banner by accident as well.

3) Button ads: Done right, these can actually work. People's eyes don't avoid these small ads like they do the average banner size. However, the odds of a site doing them right are... too large against.

Most sites that use buttons tend to stack several of them on top of each other, on the right or left side of the site. This looks like one big jumbled mess to the site viewer, and they ignore it. Why take the time to stroll through a pile of flashing nonsense when that's not your reason for coming to the site?

Ditto with those that run a string of 4 or 5 in a row across the screen.

Yes, they're small. No, that doesn't mean you need to put more of them together!

A single small button placed in a well-noticed position on your site should get ten times the response of a clump of buttons stuck together combined.


4) Text links - These are still by far the best advertising you can use. Not written off to the side, but well-placed in an area where a site viewer will be reading.

This absolutely has to be done tastefully though, so as not to insult your site viewer. Learn how this works, and you'll get a pretty steady income from it.


5) DIFFERENT-SIZED ADS - The only way you'll get these is on your own. Well, and some companies have them in CJ. I'm talking about 230-width banners instead of 468. "But it's smaller, so people won't notice it!" Re-read what I wrote about banners. People are intentionally ignoring the 468x60 graphics. A simple change of size messes with their brain cells a bit, and makes them have to think about whether it's an ad or not.

This only works for so long, though. When people get used to seeing one size ad in one position on your site, it's time to switch sizes again. Plop a button ad in your banner ad space if it's possible layout-wise! Experiment! Don't just follow the masses that are going the standard banner route... they're not making any money!

-------------

GOING OVERBOARD THESE DAYS

Banners just haven't been working. So what are sites doing? Besides popups, which the more professional sites have fortunately been avoiding so far, the concept of flooding pages with ads that surround a small amount of content has come into play.

And really big ads. Ads that can cover anywhere from 25-50% of the screen.

Bigger is not better. Bigger is insulting your site viewer. You don't get money from advertising by insulting your site viewer.

I just wrote about using a single small button rather than a flashy mess of them strung together. A simple text link.

Smaller is better. Smaller is actually attracting more attention, simply because so many sites are using the nasty banners/large ads/flash button messes.

-----

IN ALL CASES, the ads must be things of interest to your target audience. Throwing up just any old ad won't work. If you find the right affiliations via CJ or a similar program, and work them into the content of your site properly, you may actually find yourself making some money.

Spend less time worrying about whether an advertiser may pay a bit less than another one. If that one that pays less is more suited to your content, the clicks/leads/sales/whatever should more than compensate. If you throw on an ad just because it pays more, but it has nothing to even remotely do with your site content, you're just wasting your time and ad space.

----

THE ONE THING THAT IS BEING FORGOTTEN THESE DAYS

What is it? The site viewer. These are the people you need to click on your ads. And you're insulting them with large messes, banner ads that they don't look at, and popups that just annoy them.

Hmmm... you really don't want them coming back, do you?

Put plenty of content on your site. Give them a reason to come back, such as a discussion forum. Content is what gets your viewers there in the first place. And you need them on your site first to get them to click your ads, right?

It's time to redesign your site. It's time to rethink your advertising strategy. It's time to stop following the trends and come up with a way that works for your site. Some faceless random banner server can't say exactly what ads will work on your site. Only you can do that.

Dare to be different. Cut back to the absolute minimum when it comes to ads. Make sure those minimal ads are appropriate to your site. Place them where people will end up seeing them, not at the top or on the sides of the site.

Be creative! Find places on your site that people are actually looking! Does your site have a banner at the top along with your logo? Do you really think people are looking at your logo every time they change pages of your site? Of course not. Once they know the logo is there, they have no reason to look up there again. And THAT is where you are placing your banner? Where noone is looking?


Creative thought: For those of you with discussion forums (possibly like this one), try placing an ad (not 468x60!) under the final post in the thread. Have the "post reply" button centered under the ad. Hmmm... do you think they'll see it?



Quit following the masses when it comes to advertising on your site. The masses are losing money left and right. Figure out what would work better for *your* site, not what banner companies are telling you is right. The day of the easy buck on the web is gone. You're going to have to actually work to get your site to make money.


Well, if anything, I hope that makes people think. :)



For the truth about the way the average advertising company thinks, read:
http://www.satirewire.com/briefs/rectangles.shtml

Yes, it's a satirical article. But there's a lot of truth behind it.

}:8) Supermoo
June 2nd, 2001, 18:16
About that ad above the reply... I think I'd have to kill Peo, although feel free to do it on any other forum! ;)

Also I tottaly agree with what you're saying, and I try incorporating that into my sites... I hate those damn huge ads... lots of small ones, strategically placed for loading times (in the top table, that loads a few seconds before everything else), interaction (near scroll bars) and something that they havn't seen before!

For example when I started djcl.com I had like a blue neon light (Table background) flashing constantly underneath my ad... that little bit of effort made just about everyone look, yet wasn't as intrusive as a pop-up.

The latest design of djcl.com uses lots of small ads placed statgically around ad-content... "new" stickers on the text-links and lots of flashing things... I personally think it's quite a good example of maximising ad revenue. http://www.djcl.com/

Anyway enough from me, I can't wait to hear everyone else's opinion! :)

gyrbo
June 3rd, 2001, 04:06
You reallt notice the ads are their, good job. That's an idea Imidgt will use.

Czar
June 3rd, 2001, 05:17
Well spoken, someone else!

I think the real message to come out of this is not that banner ads don't work (often, they do), or that popups are not being widely adopted (they're presently used by CNN, New York Times, Excite@Home, Lycos, ESPN, BusinessWeek and many others). Rather, it's that publishers have to think outside the box, and consider the needs of both their visitors and their site, individually.

It must be said that standard sizes are established for a reason, and that is to maximize efficiency. While some viewers may block tghe 468x60 size out of their consciousness, there certainly are advantages to having a size, or several sizes, that are popular enough to allow on-the-fly rotating, campaign insertion and the like, without having to deconstruct your design or manually insert new ads each few days.

Some of my sites use no banners, but have seen success through popunders and text links. Others use searchboxes prominently. Others still contain 1-2 full size banners and 2-4 cubes or buttons.

Just as banners aren't for everyone, text links and buttons are not always the best solution. The trick is to experiment, to innovate and to be open to change. With a little testing under your belt, and with the intimate knowledge of your visitors that only you can possess, it shouldn't take too long to discover which combination of revenue streams works for you.

LastActionHero
June 3rd, 2001, 05:33
Popups are starting to show up more and more. Think about this: How many of them do you actually see before you close 'em faster than you can load? How many of you are running popup-killer programs? Both of these will be the death of popups.

The best bet would be to use pop-behinds. They are non intrusive and don't affect the normal browsing in any ways. And when the user closes the browser window voila! he is staring at something which might interest him.


Banner ads: 468x60. I speak at internet marketing conferences in Europe and the States. During a Stockholm conference, a woman did a presentation on how the average surfer completely ignores any graphic that particular 468x60 size. They used eye-tracking devices and showed what the person looked at. The testees looked at almost everything, but not once did they focus on the banner.

True they are dead and gone, nobody clicks on them not even the windows' type flashing ones.


Button ads: Done right, these can actually work. People's eyes don't avoid these small ads like they do the average banner size. However, the odds of a site doing them right are... too large against.

Might work on a site to site basis.


Text links - These are still by far the best advertising you can use. Not written off to the side, but well-placed in an area where a site viewer will be reading.

True. They integrate nicely with content and the user never suspects that he is infact clicking on an ad. They are the best bet yet.



DIFFERENT-SIZED ADS - The only way you'll get these is on your own. Well, and some companies have them in CJ. I'm talking about 230-width banners instead of 468. "But it's smaller, so people won't notice it!" Re-read what I wrote about banners. People are intentionally ignoring the 468x60 graphics. A simple change of size messes with their brain cells a bit, and makes them have to think about whether it's an ad or not.

Yeah. These might surprise the visitor initially but not for a long time!



Banners just haven't been working. So what are sites doing? Besides popups, which the more professional sites have fortunately been avoiding so far, the concept of flooding pages with ads that surround a small amount of content has come into play.

Not true. MSN has popups. Well it is not exactly professional being a Microsoft product.:D



Be creative! Find places on your site that people are actually looking! Does your site have a banner at the top along with your logo? Do you really think people are looking at your logo every time they change pages of your site? Of course not. Once they know the logo is there, they have no reason to look up there again. And THAT is where you are placing your banner? Where noone is looking?

I learnt something there. Must have to think of something to implement it. Any ideas?



Creative thought: For those of you with discussion forums (possibly like this one), try placing an ad (not 468x60!) under the final post in the thread. Have the "post reply" button centered under the ad. Hmmm... do you think they'll see it?


Bad idea. Visitors might accidently click the ad and that might turn them off.

gyrbo
June 3rd, 2001, 05:42
I see no one has mentioned search boxes?

LastActionHero
June 3rd, 2001, 06:01
Czar did


Originally posted by Czar
Well spoken, someone else!

Some of my sites use no banners, but have seen success through popunders and text links. Others use searchboxes prominently. Others still contain 1-2 full size banners and 2-4 cubes or buttons.

Toefur
June 3rd, 2001, 07:22
I just wanna say that; your standard 468*60 banners only get ignored when they aren't targetted!

On one of my sites; I originally had it completely bannerless. But I thought I could advertise my own services (in this case clothing) that are relevant to the actual site.

The banner for this, despite the fact that my site gets a lot of return visitors, has an average CTR of 12%!

The other banners I rotate on that site, which aren't all quite so targetted as that, have CTR's of an average of 3-5%!

I don't know if my site visitors are like me; but... the amount of time i've spent online; i've learnt to avoid ALL types of advertising. I mean; unless it's a google or yahoo search box on a site... I wont use it; why not?

Because im sure most of you will agree that the payed for results usually don't offer much of what you are looking for.

I hover over all text links for affiliate links. If the link goes off someplace else... I won't be clicking it. Popups and popunders, I close instantly.

I mean, most people are using the internet more and more, and they are going to get used to things... will text links too; become obselete?

jiminsd
June 3rd, 2001, 10:17
Great topic someone else!!! I'm thinking how I just skip right over all banner ads and I absolutely despise pop-ups and click them off with a vengeance. I couldn't begin to tell you the ads that Peo is currently running.

I'm going to rethink the top banners that I have running on my site and probably ditch them. The line ads are getting all of the hits.

lucifer
June 3rd, 2001, 11:06
interesting !

I have to add that pop unders are not unobtrusive - you still see them coming - I don't bother with sites that use pop up/unders I just can't be bothered with them - I find a nicer site - I don't think I'm alone in this

}:8) Supermoo
June 3rd, 2001, 15:55
Toefur,

I really like your style of marketing with this site http://www.toefur.com/sites/thecoolsite/ !

It's a horrible ad-filled page that lets you tourture your friends with it! Oh and it uses mailbits, nice! :)

Cheap Bastard
June 4th, 2001, 00:27
i agree with just about everything that's been said here... especially one point: you can't make any money anymore with just slapping an ad on there and work on content...

First, that's what really brought the prices down... Somehow most people figured "i'll slap a banner on there, i'll earn money... if the advertiser doesn't get anything, it's his fault for being so stupid" (okay i elaborated a bit but that was the basic idea (and still is for some people), on average).
What publishers need to do is make advertising on his/her site attractive to the advertiser. That's pretty much why CPS (cost per sale) was invented. The flaw is publishers don't really care about advertisers enough. While CPM has this flaw, and CPC also has this flaw (although somewhat less), CPS doesn't have this flaw (... you're gonna trick your visitors into buying something? how? Either way the advertiser gets his money's worth). CPA partially has this flaw since most actions (usually free sign-ups or something of the likes) can usually be easily 'faked'.

}:8) Supermoo
June 4th, 2001, 01:44
Wouldn't it be great if there was a way of means testing people to know if they were going to cheat in your programs... then we could keep nice, plumper payouts and everyone would be happy.

Although sadly this would leave many employees out of jobs in all the major advertisers... :(

someone else
June 4th, 2001, 09:07
I posted mainly to wake up those who are limiting themselves ad-wise to "what everyone else is doing". I agree all my points may not work for every site, and that's one of my points as well... figure out what works for your site.

Personally, I close pop-behinds just as quickly as standard popups. Thanks to everyone.net implementing these, I've gotten quick on the draw on quickly closing them before they fully load.

And yep, pop-behinds are just as intrusive to those of us who browse with more than one browser. While waiting for a page to load, I'm already on a different browser writing a message or surfing. When a pop-behind is part of a web page, it forces the browser with that web page to become the front window when that pop-behind loads, disturbing my typing.

Of the few pop-behinds I've seen that happened to load before I could close them, not one was even remotely related to anything I'd be interested in. The pop-behind services, just like the banner services are *not* hitting target audiences properly. That alone spells death for any ad service.

It also explains why most of the banner ad services are dropping the lightweight sites and sticking with well-established business sites and such. At least there, they have a better chance that their not-well-targeted banners might find someone interested in a certain ad.

Enjoy the pop-behind ride while it lasts. I predict it going the way of the banner ad (or probably worse, since banners are still around) within a year. Or at least, you'll find it not so easy to make money with them.

The general surfing public is becoming more knowledged about the web all the time. The big boom of newbies on the web is over. (Yes, there's still newbies of course, but not in the high numbers that there were when the web was still developing into what it is today.) The more web-experienced you are, the less likely you are to be suckered into clicking an ad. Heck, I can't remember the last time I clicked an ad.


---

Oh, the "ad under the forum thread" idea I mentioned is actually used on one of my sites. In fact, I've killed just about every ad on my site except that spot! They tend to do very well because they're noticed. I get pretty good turnover numbers... all the ads on my site are per-lead or per-sale, not PPC. The per-lead ads are doing outstanding!

---

Cheap Bastard
June 4th, 2001, 11:23
you'd be surprised how inexperienced users are... You're not thinking outside of your box...

web publishers (just like you and me) are evolving mroe and more but because we do doesn't mean everyone else is... I know plenty of people who let a popunder load, or don't even notice it's there

of course when the main window's closed they just close the other one either out of lack of time (finished surfing), out of disinterest (no targetting whatsoever) or just being surprised (hey, that's not supposed to be there).

Seriously though... when's the last time you've seen a regular surfer (not a web publisher) using more than one window at a time... Just doesn't happen, unless the new windows are created for them.

Toefur
June 6th, 2001, 10:59
Hehehe... how'd you stumble onto that site of mine Supermoo? :D

I wonder how many people clicked that link... Hehe. I can't believe how well that site performs; it's still going great after 10 months or so of being up.

I still think that everyone, even the newbies; will soon enough learn to ignore most ads.

I mean; my mother... she's terrible. She's got no idea what is what, she'll click on the banner ad, then she'll click on some text links, then she'll spend half an hour examining the pop behind... but once she's more used to it...

The only success I ever have is in super-targetted pay per sales.