4 ms·

I was under the impression that Google already did this. A Googler already described this to me years ago as "closing the loop", where Google's ad network alre

I was under the impression that Google already did this. A Googler already described this to me years ago as "closing the loop", where Google's ad network already exposed a customer to a brand/product, but Google only gets credit for the conversion if it happens in the same browser session online. By tying together stats between impression and conversion (purchase, even in-store), the ad network becomes more valuable -- or less, if there was already an assumption of this effect with previously overestimated results.

jforman 9y ago
Lots of companies have been improving attribution online. Offline is quite a different beast.
- hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
  I remember reading an article a few years ago about Facebook doing this. It's also why some merchants will ask for your phone number, even if you pay in cash. With your phone number, the merchant can identify you. In Facebook's case, they know what ads they show you online, then they can tie any subsequent purchases tagged with your phone number back to your FB account.
  - wavefunction 9y ago
    Sounds like another company claiming credit for something it didn't actually do. facebook showed me ChristianMingle ads for years despite marking myself as agnostic. I have a fair amount of experience with the Ad-words network and all I can see of facebook's ad network and target is that it sucks. I've never seen any place I've worked have much success deriving any meaningful value from facebook ads.
    - leesalminen 9y ago
      It works for us. But we cater to a small niche that's fairly easy to target.
    - omarchowdhury 9y ago
      What if ChristianMingle was OK with attracting agnostic to their site? I mean, you don't have to be Christian to want a partner and agnostic can also be synonymous with open.
    - H4CK3RM4N 9y ago
      I would guess that Christian Mingle specified an age/location target, and assumed the name would filter out non-Christians from clicking(and therefore the company wouldn't have to pay).
wavefunction 9y ago
This sounds like some bullshit to me. Not that Google claims to be able to close the loop, but that a Google ad actually influenced me in any way, let alone a physical purchase in a brick-and-mortar. PPC Ad-words perhaps influences me if I'm researching a product or service, but that's mostly a function of search results placement rather than . Usually I scan down below the first few search results because those are people trying to tell me they're what I'm looking for and they usually aren't. I will readily admit that I have to consider that I am a freakish outlier, though.
- thephyber 9y ago
  If you're a mammal, you are subject to operant conditioning. Hell, most vertibrates are, as well). You aren't "freakish" for believing advertising doesn't work on you. There are plenty of gamblers who have convinced themselves that they have a system that will beat the house or alcoholics that believe they can hold their liquor. The world is rife with people who believe they are immune to marketing. Nearly no one believes the ad impressions subliminally control your mind and force you to buy their advertised product. By simply seeing a product image, logo, brand name, etc (even in your periphery), you are being (re)exposed to a product in hopes that over time, you will remember the impression that ad made on you. Advertisers know, from studying consumers, that advertising doesn't work equally on all people or at all times. You should read or watch Tristan Harris describe how some of the best companies in the world (especially tech companies) are great at "persuading" their customers/users/visitors to go through a well defined loop, often taking advantage of quirks in human behavior. As a developer who worked at a game company, I've seen the development process first-hand. As an enthusiast of behavioral economics, I've seen proof that humans aren't as rational or and don't have as much "free will" as most Americans believe they have. As an amateur dog trainer who has trained a blind and deaf dog, I've seen amazing progression of learning and intent that happens when using operant conditioning to train an animal. [1] http://www.tristanharris.com/essays/ http://www.tristanharris.com/essays/
Avalaxy 9y ago
You are correct, this is not new at all. I worked as a partner with Google on implementing this 2 years ago. By then there was already public documentation on the internet.

jforman 9y ago

Lots of companies have been improving attribution online. Offline is quite a different beast.

hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
I remember reading an article a few years ago about Facebook doing this. It's also why some merchants will ask for your phone number, even if you pay in cash. With your phone number, the merchant can identify you. In Facebook's case, they know what ads they show you online, then they can tie any subsequent purchases tagged with your phone number back to your FB account.
- wavefunction 9y ago
  Sounds like another company claiming credit for something it didn't actually do. facebook showed me ChristianMingle ads for years despite marking myself as agnostic. I have a fair amount of experience with the Ad-words network and all I can see of facebook's ad network and target is that it sucks. I've never seen any place I've worked have much success deriving any meaningful value from facebook ads.
  - leesalminen 9y ago
    It works for us. But we cater to a small niche that's fairly easy to target.
  - omarchowdhury 9y ago
    What if ChristianMingle was OK with attracting agnostic to their site? I mean, you don't have to be Christian to want a partner and agnostic can also be synonymous with open.
  - H4CK3RM4N 9y ago
    I would guess that Christian Mingle specified an age/location target, and assumed the name would filter out non-Christians from clicking(and therefore the company wouldn't have to pay).

wavefunction 9y ago

This sounds like some bullshit to me. Not that Google claims to be able to close the loop, but that a Google ad actually influenced me in any way, let alone a physical purchase in a brick-and-mortar. PPC Ad-words perhaps influences me if I'm researching a product or service, but that's mostly a function of search results placement rather than . Usually I scan down below the first few search results because those are people trying to tell me they're what I'm looking for and they usually aren't. I will readily admit that I have to consider that I am a freakish outlier, though.

thephyber 9y ago
If you're a mammal, you are subject to operant conditioning. Hell, most vertibrates are, as well). You aren't "freakish" for believing advertising doesn't work on you. There are plenty of gamblers who have convinced themselves that they have a system that will beat the house or alcoholics that believe they can hold their liquor. The world is rife with people who believe they are immune to marketing. Nearly no one believes the ad impressions subliminally control your mind and force you to buy their advertised product. By simply seeing a product image, logo, brand name, etc (even in your periphery), you are being (re)exposed to a product in hopes that over time, you will remember the impression that ad made on you. Advertisers know, from studying consumers, that advertising doesn't work equally on all people or at all times. You should read or watch Tristan Harris describe how some of the best companies in the world (especially tech companies) are great at "persuading" their customers/users/visitors to go through a well defined loop, often taking advantage of quirks in human behavior. As a developer who worked at a game company, I've seen the development process first-hand. As an enthusiast of behavioral economics, I've seen proof that humans aren't as rational or and don't have as much "free will" as most Americans believe they have. As an amateur dog trainer who has trained a blind and deaf dog, I've seen amazing progression of learning and intent that happens when using operant conditioning to train an animal. [1] http://www.tristanharris.com/essays/ http://www.tristanharris.com/essays/

Avalaxy 9y ago

You are correct, this is not new at all. I worked as a partner with Google on implementing this 2 years ago. By then there was already public documentation on the internet.