5 ms·

In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've c

In my own personal experience, I can honestly say I've never "intentionally" clicked on an ad in the past 20+ years I've been on the internet. I will say I've certainly looked at ads in magazines, billboards, tv commercials (before tivo) and even those small planes pulling banners at the beach. I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure that out.

nsxwolf 9y ago
Magazine ads are often fun to look at. Great photographs. Sometimes very entertaining or interesting ad copy to read. Often informative. Most importantly they are usually for valuable, useful, and desirable products. Banner ads on the other hand...
reitanqild 9y ago
Given the amount of stupid ads I see I sometimes click one when I see something that is remotely interesting (dev tools etc), hoping to train googles AS (Artificial Stupidity) to serve me more relevant ads. (No, I'm still happily married and I cannot figure out why a company that sits on my personal email and most of my internet searches for the last 15 years cannot figure that out. Especially as I have even configured my ad preferences in the settings.)
- tzs 9y ago
  I can't figure out why Zillow thinks I'd be interested in houses in Palo Alto. They regular send me emails about houses they think I might be interested in, and they are in the Palo Alto area. The only reason they have my email address was because I made an account so I could claim my house on Zillow, so they know exactly where I live, and that is 850 miles from Palo Alto.
  - deathhand 9y ago
    They can target based upon income level and job. You being you means that if you went to the Palo Alto region you would find very similar people.
  - rajnathani 9y ago
    Do you use or at any time have used a Cali VPN?
awkwarddaturtle 9y ago
I haven't intentionally clicked on an ad nor have I intentionally look at an ad in magazines, tv commericals, etc. I've gotten rid of my magazine subs years ago and haven't owned a TV in years. > I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. Depends on the type. Certain google/facebook ads get far better traction than any traditional ad. The truth of the matter is all ads are ineffective. It's just that digital ads are easier to track ( the impression, clicks, views, etc ) whereas "traditional" ads are not. The problem for companies/ad agencies/etc are that kids/younger demographics are spending so much time on social media. We know that some digital marketing works because these youtube stars make a killing selling their own merchandise that they advertise on their own channels. The best thing for ad industry is if traditional media dies and goes away and then they could focus their attention on "digital" rather than traditional/print.
- autokad 9y ago
  > ... digital ads are easier to track ... whereas "traditional" ads are not. digital ads are not always easy to track. a lot of malware is dedicated to filling your cookies with visits so that if you happen to buy something, they can claim you saw the ad prior and take credit. in many cases, a digital add campaign creates such a tiny blip in sales its hard to differentiate from randomness, were as a TV ad shows floods of sales. > The best thing for ad industry is if traditional media dies and goes away and then they could focus their attention on "digital" rather than traditional/print. traditional advertising, namely TV, is still the most successful way to increase sales for many companies. since digital ads leads to so few sales, even the platforms have often moved away from 'advertise to produce sales' to advertise for brand management.
mathattack 9y ago
Perhaps it turns to brand awareness? For some ads (say Cars) the ROI is huge enough to justify.
maroonblazer 9y ago
Not all ads are meant to be clicked. If I have a new product that I want people to become aware of then digital advertising, appropriately planned and targeted, can be very effective.
JoBrad 9y ago
Relevance is huge. If you're shown an ad for something that you don't care about (which is most of the time, for most people), it will not be effective. However the right ad at the right time is very effective. But that's impossible to get correct all of the time, so there's no choice but for merchants to play the odds.
mschuster91 9y ago
> I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure that out. It is effective, and cheap at that. I run a small-ish left wing FB site and Twitter account, and regularly do small scale advertising - either to rally people up for a demonstration, or to annoy right-wingers. Proper targetting makes this incredibly easy, and judging by the numbers it works out just fine.
- tomcam 9y ago
  Right-winger here. I like your tactics.
zippergz 9y ago
I almost feel like there are two factions. I'm pretty similar to you. I have clicked on ads a handful of times, but it's very rare. However, I have worked in jobs where I had visibility into the metrics, and I have seen internet ads be EXTREMELY effective. Not in terms of clicks (which could easily be accidental or fraudulent), but in terms of people clicking and then purchasing. People aren't going to "accidentally" click and then give us money. And I've seen many campaigns where we were getting huge ROI in terms of actual dollars. So there are clearly lots of people out there who do click on ads and take action. I think the problem comes when you're using an intermediate metric like clicks or impressions to measure success. You have to measure the actual outcome you are trying to drive, like purchases or subscriptions. Of course, with CPG, that's a lot harder to do. And I'm not convinced that pure brand advertising is any easier to measure online than it is offline.
- tomrod 9y ago
  But it is an open question of incrementality -- did you just cannibalize a sale from a different, possibly cheaper, channel? How much lift did you actually get? That's the problem I've seen in the digital ad space -- lift is either hard to measure, or ignored completely. Causality to the sale is assumed on the ad.
  - zippergz 9y ago
    I think that's a great point, and definitely hard for a huge company like P&G. But for a small company, it can be easier, because when your volumes are low enough, it's often very easy to directly see sales uplift in your top line numbers when you run the ad. If I normally get 20 orders a day, I run an ad and get 40, then the ad budget runs out and I'm back to a steady 20, I'm not too worried about cannibalization.
    - jacobush 9y ago
      For a huge company it's even harder. I think the internet ads serve partly the same as news paper ads. There is no click through for them either. Actual paper ones.
olewhalehunter 9y ago
Marketing folks do not actually have to market any product successfully other than their own utility to thrive.
zmk_ 9y ago
Long time ago I used some free $ on adwords to advertise Dropbox. I maxed out the free storage upgrades within a day or two. I am sure I am not the one who did that. People click on ads. Plus ads are not always meant to lead to sales. For companies like P&G who sell products with many substitutes it's also about maintaining brand awareness.
- the_duke 9y ago
  I took a different route. I spent a few hours coding up a script that would launch a VM and create a new account with a catch all email, then confirm the email. Worked well also. Your approach was much less work, though. ^^
  - Ensorceled 9y ago
    And had the advantage of not being immoral.
tzs 9y ago
I've had several ads I would have clicked on them, but I didn't get to them in time. Typical scenario: I'm reading a story at fanfiction.net. I get to the bottom of the page, and click the button to go to the next page...and then I see that the ad on the bottom of the page is for something I'm interested in and I want to click, but it is too late. If I go back, either by the browser back button or by the button on the next page to go to the previous chapter, it usually does not show the same ad. (It also appears that the ad it does show then is not random. There is one particular ad that I've seen a lot when I get to a page via the back button. I wonder if it is possible to specifically target pages reached by back buttons?)
dagw 9y ago
As a counter example, I click on ads fairly often, probably once a month on average. However it is only for rather niche products or rather niche companies. I've discovered a handful of companies that have gotten my money this way over the years, many of which I probably would never have heard of otherwise.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
wdr1 9y ago
> I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. To be clear, that isn't what the article is about. P&G still spends massive amounts on digital advertising. The point they are making is they were able to identify & eliminate $100M of advertising that was ineffectual. The other part is that P&G is largely into consumer products & I highly doubt they are measuring online advertising by clicks. Clicks are a decent measure for performance advertising but pretty poor for brand advertising. And when it comes to consumer products & digital products, it's mostly brand. (Consider, when a typical person needs tooth paste, do they hop online, type it into Google, look at results & then buy it? Or, you know, do they just grab whatever brand they've always gotten on a trip to the grocery store.) Digital advertising is largely held to the same standard where most of that brand spend is: television. And there are no clicks in television. With television, they first data point they're looking for is how many people did they reach & what was the demographic composition. They may later follow on with surveys to see if they achieved the change in awareness/purchase intent/whatever, as well as try to analyze for lift in sales. So does P&G care if you click ads? Probably not. What P&G cares about is shaping how you think about laundry detergent, making you aware of their brand, creating a positive association with the right attributes, and ultimately in you buying their brand at the store.
lordnacho 9y ago
This is probably the experience of a lot of people. Never clicked on an ad, no idea who does. Same here. I happen to know a guy who drives some very expensive cars. He made his money advertising stuff online and selling it. He knows all the tricks, the inside out of how Facebook and Google work, how to source cheap stuff, how to ship things, and so on. So clearly someone is clicking the ads. My guess is he has some tricks up his sleeve that are either unknown to most marketers or slightly dodgy. Actually that last one he told me himself. But he does know a thing or two about how the ads work, what makes people buy, and all that.
gopi 9y ago
Most digital ads are direct response, so i am sure digital ads are profitable otherwise direct marketers will not spend BTB, Average ad click thro rate is 0.05%, its 1 in 2000 people. So obviously clicking ad is a rare event but it do happen

nsxwolf 9y ago

Magazine ads are often fun to look at. Great photographs. Sometimes very entertaining or interesting ad copy to read. Often informative. Most importantly they are usually for valuable, useful, and desirable products. Banner ads on the other hand...

reitanqild 9y ago

Given the amount of stupid ads I see I sometimes click one when I see something that is remotely interesting (dev tools etc), hoping to train googles AS (Artificial Stupidity) to serve me more relevant ads. (No, I'm still happily married and I cannot figure out why a company that sits on my personal email and most of my internet searches for the last 15 years cannot figure that out. Especially as I have even configured my ad preferences in the settings.)

tzs 9y ago
I can't figure out why Zillow thinks I'd be interested in houses in Palo Alto. They regular send me emails about houses they think I might be interested in, and they are in the Palo Alto area. The only reason they have my email address was because I made an account so I could claim my house on Zillow, so they know exactly where I live, and that is 850 miles from Palo Alto.
- deathhand 9y ago
  They can target based upon income level and job. You being you means that if you went to the Palo Alto region you would find very similar people.
- rajnathani 9y ago
  Do you use or at any time have used a Cali VPN?

awkwarddaturtle 9y ago

I haven't intentionally clicked on an ad nor have I intentionally look at an ad in magazines, tv commericals, etc. I've gotten rid of my magazine subs years ago and haven't owned a TV in years. > I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. Depends on the type. Certain google/facebook ads get far better traction than any traditional ad. The truth of the matter is all ads are ineffective. It's just that digital ads are easier to track ( the impression, clicks, views, etc ) whereas "traditional" ads are not. The problem for companies/ad agencies/etc are that kids/younger demographics are spending so much time on social media. We know that some digital marketing works because these youtube stars make a killing selling their own merchandise that they advertise on their own channels. The best thing for ad industry is if traditional media dies and goes away and then they could focus their attention on "digital" rather than traditional/print.

autokad 9y ago
> ... digital ads are easier to track ... whereas "traditional" ads are not. digital ads are not always easy to track. a lot of malware is dedicated to filling your cookies with visits so that if you happen to buy something, they can claim you saw the ad prior and take credit. in many cases, a digital add campaign creates such a tiny blip in sales its hard to differentiate from randomness, were as a TV ad shows floods of sales. > The best thing for ad industry is if traditional media dies and goes away and then they could focus their attention on "digital" rather than traditional/print. traditional advertising, namely TV, is still the most successful way to increase sales for many companies. since digital ads leads to so few sales, even the platforms have often moved away from 'advertise to produce sales' to advertise for brand management.

mathattack 9y ago

Perhaps it turns to brand awareness? For some ads (say Cars) the ROI is huge enough to justify.

maroonblazer 9y ago

Not all ads are meant to be clicked. If I have a new product that I want people to become aware of then digital advertising, appropriately planned and targeted, can be very effective.

JoBrad 9y ago

Relevance is huge. If you're shown an ad for something that you don't care about (which is most of the time, for most people), it will not be effective. However the right ad at the right time is very effective. But that's impossible to get correct all of the time, so there's no choice but for merchants to play the odds.

mschuster91 9y ago

> I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. What does surprise me is why its taken this long to figure that out. It is effective, and cheap at that. I run a small-ish left wing FB site and Twitter account, and regularly do small scale advertising - either to rally people up for a demonstration, or to annoy right-wingers. Proper targetting makes this incredibly easy, and judging by the numbers it works out just fine.

tomcam 9y ago
Right-winger here. I like your tactics.

zippergz 9y ago

I almost feel like there are two factions. I'm pretty similar to you. I have clicked on ads a handful of times, but it's very rare. However, I have worked in jobs where I had visibility into the metrics, and I have seen internet ads be EXTREMELY effective. Not in terms of clicks (which could easily be accidental or fraudulent), but in terms of people clicking and then purchasing. People aren't going to "accidentally" click and then give us money. And I've seen many campaigns where we were getting huge ROI in terms of actual dollars. So there are clearly lots of people out there who do click on ads and take action. I think the problem comes when you're using an intermediate metric like clicks or impressions to measure success. You have to measure the actual outcome you are trying to drive, like purchases or subscriptions. Of course, with CPG, that's a lot harder to do. And I'm not convinced that pure brand advertising is any easier to measure online than it is offline.

tomrod 9y ago
But it is an open question of incrementality -- did you just cannibalize a sale from a different, possibly cheaper, channel? How much lift did you actually get? That's the problem I've seen in the digital ad space -- lift is either hard to measure, or ignored completely. Causality to the sale is assumed on the ad.
- zippergz 9y ago
  I think that's a great point, and definitely hard for a huge company like P&G. But for a small company, it can be easier, because when your volumes are low enough, it's often very easy to directly see sales uplift in your top line numbers when you run the ad. If I normally get 20 orders a day, I run an ad and get 40, then the ad budget runs out and I'm back to a steady 20, I'm not too worried about cannibalization.
  - jacobush 9y ago
    For a huge company it's even harder. I think the internet ads serve partly the same as news paper ads. There is no click through for them either. Actual paper ones.

olewhalehunter 9y ago

Marketing folks do not actually have to market any product successfully other than their own utility to thrive.

zmk_ 9y ago

Long time ago I used some free $ on adwords to advertise Dropbox. I maxed out the free storage upgrades within a day or two. I am sure I am not the one who did that. People click on ads. Plus ads are not always meant to lead to sales. For companies like P&G who sell products with many substitutes it's also about maintaining brand awareness.

the_duke 9y ago
I took a different route. I spent a few hours coding up a script that would launch a VM and create a new account with a catch all email, then confirm the email. Worked well also. Your approach was much less work, though. ^^
- Ensorceled 9y ago
  And had the advantage of not being immoral.

tzs 9y ago

I've had several ads I would have clicked on them, but I didn't get to them in time. Typical scenario: I'm reading a story at fanfiction.net. I get to the bottom of the page, and click the button to go to the next page...and then I see that the ad on the bottom of the page is for something I'm interested in and I want to click, but it is too late. If I go back, either by the browser back button or by the button on the next page to go to the previous chapter, it usually does not show the same ad. (It also appears that the ad it does show then is not random. There is one particular ad that I've seen a lot when I get to a page via the back button. I wonder if it is possible to specifically target pages reached by back buttons?)

dagw 9y ago

As a counter example, I click on ads fairly often, probably once a month on average. However it is only for rather niche products or rather niche companies. I've discovered a handful of companies that have gotten my money this way over the years, many of which I probably would never have heard of otherwise.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

wdr1 9y ago

> I am not surprised that digital marketing is not that effective. To be clear, that isn't what the article is about. P&G still spends massive amounts on digital advertising. The point they are making is they were able to identify & eliminate $100M of advertising that was ineffectual. The other part is that P&G is largely into consumer products & I highly doubt they are measuring online advertising by clicks. Clicks are a decent measure for performance advertising but pretty poor for brand advertising. And when it comes to consumer products & digital products, it's mostly brand. (Consider, when a typical person needs tooth paste, do they hop online, type it into Google, look at results & then buy it? Or, you know, do they just grab whatever brand they've always gotten on a trip to the grocery store.) Digital advertising is largely held to the same standard where most of that brand spend is: television. And there are no clicks in television. With television, they first data point they're looking for is how many people did they reach & what was the demographic composition. They may later follow on with surveys to see if they achieved the change in awareness/purchase intent/whatever, as well as try to analyze for lift in sales. So does P&G care if you click ads? Probably not. What P&G cares about is shaping how you think about laundry detergent, making you aware of their brand, creating a positive association with the right attributes, and ultimately in you buying their brand at the store.

lordnacho 9y ago

This is probably the experience of a lot of people. Never clicked on an ad, no idea who does. Same here. I happen to know a guy who drives some very expensive cars. He made his money advertising stuff online and selling it. He knows all the tricks, the inside out of how Facebook and Google work, how to source cheap stuff, how to ship things, and so on. So clearly someone is clicking the ads. My guess is he has some tricks up his sleeve that are either unknown to most marketers or slightly dodgy. Actually that last one he told me himself. But he does know a thing or two about how the ads work, what makes people buy, and all that.

gopi 9y ago

Most digital ads are direct response, so i am sure digital ads are profitable otherwise direct marketers will not spend BTB, Average ad click thro rate is 0.05%, its 1 in 2000 people. So obviously clicking ad is a rare event but it do happen