5 ms·

> “I’ve often heard people wonder about how they are targeted so accurately and it’s no wonder because its all hidden in the small print.” > Publicly, gamblin

> “I’ve often heard people wonder about how they are targeted so accurately and it’s no wonder because its all hidden in the small print.” > Publicly, gambling executives boast of increasingly sophisticated advertising keeping people betting, while privately conceding that some are more susceptible to gambling addiction when bombarded with these type of bespoke ads and incentives. Meanwhile, in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever. A perfectly polished targeted turd is still a turd.

Rjevski 9y ago
> in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever In our world. Let’s be honest, there has to be a category of people that still falls for them, otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry. The tech-illiterate are still very much prey for ads, I’ve had first hand evidence of this a few days ago from my flatmate (the typical idiot who “logs in with Facebook” everywhere, has 50k+ unread email on a Yahoo address and reuses the same password everywhere) when she fell for some weight loss pill scam ad on Facebook. I had to help her chargeback the transactions with her credit card provider.
- kristianc 9y ago
  > In our world. Let’s be honest, there has to be a category of people that still falls for them, otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry. Not just in "our world." The average CTR is 0.06%, and that's from Google's figures [1], 60% of banner ad clicks are accidental, 54% of Internet users have never clicked one. 25% use ad blockers. They persist because they're a) cheap, b) because everyone else does it, and c) because they may, tangentially, have some brand uplift though no-one can actually prove it. Some desperately dastardly mindfuck scheme they are not. [1] http://www.richmediagallery.com/learn/benchmarks http://www.richmediagallery.com/learn/benchmarks
  - YouKnowBetter 9y ago
    The exact reason why google will, for years, happily ignore humongus ad-click-bot-farms.
  - blanderman 9y ago
    I imagine that my CTR must be much higher than average, because I will click on any ads for brands that I dislike. The idea being that I am transferring money from the advertiser to the site that I am visiting.
- crispyporkbites 9y ago
  Agree - also if you've ever used a gambling app, they will push notifications to you right before your team is about to play or a horse race is about to start because they know you're likely to bet on that if you remember. Also banner ads are for gambling are more for impressions than clickthroughs, if you watch a football (soccer) game in the UK, the ad breaks are full to the brim with "BET IN PLAY, NOW" "BET BET BET" "NOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW!" type ads which just put in the back of your mind. For a gambling addict it must be near impossible to resist.
  - stochastic_monk 9y ago
    It’s hard for alcoholics in early recovery to watch football because of the pervasive, nonstop ads for alcohol. Add to this that most of the alcohol industry is propped up by the top 10% of drinkers who average over 10 drinks a day, and you have an industry built around taking advantage of people who clearly need help.
  - jdietrich 9y ago
    For the benefit of American readers, I'll link to a few of these adverts below. It's worth emphasising the fact that ads of this sort are in every break of every match. The disembodied head of Ray Winstone bellowing in-play odds has become a cultural fixture. I'm a gambler myself, but I'm troubled by the ubiquity and sheer aggression of gambling advertising. https://youtu.be/l4INTKhOLSs?t=20s https://youtu.be/l4INTKhOLSs?t=20s
- numbsafari 9y ago
  I’ve never clicked on a single billboard, but that hasn’t stopped anyone from destroying the view.
  - sixothree 9y ago
    That doesn't mean the ads aren't working.
- thesumofall 9y ago
  > otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry There are plenty of reasons why this money might be spend without clear evidence of a ROI: - marketing departments are under pressure to increase sales in a world where the traditional outlets (TV, newspapers, ...) loose relevance - internet ad campaigns look convincing with all sorts of nice numbers, but unfortunately many of those numbers simply don’t mean what one might think they mean (fake clicks, accidental clicks, ...) - the corporate world is slow. Which head of department would voluntarily suggest to reduce their budget? The higher ups are too far away to really challenge this stuff
mayniac 9y ago
>Meanwhile, in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever. A perfectly polished targeted turd is still a turd. Don't necessarily need to click on the ad. If a user sees an ad just once it's in their mind, somewhere. TV car ads are another case where they don't expect people to buy stuff based on the ad, because who in their right mind buys a new car based solely on an advert? The idea is to get the product in users' heads. I've definitely been guilty of seeing products in banner ads then looking them up later, or letting them influence my future purchases almost unwittingly.
Retric 9y ago
> Meanwhile, in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever. Google has about 1 trillion dollars per year in revenue that says otherwise. Online advertising became so huge because it works.
- Lionsion 9y ago
  > Google has about 1 trillion dollars per year in revenue that says otherwise. Online advertising became so huge because it works. That's a non sequitur. Online advertising could be huge because of an irrational belief that it works. You conclusion needs much more support.
  - Retric 9y ago
    Suggesting that people and companies are independently and collectively spending 1 trillion dollars for zero results without any form of verification is absurd. But, if you really want to go there. Plenty of companies only advertise online and 'magically' end up making money selling real products to real people.
    - Lionsion 9y ago
      > Suggesting that people and companies are independently and collectively spending 1 trillion dollars for zero results without any form of verification is absurd. > But, if you really want to go there. Plenty of companies only advertise online and 'magically' end up making money selling real products to real people. Then quit the hand-waving and provide convincing proof. Also address the issue of bot-farms and other kinds of fraud that could cloud the metrics.
  - always_good 9y ago
    Do you know how Adsense works? You pay for the click. You can then track them through your conversion process. You can trivially see if Adsense is making you money or not. Why do you think they are just CPM banner ads and speak with such authority on them here?

Rjevski 9y ago

> in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever In our world. Let’s be honest, there has to be a category of people that still falls for them, otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry. The tech-illiterate are still very much prey for ads, I’ve had first hand evidence of this a few days ago from my flatmate (the typical idiot who “logs in with Facebook” everywhere, has 50k+ unread email on a Yahoo address and reuses the same password everywhere) when she fell for some weight loss pill scam ad on Facebook. I had to help her chargeback the transactions with her credit card provider.

kristianc 9y ago
> In our world. Let’s be honest, there has to be a category of people that still falls for them, otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry. Not just in "our world." The average CTR is 0.06%, and that's from Google's figures [1], 60% of banner ad clicks are accidental, 54% of Internet users have never clicked one. 25% use ad blockers. They persist because they're a) cheap, b) because everyone else does it, and c) because they may, tangentially, have some brand uplift though no-one can actually prove it. Some desperately dastardly mindfuck scheme they are not. [1] http://www.richmediagallery.com/learn/benchmarks http://www.richmediagallery.com/learn/benchmarks
- YouKnowBetter 9y ago
  The exact reason why google will, for years, happily ignore humongus ad-click-bot-farms.
- blanderman 9y ago
  I imagine that my CTR must be much higher than average, because I will click on any ads for brands that I dislike. The idea being that I am transferring money from the advertiser to the site that I am visiting.
crispyporkbites 9y ago
Agree - also if you've ever used a gambling app, they will push notifications to you right before your team is about to play or a horse race is about to start because they know you're likely to bet on that if you remember. Also banner ads are for gambling are more for impressions than clickthroughs, if you watch a football (soccer) game in the UK, the ad breaks are full to the brim with "BET IN PLAY, NOW" "BET BET BET" "NOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW!" type ads which just put in the back of your mind. For a gambling addict it must be near impossible to resist.
- stochastic_monk 9y ago
  It’s hard for alcoholics in early recovery to watch football because of the pervasive, nonstop ads for alcohol. Add to this that most of the alcohol industry is propped up by the top 10% of drinkers who average over 10 drinks a day, and you have an industry built around taking advantage of people who clearly need help.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  For the benefit of American readers, I'll link to a few of these adverts below. It's worth emphasising the fact that ads of this sort are in every break of every match. The disembodied head of Ray Winstone bellowing in-play odds has become a cultural fixture. I'm a gambler myself, but I'm troubled by the ubiquity and sheer aggression of gambling advertising. https://youtu.be/l4INTKhOLSs?t=20s https://youtu.be/l4INTKhOLSs?t=20s
numbsafari 9y ago
I’ve never clicked on a single billboard, but that hasn’t stopped anyone from destroying the view.
- sixothree 9y ago
  That doesn't mean the ads aren't working.
thesumofall 9y ago
> otherwise people wouldn’t keep investing billions into this bullshit industry There are plenty of reasons why this money might be spend without clear evidence of a ROI: - marketing departments are under pressure to increase sales in a world where the traditional outlets (TV, newspapers, ...) loose relevance - internet ad campaigns look convincing with all sorts of nice numbers, but unfortunately many of those numbers simply don’t mean what one might think they mean (fake clicks, accidental clicks, ...) - the corporate world is slow. Which head of department would voluntarily suggest to reduce their budget? The higher ups are too far away to really challenge this stuff

mayniac 9y ago

>Meanwhile, in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever. A perfectly polished targeted turd is still a turd. Don't necessarily need to click on the ad. If a user sees an ad just once it's in their mind, somewhere. TV car ads are another case where they don't expect people to buy stuff based on the ad, because who in their right mind buys a new car based solely on an advert? The idea is to get the product in users' heads. I've definitely been guilty of seeing products in banner ads then looking them up later, or letting them influence my future purchases almost unwittingly.

Retric 9y ago

> Meanwhile, in the real world, hardly anyone clicks on a banner ad ever. Google has about 1 trillion dollars per year in revenue that says otherwise. Online advertising became so huge because it works.

Lionsion 9y ago
> Google has about 1 trillion dollars per year in revenue that says otherwise. Online advertising became so huge because it works. That's a non sequitur. Online advertising could be huge because of an irrational belief that it works. You conclusion needs much more support.
- Retric 9y ago
  Suggesting that people and companies are independently and collectively spending 1 trillion dollars for zero results without any form of verification is absurd. But, if you really want to go there. Plenty of companies only advertise online and 'magically' end up making money selling real products to real people.
  - Lionsion 9y ago
    > Suggesting that people and companies are independently and collectively spending 1 trillion dollars for zero results without any form of verification is absurd. > But, if you really want to go there. Plenty of companies only advertise online and 'magically' end up making money selling real products to real people. Then quit the hand-waving and provide convincing proof. Also address the issue of bot-farms and other kinds of fraud that could cloud the metrics.
- always_good 9y ago
  Do you know how Adsense works? You pay for the click. You can then track them through your conversion process. You can trivially see if Adsense is making you money or not. Why do you think they are just CPM banner ads and speak with such authority on them here?