4 ms·

In theory customers do want to see ads, if the ads are working.

dannycastonguay 8y ago
In practice, ads are there because sponsors are ready to pay for something good that consumers have no desire to pay for. Thank you, advertisers, for paying for Gmail and all those good products.
- 908087 8y ago
  "Our products are so good that nobody is willing to pay for them" doesn't sound very convincing.
  - dannycastonguay 8y ago
    Maybe you have something to teach me. Are you not convinced that Google Search, DDG, Gmail, Facebook, WhatsApp, Snapchat are all "good" products in the eye of many people? As far as I can tell, all of those products are paid for by sponsors.
  - joshuamorton 8y ago
    On the other hand "consumers choose our products even though there are other free alternatives" does.
    - 908087 8y ago
      These platforms have been coasting on network effects alone for years. The "I'd quit but I have no other way to stay in touch with (friends/family/whoever)." / "but all my (whoever) are on it" justifications you constantly see from people are evidence to support that.
      - joshuamorton 8y ago
        Yes, email and web-search, the peak of consumer-side vendor lock in. Indeed, networks effects may sometimes be relevant to some of these tools. But that's certainly not always true.
n42 8y ago
this is just not true, and only describes a very specific subset of advertisement. for a very large portion of ads, the advertisers want people to see it even if it doesn't translate to a direct sale of something the user already wanted. Disney does not expect someone to see an ad for Disney World and immediately win a click-through conversion for a $2k vacation. They do expect to remain relevant, and the ads have "worked" when Disney pops into mind when I try to plan my next vacation. So they make sure to continue to advertise to families. I do not want to see those ads.
- everdev 8y ago
  > Disney does not expect someone to see an ad for Disney World and immediately win a click-through conversion for a $2k vacation Having run CPC campaigns many times, companies do care about conversion rates. However, you are tracked across multiple sites and days. But companies do want to know who converted after seeing the ad and who converted after clicking the ad. So, you're right they might not care that you convert immediately. But they do care that people convert over time or they'll pull the ad.
- bduerst 8y ago
  You're conflating direct response with awareness marketing, which are both valid. It is a concept of information theory for imperfect markets. In a perfect market, the consumer and seller know everything about each other and every other product and service that they could conceivably ever want. Since we live with imperfect markets, consumers do not have all the information about everything on the market. Sellers will pay money to communicate to consumers about their brand, product, service, etc. A percentage of consumers will be aware of this seller the next time they research or consider making a purchase decision. The perfect ad is only shown the consumers that it is relevant to. Search/display ads are still not perfect, but they're closer to this than previous mediums of communication.
  - n42 8y ago
    you're missing my point. many ads "work", and even in a perfect world where I only see the ads that "work" for me, that doesn't mean I want to see them.
dragonwriter 8y ago
If you presume rational choice theory is true except for the assumption of complete information, and presume that ads always improve the overall accuracy of information and thus justify the leap from “induced into a transaction by the presence of ads” to “wants ads”, sure. However, this is obviously false in many respects.
newsbinator 8y ago
If this were true people wouldn't unsubscribe from emails that are relevant to them. Customers want to get on with their day in general. Looking at ads, relevant or not, isn't their end goal.

In practice, ads are there because sponsors are ready to pay for something good that consumers have no desire to pay for. Thank you, advertisers, for paying for Gmail and all those good products.

908087 8y ago
"Our products are so good that nobody is willing to pay for them" doesn't sound very convincing.
- dannycastonguay 8y ago
  Maybe you have something to teach me. Are you not convinced that Google Search, DDG, Gmail, Facebook, WhatsApp, Snapchat are all "good" products in the eye of many people? As far as I can tell, all of those products are paid for by sponsors.
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  On the other hand "consumers choose our products even though there are other free alternatives" does.
  - 908087 8y ago
    These platforms have been coasting on network effects alone for years. The "I'd quit but I have no other way to stay in touch with (friends/family/whoever)." / "but all my (whoever) are on it" justifications you constantly see from people are evidence to support that.
    - joshuamorton 8y ago
      Yes, email and web-search, the peak of consumer-side vendor lock in. Indeed, networks effects may sometimes be relevant to some of these tools. But that's certainly not always true.

n42 8y ago

this is just not true, and only describes a very specific subset of advertisement. for a very large portion of ads, the advertisers want people to see it even if it doesn't translate to a direct sale of something the user already wanted. Disney does not expect someone to see an ad for Disney World and immediately win a click-through conversion for a $2k vacation. They do expect to remain relevant, and the ads have "worked" when Disney pops into mind when I try to plan my next vacation. So they make sure to continue to advertise to families. I do not want to see those ads.

everdev 8y ago
> Disney does not expect someone to see an ad for Disney World and immediately win a click-through conversion for a $2k vacation Having run CPC campaigns many times, companies do care about conversion rates. However, you are tracked across multiple sites and days. But companies do want to know who converted after seeing the ad and who converted after clicking the ad. So, you're right they might not care that you convert immediately. But they do care that people convert over time or they'll pull the ad.
bduerst 8y ago
You're conflating direct response with awareness marketing, which are both valid. It is a concept of information theory for imperfect markets. In a perfect market, the consumer and seller know everything about each other and every other product and service that they could conceivably ever want. Since we live with imperfect markets, consumers do not have all the information about everything on the market. Sellers will pay money to communicate to consumers about their brand, product, service, etc. A percentage of consumers will be aware of this seller the next time they research or consider making a purchase decision. The perfect ad is only shown the consumers that it is relevant to. Search/display ads are still not perfect, but they're closer to this than previous mediums of communication.
- n42 8y ago
  you're missing my point. many ads "work", and even in a perfect world where I only see the ads that "work" for me, that doesn't mean I want to see them.

dragonwriter 8y ago

If you presume rational choice theory is true except for the assumption of complete information, and presume that ads always improve the overall accuracy of information and thus justify the leap from “induced into a transaction by the presence of ads” to “wants ads”, sure. However, this is obviously false in many respects.

newsbinator 8y ago

If this were true people wouldn't unsubscribe from emails that are relevant to them. Customers want to get on with their day in general. Looking at ads, relevant or not, isn't their end goal.