3 ms·
I also don't work in Internet ads, but my assumption would be that advertisers are unwilling to pay for a static ad to be displayed to e.g. 100k users when they
by SifJar 7y ago
I also don't work in Internet ads, but my assumption would be that advertisers are unwilling to pay for a static ad to be displayed to e.g. 100k users when they could instead pay for ad that uses tracking to display only to the 500 users that might actually be interested.
And from NYT (or other publisher) perspective, 20 of the later is presumably more lucrative than 1 of the former
- remarkEon 7y agoFair. I obviously have a deep ignorance of the underlying economics here.
- Moru 7y ago* Translation: The 500 users that a machine thinks are interested in your product. The meassurement of this being true is just as good as a Game ad published in a computer magazine.
- mrr54 7y agoI think a video game ad displayed in a computer game magazine must be much more accurate than the kind of shitty advertising I get shown online.