5 ms·

If top HN comment completely misses the point on targeting and shows zero understanding what does it mean, and also considers "site is in Dutch" as "hyper targe

If top HN comment completely misses the point on targeting and shows zero understanding what does it mean, and also considers "site is in Dutch" as "hyper targeted" what chance have an average marketer to properly set targeting goal for an ad? Average site can profit more from untargeted ads than from the wrongly targeted ads set by the "ad experts", especialy after saving the costs of hiring such "experts".

libertine 6y ago
Funny or not, you have to take into account HN context (ah!), where the great majority of users thinks marketing is a scam and hate advertising (here comes the downvotes...) - and they have reasons to feel like that. We've been flooded by bad professionals that give a bad rep to the craft. They can profit more because they don't need any third party tech provider that take bites out of their inventory margin, or are not being forced into bidding their inventory and they set the prices they want. It's smart on the publisher part, but they end up falling into 3rd parties because of the times they have inventory not being monetized (money lost).
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  That's the concerning part. For centuries publications sourced ads to finance them just by themselves. But suddenly we got those worldwide ad auction houses that monopolize the market, and now nobody can source their own ads anymore, because the buyers are all on the auction houses. They shouldn't have more unsold inventory than if they got the alternative.
  - Spooky23 6y ago
    You make a good point about the marketplace dictating the market. In my hometown there is a weekly newspaper that is still going strong, that can support a half dozen employees, etc. All with direct ads for B2C and B2B local businesses and legal notices. It's interesting, as that business model would absolutely not work with an online platform, as it's a general interest publication that's highly local. There's no way for the local high-tensile fence contractor or well digger to generate ROI on Google. Ditto with the supermarket -- the weekly ad in the Sunday paper is very effective IMO, and superior to the online presentation in almost every way.
  - libertine 6y ago
    I think a lot of publishers preferred short term gains over a long term position... For some it was a conscious decision (as a strategy, or out of need), others thought of it as an easy cash grab. Google, Facebook, they all gave credits/financed publishers to give them a perception of more reach, but the end result was the dilution of publisher brands and gradually lost their leverage. Maybe Google, Facebook and Amazon were always going to be unstoppable forces in the market... but maybe, just maybe, if publishers stood their ground we would have a different narrative. Probably the cost would be too big, and many would fall... Who knows. I guess it was just too easy and too good, free money, a way to convert inventory automatically without the need for sales teams and the pressure to have it maximized.
renewiltord 6y ago
HN has poor understanding of ad-tech. If you aren’t in the industry, a quick coherence check is “if you’re right, you could be a millionaire next year by starting an ad agency this year, so why aren’t you doing it”. Ads are like politics, sociology, or parenting. Everyone has what they think is an informed opinion but very few are informed. If one were to ignore every statement on ad tech posted on this site they’d be more informed than I if they read any. Except that Mani Gandham fellow, who anyone else in ad tech will recognize as knowing the industry. I don’t know him personally except through his posts here.

libertine 6y ago

Funny or not, you have to take into account HN context (ah!), where the great majority of users thinks marketing is a scam and hate advertising (here comes the downvotes...) - and they have reasons to feel like that. We've been flooded by bad professionals that give a bad rep to the craft. They can profit more because they don't need any third party tech provider that take bites out of their inventory margin, or are not being forced into bidding their inventory and they set the prices they want. It's smart on the publisher part, but they end up falling into 3rd parties because of the times they have inventory not being monetized (money lost).

marcosdumay 6y ago
That's the concerning part. For centuries publications sourced ads to finance them just by themselves. But suddenly we got those worldwide ad auction houses that monopolize the market, and now nobody can source their own ads anymore, because the buyers are all on the auction houses. They shouldn't have more unsold inventory than if they got the alternative.
- Spooky23 6y ago
  You make a good point about the marketplace dictating the market. In my hometown there is a weekly newspaper that is still going strong, that can support a half dozen employees, etc. All with direct ads for B2C and B2B local businesses and legal notices. It's interesting, as that business model would absolutely not work with an online platform, as it's a general interest publication that's highly local. There's no way for the local high-tensile fence contractor or well digger to generate ROI on Google. Ditto with the supermarket -- the weekly ad in the Sunday paper is very effective IMO, and superior to the online presentation in almost every way.
- libertine 6y ago
  I think a lot of publishers preferred short term gains over a long term position... For some it was a conscious decision (as a strategy, or out of need), others thought of it as an easy cash grab. Google, Facebook, they all gave credits/financed publishers to give them a perception of more reach, but the end result was the dilution of publisher brands and gradually lost their leverage. Maybe Google, Facebook and Amazon were always going to be unstoppable forces in the market... but maybe, just maybe, if publishers stood their ground we would have a different narrative. Probably the cost would be too big, and many would fall... Who knows. I guess it was just too easy and too good, free money, a way to convert inventory automatically without the need for sales teams and the pressure to have it maximized.

renewiltord 6y ago

HN has poor understanding of ad-tech. If you aren’t in the industry, a quick coherence check is “if you’re right, you could be a millionaire next year by starting an ad agency this year, so why aren’t you doing it”. Ads are like politics, sociology, or parenting. Everyone has what they think is an informed opinion but very few are informed. If one were to ignore every statement on ad tech posted on this site they’d be more informed than I if they read any. Except that Mani Gandham fellow, who anyone else in ad tech will recognize as knowing the industry. I don’t know him personally except through his posts here.