4 ms·

Marketer here. Numbers: low nine-figures spent over the last 7 years or so on RTB display and GDN/YT Outcome: * Google on display tends to be much higher qua

Marketer here. Numbers: low nine-figures spent over the last 7 years or so on RTB display and GDN/YT Outcome: * Google on display tends to be much higher quality than most major DSP platforms. Incremental ROAS on Google's non-search ads tends to be better, with YouTube being the best performer. * When you use GDN and YouTube, you are bidding on a much more accurate set of behaviors and first part data in addition to the content matching, which is second to none for large scale. * One of the better audience types Google gives you access to is search intent. You can target people that have exhibited search behavior that indicates their interest or likelihood to purchase what you have on offer * Despite these advantages, like any platform Google can also have major quality issues if you do not manage your campaigns well and click fraud can happen easily (thankfully in my experience they're decent at detecting and refunding fraudulent spend) Edit: I would caution people commenting here to not use their own behavior as examples of how an ad platform is/isn't effective. HN users tend to be significant outliers vs. the general population.

nickff 5y ago
>"Edit: I would caution people commenting here to not use their own behavior as examples of how an ad platform is/isn't effective. HN users tend to be significant outliers vs. the general population. " Self-reported behavior is also extremely unreliable, and I would take all their comments with a grain of salt.
- redis_mlc 5y ago
  You perfectly illustrated his point, pedant.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
"Edit: I would caution people commenting here to not use their own behavior as examples of how an ad platform is/isn't effective. HN users tend to be significant outliers vs. the general population." In other words, exactly what the top comment is doing. Sample size=1. Methods=unknown ("seem 2-4x better") That said, we could apply the same principle to the parent comment from the marketer. He is using his own behaviour as an example of how the Google ad platform is/isn't effective. There is a serious lack of transarency in the "open market" system Google is both overseeing and participating in. In the long run, that opacity could spell disaster, so says a former Google lawyer. This opacity is a problem that seemingly inconsequential litigation like this from the Texas AG is (unintentionally) helping to address. Discovery helps us understand what Google wants to hide from the public.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kposehn 5y ago
Edit 2: 1. Self-referencing in my last point refers to gauging your own response to ads as a barometer of their effectiveness. 2. My points above are based on spending at scale globally (over 70 countries) for B2B and B2C products with multiple avenues to monetization 3. The outcome of my experience is based on this data in aggregate but I do not assume that past behavior indicates future success. The market is changing rapidly.

nickff 5y ago

>"Edit: I would caution people commenting here to not use their own behavior as examples of how an ad platform is/isn't effective. HN users tend to be significant outliers vs. the general population. " Self-reported behavior is also extremely unreliable, and I would take all their comments with a grain of salt.

redis_mlc 5y ago
You perfectly illustrated his point, pedant.

1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

"Edit: I would caution people commenting here to not use their own behavior as examples of how an ad platform is/isn't effective. HN users tend to be significant outliers vs. the general population." In other words, exactly what the top comment is doing. Sample size=1. Methods=unknown ("seem 2-4x better") That said, we could apply the same principle to the parent comment from the marketer. He is using his own behaviour as an example of how the Google ad platform is/isn't effective. There is a serious lack of transarency in the "open market" system Google is both overseeing and participating in. In the long run, that opacity could spell disaster, so says a former Google lawyer. This opacity is a problem that seemingly inconsequential litigation like this from the Texas AG is (unintentionally) helping to address. Discovery helps us understand what Google wants to hide from the public.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kposehn 5y ago

Edit 2: 1. Self-referencing in my last point refers to gauging your own response to ads as a barometer of their effectiveness. 2. My points above are based on spending at scale globally (over 70 countries) for B2B and B2C products with multiple avenues to monetization 3. The outcome of my experience is based on this data in aggregate but I do not assume that past behavior indicates future success. The market is changing rapidly.