4 ms·

I think the problem with this idea (and to be clear I haven't read the book) is that advertisers are much better able to track the value advertising delivers th

I think the problem with this idea (and to be clear I haven't read the book) is that advertisers are much better able to track the value advertising delivers than they were in decades past. Even post Apple privacy changes, I can still very clearly see exactly what I'm getting from my Facebook ads in terms of revenue and profit, which just isn't possible with things like TV, billboards, etc. In fact, I'd argue that the internet ad market continues to boom because it has continually delivered highly measurable value for years. It also seems very naive to me to say that large advertisers don't understand what they're doing. In many cases we're talking about large public companies whose expenses are scrutinized by major shareholders. If they were throwing money away on useless ads that didn't deliver value, there would be activists in there pushing for change.

whiplash451 5y ago
Do you have data-based evidence supporting those claims? My understanding of the field is quite the opposite. The only way to measure the true value of online advertising is to measure how much sales have been generated with ads enabled minus the sales that would have been generated without the ads. To the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved, even by the giants who have plenty of talent and data to throw at the problem. And for a reason, this is a very hard causal problem to solve, with many (many) confounding variables.
- yunohn 5y ago
  > To the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved Ideally, you could support this informed opinion with some studies? Preferably not just general anti-ads clickbait. Sure, you can’t ever /really/ know if your “inception” in the case of branding campaigns worked, but product/seasonal campaigns are super easy to measure and prove.
  - whiplash451 5y ago
    Well, the onus is on people who make the claim that it works to put the scientific material forward, not the other way around. And so, "to the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved" is not an opinion but a fact. I am happy to be proven wrong with the relevant material. And by material, I mean scientific papers, not assertions such as "product/seasonal campaigns are super easy to measure and prove."
    - yunohn 5y ago
      I understand your sentiment, but surely you realise that the entire ads industry has a lot of proven outcomes? All the millions/billions spent by customers isn’t done so blindly. There’s quite a bit of research on this topic - googling will give you a ton of results, and then a lot of hyped “ads don’t work” material too.
      - whiplash451 5y ago
        I spent six years in ad tech. I definitely realize that the industry has proven outcomes. My point is that these outcomes are not about what is called "incrementality" in the field, but about attributed clicks/sales (which could very well be a zero-sum game). And so, if you google-scholar (not google) for "online advertising incrementality", you are left with (granted, excellent) work that shows that nothing has been proven yet and that it is a very hard problem [1]. And when customers of Google, Facebook and other ad tech companies ask them about incrementality, their answer is surprisingly quiet. [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3447548.3470819 https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3447548.3470819 PS: I don't make any hyped claim that ads don't work. I question this fact in a constructive way.
        yunohn 5y ago
        I’ve spent ~5 years in ad-tech, and I’m well aware that it is not irrefutably solved. But I would attribute that to measurement limitations, than actual conceptual problems. I’ve seen the impact ads can have for SMBs and MNCs alike across verticals. Proving specific incrementality is rarely a concern from actual customers, unless they wanted to tighten their purse strings. Nobody questioned if actual incremental gains could be made - only whether there are diminishing returns for their increased spend.

whiplash451 5y ago

Do you have data-based evidence supporting those claims? My understanding of the field is quite the opposite. The only way to measure the true value of online advertising is to measure how much sales have been generated with ads enabled minus the sales that would have been generated without the ads. To the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved, even by the giants who have plenty of talent and data to throw at the problem. And for a reason, this is a very hard causal problem to solve, with many (many) confounding variables.

yunohn 5y ago
> To the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved Ideally, you could support this informed opinion with some studies? Preferably not just general anti-ads clickbait. Sure, you can’t ever /really/ know if your “inception” in the case of branding campaigns worked, but product/seasonal campaigns are super easy to measure and prove.
- whiplash451 5y ago
  Well, the onus is on people who make the claim that it works to put the scientific material forward, not the other way around. And so, "to the best of my knowledge, this is unsolved" is not an opinion but a fact. I am happy to be proven wrong with the relevant material. And by material, I mean scientific papers, not assertions such as "product/seasonal campaigns are super easy to measure and prove."
  - yunohn 5y ago
    I understand your sentiment, but surely you realise that the entire ads industry has a lot of proven outcomes? All the millions/billions spent by customers isn’t done so blindly. There’s quite a bit of research on this topic - googling will give you a ton of results, and then a lot of hyped “ads don’t work” material too.
    - whiplash451 5y ago
      I spent six years in ad tech. I definitely realize that the industry has proven outcomes. My point is that these outcomes are not about what is called "incrementality" in the field, but about attributed clicks/sales (which could very well be a zero-sum game). And so, if you google-scholar (not google) for "online advertising incrementality", you are left with (granted, excellent) work that shows that nothing has been proven yet and that it is a very hard problem [1]. And when customers of Google, Facebook and other ad tech companies ask them about incrementality, their answer is surprisingly quiet. [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3447548.3470819 https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3447548.3470819 PS: I don't make any hyped claim that ads don't work. I question this fact in a constructive way.
      - yunohn 5y ago
        I’ve spent ~5 years in ad-tech, and I’m well aware that it is not irrefutably solved. But I would attribute that to measurement limitations, than actual conceptual problems. I’ve seen the impact ads can have for SMBs and MNCs alike across verticals. Proving specific incrementality is rarely a concern from actual customers, unless they wanted to tighten their purse strings. Nobody questioned if actual incremental gains could be made - only whether there are diminishing returns for their increased spend.