3 ms·
Very basic question: Suppose in addition to the usual tracking ad for $X, you also offer "basic ads" with no tracking, no fraud protection etc., just a fixed ad
by diffeomorphism 4y ago
Very basic question: Suppose in addition to the usual tracking ad for $X, you also offer "basic ads" with no tracking, no fraud protection etc., just a fixed ad shown for the same amount of time for $Y. How much less is Y? A half? A third? One hundredth?
Follow up: Suppose the option for $X is ruled illegal. What is Y now?
- dns_snek 4y agoI'm somewhat skeptical of the figure but research from 2019 seems to suggest the difference is only around 4%. https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/31/targeted-ads-offer-little-extra-value-for-online-publishers-study-suggests/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/31/targeted-ads-offer-little-...
- diffeomorphism 4y agoWhere are you getting the 4% from? The most relevant part seems to be > [...] ads were sold with targeting attached, and advertisers were willing to pay a 60% premium for those ads. So, say $3 vs $2 or showing two tracking ads vs three basic ads. So tracking seems surprisingly useless for all the work involved?
- dns_snek 4y agoThat only shows they're mistakenly undervaluing basic ads. If advertisers lose 4% of revenue without tracking, it stands to reason they should pay ~4% less for those ads, not 40% less.