4 ms·

Why Facebook Likes Small Ads, Despite the Small Dollars

10 points by peter123 18y ago

unalone 18y ago
“The classic interruptive model is a pretty uninspired way to really get to a consumer,” Mr. Kendall said. “If we build ad products that really take advantage of how users interact on Facebook with each other, it will be much more effective over time.” You know, a lot of people rip on Facebook here, but it's comments like me that make me just utterly love it and the people that work there. They care first and foremost about creating a good interface for their users, and making a damn good product. And I really hope this strategy works, because Facebook ads are the least intrusive I've ever seen on a site.
- netcan 18y ago
  I like your optimism but I see it differently. The classic interruptive model has a known ability to create revenue. That known is not enough to justify their current valuation. I think that they are shooting for higher then that. take advantage of how users interact on_____ is the same idea as Google Adwords, Yellow Pages or Hotel booking sites. Only those have an easy to take advantage of way that people interact with them. Hotels pay to be the ones that get booked. Sites pay to be the ones that get found. Facebook has no clear way to do this. It's a nice goal. But it may well fail. But the alternative to trying for it is saying "OK. Slap some bigger ads on. Get CTR up. Lets shoot for a %200 increase in revenue" They're aiming for 1000% or more. “The classic interruptive model" won't get them there & everyone knows it. So they aim for something else that noone knows the answer to.
  - krakensden 18y ago
    Does the classical model really work though? I certainly pay more attention to Facebook ads than I do to regular, giant flashing 'punch the monkey' ones. Has anyone tried measuring this?
    - briansmith 18y ago
      "Has anyone tried measuring this?" Yes--You need to aim where the monkey is going to be, not where it is now.
    - unalone 18y ago
      I've only ever clicked the "classic monkey" links when I was bored or by accident. With Facebook, I've actually found things I like using the service. I'd say it works better for me than Google Ads, in many ways. Score one for small and personalized.
    - netcan 18y ago
      Does the classical model really work though? I took 'classical model' to mean basically use what's out there. Adsense or something similar or starting their own ad program that works similarly to adsense or using an ad program similar to what NYT or many other big news networks use & giving it generous screespace. Something like this: http://www.nytimes.whsites.net/mediakit/ http://www.nytimes.whsites.net/mediakit/ . I assume that NYT supplement whatever pageviews they cannot sell directly with adsense. Basically by classical model, I understood 'go with what the world is currently offering'. Has anyone tried measuring this? Yes people have measured this. You can be sure that media sites (newspapers & such) do. They probably have the optimal configurations. It is possible to get some more clicks (even purposeful ones), by making them bigger & noisier. Up to a point.
- volida 18y ago
  i can't wait to go 4 years fast forward when fb will be irrelevant
byrneseyeview 18y ago
The standard for low-key advertising has been set by Google, which has become the biggest media brand in the world through tiny text links. Apparently this author has never talked to anyone under 10 or over 30. Disney is still way ahead of Google, here.

10 points by peter123 18y ago

“The classic interruptive model is a pretty uninspired way to really get to a consumer,” Mr. Kendall said. “If we build ad products that really take advantage of how users interact on Facebook with each other, it will be much more effective over time.” You know, a lot of people rip on Facebook here, but it's comments like me that make me just utterly love it and the people that work there. They care first and foremost about creating a good interface for their users, and making a damn good product. And I really hope this strategy works, because Facebook ads are the least intrusive I've ever seen on a site.

netcan 18y ago
I like your optimism but I see it differently. The classic interruptive model has a known ability to create revenue. That known is not enough to justify their current valuation. I think that they are shooting for higher then that. take advantage of how users interact on_____ is the same idea as Google Adwords, Yellow Pages or Hotel booking sites. Only those have an easy to take advantage of way that people interact with them. Hotels pay to be the ones that get booked. Sites pay to be the ones that get found. Facebook has no clear way to do this. It's a nice goal. But it may well fail. But the alternative to trying for it is saying "OK. Slap some bigger ads on. Get CTR up. Lets shoot for a %200 increase in revenue" They're aiming for 1000% or more. “The classic interruptive model" won't get them there & everyone knows it. So they aim for something else that noone knows the answer to.
- krakensden 18y ago
  Does the classical model really work though? I certainly pay more attention to Facebook ads than I do to regular, giant flashing 'punch the monkey' ones. Has anyone tried measuring this?
  - briansmith 18y ago
    "Has anyone tried measuring this?" Yes--You need to aim where the monkey is going to be, not where it is now.
  - unalone 18y ago
    I've only ever clicked the "classic monkey" links when I was bored or by accident. With Facebook, I've actually found things I like using the service. I'd say it works better for me than Google Ads, in many ways. Score one for small and personalized.
  - netcan 18y ago
    Does the classical model really work though? I took 'classical model' to mean basically use what's out there. Adsense or something similar or starting their own ad program that works similarly to adsense or using an ad program similar to what NYT or many other big news networks use & giving it generous screespace. Something like this: http://www.nytimes.whsites.net/mediakit/ http://www.nytimes.whsites.net/mediakit/ . I assume that NYT supplement whatever pageviews they cannot sell directly with adsense. Basically by classical model, I understood 'go with what the world is currently offering'. Has anyone tried measuring this? Yes people have measured this. You can be sure that media sites (newspapers & such) do. They probably have the optimal configurations. It is possible to get some more clicks (even purposeful ones), by making them bigger & noisier. Up to a point.
volida 18y ago
i can't wait to go 4 years fast forward when fb will be irrelevant

byrneseyeview 18y ago

The standard for low-key advertising has been set by Google, which has become the biggest media brand in the world through tiny text links. Apparently this author has never talked to anyone under 10 or over 30. Disney is still way ahead of Google, here.