4 ms·

A very compelling anecdote, but as we start gathering more and more of this evidence it's painting a clear picture - Facebook ads are nigh useless. I wonder: w

by debacle 14y ago

A very compelling anecdote, but as we start gathering more and more of this evidence it's painting a clear picture - Facebook ads are nigh useless. I wonder: why Cairo?

samstave 14y ago
I have yet to see any good evidence that shows FB will be able to create an honestly sustainable revenue model. I am sure the "pay for a less spammy ad riddled FB experience! Only $1.99 per month!" is in the near future. And I'd bet a fair number of users would pay for that.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
  Being able to filter out all those irritating meme/joke/"inspiring thought" things would be brilliant, too.
codegeek 14y ago
"Facebook ads are nigh useless." Is it really just the fb ads or the entire system of how ads work in 2012? Is it time that someone changes how ads work as per pg's list of ideas ?
- debacle 14y ago
  We're moving towards a post marketing economy. Any marketer will tell you that. The old ways of marketing don't work anymore, and they certainly don't work on the Internet. People of the television generation are capable of filtering out marketing at an unprecedented level - the only marketing that works any more is strategically targetted marketing (a la Google) or consumer education campaigns. Sponsorship has seen a resurgence in recent years. I know that P&G really likes the sponsorship model, but there are only so many things out there to sponsor.
  - ceslami 14y ago
    Sponsorship is functionally brand awareness advertising, as opposed to conversion-oriented advertising. Sponsorship likens closer to the days of billboards and TV ads, when you either "felt the effects" or didn't, very qualitatively. Why do you, and "any marketer," think we're headed away from conversion-oriented, highly quantitative models of advertising?
    - lsc 14y ago
      the thing is, and others will disagree with me, but I think that from the point of view of your average businessperson, I'm right- the thing is that the so-called quantitative, conversion-oriented methods of advertising are not so quantitative. I mean, a lot has been written on the 'last touch' or 'first touch' problem. And a lot has been done to mitigate that, but one of the first things you learn running a business is that if you don't understand something? you massively over pay for it. And I (and I think most business owners) don't understand how a last touch conversion tracking could tell me how that customer really heard about me, and more importantly, how I gained the credibility with that customer required for them to punch in their credit card. Now, some people think they can compensate for that. But, for me? I don't understand how you could tell that a user learned about me from word of mouth (before they clicked on an adword that got them to my site and a signup.) - To me, figuring that out is so hard that I might as well just focus on the brand-building kind of advertising. Now, a lot of this is because most people are willing to pay a premium for the 'quantitative' advertising. they are willing to pay extra for things they think they can track. This means that if I'm right (and who knows) then the brand-building advertising, that most people consider largely untrackable, is underpriced. I mean, I'm not saying I'm right and you are wrong... just that there are a number of businesses that feel this way.
      - ceslami 14y ago
        That's an interesting point, and I definitely think that sponsoring an event attended by your target audience is a big step up from TV or billboards. Now this gets heady: "People are willing to pay a premium for things they can track." Perhaps advertising vectors which are easily tracked, thus optimized, yield more valuable per dollar spent. If this is the case, demand for this inventory (Adwords, etc) increases. You would expect it to become more expensive by forces of the market. This is why you don't see people lined up to fill billboard inventory, especially in the last 10 years. It is a chicken-egg problem in some ways, but I think people are willing to pay more because their advertising/conversion math enables it, and that math is easier to back up with facts.
bentlegen 14y ago
> Facebook ads are nigh useless. I guess you didn't read this: http://irvinebroque.tumblr.com/post/28415393877/how-i-made-10k-in-one-day-with-facebook-ads-re-bots http://irvinebroque.tumblr.com/post/28415393877/how-i-made-1...
- milesskorpen 14y ago
  Revenue != profit
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  That's a thinly veiled piece of advertising for a Facebook analytics startup.
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    I don't see anything there that would make me want to buy Facebook analytics services. I see an example of Facebook not being useless -- using advertised events to get real people (not bots) to show up somewhere and buy things.
- franzus 14y ago
  So he gave away records for a ridiculously low price. Do you think this is a viable business model?
  - bentlegen 14y ago
    I was merely debating the "useless" part. Clearly they are of some use.
  - unreal37 14y ago
    The author of that post says he sold them for way more than he paid for them, so .. um.. yes. That's a sustainable business model.
    - ceejayoz 14y ago
      Well, sustainable would indicate he can keep doing it. How frequently can he procure $10,000 batches of vinyl records?

by debacle 14y ago

A very compelling anecdote, but as we start gathering more and more of this evidence it's painting a clear picture - Facebook ads are nigh useless. I wonder: why Cairo?

samstave 14y ago

I have yet to see any good evidence that shows FB will be able to create an honestly sustainable revenue model. I am sure the "pay for a less spammy ad riddled FB experience! Only $1.99 per month!" is in the near future. And I'd bet a fair number of users would pay for that.

TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
Being able to filter out all those irritating meme/joke/"inspiring thought" things would be brilliant, too.

codegeek 14y ago

"Facebook ads are nigh useless." Is it really just the fb ads or the entire system of how ads work in 2012? Is it time that someone changes how ads work as per pg's list of ideas ?

debacle 14y ago
We're moving towards a post marketing economy. Any marketer will tell you that. The old ways of marketing don't work anymore, and they certainly don't work on the Internet. People of the television generation are capable of filtering out marketing at an unprecedented level - the only marketing that works any more is strategically targetted marketing (a la Google) or consumer education campaigns. Sponsorship has seen a resurgence in recent years. I know that P&G really likes the sponsorship model, but there are only so many things out there to sponsor.
- ceslami 14y ago
  Sponsorship is functionally brand awareness advertising, as opposed to conversion-oriented advertising. Sponsorship likens closer to the days of billboards and TV ads, when you either "felt the effects" or didn't, very qualitatively. Why do you, and "any marketer," think we're headed away from conversion-oriented, highly quantitative models of advertising?
  - lsc 14y ago
    the thing is, and others will disagree with me, but I think that from the point of view of your average businessperson, I'm right- the thing is that the so-called quantitative, conversion-oriented methods of advertising are not so quantitative. I mean, a lot has been written on the 'last touch' or 'first touch' problem. And a lot has been done to mitigate that, but one of the first things you learn running a business is that if you don't understand something? you massively over pay for it. And I (and I think most business owners) don't understand how a last touch conversion tracking could tell me how that customer really heard about me, and more importantly, how I gained the credibility with that customer required for them to punch in their credit card. Now, some people think they can compensate for that. But, for me? I don't understand how you could tell that a user learned about me from word of mouth (before they clicked on an adword that got them to my site and a signup.) - To me, figuring that out is so hard that I might as well just focus on the brand-building kind of advertising. Now, a lot of this is because most people are willing to pay a premium for the 'quantitative' advertising. they are willing to pay extra for things they think they can track. This means that if I'm right (and who knows) then the brand-building advertising, that most people consider largely untrackable, is underpriced. I mean, I'm not saying I'm right and you are wrong... just that there are a number of businesses that feel this way.
    - ceslami 14y ago
      That's an interesting point, and I definitely think that sponsoring an event attended by your target audience is a big step up from TV or billboards. Now this gets heady: "People are willing to pay a premium for things they can track." Perhaps advertising vectors which are easily tracked, thus optimized, yield more valuable per dollar spent. If this is the case, demand for this inventory (Adwords, etc) increases. You would expect it to become more expensive by forces of the market. This is why you don't see people lined up to fill billboard inventory, especially in the last 10 years. It is a chicken-egg problem in some ways, but I think people are willing to pay more because their advertising/conversion math enables it, and that math is easier to back up with facts.

bentlegen 14y ago

> Facebook ads are nigh useless. I guess you didn't read this: http://irvinebroque.tumblr.com/post/28415393877/how-i-made-10k-in-one-day-with-facebook-ads-re-bots http://irvinebroque.tumblr.com/post/28415393877/how-i-made-1...

milesskorpen 14y ago
Revenue != profit
ceejayoz 14y ago
That's a thinly veiled piece of advertising for a Facebook analytics startup.
- dangrossman 14y ago
  I don't see anything there that would make me want to buy Facebook analytics services. I see an example of Facebook not being useless -- using advertised events to get real people (not bots) to show up somewhere and buy things.
franzus 14y ago
So he gave away records for a ridiculously low price. Do you think this is a viable business model?
- bentlegen 14y ago
  I was merely debating the "useless" part. Clearly they are of some use.
- unreal37 14y ago
  The author of that post says he sold them for way more than he paid for them, so .. um.. yes. That's a sustainable business model.
  - ceejayoz 14y ago
    Well, sustainable would indicate he can keep doing it. How frequently can he procure $10,000 batches of vinyl records?