3 ms·

Good analysis of available data, but there lots of flaws in how the conclusion is drawn: 1. Using YT as a proxy for overall attention. There are so many variab

by mbesto 12y ago

Good analysis of available data, but there lots of flaws in how the conclusion is drawn: 1. Using YT as a proxy for overall attention. There are so many variables here at work, it's hard to begin to start why this number isn't a perfect science. 2. Advertising isn't a straight line number of attention to sales (even though most geeks in the FB era seem to think so). There are many of factors at play here (branding, image, communication, loyalty, engagement etc) and many are immeasurable. Believe it or not, effectiveness (and therefore "waste") of ad campaigns are not just how many eyeballs see the ad. I reckon most CMO's wouldn't take this type of napkin math very seriously. Note - I understand this type of content is for inbound marketing for Embedly, so this is probably quite effective. I'm personally pedantic about the data science behind it so others don't feel betrayed by it.

mattmaroon 12y ago
Also people on YouTube will just quit watching an ad, whereas someone on the Super Bowl is almost certainly not changing the channel.
kwntm 12y ago
You bring up great points! >1. Using YT as a proxy for overall attention 'Overall' attention is never a claim. This is simply building upon the views data with what is measured around how far people watch in a video. >2. Advertising isn't a straight line number of attention to sales There is no mention of sales in the post. It is comparing the price of the superbowl spot with the number of attention minutes. There are many factors which can serve as a measure of success, in this case it is looking at how people are watching the video after the ad spot. >most CMO's wouldn't take this type of napkin math very seriously Attention minutes is a fairly powerful measure. Ex. Upworthy uses it to determine which videos are most likely to be shared. The goal here is to show one way it can be used. In practice, it would be used among other measures an agency or company has- as you describe above.
- mbesto 12y ago
  > In practice, it would be used among other measures an agency or company has- as you describe above. If this is the case, then why is the conclusion that their super bowl ad dollars are a waste? > We’re going to use this to see who got the most bang for their buck, and more importantly — who messed up and what lessons there may be to learn. Maybe I'm just being pedantic about your misleading title and lede.... PS - I assume you're the author. This is very good inbound marketing for your company...I do applaud you for that.
megablast 12y ago
One of the points people don't get here is that you work with the data you have. And it is not perfect data.

by mbesto 12y ago

mattmaroon 12y ago

Also people on YouTube will just quit watching an ad, whereas someone on the Super Bowl is almost certainly not changing the channel.

kwntm 12y ago

You bring up great points! >1. Using YT as a proxy for overall attention 'Overall' attention is never a claim. This is simply building upon the views data with what is measured around how far people watch in a video. >2. Advertising isn't a straight line number of attention to sales There is no mention of sales in the post. It is comparing the price of the superbowl spot with the number of attention minutes. There are many factors which can serve as a measure of success, in this case it is looking at how people are watching the video after the ad spot. >most CMO's wouldn't take this type of napkin math very seriously Attention minutes is a fairly powerful measure. Ex. Upworthy uses it to determine which videos are most likely to be shared. The goal here is to show one way it can be used. In practice, it would be used among other measures an agency or company has- as you describe above.

mbesto 12y ago
> In practice, it would be used among other measures an agency or company has- as you describe above. If this is the case, then why is the conclusion that their super bowl ad dollars are a waste? > We’re going to use this to see who got the most bang for their buck, and more importantly — who messed up and what lessons there may be to learn. Maybe I'm just being pedantic about your misleading title and lede.... PS - I assume you're the author. This is very good inbound marketing for your company...I do applaud you for that.

megablast 12y ago

One of the points people don't get here is that you work with the data you have. And it is not perfect data.