3 ms·

Although I'm no advertising guru, I'm pretty sure that it's safe to say that the users of Safari, Chrome and Firefox are more internet savvy than the users of I

by jlgosse 17y ago

Although I'm no advertising guru, I'm pretty sure that it's safe to say that the users of Safari, Chrome and Firefox are more internet savvy than the users of Internet Explorer. For example, most people involved in technology seem to use everything except Internet Explorer, and they are often the same people who do not click on ads. From the above logic, you'll quickly realize that each savvy user who avoids using Internet Explorer also avoids ads on the new browser of their choice, which is pretty much changing the scales to the tune of a factor of two. I don't see why this is news to anyone on HN.

sjs 17y ago
IMO it also shows that people shouldn't worry about adblock (any more than they worry about lynx anyway). The people blocking ads are not clicking on them anyway.
- gyardley 17y ago
  Advertising isn't all click-oriented direct response, like mortgage lead generation. Branded display advertising is rarely clicked, but viewing it has a measurable effect on user behavior later. Fred Wilson's got a decent summary of a comScore study on exactly this: http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/12/display-adverti.html http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/12/display-adverti.html A little searching will dig up additional studies. While many of these are somewhat self-serving, I've also seen some more academic work with similar results. I don't know whether the people blocking ads would've displayed atypical post-viewing behavior - it's an interesting question. We're rarely conscious of the influence of display advertising on our decisions, so I suspect even people who actively resist clicking ads have value to a brand marketer. In any case, it's not the advertisers that worry about ad blocking, it's the publishers. As long as the display advertising is sold on a CPM basis (which is common on larger, higher-quality sites), anything that blocks a request to an adserver reduces their revenue, whether you would've clicked the ad or not.
jsm386 17y ago
I would toss Safari out of that group. As the default Mac browser its user base is going to include a significant chunk of people who just use it because it's there -- which is the same as the ignorant ie user. Lately it seems that every quarter Apple announces better computer sales...they are expanding their market to more and more home users who are going be 'less internet savvy.' Call it the halo effect or just a better product, but Apple defines mainstream retail computer sales right now. See http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10409462-37.html http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10409462-37.html

by jlgosse 17y ago

sjs 17y ago

IMO it also shows that people shouldn't worry about adblock (any more than they worry about lynx anyway). The people blocking ads are not clicking on them anyway.

gyardley 17y ago
Advertising isn't all click-oriented direct response, like mortgage lead generation. Branded display advertising is rarely clicked, but viewing it has a measurable effect on user behavior later. Fred Wilson's got a decent summary of a comScore study on exactly this: http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/12/display-adverti.html http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/12/display-adverti.html A little searching will dig up additional studies. While many of these are somewhat self-serving, I've also seen some more academic work with similar results. I don't know whether the people blocking ads would've displayed atypical post-viewing behavior - it's an interesting question. We're rarely conscious of the influence of display advertising on our decisions, so I suspect even people who actively resist clicking ads have value to a brand marketer. In any case, it's not the advertisers that worry about ad blocking, it's the publishers. As long as the display advertising is sold on a CPM basis (which is common on larger, higher-quality sites), anything that blocks a request to an adserver reduces their revenue, whether you would've clicked the ad or not.

jsm386 17y ago

I would toss Safari out of that group. As the default Mac browser its user base is going to include a significant chunk of people who just use it because it's there -- which is the same as the ignorant ie user. Lately it seems that every quarter Apple announces better computer sales...they are expanding their market to more and more home users who are going be 'less internet savvy.' Call it the halo effect or just a better product, but Apple defines mainstream retail computer sales right now. See http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10409462-37.html http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10409462-37.html