Thoughts re: Today’s WSJ article on Yahoo!’s APT

by Andy Atherton
April 22nd, 2009

Jessica Vascellaro’s WSJ article this morning on Yahoo!’s display ad platform, APT, caught my attention. The problem Yahoo! is trying to solve with APT – (quoting Jessica) “that it remains a big pain today for advertisers to buy display ads across multiple sites and for publishers who have lots of online advertising space to sell to find demand for it” – is exactly the problem we founded Brand.net to solve. Continue Reading…

 

David Moore, Chairman of WPP’s 24/7 (Now B3), Says Content Quality Doesn’t Matter

by Andy Atherton
April 15th, 2009

I was catching up on content from last week’s Ad Age digital conference when I came across this clip.  Turner Executive Walker Jacobs begins by exploring some common themes with respect to tension between top publishers and networks, but the part that really caught my attention is the short exchange at the very end of the clip between prominent market analyst Henry Blodget and David Moore, Chairman of ad network 24/7 (now renamed B3 within WPP):

Moore: “It wouldn’t hurt us at all if every premium site out there never used us again.  We’d be fine.  We don’t need ‘em.”
Blodget: “So, to heck with quality content.”
Moore: “Quality, really, is in the eye of the beholder.”

I had to rewind the clip and watch a few times to make sure I understood what Mr. Moore was saying.  I was, frankly, a little shocked to hear that from a senior executive at  WPP, parent company of some of the premier agencies in online advertising, who represent many of the most iconic brand marketers on the planet -  AT&T, Unilever, Sprint, Macy’s, Campbell’s Soup and  Colgate Palmolive among them.   I’ve had the privilege to work with each of those brands in my past life with Greg Coleman and Wenda Millard at Yahoo!, and have worked again with many of them in my new life at Brand.net.   Throughout that decade of experience, these brands have consistently reinforced the critical importance of both the quality of execution and the quality of the content surrounding their ads.  In short, the eyes of these beholders have insisted on very high content quality standards.

Because of this, we only buy from top quality sites.  If every premium site out there never used us again, it would not be possible for us to meet our clients’ standards for top quality ad environments.   However, the way the web is evolving makes maintaining quality an ever more difficult challenge.  The common practice of intermingling professional edit and UGC on the same page means that even if we start with the best sites, there are some individual pages that can create problems (most often due to user comments).  This is why we assembled a top notch technical team that in partnership with IBM has delivered a market-leading page-level filtering capability we call SafeScreenSafeScreen allows us to deliver the best of the best to our clients, which is what they look to us to provide.  Starting with top quality sites and continuing to lead the market with page-level filtering capability, we take our commitment to quality seriously and we always will.  It’s who we are.  And it’s what top advertisers told us at Yahoo! and tell us at Brand.net they are looking for from a partner.

So, a word to our premium site partners:  we *do* need you, we *will* need you, and we will continue to work with you on issues that matter to both of us,  including the need to constructively avoid channel conflict.  I am tired of glorified link farms supported by belly fat ads.  Let’s bring quality advertisers to quality content and watch the web thrive.

 

Cutting Spending Hurts Brands Long Term

by Andy Atherton
April 6th, 2009

Great article in Ad Age today.  Brands that cut spending in economic downturns lose share to private label products.  Permanently.  Some exceptionally smart marketers (P&G, L’Oreal) were identified as bucking the budget cutting trend last quarter, but the trend itself means that too many brands were pulling back on these critical ongoing investments.  When times are tough, we all must focus more than ever on getting the most impact out of every dollar of spend.  However, making cuts today that are proven to lead to permanent market share declines is exactly the sort of short-term thinking that got us into “this economy” in the first place.  At least Wall Street can blame the Fed…

 

How Big is Your Ad Network?

by Andy Atherton
April 6th, 2009

Over the weekend, I read an interesting iMedia post from last Thursday.  The author directly and convincingly challenges the importance that many seem to place on the comScore unique reach numbers as a basis of comparison for ad networks.  I have been thinking about this for a while and I agree that raw reach on comScore is a very narrow gauge at best and extremely flawed at worst.  Of all of his ideas, I think the most interesting is rating networks by renewal rate.  I think the important high-level point there is to include a notion of quality, which has been sorely lacking in all of these measurements.  In evaluating and comparing networks, is 1M uniques reached in below the fold placements on second tier social network sites the same as 1M uniques reached in branded, contextually relevant women’s lifestyle content?  Is 1M uniques reached for P&G on the first of many campaigns the same as 1M uniques reached for a predatory debt consolidation company who cancelled halfway through the campaign and never came back?  For some perhaps, but for most of the Ad Age 100 the answer to both questions is “no”.  I would also echo the author’s point about the overlap among networks.  Overlap affects the aggregate reach & frequency of a campaign, so unless a marketer is running a  CPA campaign they need to push their media partners for reach commitments on a campaign by campaign basis.  As the author points out, the overall reach of a network should be much less important to a marketer than the network’s reach on that marketer’s campaign.  Smooth, complete delivery with tightly managed frequency should be the expectation on every campaign.  High quality campaigns running in high quality inventory with high quality execution – now that’s a good basis for comparison.

 

Tropicana

by Andy Atherton
April 2nd, 2009

Cinderella, those masters of 80’s hair metal, had their biggest hit with “You don’t know what you got (until it’s gone)”.

As much as I have tried to suppress those dark days for music, I couldn’t help but hum a few bars to myself as I read today’s Ad Age story about the negative impact of Tropicana’s recent packaging overhaul. Continue Reading…