Tag Archives: Google

The Changing Face of Performance Display – the rise of Ad Exchanges

The digital media landscape is changing rapidly. “Why” I hear you ask? Well the short and simple answer is the economics of supply and demand, meets technical and mathematical innovation. Combined this with clients increasingly demanding more accountability out of their media spend, with increased knowledge about campaign performance metrics of post click and post view conversion attribution and we have a major force driving change.

The Industry’s answer to this is the advent of digital media exchanges which is in itself a major game changer, but more on that later.

Lets start of the supply side of the digital market. Anyone in the know, understands that the amount of amount of digital impressions available, is now almost infinite. This is due to a number of factors, but principally the explosion of social media where supply is endless and behavior is sticky. Think Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Tweet image sites like YFrog .com, Flicker, YouTube etc etc the list is endless. Secondly the major publishers struggle to have 100% impression sell through rates via their traditional sales channels and you have a considerable amount of unsold remnant impression inventory. So in simple terms over supply.

With infinite inventory and limited demand, the value of an impression is fast approaching zero. Not a fact most major publishers generally want the industry to know.

Up until now most of this low value high volume inventory has been sold at next to nothing rates to the traditional Performance Networks, that package up “Performance Solutions” where they factor the amount of impressions required to hit a client performance guarantee like a CPC pr CPA. Most of the CPA deals though are heavily weighted towards post view conversion metrics somewhere between 95% to 99%, which in itself is questionable from a true DR perspective. These buys are also “Blind” where a client has little or no choice on the sites their ads appear on and there is no transparency across higher performing parts of a network, so effectively not allowing a client the opportunity to optimize and refine their performance media buy and minimize wastage and cookie spraying.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is most of these Performance Networks are firstly focused on maximizing their yield, where they mark up the remnant inventory they buy by a significant multiple. This allows publishers to monetize their unsold inventory at albeit a very low rate, they can hide behind a performance network and not devalue their otherwise premium inventory. Further this allows a traditional media agency the opportunity to blend performance metrics with low cost inventory, claim questionable conversions and support in some cases their otherwise ineffective digital media buys that support commissions and other high yield volume rebates.

All in all, not a very pretty picture for the advertiser.

Now the demand sides of the equation. Enter DME’s or Digital Media Exchanges. Globally we are seeing the rise and rise of the DME that allows a site owner or publisher to make freely available an amount of inventory to an ad exchange (think stock market here), where advertisers can compete and bid real time for the ability to serve an impression to a user. This can be behaviorally targeted as well (Site retargeting, Search Retargeting etc). This market mechanism allows an advertiser to rationally price the cost of digital media based on what conversion value it creates for them (CPA, ROI, ROAS, CPC etc). With the right technology, business rules of post click and impression attribution and performance conversion metrics reporting an advertiser can now maximize what parts of a network or what ad format works best for them on their terms due to complete network and performance transparency.

2010 looks like it will bring major change to the digital media landscape. In the USA, Google is starting to push their DoubleClick network heavily with real-time bidding and an API due for release we believe before June. Yahoo! is starting to push RMX (Right Media Exchange) a little harder too. Early indications are the exchange based media buys are resulting in a 50% cost reduction in the eCPM advertisers have been achieving, compared with the traditional blind Performance Network buy, with increased conversion based value metrics as well. The exchange mechanism is also starting to extend beyond the traditional IAB approved ad formats with reports of video ad exchanges also launching in the USA.

Now, I’m not pretending this is the total solution in the digital media landscape. There is still a roll for premium based CPM buys as part of a digital brand campaign. I see Ad Exchanges as an extra digital DR element to compliment premium buys, drive the economics of digital performance harder and gain incremental impressions and conversions for the advertiser in a transparent, rational, data driven way. It is the power of search maths applied to display markets.

Double Click

Yahoo!'s Right Media Exchange

A view of the Australian Ad Market..

AU accessible digital inventory

Any of you who know me, understand how passionate I am about this with my strongly held belief that this will be the dominant media buying mechanism across all media in the next 3 to 5 years, particularly around the burgeoning IP TV markets.

In essence the power is shifting from media and network owner to advertiser with the benefit of:

  • Complete transparency across network performace
  • Complete transparency across post click and post view conversion
  • Rationally priced media, based on the value it actually creates – not how it supports commission deals, incentives etc
  • Performance based media buys with prime media cost savings in the vicinity of 50%+

Downstream Marketing in Australia is launching the country’s first biddable display capability in conjunction with Efficient Frontier in California, using their seats on the ad exchanges to access the available inventory targeting AU based eyeballs across sites globally including AU based site inventory.

Advertisements

Economics of the Future of Mobile

Recently I was asked to write an opinion piece for the magazine Marketing, capturing my thoughts on the future of mobile marketing which has always been touted as a large and emerging opportunity, but has yet failed to gain critical mass and more importantly material advertiser support.  Below is an extract of the article.

Marketing Magazine - The Future of Mobile isn't Mobile

THE FUTURE OF MOBILE ISN’T MOBILE

Mobile Marketing has been the long-held, future of advertising. A promise that everyone has got excited about, but few delivered on. I’ve seen numerous reports from industry experts and market analysts, who’ve produced endless business cases and revenue models that never seem to gain any traction anywhere but in a spreadsheet.

Many mobile-based businesses start and fail even before they’ve worked out who they are, where they fit and more importantly what the consumer need and engagement point is. The promise of mobile has been built on a nascent industry that hasn’t really found its feet so far. It begs the question, why have so many people been so wrong for so long? In my humble opinion we’ve all been considering the problem, or opportunity in the wrong context.

The future of mobile isn’t “mobile”. Building yet another disconnected platform, which operates singularly, is the problem. The real question isn’t about what is mobile, it is more about what connectivity and ubiquitous consumer centric computing experiences hold.

The Black Swan of the mobile industry came from an outlier that radically changed the face of what we understood the market to be, Apple. Like it or not Steve Jobs and the Apple crew decided to rewrite the rulebook, grounded in a consumer truth & desire for simplicity when they launched the iPhone.

iPhone

iPhone

The iPhone was one simple device that allowed consumers to do almost everything they could on a desktop or laptop, with the benefits of a compact device that had GPS functionality that could fit perfectly into your pocket at the cost of a normal mobile contract. The iPhone ran basically the same operating system as a Mac, it synced seamlessly with all your business and personal applications wirelessly and it was just easy. Combine this with creating a relatively open software platform that developers could deploy a range of consumer centric applications on, with an open software market place where developers could reach a global audience and monetize their ideas rapidly. Hey presto the face and future of mobile changed irreversibly.

The biggest change Apple brought to the mobile industry was they established and built sustainable consumer behaviour, where for the first time consumers could use mobile devices in an entertaining and meaningful way.  Almost everyone I know now uses the SAME applications and services on their desktop as they do on their mobile. Tweeting, Facebooking, Googleing, blogging, emailing, taking and sharing photos, reading PDF’s, listening to and downloading music have all become a ubiquitous experience, regardless of the device or location. The iPhone really enabled the “Social Web”, combine this with location-based mobile applications, and the face of the mobile game has changed forever, why? Because Apple rewrote the rulebook.

Apple changed the clunky face of mobile marketing and e-commerce. They did what Microsoft, Symbian, Blackberry, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, HTC et al couldn’t do. All of the previous industry incumbents were all operating based on a set of rules designed by engineers and analysts that had a vested interest in developing a disparate market, not a connected market. Apple innovated that last 10% of the mobile market and that innovation has had a 200% impact on the mobile industry as we know it.

Before you start to think this is a plug for Apple, have a look at the ripple effect across the entire mobile industry. Nokia has launched “me too” devices with their own music store, HTC have launched devices with similar interfaces and capabilities, Blackberry has started to support their developer community with a “me too” application store. The rate of change in mobile is increasing exponentially, all because an outlier rewrote the rules.

Apple's App Store

Apple's App Store

So where is the advertising world in all of this though? The advertising community both creative and media is still way behind. Ad Networks are still trying to sell on a silly impression based model (CPM) through serving non-targeted, dumb ad’s that have little relevance to a consumers experience that are at best annoying. Creative agencies and their digital heads have not yet woken up to the fact that it would be a better use of clients funds to build a simple mobile site, designed for a handheld device that delivers consumer utility rather than fight for a full flash and video site that can’t be viewed on a mobile device or indexed in a search engine. It is time to catch up people, understand the consumer and find the right intersection point.

The future isn’t mobile; it is ubiquity of experience across any device that delivers consumer utility and meaningful brand engagement.

Economics of a Google & Twitter collision…

So I’ve been thinking about what happens when like things collide.

The most interesting thing I could come up with is a big social media trend & technical collision between Google & Twitter, think Toogle or Gitter…ok maybe not on a brand front. But seriously lets think about the two most potent forms of digital marketing on the planet today, Search & Twitter (Social Media).

Twitter - the new social tool

Twitter - the new social tool

Google - the new Master of the media Universe

Google - the new Master of the media Universe

In order:

Search

Google

  • Fastest growing media on the planet (Australian est 60% year on year compound growth)
  • Search network – larger scale than any ad / publisher network
  • Media with the highest level of accountability & conversion
  • Performance related media – no click, no pay
  • Live media auction based market driven by relative pricing mechanic
  • Investment based on conversion yield
  • Media with the shortest conversion latency
  • Highest integrity media – only deals in post click metrics and avoids the BS of cookie spraying, post impression conversion & analysis
  • A CONSUMER DRIVEN MEDIA THAT MAPS CONSUMER THOUGHTS WHEN THEY ARE IN AN ACTIVE MIND STATE

Twitter

Twitter Mobile

Twitter Mobile

Twitter - the real value is the searchable content

Twitter - the real value is the searchable content

  • Collaborative social media tool
  • Growing exponentially fast
  • Maps social groups & connections
  • Maps social conversations about content & brands
  • Combines desk  & mobile functionality
  • Has indexable content / conversations / links
  • Has location based functionality in mobile devices
  • Easy to execute algorithm based analysis on conversation value & stickiness of content or users
  • A Consumer driven media – WHEN IN AN ACTIVE ENGAGED MIND STATE


QUESTION : What if you combined the power of them both?

  • A performance based, digital media super power
  • Advertising at the speed of thought (or conversation)
  • Behaviorally targeted advertising based on a collective combination of conversations and connections / social media groups
  • Location based advertising & ad serving based on real-time geo-targeting
  • Two sticky, lean forward, consumer engaged media channels

IMPACT

Immense revenue scale for both Google & Twitter.

On Google’s side an inordinate amount of live, actively engaged impression inventory to serve ads to based on conversations (past & present), combined with consumer clustering (birds of a feather flocking together etc) and search & surfing history. For Twitter a ready made ad revenue stream of either text ads, by making Twitter effectively part of the content network ( yes some tweaks to algorithms required) or make it a part of the biddable display market from a content placement perspective.

Twitter would have a ready made, low or no cost sales channel at their instant disposal. Google would have the most valuable and dynamic digital inventory available.

Together they would be unbeatable, together they’d own social & performance media, together they’d have scale and momentum that couldn’t be broken. Together they’d provide a one stop, easy solution for brands to capitalise on both in terms of performance media, social media and mobile media.

The Economics of Online Music

Short & sweet today. I’ve been talking with a new on-line music portal www.bandit.fm being pioneered by Sony BMG here in Australia. Downstream are looking at potentially partnering with Sony to help build an audience for their new service.

Now anyone that knows me, knows how much of an Apple fan I am. I think anything Apple touches, generally turns to gold. Apple have successfully become the trail blazer in almost every product category (think iMac, iPhone, iPod, Mac Books of all types and descriptions). They’ve also revolutionised the consumer software market with easy to use intuitive applications (think iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD and before anyone cans me the whole iWork suite, awesome productivity suite for $99! Let’s also not forget iPhone apps – just brilliant way to build and scale your mobile platform).To date no brand really comes close to Apple’s innovation and foresight.

But when it comes to music, I think there is a true challenger that could really take it to them. Sony have developed what I believe is the BEST music site / portal on the market today.

New iTunes killer

New iTunes killer

I think it is the best for the following reasons:

  1. Great content – they’ve developed the site intuitively with a mixture of channels, artist specific pages, video, news feeds etc. You can engage in specific genres like R&B, Hip-Hop, Rock, Pop or you can navigate to specific content rich artist pages like N.E.R.D, John Legend, Duffy etc etc.
  2. Great site build – mixture of indexable HTML & interactive flash elements, URL structures, title tages, H1 tags etc
  3. Downloads are easy after simple registration process
  4. Music & videos are DRM free
  5. Great experience – you can listen to a whole song or view a video in high quality full screen mode vs. Apple’s 30 second preview function
  6. Not constrained by an app like iTunes – you can access it from any browse
  7. Easy content network integration (PPC) into YouTube & Myspace. They are “THE PLACE” to view music related content.
Specific Music Genre Channels

Specific Music Genre Channels

Usher on Bandit.fm

Usher on Bandit.fm

The site will work very, very well for Paid Search / PPC campaigns, the site structure allows you to deep link to exact content as well as being able to achieve great quality scores which impacts highly on economical bid prices and as content is more compelling than iTunes, I believe with a much higher conversion process too.

The site also has very high potential to work very very well for Social Media, as the site structure let’s consumers be very specific about their Tweets, blog postings etc and create specific interest in genre based content communities. One area they could approve is allowing their content to be aggregated and syndicated on other sites, think embedding audio files or video files to MySpace or Facebook profile pages with pre & post roll Bandit.fm ads promoting their service – very economical way to drive new subscriptions, downloads or cross sell new artists / releases / albums.

So the product I think is truely world class, if this is release 1.0 I can’t wait for new versions updates. Bandit.FM can successfully take on iTunes and Apple in the market they really pioneered and commercialised (on-line music), and hopefully give consumers a compelling reason (safety – no viruses / Trojans, reliability ets) to BUY music rather that steal it from sites like Limewire.com. They only have to carve out small incremental percentages of the on-line global market to create real value & high return for their pioneering investment in on-line music. Congrats to the whole team at Sony BMG!

If you are into music give it a go.

The Economics of TV

Wow… hasn’t everything changed. I think  that change isn’t only constant, it is increasing at an exponentially rapid rate when it comes to marketing and consumer connections.  TV is one of those mediums that is changing at a breakneck pace, being driven primarily by the web, cheaper broadband, processor speeds and more importantly by human behaviour and the hunger to have it all now. It seems though that the only ones fighting this technological and social trend are the TV networks, somehow trying to hold back change like that boy who put his finger in the dike, trying to hold back the pressure of a tidal tsunami.

Lets define what has changed though…

Humans desire for visual entertainment hasn’t changed, we still want to see great content, be entertained, informed, learn etc. All the usual stuff we know & love in our existing inefficient model of liner TV transmission. Actually, all the stuff we do offline (Read, listen, communicate etc)  is what we NOW want to do on-line, the web has just become a faster more efficient means of content dissemination and connection.  There is a fascinating book on it it if you are really interested – Convergence Culture.  Back to TV….

So what the web has allowed us to do is no longer have to experience video content or TV in old world speak in a linear fashion (wait – start – stop – wait, repeat cycle, repeat cycle etc.) Now we can experience content in a multi-dimensional model where prime time is anytime, and we are no longer at the mercy of the television networks to dictate content and programming schedules to us. With the advent of TV shows on iTunes, Hulu, Video Ninja, etc etc we can watch whatever we want, whenever we want. In my home we see shows like Damages, Entourage, dare I say it Gossip Girl, The Mentalist, Flight of the Concords, Mad Men etc within hours of it airing in the USA. We stream it, download it and watch it all ad free on a schedule that suits our lives, rather than that of the networks. Actually we watch 3 or episodes all back to back, it is a much better experience.

Video Streaming site - Ninjavideo.net

Video Streaming site - Ninjavideo.net

So I ponder the question, what will the future & Economics of TV be? Is there a better way? (yes obviously) Who will hold the balance of power, will it remain with the networks who still today are scratching their heads, wondering if they can fight it the same way the music industry did or will they embrace the change that is being thrust upon them by a technical and consumer lead revolution? Should they look to the pioneers of the web (gambling & porn), watch & listen carefully and adapt and commercialise their models or put their heads in the sand, only to come up for breath & see that everything has moved on without them? So I hear all you naysayers saying the IP TV market is small and nascent, but so too was the wireless broadband market, the 3G handset market and yes our old friend the Music market. Believe me it is sooner than we all think, and much much sooner than the guys paid to believe the old system won’t change.

So whats the new model then….

I think, predict, believe that Goggle will become the biggest TV network in the world in the very near future….here is why:

  1. All TV based content ( that and everything else – Radio, Books etc) will be digitised ( fact is it already is!)
  2. All TVC’s will also become digitised and stored on a TVC Ad Server System (similar to current ad digital display ad servers)
  3. TV’s will be increasingly connected to media centers ( think Windows Media Center, Mac Mini or next Gen Apple TV), or co-exist in harmony with hand held devices like an iPod Touch or iPhone.
  4. Google will be able to behaviorally understand a consumer / household based on a myriad of data sources (web surfing history, Search history, IP TV viewing history etc) & serve TV ads directly into a program that has been legitimately downloaded or is being streamed in realtime. Ad serving will be served on the basis of complex algorithms in a live auction model where market forces set pricing, similar to Paid Search today. Think Google’s recently announced “interest-based” ads on the content network with the mechanic applied to TV.  Media planners & network sales forces will be a thing of the past.
  5. Consumers will decide how much advertising they are willing to bear and will trade the cost of ad free convenience off against receiving free TV, where & when they want it. So if I want no ads, I’ll have to pay a higher cost than someone who is willing to see say 8 or 10 ads an hour who may pay nothing.
  6. TV schedules & post campaign analysis will be more like digital campaign analysis than the current pay, hope and pray approach (what I like to call the Strategy of Hope) to accountable effectiveness reports. Advertisers will be able to  understand who they’ve connected with vs. what shows they’ve bought and most importantly how the consumer has reacted within different latency periods from viewing TVC’s embedded into the content (no time shifting of course). Did they visit the site,buy the product, subscribe, buy something else in the clients product portfolio, did churn drop etc etc. The opportunities are endless. Will all TV in the future be more like DR / internet based campaigns – yes I think so at least.
  7. Content producers / companies may distribute their content or shows directly to their audiences over the web and get a larger cut of ad revenue thereby dis-intermediating the networks.
  8. A new breed of KPI’s will evolve based on value & yield, rather than TARPS and average spot cost.
  9. Creative agencies will need to think of new mechanics to engage their clients audience meaningfully. No longer can they solve marketing challenges 30 seconds at a time, in the same linear fashion as the traditional TV networks serve programs.

I’d really appreciate alternate view on this, either from a Television network’s perspective or from the digital industry’s perspective. All I know is TV is going to change faster than we know it and become more like a Search market than the current state we all know and love ( or hate?).

Interesting update:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/content-rules-needed-for-internet-tv-20091105-i0b0.html

Economics of the Superbowl & Search Marketing

superbowl

We all know the Superbowl is famous for advertising, it is the single biggest event or forum where the great North American ad agencies can flout their talent strategically and creatively to a reported audience of over a billion people. Clients like Pepsi, E-Trade, Sony Pictures, Budweiser and Audi (to name but a few) spend upwards of USD$3M (AUD$4.651M) a spot to engage an audience and create an impact for their brand or product. With an audience of well over 100m alone in North America, cost (think USD$3M+ for the TVC, plus media) and you’d think in today’s world of integration every brand would be seeking to leverage the event and extend the engagement potential of such an expensive and potentially high yield opportunity…yes?

Well unfortunately the answer is NO for some of the brands that took part in the Superbowl. Some major brands missed the opportunity to drive people on-line and extend the brand experience from TV to digital, one of the easiest forms of integration that delivers a significant punch for an advertiser.

A cost of entry in the “Big Ideas” business is a micro-site these days, at least a 2 second URL at the end of the TVC, or if you’ve woken up to the consumer of the 21st Century maybe even a Search program with a simple keyword that relates creatively to the idea.

The benefits:

  1. Extended brand immersion / experience / time with the brand
  2. Extension of the creative idea into a more personal self directed environment
  3. A captured profile, conversion or viral element etc – you choose
  4. A proxy for the effectiveness of the media placement / creative idea (i.e. what % of the audience did you engage within 24 / 48 / 72 hrs etc)
  5. An amplified campaign with a greater ROI for a marginal increase in investment.

Adage reports only one in five (circa 20%) of advertisers directed viewers with a specific call to action in the TVC, miraculously the highest in the past five years. Conversely, Gartner reports 65% of advertisers did construct specific Search strategies to leverage the opportunity (up around 20% on last year).

The reported Search integration winners included E-Trade, Cash4Gold, Frosted Flakes, CareerBuilder, Diet Pepsi Max, GoDaddy and Pepsi. The losers; Budweiser, Chase Bank, Denny’s, Pixar, Vizio, “Year One,” “Angels & Demons,” Taco Bell, Bud Light, Bud Light Lime, Heineken, “Transformers 2” and Coca Cola, they missed it by a mile.

Here’s how Super Bowl advertisers ranked based on the change in Daily Reach on Super Bowl Sunday.

mp-sb-ad-scorecard2

Download the full TNS report on Superbowl effectiveness here.

In simple terms the failure to think of constructing a Search strategy around a specific creative idea / execution had a high probable  opportunity cost. Think of driving just 0.5% of your available audience on-line – 500,000 users @ est. $0.45 / click is a small additional marginal investment of $225k. Maybe less than 2.5% of the total TVC program cost.   Scale this at 1%, 1.5% and the opportunity cost is significant and the potential ROI is off the chart. The equivalent cost to generate that audience through traditional digital media would be 20 to 40 times the cost.

Here in Australia, this level of thinking hasn’t even yet started to permeate advertiser or agency thinking. Connecting Search to ATL activity is seen as bleeding edge, let alone including a specific keyword as the CTA in an execution. Google’s research indicates on average only 2% of consumers can recall a campaign URL as a CTA , vs. 55% from a specific keyword. Good news is there is a massive first mover advantage in this space.

View the winners & losers below and just think how easy it would have been to construct a great Search program & maybe even incorporate a keyword as a CTA. Lets hope we see this soon in Australia.

Brands that hit it!

Cash for Gold

E-Trade


Frosted Flakes

Careerbuilder.com

Pepsi


Brands that missed it!

Budweiser

Dennys

Movie – Angels & Demons

Bud Light

Audi



Economics of site design

Today it seems every integrated campaign has a micro-site, as it should. Having a great digital experience that consumers can navigate to increases brand engagement, understanding, preference, consideration and should provide entertainment or a compelling experience that enhances a brand or products success. On-line success can be defined by a multitude of different metrics or on-line success events. The real question is how to create a disproportional impact from a creative idea, media budget or campaign mechanic.

What I find surprising though today are the number of sites that can’t be found by consumers through Search engines. The offending culprit all to often is bad site design, a lack of understanding in how the Search engines index and rank sites and more often then not a digital creative directors complete obsession with flash, justified by “creative priorities” outweighing effectiveness goals. The truth of the matter though is creativity and consumer experience does not have to preclude a sites ability to found and indexed.

Why is Search so important?

Like it or not, Search is the primary way consumers choose to navigate the web. In Australia more than 90% of consumers find new sites through Search engines, not expensive banner ads or sponsored emails with very high CPC’s and low CTR’s. Having to rely on expensive, low yielding digital media makes a campaigns life span finite and limits reaching the heights of ROI.

Search engines are also the easiest point of interaction for consumers, “I see an ad (TV, print, outdoor, on-line content, work of mouth – WOM etc) and I go straight to a query box and get exactly what I asked for. Search engines provide engaged, relevant results for engaged consumers when they are actively seeking out specific information. Search (both SEO & SEM) is also the lowest cost channel to engage consumers. Effectiveness studies, has proved time & time again that Search is 10 to 15  times more cost efficient and creates more value than digital display or other types of digital media.

Even if the channel planner has been insightful enough to include paid Search (SEM / PPC) the campaign will suffer from a low quality score as the site will not be able to be spidered, indexed etc and this leads to a poor quality scores from the Search engines. This then results in artificially high CPC’s and will burn budget very quickly. The whole quality score issue though is a topic for post, so more on that later.

The Answer

Ensure any new site build is built in a HTML with flash elements embedded within site. Also make it a mandatory for the site have a full HTML back up version for non flash users (even though flash penetration is 97%+). Also ensure all sites have HTML site maps the spiders and bots can read and index.

This will allow:

  1. Site to be indexed properly for natural Search purposes, if it is full flash it NEVER will be indexed. Take advantage to the low / no cost traffic available. Remember around 70% of consumers click on natural Search rankings and 90%+ of all consumers use Search engines to navigate the web. You do the math, this is a big audience you can’t neglect through bad process, development skills, creative priorities and decision making.
  2. Better SEM / Paid Search results as the site will be awarded a positive quality score – your budgets will go considerably further, resulting in larger more engaged audiences and better ROI for your total campaign. Great for effectiveness case studies and your client will think your working in their best interest, not yours or the media agency’s.
  3. Take advantage of the massive trends in mobile device web surfing. As devices such as the iPhone get better and better, penetration increases and mobile data costs fall more consumers will be both Searching and visiting sites away from the desktop. Complete flash sites can’t be read on any mobile device currently. Take advantage of this huge consumer trend and don’t neglect your traffic.
  4. You to justify larger creative / development budgets because your campaign will be more effective. Break the 80/20 rule where the majority of a client budget goes into costly inefficient media. The fact is you can probably do an even better job with 50% of the budget going into performance media and Search, while allocating the remainder to a better more engaging site.

Great examples of Campaign Micro-sites

Optus Broadbandmenu.com

Optus Broadband Menu

Optus Broadband Menu

Optus Broadband Menu

Optus Broadband Menu

What the Search Engines can see

Optus Broadband - Search Engines can index content

Optus Broadband - Search Engines can index content

Macquarie Bank - Platinum Credit Card

Macquarie Bank - Platinum Credit Card

Macquarie Bank - newformofcurrency.com

Macquarie Bank - newformofcurrency.com

Macquarie Bank – discoverable by Search Engines

What the Saech Engines can see

What the Search Engines can see

Room for Improvement

The Lynx Effect

Search Engine – Google Snipett (no site description)

Lynx - Googles page description

Lynx - Googles page description

What we see

The Lynx Effect

The Lynx Effect

What Search Engines can see & index

Lynx Effect - Search Engines see nothing

Lynx Effect - Search Engines see nothing

Rexona Million Balls

Search Engine page description

Rexona

Rexona

What the Search Engines see

millionballsmission.com.au - Invisable to Search Engines

millionballsmission.com.au - Invisible to Search Engines

You be the judge on what makes more sense from a marketing ROI perspective.