The new dot com bubble is here: it’s called online advertising
thecorrespondent.com
thecorrespondent.com
0: knowing what kind of users block ads, and what adblockers they are using
1: knowing how sophisticated users use the internet
2: I could go on
edit: formatting
I have a theory that this is like a pressure valve for power users who would not tolerate being forced to view ads. The majority doesn't care, doesn't understand the technicalities, doesn't know what would be possible and how. But there is a sizable portion of people who are stubborn enough that they know the background and won't put up with locked down platforms. It's better to let them have it their way rather than causing much alienation and outrage among the techie types / power users / early adopters / hackers / tinkerers.
I don't think it's a bubble especially when you play with your own money and you have to be very careful of the keywords and targeting settings.
Isn't this the case for basically every B2B product? The goal was always to make the purchasing manager look good, not to actually help the other company. So I don't see how this is proof of a bubble, you could say the same thing about McKinsey consultants or cloud computing.
There is a time and place for ads. And some ads, definately do work. For example, in the gaming industry, you used to be able to track exactly how many users your game acquired based on what ad, allowing you to calculate ROI.
Now, if you look at all the biggest ad spenders on facebook, take a look and see which one is more: the big brand advertisers (where ROI is not calculated), vs gaming companies and other businesses that can calculate ROI. You'll see, the market for ads and thus the price paid for ads, is dominated by non-ROI calculated Ad spend. That certainly seems like a bubble to me. and, let's not forget, millenials aren't attached to brands to the same degree that previous generations were.
If anything online ads are the most traceable form of advertising.
There are also things that I buy where I do have a preference, but could be persuaded to try something else. I have particular brands of t-shirts, underwear, socks, etc. that I re-up on from time to time, but if some evidence arrives "this is better" I would consider buying it.
Most of the ads I see on the Internet are kind of a waste, though. Here are some ads I remember from the New York Times, which is basically the only platform that I don't block ads on:
1) Delta has a lot of flights to the west coast from New York. I don't really care, I have 700,000 miles on American and unless you are going to sell me a business class seat for economy prices, I'm not going to try your product. Even though your ad literally takes up my entire screen. I'm sure you paid a lot for that, but it means nothing to me. I am aware that Delta as a company exists. Because of my awareness, I choose not to buy your product ;)
2) I could buy a wide variety of $3MM condos throughout the New York area. If I had $3MM, I would. I don't, though, so you wasted your ad money again.
3) Luxury watches are a thing I could buy; I have seen ads from both Omega and Rolex. This is actually relevant to my interests, but I don't see myself ever buying a Rolex (too many people that aren't interested in watches have them); a Grand Seiko will be next. If I ever feel like spending $6000 on something I don't need, which isn't really my style.
4) Today, the only ad I'm getting is one for "SAS for AI". If I needed AI, I would probably write it myself. Somehow that sounds easier than talking to their sales team and sorting through their probably incorrect documentation. (If you wanted to sell that to me, tell me how much it costs, and show me how good the documentation is. Instead, all they are showing is a stock photo of some guy with glasses. He has glasses so he must be smart! Wowie!)
Anyway... my point is that advertising will always exist, but I do agree that a lot of money is being wasted.
The article shows that you can show good ROI for customers, but for reasons provided in the article they are false and customers absolutely refuse to believe they are false even when shown otherwise. Just like the last time this was posted, many commenters just replplay the role of the advertising customers described in this article.
That there's a gem--would have and will save me much futile debating.
That would mean that legacy TV, Newspapers, etc. were all a bubble too.
Now there is word of mouth, or target advertising or just listening to your mic (FB, Google, NSA) to then push ads on every platform.
For example, billboards are very expensive with not much ROI. How many billboards do we drive by and not pay attention, or will never buy that product or get the message thats on it. It's rate imho.
With tech, there are less or no ads/commercials in TV episodes. We can either fast fwd through the ad, or there are none.
Depends on what you mean by "commercials". Hasbro cartoon series (Transformers, Mighty Max, My Little Pony, etc. etc.) were basically money-losers designed to get kids to buy toys. The entire TV show was effectively a giant commercial.