| 5:16 pm on May 15, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Better than what? If the brightest Internet stars can't figure it out, I'm not sure anyone ever will.
| 8:06 pm on May 15, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Better than not - to keep the share price on an even keel!
| 3:32 am on May 16, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I don't understand what's so difficult about ads on social sites...People aren't going to click on ads so ppc is out of the question. Only way is to sell ads based on impressions/eyeballs. Notmuch different from selling tv ads
| 12:08 pm on May 16, 2008 (gmt 0)|
People click on ads at a very predictable rate, and the rate gets higher the more targeted the ads are. Social networking ads are totally different to TV ads. TV ads cannot know when your friends birthday is and what they want, neither do they know what you like or what your demographic is.
If all ads were targeted like social ads can be then no under 30 year olds would ever see those stairlift adverts, instead advertisers have to guess what the majority demographic will be at any particular time. AFAIK TV ads are priced on the number of viewers, if only 10% of those visitors are your customers then you have to pay for the 90% even if it is useless to you therefore social ads are more appealing than TV ads or search ads.
The keyword is targeting.
| 12:17 pm on May 16, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Notmuch different from selling tv ads |
Maybe they're concentrating too much on "learning" the pages and trying to target the ads that way. When instead, they should just display random ads and hope for the best?
Either way, I'm not sure what Mr. Brin is looking at. The ads on Myspace haven't improved one bit (IMO).
| 2:01 pm on May 16, 2008 (gmt 0)|
>>When instead, they should just display random ads and hope for the best?
That's the problem. No one wants to admit that, at best, these social networks can display untargeted advertisements. They look at the page views and drool over the possibilities only to realize later on the traffic is tough to crack.
The flaw in valuing these social networks is the misunderstanding of why people join or participate. They're not shopping, they're not looking for information, they are there to socialize.
Did you ever meet someone at a social gathering that was trying to sell you something? What goes through your head is "How can I get away from this guy?" Not "Great, I was hoping to meet a used car salesman at this wedding!"
| 2:22 pm on May 16, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|ads on Myspace haven't improved one bit (IMO) |
Exactly celgins. What a load of bull - they have overpaid and yes they get all these lovely page impressions and access to users but they can't admit they are no closer to being able to monetise than anyone else (despite their superior algos) - except their headache is that much worse thanks to the $billion they spent!
| 2:53 am on May 17, 2008 (gmt 0)|
For years I've believed that these types of sites should be running ads for brand awareness, not clicks. Drink Coke, drive a Toyota, eat at Chilis, go see Iron Man in theaters now! Those are the proper ads. On TV, there is no direct response (besides the "call now" commercials). Yet anyone advertising on the web demands clicks. Why is this so hard-wired in the brains of advertisers? This confounded me five years ago, and it still confounds me today. Some ads should simply serve as billboards, nothing more.