Forum Moderators: skibum
If you polled webmasters, I believe, you would find very little tolerance for pop-up ads.
Here is a survery that says that users are far more tolerant than might be suspected.
Does this information have any implication on how you should be marketing your site?
http://www.emarketer.com/analysis/marketing/20020220_mark.html
It says *n=413, as in the survey was done on 413 people (as cyril kearney & JayC mentioned it).
I would say with a few million users a sample of 413 is not exactly authoritive...
For which they're paid by companies directly involved in marketing and advertising (a fact they don't hide on their website). As goes the online ad industry, so go their revenues.
I'm not saying it is coloring their research, but I am saying it looks less than completely scientific, and reading some of the study's details only reinforces my skepticism.
I don't understand this logic. If a company collects business information for advertisers and agency clients why would their clients want DL to sell them misinformation?
Webmasters in this thread seem to be saying that people universally won't tolerate pop-ups. Even such a small sample that is so much at odds with this opinion is relevant.
Webmasters seem to be defending their point of view just from their own judgment. No Webmaster is citing an impartial survey to bolster his point of view. Each just attacks the methodology of an acknowledged industry authority.
I feel that Webmasters do this all the time. I think that Webmaster’s judgments often do not reflect the point of view of more casual users.
No, we seem to be saying that people often won't tolerate pop-ups, and that it's often enough to be a problem. This is based not only on our own surfing behavior, but on the feedback we get from our sites' users.
No Webmaster is citing an impartial survey to bolster his point of view.
Actually, no one is citing an impartial survey at all, to bolster any point of view.
Each just attacks the methodology of an acknowledged industry authority.
We've listed some good reasons to be uncomfortable with that "industry authority" and its methodology. Don't dismiss them as "attacks."
What I think is being said here is that barring a wholly objective study (like, say, university research), our primary responsibility is to our users, who are all too happy to let us know when they won't tolerate something.
OTOH, I'll be happy to agree with Dynamic Logic if they'll offer to come around and click my pop-up ads. ;)
i think the real question is whether in the gain of business from pop-ups, is it worth the loss off.
Too, joe surfer, control is a surprising element of the success of a site, and the more that one (joe surfer) believe's what is happening in front of them is because of their own actions, the more one is happy to deal with it (it's called free will).
The illusion is often better than the truth, if one believe's what is seen, then that is enough. Popups, show the layman computer user, that things are happening that they do not know; why they are happening, and i am sure that with most knew users who venture into the internet playground on the first couple of hundred of times, popups are tied into spam, from the best venturists of the internet.
What you have to look at is the following:
1. Are you online to sell a product?
2. what do you do with the person that does not buy anything from your site ( eats bandwidth)
3. Are surfers so used to banners that they hardly ever click them?
4. How do you send them somewhere you can make some money off them?
Some sites use consoles to show the surfer something that really has nothing to do with their site...
Like going into a book store and when you are leaveing there is HIGH priced candy right near the door... Ever notice that this is not amoungst the books as it is not what the the store is trying to sell. This is an Exit Sale That is the good thing about a popup console. that will allow you to make thing for all the hard work you did to get the surfer to your site.
My thing is the surfer is not my buddy.. he is a prospective customer and that is all he is... Some surfer get upset at the colors of your site... what do you do then? Change the colors of your site? No I don't think so.
So then why all the worry if surfers are upset about how you advertise?
When a surfer leave one of my sites he/she gets a pop up but if clicking anything inside my site he/she will never get any. only on leaving.
Everyone hates consoles/popups until they make money using them and then they are good.
Just my 2 cents.
Sound theory, if you count on only one visit from each surfer. Less sound if you count on repeat visits and repeat business.
If you owned a shop, would you yell at everyone who browses but doesn't buy? No, because a smart businessperson realizes they must be a bit interested, or they wouldn't have come into your store in the first place.
If most of your visitors are leaving without buying your product, your job should be to figure out why, not to punish them.
This reminds me of the Monty Python sketch where the architect designs the apartment block with an abattoir in the lobby -- "I guess I hadn't fully divined your attitude toward your tenants..."
Greektomi
Because they need the revenue so badly that they are unable to look long term.
0.22% of total page requests in the site are for this page...a little better than 1 in 500...given that the average visitor seems to view just under 5 pages that amounts to very approximately one in a hundred visitors viewing the info
I'd like to know what sort of click through people are getting from pop ups
NFFC responds "Because they need the revenue so badly that they are unable to look long term."
It is hard to believe that Microsoft with 40 Billion is cash sitting in the bank is so desperate that they are not taking a long-term view.
Still no webmaster is citing a study to show that users will not tolerate pop-up ads.
Can it be possible that the general attitude toward pop-ups that webmasters are showing is out of step with the reality of the marketplace.
If it is, what negative impact is it causing on the businesses that employ them?
I spent four years on MSN's payroll, and I can assure you that "taking a long-term view" has never been one of MSN's strengths. :-)
Advertisers, especially those who are affiliated with major traditional advertising groups have a long history of just getting it wrong as far as the Web is concerned! These conceited fools just thought that winning over the Web would be a pushover and no different from other advertising.
And they have a history of spinning "research" which says things are looking good. It was also the strategy used by tobacco companies to prove that tobaaco didnt cause lung cancer! Research funded by interested parties, despite the research company used, must always be taken with a pich of salt. When these stakeholders report on the research it is very very simple to spin it. Just publish the "postive research" and ignore the "negeative" studies. And ignore methodological concerns in the positive studies cause 99% of people dont understand the difference between the Standard Error of the Mean and a Median, and are too busy to find out that it acctually makes the results useless.
When it became obvious that banner ads weren't working the advertising industries' reaction was knee jerk, and insulting. Just make the bloody ads BIGGER and more intrusive! That after all was all that those flash ads, and tower ads were all about. They never took the time to investigate new ways of advertising, better suited for the Web environment
I guess this is one reason whey many are suspicious of these types of research studies which seem flawed methodologically. Especially when it conflicts with more informal, but often more powerful, personal experience and feedback from viewers. Let me just say for example that I cringe evey time I have to go to Yahoo now, at the amount of advertising that will be forced upon me. Enough to look seriously at alternatives to their services.
Webmasters may not be representative of the casual browser and buyer. I agreee. But they may even be MORE patient with pop ups etc. After all it is their job. Personally (and of course this is not scientific!), I find more "casual users" are sayong to me ther are going to the Web less often these days just becuase the signal to noise ration is outta hand. It just simply is not returning a positive experience. These guys are going back to shopping malls for a more relaxing environment... and (heavens forbid!) the local library!
Maybe the reason why people cant come up with research to counter thant of yours is that there is no commercial incentive to do this research, unlike advertising groups funding research to "prove" to webmasters that pop ups are effective! We have to rely on objective sources such as universities, who always take longer to do the research as they are not as monied up.
Actually the politics of research is very interesting. Just look at all those tobacco-sponsored research studies a decade back that "proved" there was no link between smoking and cancer!
How can I being a stateholder of sorts (a computer consultant that has business clients that advertise) enter into a dialog with you?
I thought it is was clear that the original article discussed in this thread was done by a business intelligence company. There success or failure is determined by the intelligence they gather for advertisers and agencies.
For you to be right, they would be producing false information to sell to their clients so that their clients could justify spending money on pop-ups that were worthless and alienated customers.
As you see it the reason for believing this is because "These conceited fools just thought that winning over the Web would be a pushover and no different from other advertising."
I don't ascribe to the theory that everyone involved in business is a fool and a knave. I personally feel that a good bit of what I am marketing as a consultant is my ability to think outside of the box. I don't peddle lies.
We work with advertising agencies as a research agency. We know very good ones, but many we have had bad experiences with - they dont respect feedback from customers as much as their own creative ideas! Many are geared to impress clients by snazzy presentations rather than facts. And the lack of knowledge on how to really ride on the back of the Web is many times badly lacking, often based on their own personal experience in surfing creative sites.
Please also be aware that I'm not calling into the professionalism of the research company as you seem to imply. The credentials you provide are enough. However i (and several others in this thread) am/are calling into question the journalist's interpretation of the results. Even some of the results are not that impressive to back up his and your conclusions and headlines when you look at the limited data that he *does* provide. But secondly and more importantly, the article does not provide enough information on the research methodology to assist informed readers in assessing the validity and reliability of the results. Hence my concern re putting a spin on results.
We have had this same problem ourself. A client badly misinterpreted our results to give a very positive spin in a press release without citing our "limitations" section. It took a lot of work to regain our credibility becuase we as a research company were blamed. Now we put sections in the contracts to limit this sort of damage. It may well be that this research company is also finding themself in this position so I do sympathise.
I value our own discussions here Cyril. I honestly think you are one of the better ones and have demonstrated to me that you have the open mind, and enthusiasm for new substantial ideas that many in your industry sometimes lacks.
How many advertising indsustry professionals as opposed to Webmasters and SEO's do we have visiting here? Very few i would venture, and your presence here where you dont get much support is highly valued for me. I do hope that I will come over better as an open minded person in future and open to engaging in useful discussions. I have my own socialised views as a result of my training and experience as do people from other professional areas. objectivity is highly valued but practically impossible yes?
