Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I like the idea of displaying video ads on my sites, as long as they remain tasteful and high quality.
However, I can't imagine Google having a large inventory for these ads, surely the high production costs involved in video production would rule most SME's out, whereas pure AS contextual ads are low cost, easy setup and easy to maintain.
Will it take off?
[edited by: jatar_k at 3:38 pm (utc) on May 23, 2006]
On broadband I think this might be pretty slick. From a short glance it didn't seem to slow the initial loading time for the page, so unless a visitor clicks the ad to see it run, which I think is required to see it run, it might not be too intrusive.
To address your concern, Google will host the video and it is user-initiated. For publishers, this means that video ads should not slow down your site and you will not have to pay for the bandwidth. No data will be transferred until the user presses "Play".
I know it was already mentioned, but if anyone has any questions about video ads I recommend [adsense.blogspot.com...] .
Here, you can test the example, and also find links to relevant AdSense Help entries that will address most of your questions.
-ASA
I like the idea of displaying video ads on my sites, as long as they remain tasteful and high quality.However, I can't imagine Google having a large inventory for these ads, surely the high production costs involved in video production would rule most SME's out, whereas pure AS contextual ads are low cost, easy setup and easy to maintain.
Will it take off?
The Internet is simply not the same thing as television. Bigger, flashier, louder ads are simply inferior. That's because when people see unexpeceted loud or FMV content on a website, they freak out and hit the back button. And what are the chances that a user will CLICK on a VIDEO AD other than to turn it off? Maybe 1 in 100,000? Because the Internet is so open-ended and USER-CONTROLLED, you cannot get away with in-your-face advertising. The Internet (save for the blackhat websites) has moved farther and farther away from high-tech advertising.
Google became the fastest growing company in the history of the planet BECAUSE of its minimalistic advertising. Don't think for a second that Google is going reverse its strategy.
There are very limited circumstances in which video ads would work:
- Non-user-controlled website content, such as video ads preceding streaming audio/video content.
- Websites that sell streaming video content, such as the major TV networks (in the future).
- Passive two-second video snippets that don't make visitors freak out, such as a "Subway, Eat Fresh!" or a "Always Coca-Cola!" where there is NO NEED for visitors to click on anything.
However, these types of ads are only for the big players out there with the big budgets. For 99.99% of websites, video ads have no business being there.
The video ads will be user-initiated, which is a good thing. But doesn't that tell you that the concept is fundamentally flawed? That's like saying "Here's an ad that you probably don't want to see, so we won't show it to you. But on the off chance that you DO want to see it, here's the play button!"
How many people would actually say "Yes! I AM in the mood for a commercial right now!" Let's say 1 in 1,000 choose to watch the video, and then 1 in 100 of those click the link. Talk about a three-zero or four-zero (0.001%) click-through ratio!
Come on. We're all web publishers, and we all know that if you give users a reason NOT to click on an ad, then they darn well won't click on it.
Imagine you're looking for more information about a new digital camera, a car, a holiday destination, ... You read an article and suddenly you see a Google ad unit which allows you to see a video of this camera, car, country or whatever. I think there's a good chance you'll click on it to see it in action.
However, it has to be well targeted. If it's not it will probably perform poorly.
How many people would actually say "Yes! I AM in the mood for a commercial right now!" Let's say 1 in 1,000 choose to watch the video, and then 1 in 100 of those click the link. Talk about a three-zero or four-zero (0.001%) click-through ratio!
I imagine this sort of thing might do well for things like travel promotions. I also don't think it is meant for low-budget advertisers.
Actually, there are a few sites I regularly visit that have click-to-play ads (some have click-to-turn-off ads also). I'm not exactly thrilled about the interruption of my user experience, but I may be in a minority in that regard.
I'm not exactly thrilled about the interruption of my user experience, but I may be in a minority in that regard.
