Ad Blocking Report - 22 billion in lost revenue

The lost ad revenue figures will double in 2016

[netmeg]

From the folks at Marketingland:

Ad-blocking software, once thought to be a relatively small-scale phenomenon, is apparently rapidly going mainstream. According to a new report from Adobe and PageFair — an Irish company founded in 2012 that “measure[s] the cost of adblocking and display[s] alternative non-intrusive advertising to adblockers” — $21.8 billion in global ad revenues have been blocked/lost so far in 2015.

[marketingland.com...]

TL:DR: If you think ad blockers aren't affecting you, you may be wrong. They're everywhere now. Firefox. Safari. Edge. And it's only going to get worse.

[tangor]

Nope, me either. The question is how widely it will be accepted.

Uptake, year on year, is increasing, and two different German courts have ruled that Adblock Plus (specific) and ad blocking (in general) are legal.

The genie is out of the bottle.

[trebuchet]

Uptake, year on year, is increasing

So did the uptake of Myspace until 2008.

Fundamental law of business - never base predictions about user behaviour on past user behaviour. There are too many variables in this equation to be making hail mary calls about genies and bottles.

If I thought for a second that adblocking was going to take over user browsing then I'd be out now. I could be wrong, of course, but then again so could you.

[MrSavage]

Hey, great point made. Google has a heck of a lot more to lose than me, so taking on the stress at this point may not be worth it. A rapid spike in usage will/should ultimate cause some reaction from the top, the vested interest groups. I love what CBS is doing. I would say this. They make so little off their site they likely don't give a S whether a percentage piss off elsewhere to mooch content while blocking ads. Gas wars have to start somewhere. Makes no sense from a financial perspective, but to some people it's a good idea, at least for a day or two. CBS and the middle finger? I'm fine with it.

[blend27]

I already pay my cable subscription, which includes CBS HD content. I could watch the same content thru XFINITY online with no ads of get it elsewhere with no ads for free.

"Get it elsewhere for free" being?

If I tell You I'll have to Hack You..... ;)

"Hack" being that since no AdBlockers installed on your end, and script runs wild, most likely you will experience slightly slower computer performance due to some unwanted script maxing out your 2 year old CPU.

(The adblock lovers will be along shortly to tell us again why that's the wrong approach and we should not be turning away users, even freeloaders.)

Yes, Yes!...

Here is one! Think of all those MFAs and Ad Supported Scraper`s income plunge with more AdBlockers. More Ad inventory for Your Real Publisher sites, more visitors that could find real information on your sites. All you have to do is captivate(to influence and dominate by some special charm, art, or trait and with an irresistible appeal ) the user and find a way to monetize their attention on your sites!

[ken_b]

LOL...

More Ad inventory for Your Real Publisher sites,...

Yeah, right... The ads are BLOCKED ... so no benefit to the "Real Publisher" sites.

And how many adblock users are going to mess with exceptions and whitelists? Please quote a % number with a link to a credible source.
.

[blend27]

how many?

ken_b,

I don't know, that is not the point.

Some one has 10K to burn thru. There is a demographic that visits specific sites. Find the one with 10k before they burn it else where.

As far as exceptions, install AdBlocker, NoScript. Try it for a month. See for yourself how you personally would adapt. If You run Ads on your sites, visit them, then think How else would you monetize that traffic.

Rockefeller built his own Pipeline to carry Oil to his refineries when 2 of the major RailRoads in the country went against him. Later he was faced with Carnegie's Bridges!.

We have Halls and Centers named after them, here in NY.

Every problem creates an opportunity...



p.s.
last post in this thread. good luck(finger not included).

[trebuchet]

"Hack" being that since no AdBlockers installed on your end, and script runs wild, most likely you will experience slightly slower computer performance due to some unwanted script maxing out your 2 year old CPU.

There are some really bizarre things posted in this thread and your ESP about my CPU is one of them.

And how many adblock users are going to mess with exceptions and whitelists? Please quote a % number with a link to a credible source.

I've already cited my experiences with this so far, though they may not be typical. I'd be curious to see what other people have found. As with a lot of things the content will be the key. If it's good enough and they want it bad enough, a lot will whitelist. ABP certainly makes it easy enough to do this, it's one click.

[tangor]

And how many adblock users are going to mess with exceptions and whitelists? Please quote a % number with a link to a credible source.

100%, that would be me, pretty sure I remain credible. Every site that I find worthwhile I whitelist THE DOMAIN LEVEL (and kill off all the Third Party stuff). IF you have ADS at the server level I will see them, er... they will display. Have to admit I have extreme ad blindness, especially video/moving ads (those I right click and then ad to my BLACK LIST. I will add this caveat: If I come to the site for the first time they get a temporary allow (site level) If I don't like what I find, or it's sub par to expectations, I make no changes to my whitelist. If I DO like it, I will right then change to whitelist and next time I come back all is okey dokey. There aren't that many sites that I do that with.

Treat me right as a visitor, I will be your best friend. :)

As for other "credible sources" spend a little time doing research on the web to see where all this adblocking is going, how it fares legally, and what the future might bring.

Suggestion above to install and try it to SEE WHAT THOSE FOLKS SEE is best advice. And will provide all kinds of insight into how to work within that paradigm and continue to generate revenue.

[nomis5]

I've read this thread as it's developed and become increasingly worried. So, a few minutes ago I downloaded Adblock in Firefox. Here's my unbiased, newbie type experience.

I'm shocked, totally shocked! i now have meaningful access to sites such as main UK press sites and several other "free" sites. Totally gob-smacked. If my experience is anything to go by, Ad Blockers are a massive threat to advertising.

Would I recommend it to my friends and family?

Absolutely not. If I did, the word would spread to them even quicker and my own sites would be threatened even faster.

As a newbie to this sort of thing, I can tell you that whitelisting "good" sites is a pipe dream. I am so pleased with the results that there is no way that I'm going to muck around with any of the settings. Why bother?

How did the download process go? It took less than half a minute.

For me, this is is the most dramatic threat i have ever encountered to my business model. From tomorrow my absolute number one priority for the forseeable future is to fastrack my rather feeble efforts at monetising my sites in a different manner. No other development will take place on my sites until this is sorted.

I can clearly see that my current efforts in this direction on my own sites are successful and so far are untouched by the adblocker. Because they use such a tiny amount of bandwidth I can't see the point of any adblocker software interfering with them.

If you haven't yet downloaded an adblocker and given it a try, do it NOW. Try it for an hour or so and I guarantee you will be shocked. I understand I'm probably talking to the "already informed" but i certainly wasn't.

Details: UK based, internet connection via 3G mobile connection (I live in the middle of nowhere).

[tangor]

I am so pleased with the results that there is no way that I'm going to muck around with any of the settings.

This, then, is your starting point for achieving the goal of advertising revenue that is NOT blocked. Therein lies the adventure and success for the future.

I do hope others take up the challenge to try it before you deny it... as the future for them, too, is an exploration to the ultimate goal of VALID and INCOME related advertising.

[thms]

I have a totally different experience than nomis5.

I don't see problem with ads, from my experience, sites that you will probably get annoyed with ads are adult, warez, gossip, celebrity, top 10 sites, etc. Other than these kinds of sites, the amount of annoying ads that I see is negligible and I usually hit the back button.

In fact, I lost count how many times I got a great deal/discount or found a great product seeing a banner while browsing. Saved me tons of money or helped me find great products.

If adblocking was such an ethereal experience as nomis5 is describing, trust me, by now, all the world would be using it.

Sorry but ads on the internet are not going away.

[ember]

What if you put a little note on your site explaining that it is supported by advertising. I think a lot of people have no idea what goes into maintaining a site and might be more receptive to ads if they knew that without them, a lot of their favorite mom and pop sites might disappear.

Perhaps this would violate Adsense' TOS about drawing undue attention to ads. Or maybe they'll let us do it if they can't figure out how to battle ad blockers.

[trebuchet]

@tangor and his chums just love telling us how they use the web, how they respond to ads, how they are panicked by third party ads and scripts, how they run script killers, etc. - like it makes a blind bit of difference. They are not typical users. The average website user does not know where the ads come from or how much Javascript is fired when they visit. They just want content and they want it for nothing. If I was writing a site for webmasters and computer techs I might be concerned how WebmasterWorld posters use it, however that is not the case.

If you haven't yet downloaded an adblocker and given it a try, do it NOW. Try it for an hour or so and I guarantee you will be shocked.

You seem easily spooked. I installed and used adblockers when they first appeared. Yes, websites look cleaner and load slightly quicker. Shocked? I don't think so. Reader views and printable formatting were around well before adblocking. You are right to explore other forms of monetisation, as we all should be anyway, however predictions of the death of online ads are premature.

Sorry but ads on the internet are not going away.

Not in the short or medium term. Plus we've only seen the first shots fired so far. Let's just wait and see what happens when ad-reliant content producers either stop producing content, start erecting paywalls or start locking the door to adblock users. I doubt the story is far from over just yet.

[tangor]

They are not typical users.

True. We are usually the techs and educators for all our clients (who then spread that wisdom).

There is no glee, trebuchet, only a sad reality.... which can be navigated by the ad-reliant webmaster willing to explore other avenues, and yet, adblockers won't immediately "kill" an existing third party advertising ecosystem. But these softwares will eventually induce some constraints and changes on the status quo. Some webmasters will heed the early (not really early as we're 10 years into this---the maladverts are since 2007) warning. Other webmasters will be stalwart and unbending, sure in the specification that currently imbues the average webmaster beholden to... (okay, getting odd in word choices) LOL!

Head in sand or not.

As for the "glee" which was probably insincere, there is a bit of happy that a few of us noted the trends early and made different arrangements. YMMV


My comments, in general, have been positive in that pro-active webmasters can get beyond the "adblocker peril" and back to business with different opportunities (some of which I have shared, others I have NOT and will not because that is bread and butter for ME and my CLIENTS and is up to those who DO the RESEARCH to find the path to do for themselves). My other commentary on this thread has been WHY the uptick in adblockers and the very valid reasons for that year on year growth.

Meanwhile, the users will do what the users do.

[trebuchet]

True. We are usually the techs and educators for all our clients (who then spread that wisdom).

"Wisdom", haha.

You are not circulating any "wisdom". You are circulating a point of view that your clients will be better off with adblocking installed. While that may be true to some extent, the law of unintended consequences applies. As I've said, your clients may take up adblocking but they should be prepared to (a) have a lot of content doors closed, and (b) have advertising pushed into their faces in new and perhaps more aggressive forms. But if that's the world they want, that's the world they'll get.

Love the I've-got-a-secret-monetisation-method-but-I'm-not-telling routine too. Priceless.

Meanwhile, the users will do what the users do.

Undoubtedly.

[thms]

sorry wrong message.

[Automotive site]

Is it possible to opt out of interest based ads, the kind they show based on user behaviour? I just want to have ads shown based on the content of the page and the site.

[blend27]

Here is a quick & Interesting study on data usage/time to load/cost to consumer from NYTIMES(Front Page Article today) for Mobile:
The Cost of Mobile Ads on 50 News Websites: [nytimes.com...]

From the Article:

Boston.com’s mobile website ads averaged 30 seconds to load on a typical 4G connection, mostly because of large video ads. That’s the equivalent of 32 cents of cell data in ads every time the home page is loaded.

And now with over 12 mil IPhone 6s'` sold the opening weekend - the game is on...

[pageoneresults]

The game rules just changed...

Mobile Operator Digicel Will Block Advertising Across Its Network
[wsj.com...]

Wireless operator Digicel will soon begin blocking online advertising from traveling across its networks in the Caribbean and South Pacific, the company announced Wednesday.

[netmeg]

Ad Block Plus to Set Up Independent Board to Determine Acceptable Ads [thesempost.com]

[trebuchet]

The game rules just changed...

Don't think so. 'Game rules' are changed by the T-Mobiles and ATTs of this world, not by cellphone providers in Jamaica.

Does EyeO setting up an 'independent board' to vet advertising standards mean that it will stop seeking and accepting payments from wealthy companies and ad networks?

[pageoneresults]

Don't think so. 'Game rules' are changed by the T-Mobiles and ATTs of this world, not by cellphone providers in Jamaica.

Think again.

German telecommunications group Deutsche Telekom is also considering blocking advertising on its networks. Deutsche Telekom has a controlling stake in T-Mobile US.

[trebuchet]

"Considering" doesn't mean "doing". And even if it does happens it'll be Europe-driven, to extract handouts from Google (more ad-based extortion).

[tangor]

In all cases of mobile, it will be the USER who revolts as they are the one paying the bill for their data access. As noted above, if that is 32 cents each visit that is not chump change over the course of a month, much less a year, and "unlimited" is not truly unlimited. And for those on structured data plans might even turn users AWAY to protect those data caps.

Granted that most of us here do not serve large video ads, there is still an overhead FOR THE USER (that TANSTASFL thing) which some publishers chose to ignore in this conversation.

The mobile networks are also facing costs involved (it is, after all, data packets being transmitted), and for them there is no "value gained" in serving such. This aspect some publishers chose to ignore in this conversation.

While desktop systems still have these same costs, they are on a different delivery network which reduces the impact of cost to the user... though it still remains.

There is no argument that says there should be no advertising or monetization of the net. What is being said is that ABUSE of that which impacts the end USER (particularly on mobile, the largest growing segment of the web) will be noticed and responded to, and in that regard, adblockers are part of that toolbox. If publishers won't change, the user certainly will.

[trebuchet]

You're right on most points, however I think the argument for mobile providers blocking ads is fallacious. There is no add on cost to these providers for serving ads. The user pays data costs, whatever their sources. It could even be argued that mobile ads MAKE money for mobile providers, by pushing users into higher data plans or forcing them to pay excess data charges.

I suspect non-US providers smell a revenue opportunity here. They block ads, supposedly in the interests of their customers, then charge Google, Yahoo, etc. to whitelist their ads. If Google pays, the ads are served and the user is no better off (unless they engage their own adblocking). And yet another chunk of ad revenue is derailed into someone else's pockets.

[tangor]

There is no add on cost to these providers for serving ads.

I have to disagree. Each provider has put together a "pipe" large enough to do their core business. If that "pipe" has to grow to cover a larger data stream than envision, THAT COMES AT THEIR COST, not the user ... initially that is. And even if the provider were to then transmit that cost to their customers, that relates into higher costs to the users... who just might move to a different company with lower costs (where that is possible).

The "internet" is not unlimited. Never has been. There is a cost for everything, always has been.

Traffic is traffic. Somebody, somewhere, pays for it. And builds for it. And manages it.

A mobile provider might be the first up from the user to rebel (and kill ads) for all the reasons above.

UNLESS, there is a quid quo pro that can be established.

(I know this, having worked in a few regional ISP data centers where inbound costs from certain data streams have often exceeded projections and were denied to keep the network operational)

Ultimately it will be publishers who get hit worse. User rebellion will manage their costs by denial. Providers will manage their costs by denial. The ad servicing companies will see a reduction overall, but will stay in business. But the average small publisher (those on this list for example) will see all third party ad service revenue disappear. And partly because of publisher abuses of too many ads, too much tracking, etc....

But when the "big boys" (not the User) start talking, you know the industry is headed for a shake up.

It could even be argued that mobile ads MAKE money for mobile providers, by pushing users into higher data plans or forcing them to pay excess data charges.

That argument disappears, after all, the end user will jump on the adblock wagon... don't doubt that!

[pageoneresults]

The user pays data costs, whatever their sources. It could even be argued that mobile ads MAKE money for mobile providers, by pushing users into higher data plans or forcing them to pay excess data charges.

Is this the general attitude of Publishers? Sock it to the user? :(

It's bad enough that websites are coming out of the box weighing in at 3-4MB+ with 100+ HTTP Requests. And then you have all this third party advertising crap that really disrupts the entire process.

[trebuchet]

Each provider has put together a "pipe" large enough to do their core business. If that "pipe" has to grow to cover a larger data stream than envision, THAT COMES AT THEIR COST, not the user ... initially that is.

Yes but those costs are passed on to the user eventually anyway. There's a valid enough argument for adblocking from the user's perspective. But I think any push for network-wide adblocking has to be weighed against broader commercial considerations.

Is this the general attitude of Publishers? Sock it to the user? :(

It's an observation. I'm not sure where you read that I endorse or approve of it.

[tangor]

But I think any push for network-wide adblocking has to be weighed against broader commercial considerations.

Such as ... what? Everyone else absorbing the costs for third party content which is not the content the user, or the provider, signed up for? Data is data, and some of it is less desired (in the eyes of those forced to carry or accept it).

Sadly, it will be the publisher (web sites reliant on ad revenue) who will get squashed while this is getting figured out. Unless, of course, that publisher has explored other monetization opportunities.

[trebuchet]

Such as ... what? Everyone else absorbing the costs for third party content which is not the content the user, or the provider, signed up for? Data is data, and some of it is less desired (in the eyes of those forced to carry or accept it).

Frankly I think it's silly to talk of ad-bearing data like it's some kind of unwanted burden. Data, as you say, is data - and in the end the cost for delivering it is borne by the user. If providers were so burdened by 'ad data' they'd have acted on this long ago. If their networks and infrastructure and bandwidth are so stretched by 'ad data' that they need to block it, then clearly they haven't managed their forward planning at all well.

Are there any statistics - and I mean reliable statistics, not guesses - that show what proportion of mobile data is made up of advertising? Figures on mobile advertising are easy enough to find.

The "commercial considerations" I was referring to are the possible ramifications of blocking advertising, particularly with regard to clients and competitors. If one provider starts blocking ads, how is this going to impact their relationship with other companies who may rely on advertising? And how is it going to swing with the big G? There are all kinds of commercial consequences to be considered, both known and unintended. I don't think it's as easy a decision as has been suggested.