The problem that the article highlights is not a new issue, however for a marketer it is one worth discussing further. As an interviewee in the article points out:
"You're headed to the supermarket and on your way in you see the big sign in the window advertising ground round for $3.99 a pound. You need some anyway, so you buy it. In the online world, which measures the last ad seen, that sign alone would be given credit for your purchases in the store. But it's quite likely that you were going shopping in the first place because you saw something in the weekend circular that you wanted to buy or maybe you heard a radio ad."So what does that mean? Should everything be based on a CPM basis? Probably not.. and advertisers probably wouldn't go for this because costs would get too inflated. How do you really know what affected the buying decision? Its probably a combination of reaching the right person, at the right time and the right place. But what kind of metric can you use to determine that?
I think the answer here is all in the mobile story. As people start consuming more information on the go you gain more information about who they are, where they are, what they are doing. It seems Google recognized this opportunity rearly. Apple, MSFT, Cell Phone Operators, Others??? Opportunity Knocks! The "what" that Google has right now will not be as important as who and where. The way to beat Google... forget about clicks.. you've lost that game...think about what else can provide value.
No comments:
Post a Comment