Video Email and Advertising

Online Video Ads Ride High During Tough Economic Times

2008-11-17T18:22:00.000-08:00

As the economy continues to crumble, the successful begin to work smarter, rather than working harder.MediaPost's "Online Video Insider" hits the nail right on the head. The article was written by Glenn Pingul, vice president of marketing for Mixpo, an online video advertising company dedicated to local small- and medium-sized businesses.

"In times like this, it is easy for advertisers (dragging their agencies with them) to simply retrench and wait for better days to market themselves. It’s also easy for advertisers to stay away from “newer” ad types like online video — ad types that could be deemed risky or peripheral to a core media campaign." The statement "no guts, no glory" has never been truer. Let's always remember that the definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over, and expecting different results. Your business might not go insane, but bankruptcy is a very real possibility in this rapidly declining market.

Those who move aggressively forward will be the winners. Kellogg bested C.W. Post during the Great Depression and became the category leader. These winners were clearly strategic but what they really had was the guts to push forward when the data told them to do otherwise.

Mr Pongull correctly points out that "In these tightening economic times — borne out in recent reports from analysts from the Kelsey Group and Borrell Associates, both of which continue to forecast higher online ad spending — smart advertisers will seek the higher ground that advertising on the Web offers, largely because it is so measurable, especially in applications like online video."

Where does online video advertising fit in?

"Coupled with the ability to drive direct response and gather deep insight into performance, video is taking a powerful new role in the marketing mix. "

"Case in point: We’ve been working with dozens of local publishers who have incorporated video into their standard 300×250 display ad packages." In our case, here at Global Video Tech, our standard is a 640 X 480 large format video with extremely high quality, no downloading and never pauses to "buffer". Let your prospects REALLY see what you have to offer.

"Advertisers are seeing measurable performance results that exceed what they expected if they were running regular display ads. Beyond click-through rates and possibly conversion data, advertisers are seeing a new set of metrics emerge: Video ads offer brand exposure (we’ve seen video ads run that are longer than two minutes) Note: Our sample streaming video email is 22 minutes long and plays immediately - no downloading required; video ad interaction (repeat plays, sharing, expanding the player); measurable engagement (play through, exit point); and conversion (lead generation, clicks). "

"Advertisers take this data and turn it into insights on how effective their creative is: How many leads am I getting and when in the video do they occur? How much are viewers watching? When in the video do they abandon watching my video ad?" Global Video Tech has provided these capabilities, and many others, to our customers since day one.

Execution vs. Optimization

"The days of simply deploying ad campaigns, sitting back and checking spend levels against impressions are over."

"Today, we’re seeing numerous companies leverage online video advertising platforms to focus much more on the optimization piece. In one example, an advertiser tested two video ads in the same banner ad campaign, running them in A/B rotation, and saw that one was getting a click-to-open rate of .40% (not bad vis-a-vis a regular display ad) but the other one was getting a click-to-open rate of 2.7%! " The Global Video Tech solution makes market testing very simple. Any number of streaming video ads can be created, sent to target lists and evaluated simply and easily.

"Yes, it always takes guts for marketers to break new ground, but with video, they have numerous means to measure what really works, getting a true gut check as to whether they’re on track all along the way." If you're ready to break free from the herd and go for success in these troubled times, start by going here.

We're Their Leader, Which Way Did They Go?

2008-05-29T07:52:00.000-07:00

A little chuckle every now and then is a good thing. The advertising industry thrives on controlling their customers and maximizing revenues with that control. They're frantically trying to stuff the video genie back into the bottle, and it ain't working.

In the "Video Insider", Steve Robinson points out the problem involved in trying to control a market where anyone can play, anytime they choose and the rules don't matter.

Steve remarks that, "despite collaboration among many members of the media ecosystem and the Internet Advertising Bureau to create a comprehensive set of guidelines and standards for in-video advertising and make the promise of broadband-delivered and interactive video a reality, every publisher still has its own video player implementation". They just hate that when that happens.

Of course, the objective here is to squash any form of free enterprise and "make Internet video a sound business". That is, of course, one that can have the entry gates controlled by the advertising industry.

Continuing to harp on the mantra that makes advertising only 50% effective, Steve says, "On the Internet, video publishers want higher CPMs and more value for their content". Unfortunately, Steve is wrong. Smart businesses want to know what's actually going on with their advertising and how it is being received. They want to know about "duration", not how many times a click happened. How interested were my viewers, not how many.

If you want more value for the content, produce video ads that people like to watch. Unfortunately, large corporations are slow to change. They can't measure duration because they're still locked into the old progressive download video models, so they can't measure anything except hits and clicks.

They're slow to change because it's all about the Benjamins. Progressive download video is dirt cheap and makes a lot of money when you wrap it in magic words like "CPM" and "standards". It benefits the seller tremendously and doesn't benefit the advertiser much at all.

Steve refers to the ability of anyone with a video camera and a streaming video account as "technical chaos" because they aren't lining up to pay the gatekeepers.

He is absolutely correct when he says, "All of us realize Internet-delivered digital video allows for more advertising engagement and consumer satisfaction than television. Ad avails are unlimited and ad formats will continue to evolve as the combination of software tools and creativity drive innovation for new and more captivating ad experiences".

Steve makes a last ditch plea to get that damn genie back in the bottle when he says, "But if we don’t get ahead of the technical chaos issue we will drown, and the efficiencies, accessibility and scalability of the Internet advertising ecosystem will be unrealized". The "we" in there is, of course, the advertising business.

We think anarchy is a good thing and makes evolution happen faster. By all means, let the huge corporations continue on in their tried and true lumbering ways and develop those standards that they should all live by.

As for the rest of us that are not not listed on NASDAQ or the Stock Exchange, march on! Get yourself a video producer and make some nice commercials. Utilize businesses like Global Video Technology to measure the duration of prospect interest in your message and hone your message. You have the ability to control your own message and it's distribution. You CAN improve on the 50% failure rate of traditional advertising, and save a ton of money in the process.

Watch your sales flourish as the biggies continue to debate which video ad sizes should become the standard and whether they should continue to annoy the hell out of sales prospects with pre-roll ads.

What are you waiting for? Start learning about how video advertising can work for you today!

Are You Still Rewarding Failure?

2008-05-22T11:20:00.000-07:00

In an article published in the Online Video Insider, Gregory Wilson points out, "In the non-digital age, we knew that half of all the advertising that ran didn’t work.

In the non-digital age, agencies were paid well regardless how feeble or magnificent their efforts.

If an ad didn’t work, agencies blamed many factors. Not surprisingly, the creative itself was seldom on the top of the list."

I didn't know that, but I'm happy to say that we, at Global Video Technology, were ready to take advantage of the power of the digital age from Day 1 with our product.

Mr. Wilson continues,"If viewers click in to watch something, it’s probably because they are interested. How long they stay interested, can be measured as duration." The duration is the difference in time between the time the person began watching the video and when they stopped watching the video.

Mr. Wilson seems to think that the day is coming when the advertising agencies will be held accountable for delivering more duration, rather than less.

At Global Video Technology, we stopped monetizing failure right from the start. Our customers only pay for the exact amount of time their videos were watched, to the ten-thousandth of a minute. In addition, they can see the exact amount of time all their video viewings were used and determine whether or not it is a bad ad very easily.

Mr. Wilson loves the concept of "duration. We do too. That's why we took it into account when we developed our product FOUR YEARS AGO. Our customers have been able to evaluate duration for quite a while.

If you're considering video for your business advertising, or you're unhappy with your current video advertising, come over and check us out.

Are YOU using a streaming video serial autoresponder yet?

2008-05-07T04:51:00.000-07:00

A recent article on "Email Insider" (http://blogs.mediapost.com/email_insider/?p=634) makes a pretty strong case for either having an elaborate mailing and tracking system for sending multiple emails to prospects, or utilizing a tool like Global Video Technology's Streaming Video Serial Autoresponder (http://www.globalvideotech.com/videoautoresponder.cfm).

The Internet has made sales cycles longer. “Selling now takes more time and resources then ever before. The sales cycle has become 22% longer as buyers are taking longer to consider their decisions. Plus, buying is being managed more professionally.” (Source: Sirius Decisions)

Longer sales cycles require more contact with the prospect, adding complexity to keeping track of who gets what mailing piece and when.

The author argues for segmentation of your email market, rather than a "one size fits all" email blast and we agree with that approach:

"Not all prospects are the same –you may have new buyers (never before purchased from your company), active buyers (or customers who are currently using one of your products) and lapsed buyers. Tailor the message for each, featuring the information you know they need to make a decision. Present the information in a compelling and credible way, and you can shorten the research phase for them (and close deals faster). Further segmentation can be done by product line or category, and by allowing prospects to select information that is most interesting to them (what we call self-segmentation)".

The Global Video Technology Streaming Video Serial Autoresponder product allows you to create individual automated sales cycles, each one containing up to 12 streaming video email messages that can be directed to each unique segment.

The timing of when to send the streaming video email is important, as the article points out:

"Cadence counts. Match your prospect email marketing to the buying cycle — send less email when your prospects are not in market, and send more when they are actively in market and researching for solutions to their problems".

Our Streaming Video Serial Autoresponder customers have the ability to control the time delay between individual mailings from one day to 9,999 weeks per mailing.

The author makes a very important point about the message being very important:

"Tap the prospect’s desire for unbiased information by presenting benefits, not features. Speak in a friendly tone, but avoid hype."

Don't play "feature poker" and describe all the whiz bang widgets your product has on it, describe how using your product will increase sales, reduce customer inventory, etc. Stress the benefits your product offers to a customer rather than the things the product does.

The author presents a very clear and strong argument for the use of a tool, like our Streaming Video Serial Autoresponder:

"Storytelling sells. Prospects are researching — that is what is lengthening the sales cycle. Use a series of email “conversations” to help them compare competitive sets (the more honest you are, the longer they stay on your site!)"

The choice really comes down to how you will manage all those email cycles. Will it be by hand, and risk missing prospects in a cycle, sending out the wrong email message to a prospect or sending late, etc.? Wouldn't it be better to have a "set it and forget it" tool that handles the messages, the list and the timing for you?

When the going gets tough, working smarter is preferable to working harder. Maybe it's time to take a closer look at the Global Video technology Streaming Video Serial Autoresponder (http://www.globalvideotech.com/videoautoresponder.cfm). We'll even let you try it out at no cost to you.

Online Video Attracts Six Out of Ten Internet Users Weekly

2008-01-09T07:41:00.000-08:00

Online video is becoming a normal part of everyone's viewing habits. People actively seek out video content and are very receptive to it. Perhaps this is a good time to consider using streaming video in your own marketing efforts. Learn more HERE.

Source: http://blogs.mediapost.com/research_brief/?p=1614 (Posted January 9th, 2008 by Jack Loechner)

According to the latest Horowitz Associates report, Broadband Content and Services 2007, six out of ten high speed Internet users watch/download online video content at least once a week and 86% do so on a monthly basis, compared to 45% and 71%, respectively, in the 2006 study. News and user-generated, non-professional content are the most often viewed genres, followed by movie previews/trailers, music videos, and previews/segments of TV shows.
Weekly viewing of full episodes of television shows doubled from last year, with 16% of high speed Internet users watching TV online on a weekly basis.

(This is a strong indication that viewers are willing to watch longer video content, as long as it's interesting. Stop thinking in terms of TV ad spots for your advertising. Entertain and inform viewers about your products or services and get them involved with interactive content alongside your video).

Penetration of video-enabled handheld (portable) devices is on the rise as is viewing of video content on these devices. 27% of Internet users have a cell, iPod/MP3 player, or PDA with video capability, and an additional 23% do not have this capability but are interested in getting it.
Among those with video-enabled handheld devices, 35% watch video on their devices at least weekly and 62% do so at least monthly, translating to 18% of Internet users overall who watch video content on a handheld device at least monthly. This figure is up from 8% just one year ago.
Howard Horowitz, President of Horowitz Associates, Inc, concludes that "There is a dynamic relationship between broadband access, broadband content and broadband consumption… bringing more consumers to the platform… (which) creates an even greater demand (and expectation) for broadband video… the data suggest that broadband video is not cannibalistic to linear video, but rather, an enhancement to the consumers' 'traditional' TV experience."

(An opportunity exists to place your advertising in the hands of a viewer, no matter where they are, AND know who that viewer was and their email address. Video email on a PDA is a very powerful marketing tool, and we can provide that to you. Learn more HERE.)

"Streaming Media" Magazine Bets On The Wrong Horse

2007-07-03T14:02:00.000-07:00

Imagine my surprise. I thought "Streaming Media" magazine was all about video delivered from intelligent streaming video servers, not progressive download video "streaming" from a Web server.

Well, their June/July 2007 issue clarifies the position with their article entitled "Streaming Vs. Progressive Download" by Doug Mow, Tom Gilley and Dane Atkinson. I can't provide a link because the current magazine edition is not online yet.

Those of you familiar with the use of RTSP (Real Time Streaming Protocol) will find humor in a magazine called "Streaming Video" telling you that progressive download video is the cat's pajamas.

Their reasoning seems to be based upon the concept that user-created content, ala "YouTube" is Web 2.0 in action and is the coming standard.

Frankly, we hope not. YouTube videos are amateurish and very low quality. On the other hand, you don't need expensive video servers. Any old Web server will do.

Their distinction between streaming video and progressive download is on the money, but they err when they tell people that video seen with Windows Media Player is streaming video. If it comes to you from a Windows Media Server, it is true streaming video. If it's a file type on a Web server that your file associations say must be viewed with Windows Media Player, it's progressive download. The same is true with Real Player.

They compound the error when they tell you that all Quicktime videos and all Flash videos are progressive download videos. That's 100% incorrect. Some are, and some are not. It depends on what serves the video to you. Once again, if it's a Web server providing the video to you, you're looking at progressive download.

Under the category of scalability, they claim that streaming video has fixed bandwidth. Wrong. Intelligent video servers test the bandwidth available to the viewer several times per second, and adjust the stream rate to provide the best quality viewing. Progressive download video does none of that. It throws it over the fence and you see whatever your current bandwidth allows.

They claim that streaming videos pause to buffer and progressive download videos never do. The reverse is the truth. There is a very slight pause at the beginning of a streaming video presentation while the video server determines the optimal stream rate for you. After that, the streaming video never pauses to buffer. Progressive download video will pause to buffer if the incoming bandwidth drops low enough to allow the video buffer on your computer to empty.

This pausing to buffer is quite common with progressive download video because nothing is monitoring available bandwidth. The Web server tosses over the video, as Web servers are programmed to do, and then goes on to other tasks.

Streaming video has a limit to the number of simultaneous viewers, just like a Web server has a limit to the number of requests it can handle simultaneously. The solution, in both cases, is the same. Cluster servers. Basically, these are servers containing duplicate data that share the incoming and outgoing loads.

They also claim that progressive download video provides a better viewing experience. Realistically, I think "equivalent" is probably a better term, but only for short videos.

There is a video term known as "audio/video sync". This is the coordination between the audio track and the video track to insure they always synchronize. This can't happen with progressive download video because it's tossed out by a non-persistent Web server and never monitored again. The "mouth moves, but there's no sound" is a characteristic of progressive download video, and one of the most famous problems with long videos.

Streaming video synchronizes the audio and video tracks all the way through the video, regardless of the length.

The authors mention Digital Rights Management (DRM) and correctly state that streaming video has it built in, while progressive download offers no security in that area.

The authors think it's better for the public to be able to take any video they can find, do whatever they like with it and send it to whoever they choose. That's a really powerful ability of progressive download video, because it offers no Digital Rights Management.

I shudder when I think of all my misguided AOL friends that send every joke they get to everyone in their address book, including me. Imagine the effect on getting your email when they start sending you lots of long videos that must physically download to you first. Having your email take 30 minutes or more to get it all in so you can read it may become a common event.

I can send someone "Gone With The Wind" in a streaming video email. It will take a few seconds for the email to arrive and a second or two after opening the email, the 3+ hour video will begin to play, right in the email, in most cases.

See an example for yourself HERE. (Unfortunately, GWTW is copyrighted, but this one will give you the idea).

When the authors discuss cost for streaming video, it's in terms of you owning all the hardware and bandwidth, not simply using it. Using that analogy, connecting to the Internet would be very expensive because you'd have to lease a high bandwidth line, purchase and install the Web server software/hardware, establish the DNS, etc., etc. Fortunately, you can simply connect to an ISP at a far lower cost because you're sharing the resources with a lot of other people.

Guess what? You can also do the same thing with streaming video. No hardware costs, no software costs and no technical knowledge required. A very low bandwidth fee per minute covers it all. For the real scoop, CLICK HERE.

The authors claim that, at the end of the day, the customer just wants his video out there. We think they're dead wrong.

At the end of the day, and every day thereafter, all customers want to know the same thing, "am I getting value for my money"?

What can progressive download offer you? The number of "hits" on the file (a.k.a. "impressions). We believe that "HITS" is an acronym standing for "How Idiots Track Success".

Well, OK, we can also tell you the IP address of anyone that watched it for at least 1 microsecond. Still no good. All AOL users, for example, will show as being in Virginia because that's where AOL is located. Is "somebody, somewhere watched my advertising video for some unknown period of time" good enough for you? OK, then progressive download video is for you.

Woo Hoo! Someone saw your video! Who? How much of it did they watch? Can you capture the email address of the viewer and store it in a warm leads database or spreadsheet?

If you're using progressive download video, the answers are "no idea", "no idea" and "no". Streaming video provides that very useful information to you, in our case, at no additional cost.

The bottom line is that if all you want to do is make videos with your Web cam that others can download, alter at will and send to anyone they like, use progressive download.

If you're advertising a product, trying to create a brand and want to know who sees your advertising and how to reach them directly, progressive download video is not for you.

Let me know what you think on the subject. Posting comments is simple.

Wait 24 Months For What Exists Today

2007-06-19T08:45:00.000-07:00

In a shining example of how "you don't know what you don't know" can hurt you, consider this startling revelation.

In a MediaPost Commentary, Gavin O'Malley reports that Colleen DeCourcy, chief experience officer at JWT, when asked what agencies in dire need of digital expertise should do, said, essentially, "wait".

"We have 24 months before finding digital talent becomes really easy," DeCourcy explained during the American Association of Advertising Agencies' first-ever Digital Conference last week.

At the rate that Internet and digital technology evolve, there won't be any need for advertising agencies to start looking for talent in 24 months. In 24 months, there won't be any clients of any substantial numbers needing digital advertising services, like online video. They will have already been doing it for a long, long time.

Global Video Technology, for example, has been providing streaming video email and streaming video on demand services, with real time statistics tracking, for over 2 years. They recently added streaming video email autoresponders and support for sales pipeline management. They also offer two methods for bulk emailing; one for those with a list and one for those who use database marketers.

Imagine where companies like this will be in 24 months. The advertising agencies need to wake up to reality very soon.

How Pre-Roll Can Kill Your Own Video Advertising

2007-06-15T09:00:00.000-07:00

Les Luchter provides an interesting insight in a recent article.

He mentions the already "traditional" online format of pre-roll is suffering from too few advertisers buying up lots and lots of inventory. This is indicative of the trouble the advertising industry is in, trying to figure out what kind of animal this video stuff is.

Pre-roll is already considered a "traditional" form of video advertising, while the industry still argues over whether 15 second pre-rolls or 30 second pre-rolls should be the "standard".

In our previous posting, we pointed out that highly experienced people, like Doug McFarland Of ScanScout have said that pre-roll is a broken model because it ignores the fact that the Internet is all about viewer choice.

Gee, guess what's happening now in the world of pre-roll ads? If you guessed a handful of advertisers latching onto an enormous amount of video inventory, give yourself a gold star.

The result? Targeted marketing takes a bath. So much for behavioral marketing techniques, huh?

A really funny mention in the article is Will Richmond, the president and founder of Broadband Directions, who wondered why, although he receives other Internet ads targeted directly to him, he keeps seeing pre-rolls for tampons.

This is a perfect example of why consumers will click off pre-roll ads they can't fast forward past, and completely miss your advertising message.

Why does it make sense to take a few pennies for showing the pre-roll and lose your profit margin on your products because people hate the pre-roll ads?

Let's be careful out there!

Another one gets it

2007-06-13T09:01:00.000-07:00

Doug McFarland has over 22 years of experience in the media business, with more than ten in executive positions within interactive media. He joined video advertising startup ScanScout earlier this year as chief executive officer.

MediaPost published a recent interview with him that is a very refreshing view of where interactive advertising should be going.

Mr. McFarland shares our view that pre-roll, post-roll and anything-roll ads will not be acceptable in the long term. He says, "In terms of pre-roll and post-roll video ads - I don't want to say that it's a broken model, but it's not as appropriate for this medium. In this medium, the consumer is in control."

The Internet is all about choice, and the consumer can choose to dump your invasive advertising anytime they like. The advertiser may think they're very clever in using a pre-roll ad that the viewer must watch in order to see the video content that follows, but they can't prevent the viewer from clicking off and going elsewhere.

ScanScout also bills on a performance model. No clicks, no income. None of that "impressions" baloney that is meaningless in the online world and only costs the customer extra money.

Lastly, the distaste for pre-roll ads means that the advertising is interactive and alongside the video content. This is something that we have been advocating for quite some time, and the way I think interactive advertising will go in the online environment.

"ScanScout's technology creates new inventory alongside and within the video content, creating new revenue streams for publishers". We applaud ScanScout for their excellent approach and wish them the greatest success.

Bloody Hell! Someone's Finally Catching On

2007-06-12T09:39:00.000-07:00

There's a very interesting article on MediaPost today (free subscription required) by Jason Klein, titled "Don't Forget About Rich Media".

What's really interesting is that it's like somebody got bonked in the head, like the V-8 juice commercial, and suddenly realized there's life after banner ads, measuring hits, counting impressions and all the other "metrics" that tell you nothing, other than that someone saw your ad.

Jason says, "Rich media afforded the opportunity to provide a dialogue with users; no longer was it about push media, but rather a two-way relationship where the information and entertainment were there for the user's taking -- or not. Democratic. Simple. Engaging. Informative. And, most important, less annoying!"

What a concept! Advertising that isn't annoying. That's refreshing in itself. I hope that means the end of skyscraper ads that consume the sides of Web pages, ads that fly out and cover the content, ads that make annoying sounds when approached, etc.

Pre-roll ads that the viewer cannot fast forward and ignore are a new annoyance that is still fascinating the advertising world. The concept of placing the ad alongside the video and using rich media to make the ad interactive is still way beyond their grasp yet, but they'll get there eventually. They're still in the "cram it down your throat" mode of advertising with online video.

Jason goes on to say, "In fact, these were just the superficial benefits of a rich-media experience. Tracking interaction times, interaction rates, segmented click-through details, and more are all available in real time. We now know how users interact with brands and what they couldn't care less about. Not only could ad creative and placements be optimized, but this tracking could also inform Web site creative, communications positioning and even offline initiatives."

That's pretty accurate. These are all the things that the current YouTube/progressive download media cannot do at all.

Jason nails it down tight when he says, "Any agency worth its weight in impressions would be remiss in ignoring what is currently unfolding in the online video ad space. But to be swept up in the hype and seeming ease of transition from traditional to interactive opportunities through video ads is to shortchange our industry. After all, it's called "interactive" for a reason."

Yes, they would definitely be remiss, but they seem, collectively, to have a pretty advanced "not invented here" complex, as in "it's not a great idea unless it's my idea". Advertising still appears to view online video as a different kind of TV advertising. They fail to realize, to their peril, that TV is not interactive.

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the traditional advertising agencies that focus on print, TV and radio advertising and pay lip service to the online world by adding a "media" department will eventually go the way of the dodo bird in the online world. They'll still be out there creating print ads and clever TV commercials, but for a far smaller audience.

The online advertising world will be captured by new people that really understand streaming video, interactive design and know how to use it effectively. Clients will realize that they can advertise locally, regionally, nationally and globally all at the same time and do business right in their ads.

Madison Avenue will gradually become insignificant in the online advertising world and watch billions of dollars in potential revenue sail away.

I could be wrong, but I don't think so. It's going to be very interesting to find out what really happens.

YouTube Is The Wrong Answer

2007-05-22T06:37:00.000-07:00

Greg Pulier, founder and CEO of Interactive Video Technologies, has a "must read" article on MediaPost's Video Insider blog. Far too many advertisers are dumping video clips onto YouTube, trying to ride the coat tails of social networking and capture some eyeballs.

What they're apparently hoping for is some kind of viral "buzz" where YouTubers will start talking about this cool video they saw.

The key point that Greg makes is "The primary goal when deploying this kind of programming is to provide compelling online content for key audiences that garners and maintains consumer’s attention and trust, not simply to copy what people are doing online for fun (see MySpace and YouTube) in a grandiose hope that it goes viral."

The type of thinking that places ads on YouTube indicates an inability to grasp the effective use of the medium.

Greg goes on to say, "Regardless of whether your company is looking to outsource a specific campaign or bring video creation in-house, serious businesses need to proceed with a certain level of control over the content they present to the masses. This means the clips should be fully branded, the content should be trackable and it should be shared on the company’s terms."

When using a platform like YouTube, the clip is not fully branded. YouTube is being promoted and may become tightly intertwined with statements like "Go to YouTube and check out the cool Ajax, Inc. ad". The point then isn't what Ajax has to offer, it's the new video on YouTube. Major difference. Integrating the videos within your own Internet presence will always fully brand your video.

It's going to take just as much effort to bring people to your branded videos on your property as it will to help them find your video in the ocean of debris that represents YouTube.

Trackable? Not in the least. You'll never know who saw your video, or how much of it they watched. Streaming video, done right, offers a metrics capability that no other medium can provide. Can TV, radio, newspapers and magazines tell you exactly who saw your ad and how much time they spent with it? No, not at all.

There is a lot of discussion lately about the accuracy of ad measurements reported. The core of the matter is that the advertiser simply wants to know if they are getting what they paid for. They no longer accept "impressions" as viable in online advertising. Because the advertising industry is way behind the curve on online video, they're stumbling around trying to find some way to track progressive download advertising videos that play from a non-persistent Web server. Their solution currently seems to be to increase overhead by adding a software layer, or "Web bug" to do the tracking.

Unfortunately, people are very leery of spam and totally in fear of getting a virus that will destroy life as we know it. So, they buy software and load it onto their computers to swat and kill anything that appears the least bit potentially harmful. Web bugs will be noticed and the offender summarily squashed. Yes, there will be improved metrics and no, they won't be accurate either.

Streaming video offers the answer, but the industry lags behind.

If using YouTube, the video content is never shared on the company terms. it's there to be used as the viewer sees fit, and the company has little control over it. Having control over the content and its use is very important to insure the correct message gets out and to protect the brand.

If metrics are important to you for your video advertising, then you should be talking to us.

A Solution For Ad Blocking

2007-05-18T08:36:00.000-07:00

A recent article demonstrated a free software product that replaces display ads and banner ads on a Web site with art pictures. Before all you agency folks begin jumping out of windows, at the moment it only works with the Firefox browser. For some excellent reasons, Firefox has only 15% of the market, so there's no reason to panic....yet.

The article points out that Windows doesn't allow this ability and charges to be able to do so. Well, Windows also has more security holes in it than a Swiss cheese, so if the demand is there, someone will find a way, eventually. So, it's simply a matter of time before banner ads, which are highly ineffective anyway, go the way of the dodo bird.

I think the most intelligent alternative is to recognize that the Internet is all about choice and ramming advertising down the throats of viewers annoys them and motivates them to find ways to block it.

I like the following concept:

Using streaming video technology, place the video and the ad side by side.
Make the ad interactive, such as a "Tell A Friend" or "Buy Now" and have all interaction happen within the ad space area. The viewer gets does not get hijacked.
Pause the video any time the ad is touched and automatically resume playing when the viewer finishes interacting with the ad. The viewer loses nothing if they pay attention to the ad. No annoying pre-roll or mid-roll ads are needed, and the post-roll ads that are not likely to be seen are eliminated.

I believe this approach will get more business for advertisers and cause less difficulty for advertising agencies in the future.

If you'd like to get involved in developing a software product that will support this approach, let me know.

A Slow Evolution

2007-05-18T07:47:00.000-07:00

Well, it appears that the advertising industry is still like a basset hound tracking a deer. It took them a while to discover that the public hated banner ads of any kind and that they were largely ineffective.

Now they've discovered "rich media" and video and are busily trying to figure out how to over saturate that medium with advertising and continue to annoy people.

At the moment, advertising agencies are spinning in circles over the demand for accurate "metrics", because advertisers want to know if they're getting what they're paying for. That's a perfectly reasonable request. As Jay Bailey points out in this excellent article, the "standards" for metrics are highly elusive.

As Jay points out, the Internet economy consists of "Various vendors offering various numbers accrued using various methodologies".

He gives a great analogy by pointing out that if the medical field ran this way, many more of us would be dead or encountering treatments with success rates reminiscent of the Middle Ages. The horror scenarios at NASA would be endless: "Carl says that bolt has to withstand four tons of pressure, but it really depends on what he means by 'pressure'. Or by 'four'"

Frankly, I think the problem derives from the inability to understand that the Internet is a completely new form of media, completely unlike any other. Advertising seems to be following the old statement that when the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems become nails.

The advertising industry has recently discovered video. Unfortunately, it's progressive download video, but that more readily lends itself to the "nails" model. Progressive download video is a "thing", and things can be measured.

Progressive download video runs from a Web server and can be tracked by how many times the file was accessed. Metrics!

Well, actually you're tracking hits. I like to think that "hits" is an acronym representing "How Idiots Track Success". Do you know WHO watched the video? Do you know exactly how long they watched the advertising message? Nope, you only know that somebody, somewhere accessed that video file.

Here is where streaming video becomes the tool of choice. First of all, if you're interested in showing a high quality ad, there is no comparison between streaming video and progressive download video. Streaming video is broadcast from an intelligent video server that constantly monitors the connection and adjusts the stream rate to maintain the highest quality. Progressive download video comes from a Web server and is simply tossed over to your browser as is. If the Internet is really busy when the progressive download video plays, it makes a really bad impression.

The measurement capability is what sets streaming video apart from progressive download video. If you email a streaming video, it plays in the email and the email address is captured. The length of time viewed is captured in real time, to the ten-thousandth of a minute.

Would it be better to know that johnsmith@abc.com watched your ad for .8666 minutes, or that somebody, somewhere accessed your video once?

It gets even better. If you know that your ad runs for 30 seconds, capture all your views and measure average viewing time. If it's 5 seconds, you already know they hate your ad.

Develop two or three streaming videos for the same ad. Send the the three videos out to three different control groups. Looking at the viewing times will immediately tell you which version is the winner. Inexpensive market research comes with the technology.

If you're an advertiser, demand the best for your advertising dollar. Learn about streaming video here.

If you're an advertising agency, welcome, you're obviously a forward thinking person. Learn more about streaming video and advertising here.

The Metrics That Aren't

2007-04-30T07:13:00.000-07:00

MediaPost has an article that applauds a logical fallacy.

The author makes statements like "publishers must still work to show advertisers that users are engaged with their online ads".

"comScore recently announced that how often a user returns to a site is a good metric for determining user engagement".

Tracking return visits is as inaccurate as tracking email forwards. Tracking return visits is done by measuring how many times a given IP address has visited a Web site. This does not necessarily indicate the same individual has been back. Many ISP's change a customer's IP address often to prevent them from running Web servers or email servers that utilize the ISP's bandwidth. This is done with a technique known as DHCP, and is transparent to the customer.

This, of course, creates multiple possibilities; the customer has been back 45 times in 2 days, but you don't know that because he was assigned a different IP address every time he logged on to his computer, or you show 300 return visits from the same IP address, and it's really 290 unique people.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you CAN unerringly know that you have had 1500 unique return visits today. It's still in the arena of "hits". WHY did they come back? For WHAT purpose? WHAT did they do when they DID come back? The answer is a big shrug and "dunno".

I'm sure that publishers are working to find answers to those questions, but the solution might poison the well if they're not careful. The use of cleverly hidden tracking mechanisms on a Web site will add to the Web sites overhead and will slow the site down, driving people away. A real Catch-22.

A consultant in Atlanta, the late George Plossl, coined a term that describes this process. His term, and it fits well, is "the illusion of precision".

On the other hand, if you have content that users will register to see, and give you their email address, it's a simple matter to track WHO looks at each page, and for how long. Add streaming video content from a company like Global Video Technology, LLC on a page and you'll know WHO watched the video and for how long. It might also be possible to tell WHO clicked a banner ad on a page, based upon who was looking at the page at that time. On a site that gets hundreds of visits per hour, there might be two or more people looking at a given page at any moment, which, once again, introduces guesswork into the equation.

However, if it was a streaming video-based banner ad that GVT created, you'd have the exact email address of the person interacting with the ad, and what action they took with the ad (told a friend, filled out a form, etc.).

The illusion, at that point, actually becomes the precision they seek but cannot find today. Because they're not looking in the right place.

Men Dominate Internet Video Watching

2007-04-11T07:04:00.000-07:00

In the previous post, we mentioned that Meredith, a media company that has 75 million women customers, opened Better.tv. This is a 20 channel broadband video network.

Well, on March 27, eMarketer released a study showing that men watched online video more than women do.

"While 78% of males watch video online, only 66% of females do," says Debra Aho Williamson, eMarketer senior analyst and the author of the new Women Online: Taking A New Look report. "They are less likely than males to visit most video destination sites — even the biggie, YouTube."

Based upon this study, it should be interesting to see how many of the 75 million women actually use Better.tv.

Better.tv Comes To The Neighborhood

2007-04-11T06:39:00.000-07:00

Meredith, a company that markets a wide range of products, such as magazines, to 75 million women has announced the creation of Better.tv, a broadband network with more than 20 channels--spanning food, family, home, style, remodeling, entertainment, relationships, fitness and health topics--Better.tv can mine material from its magazine stable. Those publications include Better Homes and Gardens, Ladies' Home Journal, More, Family Circle, Parents and Fitness.

Meredith is a media company and wants to provide a "360" experience for its advertisers, and give them the ability to reach as many women as possible.

The biggest hurdle, of course, is being able to get away from the typical measurements of advertising success and being able to drill down to the level of "who among those 75 million women is interested in what".

Streaming video technology has the ability to get that information for them seamlessly, but the large corporations and advertising agencies are still locked into the progressive download phase of video, so until one of the biggies gains insight into the obvious, look for press releases on why CPA measurement is absolutely wonderful.

Martha Stewart Does Video Big Time

2007-04-10T05:05:00.000-07:00

On the newly re-done Martha Stewart Web Site, video is a major component.

The site has both how-to and recipe videos galore.

"The site offers more than 700 videos--including full-length daily episodes of Martha's eponymous TV show, how-to clips and cooking segments--as well as segments from "Everyday Food TV" and audio clips from "Martha Stewart Living Radio" on Sirius Satellite Radio."

The videos aren't streaming videos, they're progressive download videos. As a result, on the longer ones, such as the Deviled Egg recipe, you can begin to see the audio/video sync begin to drift and the mouth movements are slightly off from the sound.

They're getting closer to what's needed. Kudos to Ms. Stewart for understanding that video is the way to get the message across.

Pre-roll Ads And Video Length

2007-04-09T12:21:00.000-07:00

Nothing new to report in this arena. Consumers are STILL highly reluctant to watch a video ad, prior to seeing a video less than 3 minutes in length.

Apparently, online video viewers put a premium on their time, and videos of less than 3 minutes in length don't have enough value to make them want to sit through an ad video first.

That's bad news for pre-roll because, as we pointed out in a previous blog entry, almost nobody is downloading any videos longer than 3 minutes in length.

One suggestion would be to place a text-oriented graphics ad, that was clickable, next to the video. Nobody really clicks on banner ads any more, but this might work IF

That ad was related to the video topic. Too many banner ads have nothing to do with the page topics they appear on.
The ad content was very engaging and compelling.
Clicking the ad doesn't kidnap someone to parts unknown and make it difficult, if not impossible, to get back. Make the click open the destination Web site in a new window.

An Opportunity For The Travel Industry

2007-04-09T07:53:00.000-07:00

Like most industries that have enjoyed a captive market until the advent of the Internet, the travel industry is struggling.

It's tough to adjust to the idea that you're not the only provider of travel information and that a forest of blogs, Web sites and newsletters, as well as social networking sites, are providing first hand information about travel experiences.

Airlines and hotels are also selling direct on the Internet, further eroding profits.

U.S. customers spent $79 billion on online travel last year, according to a new report released on April 4, 2007 by eMarketer. The research firm predicts that spending in this category will grow at around 17% a year for the next five years, totaling $146 billion by 2010.

The report suggests that travel providers will have to be more creative in their packages, moving "from a service model based on mass consumption to one centered on creating customized packages for groups of travelers with unique interests and needs."

Here's some examples of creative ways that can be used:

Offer a library of streaming travel videos that can be viewed anytime
Have visitors register, select areas of interest and regularly email them travel videos of interest (along with promotional and ordering text content)
Provide discount coupons for those willing to watch travel videos and answer 3 simple questions about the video. This gets you the email address of those who saw your videos online.

There's a huge market out there, and room for everyone. Learn and use new technologies and you will prosper.

Baby Boomers - The Overlooked Market

2007-04-09T07:41:00.000-07:00

Most advertisers assume that Baby Boomers, or ThirdAgers aren't much of a market on the Internet. Well, according to a recent survey, we again have proof that "assume" isn't a good thing to do.

An online research study conducted by ThirdAge Inc. and JWT BOOM provides some startling information about the online habits of this market segment.

"Over 72% of ThirdAgers access the Internet from Broadband in their homes. This is significantly more than the national average across all age groups." Good news, right? Not if you are planning on using video to advertise to them.

"What they’re not doing is watching videos, writing blogs, playing games or downloading music. "

Not all the news is bad. I know lots of people that avoid YouTube video watching, for example. Here's a useful nugget of information, according to the survey, 73% of the Baby Bommers/ThirdAgers surveyed shop online.

It looks to me like there's an opportunity to tie online video into online shopping as a way to increase sales.

Download Movies & TV Shows? Not Yet

2007-04-09T07:05:00.000-07:00

1 to 3 minute videos still dominate the Internet video market. Only very slightly over 25% of viewers have ever downloaded a TV show, and far less have downloaded a movie. The market is there, but nobody seems to know how to attract it.

I think I see the problem. Progressive download video. If you download a 2 hour movie, you're actually doing that; putting a huge 2 hour movie on your hard drive. That's going to gobble up your hard drive space in no time if you're a movie buff.

Secondly, a 2 hour movie isn't going to download in a heartbeat, and that's a really big problem. We live in a society that demands instant gratification. Fast food. Instant Breakfast. Instant mashed potatoes. More people get movies from Netflix than download them. Why? Because downloading a movie takes a lot of time.

Gee, is there a solution? Of course. Use streaming video. Streaming video downloads nothing and begins playing immediately, regardless of video length.

Ahhh, but true streaming video is incapable of playing full screen, right? Wrong. The problem is that streaming video requires bandwidth, and the larger the image, the more bandwidth required to display the video. The average cable/DSL user doesn't have the bandwidth available to them, yet, to show full screen video.

I predict that the NetGear will provide part of the solution (we'll overlook the "feature" that allows you to play those truly poor quality YouTube videos on your TV), along with some additional computer programing. Apple TV? Forget it. It's another expensive promotional tool for iTunes only.

It appears that there is a huge market out there, given the fact that Netflix and Blockbuster are beating each others brains out to quickly deliver movie DVD's to customers.

If there are any visionaries out there that would like to get their share of this market, the programming talent is readily available. Send me an email and let's talk.

Wrong Answer!

2007-03-30T14:53:00.000-07:00

The Email Diva has, apparently never heard of us. In the referenced question to her regarding email tracking, she says "Opens are measured when a tiny image is called from a server; if the image is downloaded, it counts as an open."

Wow, this is SO 1980. I guess, since the Diva thinks it's nigh unto impossible to track an open, knowing WHO did the open is probably in the realm of science fiction for her.

If only she had sent herself a sample video email, she might have become one of the leading gurus of email marketing with video.

Somebody send her an email and let her know, would you please?

If They Could Only Figure Out How To Advertise With It

2007-03-29T07:46:00.000-07:00

Sometimes it helps to have a sense of humor. An interesting article by Scott Meyer makes this statement about online video: "While there's little doubt that the outlook for online video is optimistic, it's time to think realistically about whether it can live up to the hype."

It's a little confusing at that point because it sounds like he's talking about online video itself.

He then goes on to point out that almost 40% of the U. S. online population watched online videos. I wouldn't call that "hype" exactly.

Then the point becomes apparent, "total advertising spend per user is not keeping pace".

Good grief. There's not enough advertising in online video. Oddly enough, that 40% doesn't seem to see the problem.

Seriously though, the real problem is the advertising industry doesn't understand this new medium very well yet and needs to develop effective content, ad formats and measurement tracking. It appears to be a major task in that by 2010, online video ad spending will only be 10% of all online ad spending.

This is strange thinking, in my opinion. DoubleClick recently released research showing that Internet video ads get twice as much interaction as standard ad formats, but by 2010, the advertising agencies will be spending 90% of their ad budgets on advertising that's only 50% as effective as online video.

When the advertisers discover this fact, I think we'll all be amazed at the progress the advertising industry will make toward supporting online video ads.

This is why it pays to have a sense of humor.

Rick Bruner, research director at DoubleClick, said "Online video ads are quickly becoming the medium of choice to drive both brand awareness and sales..." The advertising industry can ignore that at their peril. If a vacuum exists, there will be somebody to fill it, so they can't say they haven't been warned.

The Mobile Internet Isn't A Market - Yet

2007-03-29T07:21:00.000-07:00

A new report reveals that approximately 60% of U. S. broadband Internet users own an Internet-enabled mobile device, like a BlackBerry, but only 5% of those mobile devices actually access the Internet.

It's interesting to see that one of the major reasons that a greater percentage of these Internet savvy folks don't use the Internet on their mobile devices is the fees associated with doing so, and the inherent unrealiability of cell phone connections to begin with.

It's only in the USA that mobile phone bandwidth providers gouge their customers. In other countries, wireless costs are a very economical flat rate charge, very much like the digital telephone services that cable companies provide.

I'm sure it would be frustrating to be filling out a form on a Web site while riding in a car and, just at the instant you are ready to click the "Submit" button, your cell phone connection drops and you lose the call.

Video Ads on Web Get Twice the Interaction

2007-03-28T06:17:00.000-07:00

You've probably suspected that video advertising was powerful stuff, but now the folks at DoubleClick have released research results that proves it.

The research showed not only that video ads were clicked on twice as much as image ads, but that viewers typically watched two-thirds of the ad AND click rates were higher than image ads.

Given this information, if your company is still using image advertising as their primary method of online advertising, stop and ask yourself why.