Re: UKNM: Advertising might actually be dead

[Mat Morrison]

>[...]from what I remember, the reasons advertisers wanted standards was

>because they were having to create different sized banners for 

different

>sites. I don't see why sites which accept advertising can't be more

>flexible. Is there a reason why all the ads they display need to be a 

given

>size?



Let's say we accept this reasoning. How do we value banners? Is a larger 

banner more valuable than a smaller? 468x60 pretty much approximates to 

10% of screen estate of the old 640x480 screens. Should we see this as a 

benchmark against which to arrange the CPM? 


Standardisation allows media-owners/audience centres to price and sell 

comparable media.


Campaigns like, say the Levi's I-Candy boxes do move away from the 

traditional model -- but do they move so far as to be effectively 

sponsorship? Can we really buy the same sort of targeting, frequency 

capping, audience tracking and adjustment with this sort of campaign as 

we can with a "standard" banner?


Paradoxically, I believe, standardisation allows us much more 

flexibility in the way we plan and buy our campaigns than your 

free-and-easy approach.


Mat



______________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com