UKNM: Banners

[Ray Taylor]

manoupostmaster [dot] co [dot] uk

 said:


>Which brings me back to my favourite rant. BANNERS JUST SUCK.


Steve Johnston/IMRG <

steveimrg [dot] org

> replied


>>The results of an online survey of 12-16 year olds we have been running

>>since the 19th Jansupport your contention entirely. Answer 11, 78% do not

>>click on banners):

>>http://www.imrg.org/survey/answers/youth.htm


One reason why market research gets such a bad name is that it is used so

badly. The results of an "online survey" are worthless because the sample is

self-selecting.


>As I suspect there are very few 12-16 year olds on this list, so can I

>request you do not fill in a response. But for those interested, the

>question page is here:

>http://www.imrg.org/survey/answers/youth.htm


Exactly. Relying on people's honesty in a survey is hardly a guarantee that

the sample is accurate. And even if only 12-16 year olds filled it in, your

sample, would by definition, be of people who like to fill in forms. People

who like to fill in forms are not representative of any population (other

than compulsive form-fillers and bureaucrats).


But of course youngsters will not be particularly attracted to banner ads.

Anyone who has the thankless task of trying to win young eyes on the web

will need to think beyond the banner.


Going back to the original point "Banners suck" I am never quite sure what

people mean when they use this expression. Is it a reference to oral sex (I

see no objection to the practice, personally), is it derived from an insult

directed at gay men (still see no objection) or does it refer to the pulling

power of, in this case, banner ads?


It is common knowledge that a typical click-through rate on a banner

campaign is 1-2%. Which makes it better than direct mail, for considerably

less environmental and economic impact.


Of course the technique is old-media and crude. But then the new media are

still trying to grow up and develop their own paradigms.


>>Old and New Media MUST learn that sales come through ENGAGING with >>the

consumer.


So what does this mean exactly? The only examples I ever hear of are

sponsoring sports games. Hardly radical thinking, now, is it?


It's all very well coming up with fancy clich�s to convince people you have

something new and different on offer but the fact is that there is yet

nothing new on the table from the New Media thinkers, just repackaging of

the old, old thought.


Banner advertising on web sites is very crude, very limited, and seldom very

creative. But in most cases it could be a whole lot better if the campaigns

were better thought out.


NMC/Adplan is currently working with technology and design partners on some

new techniques for presenting advertisements that probably will meet Manou's

criteria of engaging the audience. The techniques under development will not

displace banner advertising techniques, merely complement them, at least in

the short term. As to the long term, I will leave it up to the clever people

on this list to tell us what that will bring.


Ray Taylor

NMC/Adplan

Web advertising - it's all about what is today, not what might be tomorrow


********************

UKNM is sponsored by Excite UK, visit us at http://www.excite.co.uk.

Email Khalil Ibrahimi

khalilexcitecorp [dot] com (mailto:khalilexcitecorp [dot] com)

 to advertise on Excite.

********************

Change your UKNM subscription use http://www.chinwag.com/uknm.html