The end of video CPMs

While several industry studies predict that online ad spending will decrease in 2009, activity in the online video segment might be cause for industry optimism. According to eMarketer's predictions for 2009, video ad spending will grow despite the current economic climate, rising by 45 percent this year to reach $850 million.

Even with the guarded optimism about projected market growth, the current model for monetizing online video isn't working. Ad networks, video technology providers, and other industry players are at a loss when trying to find a model that can grow significant revenue. For years, the online video industry has been relying on a TV-based scale for measuring the effectiveness of a campaign. The traditional cost per thousand impressions (CPM) model, originally adopted in the TV world, doesn't translate to the online video market. Lacking a better standard, the industry took an old model of monetizing TV and slapped it onto the latest online technology.

Online video advertising is still a relatively new medium. Marketers and advertisers alike are looking for the best way to utilize this new channel to effectively engage users and convert them to customers. As the industry evolves and viewers continue to gravitate from television to the online channel, the industry needs to evolve alongside its audience by transitioning to a performance-based pricing (PBP) model.

Online video is a completely different animal than TV -- content is consumed in a much more interactive experience between the consumer and the brand. The user is not just served a static 30-second spot like with television. Instead, they have the ability to connect and react with the ad on a much more personal level.

Today, online video ads can be developed with thousands of variations, enabling consumers to make choices in real-time and giving them more control over the content they consume. As a result, the online audience offers a heightened level of engagement, providing increased awareness and recognition for brands that television doesn't offer. This kind of innovative advertising with deeper flexibility and interaction deserves its own ad model that is mutually beneficial for both the video provider and the brand.

In today's economy, brands expect more value from their advertising dollars online and are skeptical of paying for impressions that don't provide measurable ROI or result in sales conversions. Likewise, video providers have been hesitant to move away from the CPM model for fear of missing out on a more predictable revenue stream. The advantage of a performance-based pricing model is that it better aligns the goals of the brand and the video provider, while sharing the economic benefits of a successful campaign.

A straight cost-per-action (CPA) model isn't realistic. However, a tiered PBP dynamic -- where advertisers pay a rising scale based on impressions, cost per click, engagement, interaction, and sales conversion -- brings more value to the advertiser, while rewarding the vendor for converting a consumer to a customer.

Brands realize that consumers are more valuable to them as they progress deeper through the online video ad food chain, and are willing to pay more at each level of interaction -- as long as it's measurable. It makes sense to link the deep flexibility and interactive nature of the ads to a similarly flexible pricing model where everybody wins.

The performance-based pricing model can work most effectively when there is a direct-response dynamic associated with the ad because the vendor is rewarded the most when the brand reaches its ultimate goal of transacting a sale. There is not one standard way to structure this new way of thinking; brands and vendors need to work together to customize a performance model that is mutually beneficial. Any number of elements could be included in this payment structure, including:

  • Cost per impression (CPM): Serving the ad to the consumer.
  • Cost per click (CPC): Getting the consumer to click through the ad to the brand's site.
  • Cost per engagement (CPE): The consumer watches a video or sends information to a friend.
  • Cost per action (CPA): Delivering a quote or more information, such as a whitepaper download.
  • Cost per sale (CPS): Converting the consumer to a customer.

The performance-based pricing model takes into account the fact that an impression is great for brand awareness, but won't impact the bottom line the same way a click-through or conversion does. Developing premium campaigns with a heightened emphasis on the end goal -- conversion rates -- positions the tiered PBP model as a clear recession winner and delivers the most value to the brand.

The advertising industry was founded on the driving principle of creativity. Today, the industry needs to be creative in developing an approach that makes more sense. Innovation is often born in trying economic times, and this is a great way of eliminating risk while advertisers experiment with new technologies.

Naj Kidwai is CEO of Real Time Content.

 

Comments

scott broomfield
scott broomfield March 9, 2009 at 7:15 PM

Naj -

I couldn't agree more that CPMs and video do not, necessarily, go hand in hand. Many, many of our customers see their videos as the message, as the ad. This means they do not want to place another ad inside. it means that the revenues models will continue to morph as we journey down this new path of online video. We do, however, see a strong trend toward interactivity and the resultant user engagement, as well as strong analytics on the back-end to answer the question - is anybody listening.

All the best,
Scott Broomfield; Co-Founder of Veeple

Martin Russ
Martin Russ February 23, 2009 at 7:11 PM

Sanjay, you are absolutely right that TVCs can be used as a frequency enhancer, and the cost is very attractive online. But by adding personalization, the engagement with consumers can be strengthened. Using subtle variations in a TVC for repeat views online can make ads more memorable – and potentially less annoying! Maybe even ‘Saved by Zero'?

Sanjay Vasudeva
Sanjay Vasudeva February 23, 2009 at 7:38 AM

I dont quite agree with you on the performance route for TVC's or Video Ads on Internet. In our haste to make the business viable and in order to innovate the internet has taken itself away from being an advertsing medium and has become a medium to measure performances only. ( Not for All Brands thankfully)
While there are reach channels and Frequency channels on TV...why cant TVC's on internet be added on as a frequency enhancer.
The TVC on video does the DUAL purpose of displaying ads and also creates an interactive platform for the consumer taking him to become a customer of the product.
The strength of Internet TVC is that while it builds up frequency it also allows the brand to get the direct interaction with the consumers...something no static media like Radio,TV or Print can deliver.
TVC on Internet can run at One hudredth the price of a 10 Sec TVC cost on any frequency building channel.

So I reckon the Internet marketers should not ruin a great revenue opportunity by taking the Performance route on Internet Video Ads and just bide their time and gain the confidence of TV buyers gradually. With the increasing media cost on the Traditional media front Advertsiers and Media Planners would find great value in Video Ads as Pre/Post Rolls on the Internet.