I love the recent article published on iMedia by Tom Hespos, "
Why ad network reach reports are stupid," and there's a "pony" in Tom's article. Why hasn't someone started a business to specifically rate networks on points that matter instead of simply posting size/reach of the networks?
The issue Tom presented is that reach and the "this is how many freaking millions of unique people we reach" mentality are completely outdated. So as a starter kit for some enterprising entrepreneur out there, I'm going to throw out some ideas on the value an ad network rating business could provide; not only to ad networks, but the advertisers who buy from them.
1. More insight
I'm not just referring to site lists. We know that some networks work blind, and they've proven there's a market for that. For the other advertisers out there, I'm referring to the ability to see your unique reach between networks as well as any overlap that occurs from one to another. As Tom points out, this information is extremely useful for marketers to know which networks are worth the time and energy.
2. Fraud!
The fervor about click fraud has died down over the past several years, but what about impression fraud? One way to measure impression fraud is by testing the ability for a network to match cookie information. Cookie-match information is definitely needed with more and more companies building data pools.
In our experience, we have found that a few of the internet's "largest networks" are unable to match the majority of "real" cookie information, even when they say they have massive reach. The reason? Simple -- lots of crap traffic! If a network can't match against live cookie information, it's an indicator that the network may be serving a significant amount of fraudulent ads. Cookie-match testing and reporting the results of those tests would be incredibly valuable.
3. Retention rate (on both sides)A network's ability to retain advertisers is the key to future growth and viability. As Tom pointed out, it could also be a great stat in determining who you might work with. When I'm choosing a movie to rent or a new book to buy, I rely heavily on reviews from people who have experience with my prospective selection. If a network can't hold on to advertisers and have them become "network evangelists," that is something other advertisers should know.
Likewise, publisher reviews about networks would be great for publishers to help them decide which network to link up with. Do the networks pay publishers on time? Are they providing decent revenue share? These are questions I know publishers would be interested to have answered.
4. Segmentation/targetingIt's easy for any network to tell you it can provide you the necessary targeting you are after. Targeted messages by far perform better than non-targeted ones, so this is an important feature for advertisers to look for when deciding which networks to work with. But can the networks really target customers the way they claim? An independent review of targeting and segmentation features would be important for advertisers to peruse when choosing networks.
6. Technology platform
Your grandmother can easily set up a new network these days. This isn't news to those of us in the business. There is nothing wrong with granny's ad network, but the technology platform she works with is important information for advertisers and publishers. If there were a way to know the technology platform powering the ad network, it would tell a lot about what the company really has to offer.
So, until someone takes the initiative and starts a company that provides this type of data, the question remains: What makes one ad network different from another, other than their "reach"? What's the real difference? The irony here is that we're talking about networks that exist to help other companies market their products and services, yet networks display irrelevant features and data to sell you on why you should use their product or service. Why is that? Well, to be frank, there's no real answer to the question for the majority of networks. There really isn't a difference.
Chad Little is CEO of Fetchback.
