Problem 2
Ineffective creative formats
In March, I wrote an article called, "Why online creative stinks so badly." In that article, I spoke about standard format sizes that are too small and the lack of interactivity that exists in most ads online.
Let's dig into this just a bit more today. The problem, as I continue to see it, is that we don't provide the advertiser with a palette that enables the creation of a truly emotional experience. Part of this ties back to the size of the ad. When the current ad formats were standardized in 2002, the average screen resolution was still 800 x 600 pixels. Average screen resolution today is much larger -- although I haven't gotten definitive sources, a safe bet is something like 1280 pixels wide, with a variety of heights due to the proliferation of widescreen ads.
The hallmark online display ad unit is the 300 x 250. This is the unit that most advertisers have adopted as their preference. It generally elicits the highest cost per thousand ads (CPM) and is preferred by brand advertisers as a format in which they can get a decent message across. But as we've seen screen sizes (and therefore screen resolutions) grow over the past five years, this has effectively shrunk the pixel size of the ads proportionately downward.
Standard ratio screen resolutions with 300 x 250 ad:

As you can see above, when the average resolution was 800 x 600, a 300 x 250 pixel ad unit was pretty large (from a percentage of screen coverage point of view). But as average screen resolution has pushed upward, the relative size of the ad unit has diminished significantly. In my March article, I suggested that one way we could improve the value of online creative formats for advertisers is simply to increase the size of the standard display unit -- effectively double the dimensions of the 300 x 250 banner to 600 x 500 pixels. If we did this, we'd be looking at something like below:
