Why marketers can't ignore the cloud computing revolution

What's the difference between a television and a movie theater? Are they the same thing? What about a television with broadcast and a television with cable? What about with TiVo? What about watching TV on Hulu? Are they the same thing? I could describe all these experiences at a high enough level and make them sound like the same thing. But they are not.

From a consumer standpoint, you might not care if you're getting your TV over an IPTV connection or a cable connection as long as the video quality is good -- just like you don't care about DSL verses cable broadband as long as it's fast enough. But there are definitely business values to these varying technologies that matter a lot.

Recently in a conversation with two of the smartest guys I know in the online ad industry, there were some rather disparaging comments made about cloud computing -- essentially calling the whole thing marketing hype. After all, "isn't the internet defined as many connected servers facing user clients with no single, central server? That makes the cloud simply a whole mess more of them, no?"

Well, actually -- no. Think of the internet as infrastructure. You can do lots of different things with that infrastructure, including cloud services. And there are really significant implications for online advertising -- and for the evolution of marketing in general.

Let's say you owned an internet ad startup that was building a new ad serving system.

Approach A: The old-fashioned way -- without using cloud services
Write your software and prototype it in a small lab environment "on premise." Build out a data center with dozens of servers, multiple databases, and massive amounts of storage for the log files. Let's say the load of the impressions is expected to be around 30 billion a month.

Now let's say the peak load for delivering those ads requires 200 servers, but the average load is 50 servers, and the lowest load requires five servers. That means you would need to have 200 servers to handle the peak load -- but that peak load only represents a small amount of time. That's quite expensive, and a bit frustrating to only have a tiny bit of utilization of your server infrastructure -- and to have the financial obligations and tax implications of the investment. And on top of that, the servers are moving closer to obsolescence every day. Keeping the whole thing up to date on newest versions of hardware, server software, and database software is complex and requires a lot of people to manage the systems.

Approach B: Building out on cloud services
Now let's say you went down route B, in which you build your technology on a cloud services platform like Windows Azure or the Amazon Elastic Cloud 2.0 (EC2). You build your software so that the cloud platform can dynamically balance the number of servers dedicated to the service based on the load experienced at that moment in time. The overall cost of starting the company is dramatically lower, and the total cost of ownership of software and services is dramatically lower.

Now let's say you're an enterprise with a huge internal IT data center that you use for managing your ERP, CRM, and other enterprise capabilities. And now you want to integrate your online marketing data into the marketing business intelligence systems your analysts use to figure out how to spend their budgets. But in this world -- as opposed to the volumes of data you deal with offline, where you're dealing with a gigabyte or two of data a month -- you're dealing with terabytes or even petabytes of data a month. And you've never handled anything on that scale with your corporate IT resources. No problem -- put the data onto a cloud storage system, then build your analytics capabilities in the cloud. You can operate your business just like before, but without having to suddenly build out a huge new datacenter and develop new capabilities for dealing with massive amounts of data.

Once you have your online marketing data in an environment that enables you to merge it with data from other sources -- say, the U.S. Census or health statistics or mapping data or location data -- you can start doing analysis in much more valuable ways. The same goes for applications.

Cloud services may not sound super sexy -- it may sound like a techie kind of discussion for marketers. But you should know that cloud services are powering many of the new technologies in the online advertising space. I haven't talked to a single startup that was started in the last couple of years that isn't using cloud services for a big chunk of its infrastructure. And these platforms will become even more powerful and compelling over time.

Eric Picard is the advertising technology advisor to the Advertising Platform Engineering team at Microsoft.

On Twitter? Follow Picard at @ericpicard. Follow iMedia Connection at @iMediaTweet.

 

Comments

Anna Talerico
Anna Talerico March 12, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Eric, Grat article. I call this the great 'tech & marketing mashup'. It's getting hard to be a marketer that doesn't 'get' tech. Thinking about the cloud is exactly what marketers should be doing.

Alberto Berta
Alberto Berta March 11, 2010 at 12:57 PM

One issue that is not discussed here is the backup. What happens to the data if a part of the cloud is unavailable? Storage costs remain the same or may even increase if it is crucial to be -really- always available. Also, not a word about security. Is it the same? Is it safer? And how often do we have to upgrade on our end? And at what cost?

Eric Picard
Eric Picard March 11, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Hi Bryan - great to see you're following here!

This article was really written for marketers more than IT Pros, so I didn't cover all aspects of this or give it deep analysis. Clearly beyond a certain scale, you can save costs by building out your own infrastructure. But you might find if you work with your finance partners, there are some accounting rules that could come into play that change the game a bit on things like amortization - but I'll leave that to the tax pros.

I think calling Cloud Services another brand of Managed Services missed the value of cloud services a bit. If you're just using Cloud as a managed services replacement, you probably could get a bit more value from it than that. But for this audience, I don't think we'd do them much of a service by debating this.

I think the elasticity of Azure or EC2 are among the most valuable pieces that change the game more than just a bit. That ability to let the cloud handle the load and not particularly worrying about having enough servers in the farm. And you should check out SQL Azure and especially something they're doing under 'codename Dallas' as it relates to data and being able to build apps on top of huge available data feeds.

Just rebuilding ad serving (granted - an example I used) in the cloud is a basic application of cloud computing. The data assets and letting enterprises that don't handle massive amounts of data in their current IT infrastucture begin pushing that scalability out to the cloud is really where marketing will see its greatest value.

On the cost side - Bluestreak's a bit mature (and has a large fixed cost sunk into datacenters already) for rebuilding everything in the cloud. But you might consider using the Cloud for specific elements of your business - e.g. Putting a bunch of your reporting in the cloud, or if you get around to building a real-time bidding engine (becoming a DSP) you may want to build that new business on Cloud infrastructure to defray the startup costs.

Fun times!

Bryan Berdy
Bryan Berdy March 11, 2010 at 10:47 AM

Eric, this write-up is incomplete. You didn't identify costs of the cloud vs. private collocation.
There is a tipping point when one is surpasses the other.
We have explored cloud computing, which is more of a new marketing term for "managed service".
The quote that we received from EC2 was 2x the current price of our datacenters. We would be placed on "shared servers" and pay a ridiculous amount for utilization, storage, and bandwidth. When you are in a conversation with Amazon or any other vendor, and you explain that your bandwidth requirement is 650Mbps, your servers require at least 16GB RAM, and about 20TB of high performance fiber channel storage (dedicated SAN), the long pause, then "well get back to you".
Most large datacenters in themselves are "clouds". You probably would never see Microsoft contacting Amazon for cloud storage, as MS probably has a hybrid of traditional massive datacenters that has some form of a cloud.
So cloud is a great for small startups, and allows them the ability to launch their product. When that company's volume starts to grow, they will reach a point where they need to graduate from the cloud to their own datacenter.
It is not the silver bullet everyone is touting that will replace traditional data centers or collocation facilities.

Chris Hanburger
Chris Hanburger March 11, 2010 at 9:13 AM

Thanks for bringing this to light Eric. This is so very self serving since we are utilizing the cloud at Tracksimple, but the benefits and raw ability to process, previously unheard of amounts of data, is a very powerful ability. I'm sure we'll see more and more companies leveraging this ability in the near term.

Michael Andrew
Michael Andrew March 10, 2010 at 8:59 PM

This is right on Eric.

Glad you brought up that it is not just about the online data but merging that with offline sources in order to produce more valuable analysis. Suddenly marketers have "big data" and the challenge will be building models that can assimilate all of this data and use it to move the marketing mix forward in a productive way.