In this first part of a conversation with Gorilla Nation's president, we learn the difference between rep firms and ad networks.

Gorilla Nation Media ™ (GNM) is an online ad sales representation firm, handling the media sales for more than 250 highly trafficked websites in different content verticals. GNM is a one-stop shop for advertisers/agencies looking to build brand awareness through rich media and high impact ad units, across targeted content categories.

Brian Fitzgerald is president of GNM. We talked with him to learn more about rep firms versus networks.

iMedia: First off -- let's address the unusual name. Why do you call your firm Gorilla Nation Media?

Brian Fitzgerald: We started by representing medium- to low-reach sites in very specific content verticals that had clear interest to brand advertisers. We wanted to bundle or aggregate reach across similar sites while providing marketers with the same integrated media opportunities they were used to finding only on larger, more branded web properties. We just grew from there -- targeting audiences in ways that nobody else could, and we saw ourselves as guerillas in this effort, leaving no stone unturned. 

As it developed, the strength of our offerings grew so broadly that one day, as someone described this industry as a jungle, Gorilla Nation seemed a good fit, and an easy one to remember. Contrary to what some have guessed, it’s not related to anyone being especially hirsute, although we do go a little bit ape at some of the parties we throw, like the one with KlipMart at Ad:Tech in San Francisco.

iMedia: What is the difference between a rep firm and a network?

Fitzgerald: Generally, networks will aggregate hundreds or even thousands of sites into general verticals with no opportunity to leverage the sites for integrated media and promotional opportunities. Rep firms provide direct relationships with individual, better-branded sites, offering integrated media and promotional opportunities that connect the advertiser’s brand to the site’s user in more direct and impactful ways. 

Over the past few years, networks have seen tremendous growth as they target performance-oriented advertisers and marketers and offer them large reach coupled with optimization tools to deliver better campaign performance. If a buyer is planning for a branding initiative, however, they are generally more interested in ensuring that 1) the message is in front of the right audience; 2) they are getting a large enough share of voice from the buy to ensure some level of message retention and 3) they are afforded the ability to utilize rich media formats and integrated promotional opportunities that deliver a more impactful message. By building a campaign across targeted audience segments, guaranteeing share of voice and providing relevant, impactful media and promotional opportunities, a rep firm delivers what no network can. 

iMedia: Why do you prefer to differentiate yourself as a rep firm, when the movement in the industry is back toward the network models of years ago?

Fitzgerald: While performance networks and optimizing technology have both been on the rise, so have the performance of individual sites that address the needs of certain user sets. I’m thinking of the large reach of independently owned and operated sites like SOHH.com, CraveOnline.com or even a GameWinners.com, which people may not have heard of a year ago and which would have landed on network inventory lists, but which can derive a lot of benefit from a well-connected rep firm now on their own merit. 

iMedia: But, with there being so many sites in your portfolio, doesn’t a network model make sense?

Fitzgerald: I think this is where a lot of other media companies may have missed the boat. With the proper technology and personnel, a rep firm can effectively handle site-specific sales for a multitude of web properties. We do not view our sites as simply ad inventory in the aggregate, whose performance can be optimized to deliver the most effective DR or DM campaign. 

For instance, instead of looking at a film site as a collection of unique users, some of which want credit cards and some of which want anti-aging cream, we look at what their core value proposition is -- the opportunity to deliver the advertiser’s message within the right context or environment. If a marketer is targeting pregnant moms-to-be or science fiction fans, the right rep firm can deliver more value by offering them media and promotional opportunities that go beyond the banner and lend legitimacy to the offer by presenting it within the proper context for the user. A brand marketer is, generally, more interested in influencing the short- and long-term purchasing intent of a user through a trusted communication source that the user personally identifies with. Here’s an example. A beverage company wants to seem hip and cool so they target young teens with a new product offering. They will generally derive more value from sponsoring a trusted communications channel, like video updates, alerts, hot picks, etc., on a surfing site reaching teens, than by going out and buying pops across a network’s general sports channel.

iMedia: Behavioral marketing firms have been on the rise and offer advertisers that same ability, don’t’ they?

Fitzgerald: Not exactly. This is why they’re all moving toward network models, because they don’t have the reach, and not enough of the sites in their portfolio set aside the inventory for them to drive the kind of volume that branded advertisers seek. When people talk about the inventory dearth online, this is part of that dearth. 

iMedia: Okay, but not all of the sites you represent are tier-one web properties. Aren’t there benefits to having some of the less mainstream, or “underground,” sites in your portfolio?

Fitzgerald: Back in 1985, major brands saw how cool it was just to be present on MTV, how advertising on MTV “authorized” or “allowed” the fan to identify with the product being advertised. The brand association benefit they derived then is similar to the brand association benefit that Coke or New Line Cinema gets today from appearing on these sites. If the user thinks the site is cool, then the brand benefits as well, of course. This is something we offer that Yahoo!, ad networks or even large destinations can not.

Some of these so-called “underground,” sites which have been under-leveraged for years, can drive the most loyal audiences, and some have seen their page views really surge, from perhaps one or two million uniques a month to many times that.

iMedia: Why are branded sites that have been selling their own inventory for years suddenly turning to rep firms like Gorilla Nation Media?

Fitzgerald: In the last year there has been a huge increase in the number of larger online brands coming to us for representation. We feel that it’s due to the ability of firms like ours to make connections with brands and agencies across the country right from the start. Firms would rather start making money than training sales staff that wouldn’t be as seasoned as those at a rep firm like GNM.

So, now we do manage a lot of top line brands online, like Universal Music Group’s DefJam.com, IslandRecords.com and more, many of Sony’s web properties, RogerEbert.com, MaryKateandAshley.com and many more. That said we have also focused on identifying underleveraged web properties. 

Tomorrow: his perspective on current trends