In regards to your statement, “I’ve sat in too many meetings where someone senior pontificates about how display ads are clicked only by mid-western housewives.”

I was curious what you thought press release last year about Natural Born Clickers.
http://www.smvgroup.com/news_popup_flash.asp?pr...

At first glance, it sounds suspect…but maybe it's true.

I look forward to the day when we evaluate campaigns based on deltas that have nothing to do with CTR.

I think display ads (IAB Standards) don’t deliver Visceral Impact. That is impact that is felt regardless of whether or not a user wants to engage. I think TV, OOH, Radio delivers that better. Most of the large pallette experiences online only occur after a click or mouse-over. So although digital can combine aspects of print, radio, TV, etc… its doesn’t do for enough people.

I think engagement is still important and banners are a solid entry point into an experience. But if your only focused on engaging people than your message won’t get through to more passive customers. And you need to effect them in order to get them to want to click in the first place.

A complete communications plans leans on both impact and engagement. When we rely so heavily on small banners that are easy to ignore, we’re selling the potential of the medium short. There are other solutions out (pre-roll, floaters, interstitials) but many publishers are scared to use them because it will scare their audience off. My answer is that if a website can’t be valuable enough for its audience to suffer a little interruption, its not valuable enough, which is fine but the CPMs won’t be high.

Andy, I totally agree with you on many of your points. I think your points can all be a post in themselves. Beyond the click is huge, but we’ve trained marketers to understand the power of clicks, so getting them to think contrary is hard to do so. We’re all trying.

Time and frequency is important, and I know Lotame is in this space, as is IGA Worldwide and a bunch of other companies. At IGA, we were the pioneers of time, size, and angle of ad unit on the screen – and only charged marketers for quality. Does this mean that any of the other ad impressions were garbage? No. Not at all. We just charged for very premium impressions that hit a certain threshold.

I’d love to argue the point of “Quality of Media Placement” vs. “Tonage.” What is tonage? What is a quality of media placement?

Greg – you mention that display ads don’t deliver on the communications objectives of an industry – what are we missing? Radio, print, television, OOH are all combined into today’s digital media. I’d love to hear what we’re missing.

Great conversation, lets keep it going…

Few points:

1) beyond the click – is a marketer measuring intent to purchase, awareness and recall.

2) data inherit to social media – is there any data point that can be culled/pulled or targeted against that is inherit to the fastest growing segment of media EVER.

3) can it be about quality of media placement over TONAGE?

4) if content is NOT apparent — is there something else that can replace the disappearance of content?

5) is time and frequency important?

6) do display ads worked if both priced, targeted and most of all LEVERAGED IN A WAY that can make other forms of media more efficient?

I thin kthe answer to all 6 of the above is apparent….and most brands understand that just because 99.6% of your impressions are NOT clicked on – does not mean that =they are wasted….it simply means that the industry has done a GREAT job of measuring the .4 % of consumers that respond — and, a miserable job of valuing the 99%.

Nuff said’. David rocks — and happy for you Daddio.

Andy