Comments on: Online TV Ads Suck Less Than TV Ads On TV: Study

By: Online Video Ads More Effective Than Offline TV

Online Video Ads More Effective Than Offline TV — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:28:22 +0000

[...] to TechCrunch for pointing this out AKPC_IDS += "479,"; Learn more with these related posts: Video Ads are THE [...]

By: Free Tv Shows Online

Free Tv Shows Online — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:01:08 +0000

Very Lazy…

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:54:47 +0000

Hi,

does anyone know exactly where in the Simmons study this 47% figure comes from? I’ve looked all over the website and at various reports which they’ve put out, and not only haven’t I been able to find this figure, I’ve also been able only to find comparisons between tv, magazines and websites (as opposed to video sites specifically).

e.g. the marketingvox coverage gives this elusive figure but none of its tables show online video – merely online.

Am I missing anything?

http://www.mark...ptivity-035681/

By: TV Related Links | Two Guys, a Girl and a Blog

TV Related Links | Two Guys, a Girl and a Blog — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:30:26 +0000

[...] • Techcrunch posted a study on why online tv ads suck less than tv ads on tv. Television execs take notes. Read it here. [...]

By: Wade

Wade — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 07:01:35 +0000

Post 27 is CLASSIC SPAM

By: Ultimate Diligence Blog (=^ v ^=)

Ultimate Diligence Blog (=^ v ^=) — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:18:25 +0000

Thanks for sharing! ^o^

hi, if you have time, go to my blog take a look, thx!!!!! ^o^

The blog have many informations, hope to able to help you!!!^^

Ultimate Diligence Blog (=^ v ^=)

http://ultimate...g.blogspot.com/

By: Heather

Heather — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 15:11:17 +0000

This is not only valuable, but I very much agree with the finding. I watch Heroes online and sit through all of the commercials NBC.com shows me while I completely tune out if I watch via the TV. Since I work in IT marketing, I consider this kind of study very helpful.

By: Greg Stuart

Greg Stuart — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:44:29 +0000

The challenges with studies like this (and I have seen a lot of them over 2 decades in advertising) is that we need to assess the value of consumers self described “engagement” metrics.

Consumer often have little idea on their interaction with advertising as it tends to operate at what you could call “low involvement level”. Most consumers think they are not impacted but yet when you do real experimental design methodlogy studies (basically what the drug companies do with placebo’s and blind split cell studies) then you see that consumers exposed to ads vs those that are not see their attitudes change (whether they think they looked at the ad or not).

Second, how does so called engagement relate to advertising effectiveness? Even if we define engagement (the Adertising Research Foundation tried a couple of years ago and I think failed at a good difinition), how do these metrics Simmons chose relate to that measurement. Likely prececious little I’d guess. And given I said above that consumers’ interactions with advertising are not self decribed, then there is not much value.

So while studies like this may help sales teams in talking to marketers, I find there is very little value. Whether there is good sample size or not. (Duncan is right, 76k is a VERY good sample size in addition to the fact it was done online and via telephone for what I’ll guess was to vaildate the online data points. Remember that TV measurement via Neilsen manages the currency for $60 billion in TV advertising with less than 10k consumers).

By: uploadchoice

uploadchoice — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 05:55:23 +0000

Most of people switch to another channel as the large number of ads are annoying.

By: Planet Malaysia

Planet Malaysia — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 05:51:23 +0000

Strongly agreed.

By: David Mackey

David Mackey — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 05:02:36 +0000

Online TV ads are so much better than traditional ads, for several reasons. First, there are so few of them. Instead of five minutes of commercials during each break there is one thirty second commercial. There isn’t even time to get up and get popcorn! Secondly, while they aren’t doing a good job yet there is great opportunity to offer variety in the commercials, ensuring that you see new commercials each time – even if for the same product. Thirdly, the ads offer interactivity that allows them to be more unique, fun, and interactive than strict tv ads.

By: Ballmer

Ballmer — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 03:53:04 +0000

Online ads can be ignored more easily!

fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com

By: Duncan

Duncan — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 01:40:10 +0000

Surely this is largely down to the fact that TV is a sit back and less attention craving medium than online TV, where the typical posture and holding a mouse in your hand encourages participation.

By: Amit M

Amit M — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 18:09:37 +0000

I would say that for myself, the results of the survey are accurate. Who cares? This is huge for the technology and media industries and we will only see more innovation in this field 5 years to come. Digital media advertising might be the next big startup thing after social networking and search.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 12:46:13 +0000

Relax people, cut this post some slack. It’s an interesting finding, wherever it comes from. And it’s timely.

And no, it’s not subjective to say that 70,000+ is a decent sample size in this context. If you knew anything about stats, you’d say so too. It just is.

By: harsha

harsha — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:46:04 +0000

Relax Point that I was trying to make was that google apps is not really relevant in the entire discussion..but maybe, it’s important to cover this topic for the “complete” web2.0 coverage!
Merry Christmas to you (wondering what are you doing in the late hours)

http://techinde...d.blogspot.com/

By: Werbeclips in Online TV-Beiträgen erzeugen hohe Aufmerksamkeit beim Konsumenten | Ergründet

Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:41:15 +0000

[...] man heute bei TechCrunch lesen kann, erzeugen Online TV-Spots nach einer Studie von Simmons eine 47% höhere Aufmerksamkeit [...]

By: Duncan Riley

Duncan Riley — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:24:58 +0000

Bill
true, its certainly not a one size fits all proposition, but they’re still nice figures to see.

By: Chameleon Headsets

Chameleon Headsets — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:21:31 +0000

There’s also a demographic I’m sure comes into play here, too Duncan. It’s doubtful that Grandma is an on-line ad target, nor the “computer illiterate” crowd, so the ads can be more carefully shaped to appeal more closely to the profile most likely to see it..

Bill Burke
http://www.phoneportals.com
Your Audio, Live Streams, and more…
To every phone: On-Demand or Shouted-Out

By: Small Business Marketing

Small Business Marketing — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:12:00 +0000

Is this related to the faxt that watching TV is typically a shared experience and we can be easily distracted while watching the same programming on your computer is a very personal experience and you can concentrate more?

By: Parul Bindra

Parul Bindra — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 10:53:31 +0000

I saw a Piper Jaffray report few weeks back, which estimated that online advertising would reach around $100 Billion by around 2011.
Obviously, this will be all the money shifting over from TV. And, a lot of that is dependant on some new technologies. Shelly Palmer, who writes for Media 3.0, has an interesting blog about this shift — called “It’s Just a Question of When. (Basically, he thinks there is currently no way to spend the massive TV-amounts on Internet advertising — since there is no “mass audience” to reach, only smaller, fractured ones.)
But, the shift is on, and there is no doubt to me that this is where the money is heading.

Parul
http://www.bhopu.com

By: Duncan Riley

Duncan Riley — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 05:25:10 +0000

Mac
so be it, Your Royal Highness

By: Mac

Mac — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 05:17:13 +0000

Fine, Duncan, I give. While I will not profess to know more than you about technology start-ups, I would hope that with my Masters in sociology and Masters in statistics would give me the upper hand in matters of survey sampling. Apparently, I’m just the bloody queen of England.

By: Duncan Riley

Duncan Riley — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 02:41:59 +0000

Mac
the last survey I wrote about made a conclusion that ppl weren’t using Google Docs based on 600 “PC Users,” that’s not a representative sample given Apple’s market share for example. The bigger the audience, the more likely the sample will be more representative of the overall market because statistical anomalies flatten out the bigger the sample audience. Can you skew a survey? hell yes, but I’d still more trust the results of a study/ survey that polled 5,000 ppl compared to one that polled 5, wouldn’t you? There’s no vacuum in that when you’re talking about studies of broader market trends…if you’re surveying owners of tech blogs with more than 1million weekly page views for example the number you could suvey would be much smaller, but we’re talking broader market analysis here, not niche topics.

By: MDR

MDR — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 01:52:58 +0000

This was a useful post – thanks Duncan. As an online media producer, this is the kind of study I show my sponsors.