Slashdot Mirror

My heart almost sank until I realized IAB != IAB

Good IAB: http://www.iab.org/
  Bad IAB: http://www.iab.net/

Ed Bott says that Sarah Downey (Privacy Advocate) says that the IAB says that the IAB membership "will continue to monetize data".

Except that to become an IAB member, a company must comply to the IAB code of conduct, which includes the self-regulatory program for online behavioral targeting. This includes the requirement of providing a consumer choice mechanism, which has been implemented for the industry at www.aboutads.info.

I guess fact checking was too much for Ed...

Ed Bott says that Sarah Downey (Privacy Advocate) says that the IAB says that the IAB membership "will continue to monetize data".

Except that to become an IAB member, a company must comply to the IAB code of conduct, which includes the self-regulatory program for online behavioral targeting. This includes the requirement of providing a consumer choice mechanism, which has been implemented for the industry at www.aboutads.info.

I guess fact checking was too much for Ed...

...I'd like to know how much ad revenue have they generated in the past year, which would be a small fraction of it's valuation....

To extend on those remarks, two years ago the entire online advertising market was about $25B annually, with about half that going to GOOG for search placement. Old timers like myself will be surprised that only about a third of the online ad market is banner ads. I suppose adblocker-type technology will eventually completely kill off that market segment, or at least I hope it does. Anyway, FB can only be a small fraction of $10B ad revenue.

In normal market conditions companies used to sell for P.E. ratios in the single digit-ish range, but for a couple decades ultra high PE ratios have taken over. Once the baby boomers cash in their 401Ks that'll drop back to normal. Anyway it would not be all that out of line for a couple billion in revenue to account for a couple dozen billion in valuation.

Also the data they have is useful for spam services that are not online. Expect it to be mandatory to link your postal spam mail address and your social security number to your FB account, supposedly to cut down on griefers and spammers, but more likely to make the data they have on you more valuable.

Facebook has become a giant in web advertising. Their revenue was estimated at $3.8 billion in 2011 (slightly lower than their own prediction of $4b), and to reach $7b next year (2013). Similar numbers have been reported many places, but one source: http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1008598

Total online ad market is at $31b, so Facebook has 12% market share of the global online ad market. source: http://www.iab.net/insights_research/industry_data_and_landscape/1675/1816825 . Their market share of users and time is even higher than that - 16% -- source: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-is-destroying-google-in-time-spent-online-chart/4183

I would be ok with the occasional banner ad or something along those lines, but we all know that for every advertiser that attempts to play nicely, a dozen others will come up with some new obnoxious ad.

This is exactly why I block all ads. If advertisers can all agree on standards for ad width, height, and placement then they can also agree to acceptable behavior for ads (no sounds, flashing, etc). Since they have refused to the the latter, I block all ads because some advertisers cross the line with annoyance. What is the saying in English? One bad apple spoils the barrel.

The study was based on comScore technology, which continuously and confidentially captures the complete Internet activity - including specific keyword queries across all major search engines - of a representative cross-section of more than 1.5 million global Internet users. comScore methodology combines industry-endorsed random digit dial (RDD) sampling methodologies with massive population samples across key home, work, university and non-U.S. locations. This unique combination of technology and methodology enables searching activity to be accurately linked - immediately and over time - to consumers' Web-wide visiting and actual buying behavior.

Why don't you read the actual standards and then comment, rather then speculating out of your ass.

Complain to The IAB.

Tell them you're sick and tired of intrusive advertising. Tell them your failure to click-through is *not* because you didn't notice their ad.

Ah Bugger IT! Just write a script to auto-submit their "contact" web forms with SPAM.

I personally do not... but from the IAB press release:

In IAB ad effectiveness research conducted by Marketing Evolution's Rex Briggs, it was found that "...the larger format sizes, which are naturally more visible and provide more creative freedom, did prove to be significantly more effective than smaller, standard banners across all campaigns."

So, would the real Rex Briggs please stand up... and tell us who these suc... er, loyal customers really are?

(in case you didn't follow that last link....)

Rex Briggs, Principal, Marketing Evolution
4062 Albert Circle, El Dorado Hills, CA 95726
www.marketingevolution.com
Rex@marketingevolution.com
Voice: 415-559-9374
Fax: 508-629-8790

Maybe Rex would be interested in some of the same catalogues and other valuable offers that Alan Ralsky is enjoying?

• 728x90
• 160x600
• 180x150
• 300x250

In this case, companies adhering to the new standards will be a good thing for all of us running through our apache proxies.

Just to know what we're talking about, check this. To be honest, that 728x90 banner looks pretty familiar to me....

While I'm certain they didn't have a /. audience in mind when they posted it, I couldn't help but notice the headline that asks "WHAT'S YOUR OPINION ON THE UNIVERSAL AD PACKAGE?" with a link to a survey where you can tell 'em what you really think.

I noticed that there no annoying POP-UPs on the IAB Web Site

It is *not* the Internet Architecture Board, it is the Internet Advertising Bureau. Could you imagine it being different?

Yeah, yeah, it's redundant. But that's what came to my mind when I read IAB on the title.

Rather funny wsn't AOL advertising on their networks back in 95? Wouldn't it be 'obvious to someone skilled in the art' to add adds to on line newspapers since they have adds on their paper print?

I hope they do go after all these on line advertisers. Then we could get ride of al these stupid adds on line ;-).

I think that doubleclick as well as many others were doing this long before this patent was filed, and IMHO it is very vague.

"inputting configuration parameters" .. uh this is done so that you can set your banner size to 480x60 and the other sizes.. hmm what I wonder what the the IAB (http://www.iab.net/) think of this.

If Apple was building hardware specifically to support interactive advertising, (which sounds unlikely to me.) they aren't using a standard banner format.

Besides, everyone knows that banner ads don't work.

If Apple was building hardware specifically to support interactive advertising, (which sounds unlikely to me.) they aren't using a standard banner format.

Besides, everyone knows that banner ads don't work.

As usual, if you feel inclined to contact them directly, please use at least two brain cells and leave the flame gear in storage. (High Voltage might be okay, however.)

Read this great article by Rex Briggs - "Abolish Clickthrough Now". Rex has done some major quantitative studies in support of the effectiveness of banners for branding. Advertisers are only just beginning to lose their prejudice - banners won't go away, and targeting will always attract a higher CPM. I don't see those Data Mining grads out of a job any time soon.

www.iab.net/conference/ny99/abolish.html