Online Ad Spending Still Too Inefficient

Here is a criticism I haven’t heard leveled recently at online ad spending: It’s too inefficient. The comment comes from DoubleClick CEO David Rosenblatt in today’s WSJ:

Advertisers are interested in two things. One is increasing the efficiency of their media buys. It still costs too much to spend money online compared to offline. For
example, every part of the process is still not as efficient.
Everything from tracking measurement across thousands of Web sites,
collecting all of those forms of data, billings, physically trafficking
ad units out to publishers — all of those sorts of things are still
too manual…

The second thing advertisers are looking for is measuring
the efficacy of their media. So I think we as an industry have done a
good job of perfecting that measurement within specific channels, like
search or within graphical, but not as much between them. If you have
$100 to spend and you have a certain goal for your advertising, you
should be neutral between spending that on graphical, on video, on
search media — let alone between the Internet and offline channels.
But in order to make that decision you need tools to help you measure
the relative efficacies, and those don’t really exist yet.

Sounds like an opportunity to me.

Related posts:

  1. More Signs of an Inflection Point in Online Ads
  2. Convergence … in Online Advertising
  3. Online Ad Revenue Continues to Spike
  4. Consumer Product Companies Heart Online Ads
  5. Sports & the Future of Online Communities

Comments

  1. David Spark says:

    Advertisers are lazy. Buying space/time is cheaper than creating content. But what they’re realizing is it’s not enough to just spread messages but you have to have stories even for the most standard consumables.