Help? Comparing Sponsored Online Videos to Digital Display Advertising

Alright, half of you want to talk about poop and farts, and really don’t care about online advertising.

But I know a few of you digital marketing and online video lovers are RSSing this blog quietely. And I need your help. I’m drafting a really interesting piece that compares online-video promotion (not prerolls or overlays, but contextual stuff) to traditional online advertising. This is a follow-up to my manic post about proving online video can sell.

I’ve got a few online-video campaigns (entertaining videos by webstars) yielding views for as low as a nickel. This isn’t preroll or invideo… this is host-endorsed, digital storytelling, entertaining content. That seems unbeatable by another other online-advertising medium. Impressions are dirt cheap, but eye charts show that the vast majority of impressions go unseen. And at best we glance. Maybe .014 percent of us click the ad (unless it’s a rich media ad, where Pointroll claims 3-5 percent).

Here’s my question:

  • Who’s got REAL standards on the engagement level of a CPM buy. How much waste is there? I can find all the “horray” reports easily by Dynamic Logic and Insight. I need eMarketer, Forrester or credible numbers for comparison. All I have now is .014 click-thru for flat ads and 3-5 for rich media. What about percent that actually see the ads? What about time?
  • How do you compare these impressions to a hosted endorsement in the context of the show? What’s it worth when Jimmy Kimmel pimps a product? I think about $300K. When I watch Film Riot (a Revision3 show that is going to explode), the guys do a playful Netflix spot in the middle. It’s tucked between segments and I’d never skip it. It’s as entertaining as the show, and I’ll bet Netflix is getting that for a steal.
  • Realize I can’t yet do a pre/post and test/control study, which will show that recall, intent and purchase for Film Riot’s spot will be exponentially more effective than even the most expensive CPM. I just need to give media buyers an apples to oranges comparison so they understand that this type of advertising will give them DEPTH to complement the reach of other advertising.
  • Don’t tell me I’m comparing apples to oranges, because I know. I just need to show it’s as good as other online-advertising options because otherwise the media buyer will never experiment.

BTW- you’ll love this. A recent Hitviews campaign promoting a destination site showed a greater than 6 percent click thru rate from the videos about the site. SIX PERCENT. That means if we did nickel views, the site was getting qualified traffic for 30-60 cents. By my estimates, that would cost $5-$50 per visitor through display, and search really wouldn’t have worked as well for an entertainment site (or company intent on branding).

Author: Nalts

Hi. I'm Nalts.

9 thoughts on “Help? Comparing Sponsored Online Videos to Digital Display Advertising”

  1. You ask such good questions, but who are you expecting to answer them?

    Why don’t you team up with someone (academic? big-time media consulting outfit? who does this kind of research) to actually test out some of these questions? Then you can write a book or at least an article and charge bigger consulting fees.

Comments are closed.