advertisements Archive

A big thank you to all of our readers. Our RSS numbers are going up and that means a lot to me. I appreciate all the feedback about tweaks and things you would like to see. Keep it coming!

I would also like to thank our sponsors. I asked each sponsor for some updates and here are the hot and new things they are working on:

AdaptiveBlue – The guys at AdaptiveBlue (makers of the BlueOrganizer Firefox extension) have launched a pretty cool new option to their site. Called the BlueShowcase, they are showing some web celebs and their badges. Currently, Seth Godin, Richard McManus, Emily Chang and Fred Wilson. Our badge is on the left menu under Interviewed!.

Text Link Ads – The team over at Text Link Ads launched a new offering for bloggers and site publishers last month. Auction Ads allows you to monetize your website by displaying live eBay auctions next to your related copy.

Zoho – Zoho has launched some updates to their Projects and Wiki tools. They have also launched a fun comicstrip generator, ToonDoo.

We have more exciting things coming for CenterNetworks in the coming weeks, so stay tuned!

Life Magazine is printing its last issue this month. Today we learn Child magazine is moving online-only this summer. Why? It's easy. Significantly lower expenses and the promise of greater revenue. MySpace reportedly is earning $30 million in revenue per month.

Wired print magazine this month has 57% ads. That means for every page (or half page) of content, there is a full-page ad. Is this what magazines need to do to survive? If so, I get the idea of moving online-only. 

On the surface, it looks like a great opportunity. I am wondering though, will the Internet become clogged with these new online-only magazines? We have to decide where we spend our time offline, which magazine(s) to purchase and subscribe to. And now we will need to determine which online magazines we will read and RSS to. Will these online-only offerings be able to survive as more noise comes into play?

So you are probably asking what does this have to do with a Web startup? Simple. These magazines MUST differentiate themselves online. Even more than they had to do with the print mag. You need to do the same thing with your web app. On American Idol (and I am sure all the world idol competitions), the judges say over and over, "if you want to win, you have to make it your own (dog)."

Think about this as a starting point. You are in an elevator with a major VC. You have 45 floors to ride. What will you say to this VC about your startup. How will you explain why it's better than x or y player in the current market. If you can't do this, then don't launch until you can.

Amazon announced today to its affiliates that their new PPA model has moved into Beta. Named "Context Links" the program most resembles those by Kontera and Vibrant Media. I have used Vibrant Media's Intellitxt offering on HTMLCenter and it has provided some additional revenue for the site without being overwhelming.

With Amazon's program, you just add code to your page and Amazon takes care of the rest. You are not technically "supporting" a specific product; Amazon figures out what to show. And the links are based on the words already within your content. So you might be wondering how this differs from the announcement from Google last week about their PPA offering. Pretty simple actually. With Google's PPA program, you add content to your page pushing the links. I believe Google's setup is more along the lines of the Payperpost model.

I have placed the code within some of the tutorials on HTMLCenter but it is not showing links yet (links are now showing). The Context Links setup is very easy and flexible… here is a screenshot:

Will these contextual (PPA) ads work long-term? I know they have worked for me for a couple of years and so far I have not had lots of pushback on HTMLCenter. You might be wondering if I will add them to CN… not yet, still working on the optimal setup for ads for CN.

It is interesting to think about how ads have evolved. We started outside the content, then moved inside with the 300 boxes and so forth and now we are linking the internal story content. Not sure we can go any much deeper than that!

Valleywag has a post this afternoon showing an email from Ted Murphy, Payperpost CEO to Brian at Gizmodo asking him to sign with PPP. I am guessing this took some guts from Ted knowing how most major big blogs really are not happy with the current situation with PPP.

I like this part from the email, "We offer high profile blogs like gizmodo special treatment such as guaranteed revenue. All of our content requires disclosure and you can opt to take only neutral opportunities (meaning you don't have to write a positive review). "

So PPP does accept clients who will force a blogger to write a positive review. That's shameful. For example, from what I can tell, ReviewMe does not force this. I already believe that writing ANY negative reviews will hurt your chances for future purchases.

Here is my (first) suggestion for PPP: Change your business model. Become an advertorial company. Do what TV, print and radio does… charge for a slot. So for example, you could buy a full page post on Gizmodo, CN, TC, BB, anywhere that will allow it (I am not saying these will/would). Then the advertiser provides the full content for that post, title, links, etc.

Frankly, when I listen to the radio, stations run all kind of ads and NEVER say that this ad is sponsored. When the DJ's promote a product, they are essentially doing a paid post but there is no disclosure. Yesterday, the ad came so close to the end of a segment it appeared as if they were talking about the product as part of the segment, when later I realized it was an ad.

If PPP was to change their model to this advertorial model, each paid post would begin with a simple disclaimer: "This is a paid advertorial, the opinions reflected may not represent XYZ site." The same disclaimer would end the post.

The real benefit to this is that then the users of that web site or blog could post comments based on what the company thinks the pros/cons of their products are in an independent manner. I could see some real strength in this. So do you agree or disagree?

i received a flyer last week for the new Microsoft adCenter. The flyer offered me $200 in free clicks if I sgnup by the end of February. Well, since the fine print does not require me to pay anything over the $200, I figured why not. Oh, there is a $5 "administrative fee" that they charge. So $195 in free clicks basically. Still, at 5-50c per, that could be several hundred new visitors to CN.

Here is a scan of the flyer:

I setup the account and it appeared to work ok. The process was straightforward in setting up the account, and then I had to verify my email and was then granted access in setting up the keywords and advertisements. You can see the advert if you search for Web 2.0 on MSN. (Don't click it though!)

Here is the ad:

So this is where my confusion begins. As someone who has bought and sold media since before there was a Google or eBay, I understand that some systems work and some need some help.

The ad went into a "submitted" status and remained there for close to 3 days. A bit too long if you ask me. But I roll with it. I did not receive any emails that the ads were live. I tried to find help. The welcome email offers a help link which takes you to the help on MSN (which is outside adCenter). There is no information about how long it takes for an ad to be approved. So I email customer service and ask for help. After waiting 48 hours with no reply, I decided to give them a call. The rep I spoke with sounded like I annoyed her with my questions. She let me know that the ad was now running. While on the phone, I logged in and sure enough, there are clicks. However, they show a lot more clicks than I do. I asked her why no one has replied to my email, but she had no answer other than, "I understand your frustration." I asked her how long it typically takes for an advertisement to be activated, and she had no answer.

Twenty-four hours after my phone conversation, I receive an email that my ad is only partially approved in that 2 of my keywords were not approved. Shortly after that, I receive an email from someone at MS to help me. He explains that the ad is live

Not one of the emails I have received (except the initial confirmation email) included a link to login. Each email includes links in a sidebar that take you to the help on live.msn.com but nothing to adCenter. That needs to be fixed. When I received the email from the customer service person, he should have included a link for me to login.

In case any of you are interested, here is my ad performance to-date:

Keyword pricing: Internet $0.49, Video $0.38, Web 2.0 $0.27

Lastly, what I find confusing is that some of the links they use in email and online do not actually direct you to the adCenter product. I can't find the source now, but one of the links asked me to sign-in with my standard MSN/Hotmail username which did not take me to adCenter. I think a basic review of all of their literature: print, email, etc. is warranted. This will help to clear up a lot of the confusion which I bet other customers have as well.

Final wrap-up

Microsoft is trying to compete with the beast that is Google in the text ad space. I think their UI is a bit cleaner than Google's but typically I receive a bit better support with Google. So far, I don't see anything that "WOW"'s me, especially since with Google, I can also advertise on web sites that run AdSense. I did not see an option for this in adCenter. I like Microsoft – I think they are doing some great things right now. Beef up that support and make your system easier to find and I think the game might be on. Right now, all I see is a static filled picture.

Frankly, when I compare this to the StumbleUpon sponsored stumbles, there really is no comparison. SSS is much easier and quicker to use and less expensive overall. Of course there is a tradeoff in terms of customization, flexibility and reporting that you get with Google AdWords and Microsoft adCenter.

A friend of mine, Karen, who runs Coolmath.com, sent me a weird advertisement she saw on her site as part of her Adsense block. (image on right) The ad was FOR her site, but ON her site.  It did, indeed, click over to Coolmath.com and the phrasing in the ad was straight from her site.  But, this ad was NOT from Karen's AdWords account.  Not even close.  She did not set this ad up and the ad advertises her own site ON her own site!  Karen wonders if some benevolent billionaire who's a big Coolmath fan bought this ad.

No one on our advertising message board could figure out why anyone would setup this type of campaign. After a day of trying to figure out why this ad would appear, Karen contacted Google Adsense support.

After A WEEK of waiting for a reply, she received the following reply to her inquiry about the weird advertisement:

Thank you for reporting an ad that may violate one of our policies. We have taken the appropriate actions for the account.

I am a bit disappointed that they did not share any other information about what happened. We know that Google is tight lipped about their policies and practices, but to not even confirm that there was a problem is really leaving the question open. Their use of the word "may" in the reply message means that the ad actually might be ok!

While the only idea I could come up with is that the ad was a mistake in the URL and an oversight by the person setting up the ad, I am interested in see if any of you have ideas about why this ad was created. Could something malicious advertiser be behind it?

Yahoo! has launched its mobile display advertising platform on the company's Yahoo! Mobile Web service (m.yahoo.com) in 19 countries across Europe, Asia and the Americas instantly enabling advertisers to reach consumers around the globe on their mobile phones. This worldwide launch demonstrates Yahoo!'s continued focus on extending our leadership in display advertising and intension to be number one in mobile monetization.

Major global advertisers including Hilton's Embassy Suites, Infiniti, Intel, Nissan, Pepsi, Procter & Gamble Asia Pacific and Singapore Airlines will launch the inaugural mobile advertising campaigns on this new platform beginning today. The advertisements will run near the top of the Yahoo! Mobile Web home page. Consumers will be able to click on these interactive ads to directly call the advertiser or to learn more information about the advertiser's offer.

"Yahoo!'s clear leadership in Internet display advertising combined with the global reach and popularity of our mobile services makes it natural that top advertisers are coming to us to go mobile," said Geraldine Wilson, general manager and vice president, Connected Life, Europe, Yahoo!. "Only Yahoo! can offer the world's biggest advertisers the ability to work with one trusted partner to reach a targeted audience of engaged consumers on both their PC and mobile phone."

I think the key to mobile advertisements will be the level of intrusiveness. And I also wonder if these ads will eat the very expensive bandwidth costs in the U.S. for data? Anyone have insight?