For further information about email marketing, download Econsultancy's Email Census (based on a survey of digital marketers) and the Email Marketing Platforms Buyer's Guide (particularly relevant for the UK market). See also the Email Statistics Compendium.
online magazine vs integrated content 9 replies Looking For CRM Vendor/Software 4 replies Mega Menu's and SEO 4 replies PPC Benchmarks for Catalog/Online Apparel e-Tailers 1 reply Finding an appropriate affiliate network 2 replies
Best practice approach to securing user engagement with a company intranet 672 views Email Marketing 611 views Email marketing 601 views Building a bespoke PDF brochure via web form 550 views Query: Which agency designed this? 519 views
Email Marketing 9 replies Social Media: PR or Marketing? 7 replies Effective SEO without link building 7 replies Best practice approach to securing user engagement with a company intranet 7 replies Email marketing 5 replies
CEO at egaming 2.0
05 June 2003 08:12am
Greetings:
Recently reviewed the excellent Benchmark report from e-cons... but saw no reference to that once hot-topic of "unclicked response rates. I'd experiemented with measuring them in the past but quickly saw that the additional CPM was not generating a positive ROI. Mind you, I had a hell of a difficult URL to try to remember, so it wasn't the be all end all of a test.
I was prompted to start thinking about it again when I saw a tradedoubler report for a client that indicated that about 50% of the accounts acquired we're "out of session," i.e. they came through the system as expected but only later transacted. Mind you, it's with a FAR more memorable URL... ay thoughts or, better yet, on real data on unCTRs?
Cheers
Alex Czajkowski
British Isles Gaming Ltd
CEO at Econsultancy
09 June 2003 10:25am
Hi Alex
This is an interesting question and you're right not something that we've covered (yet) in our Online Marketing Benchmarks report. Will be in the update!
You say "I'd experiemented with measuring them in the past ..." - how do you track these unclicked responses out of interest? Are you using a campaign-specific URL - like a microsite or a forward-slash sub-section? If not, and there has been no click, then I'd imagine it is hard to track? For forward-slash sub-sections I'd imagine many users go to the root URL anyway, further under-reporting response rates? Obviously where there has been a click (like with Tradedoubler report you mention) then subsequent purchases can be tracked years later if necessary using a cookie.
"Unclicked banner responses" might be looked at as proof of the positive branding effect of online advertising? Increasingly I hear agencies talking about metrics like 'time with brand' for online. Furthermore, there are developments like the "surround-session" advertising where site users get exposure to an advertising brand for the duration of their session. I haven't heard yet about much research on the results for this, but in many ways I think this is a much more interesting development than what we hear about rich media and changing ad formats.
Perhaps most interesting of all, and hardest to measure, is the delayed-response effect *offline* as a result of online brand exposure e.g. I see the M&S ad online so I go and buy in the store. The web is delivering huge value here but it is hard to measure accurately and yet a crucial piece of information for all those e-commerce managers pitching for increased budgets to invest online.
CEO at egaming 2.0
09 June 2003 11:37am
I'm fairly dubious of achieving significant positive brand value in a 468 x 60, but theory on the unclicked was that a cookie was served along with the banner, so those "unclicked" visitors who later did hit the site would be accounted for--or so the agency selling the service proclaimed. I recall that there was talk at the time of seeing a "20-30% uplift in banner response" by including unclicked, but, as I said, it never materialised for me.
Cheers.
On 10:25:10 9 June 2003 Ashley wrote:
>Hi Alex
>
>This is an interesting question and you're right not
>something that we've covered (yet) in our Online Marketing
>Benchmarks report. Will be in the update!
>
>You say "I'd experiemented with measuring them in the
>past ..." - how do you track these unclicked
>responses out of interest? Are you using a
>campaign-specific URL - like a microsite or a
>forward-slash sub-section? If not, and there has been no
>click, then I'd imagine it is hard to track? For
>forward-slash sub-sections I'd imagine many users go to
>the root URL anyway, further under-reporting response
>rates? Obviously where there has been a click (like with
>Tradedoubler report you mention) then subsequent purchases
>can be tracked years later if necessary using a cookie.
>
>"Unclicked banner responses" might be looked at
>as proof of the positive branding effect of online
>advertising? Increasingly I hear agencies talking about
>metrics like 'time with brand' for online. Furthermore,
>there are developments like the
>"surround-session" advertising where site users
>get exposure to an advertising brand for the duration of
>their session. I haven't heard yet about much research on
>the results for this, but in many ways I think this is a
>much more interesting development than what we hear about
>rich media and changing ad formats.
>
>Perhaps most interesting of all, and hardest to measure,
>is the delayed-response effect *offline* as a result of
>online brand exposure e.g. I see the M&S ad online so
>I go and buy in the store. The web is delivering huge
>value here but it is hard to measure accurately and yet a
>crucial piece of information for all those e-commerce
>managers pitching for increased budgets to invest online.
CEO at Econsultancy
09 June 2003 12:03pm
Sounds like third party cookies and cross-site tracking a la DoubleClick-gate? Not flavour of the month any more (or evan legal, soon).
I agree that 468 X 60 banners probably don't do that much for online-offline response driving, hence the quest for new formats. They too, however, are surely quickly doomed to become blind spots as users get used to them, so constant innovation, permission marketing, good targeting for relevancy and excellent creative execution are required....
On 11:37:26 9 June 2003 alexczaj wrote:
>I'm fairly dubious of achieving significant positive brand
>value in a 468 x 60, but theory on the unclicked was that
>a cookie was served along with the banner, so those
>"unclicked" visitors who later did hit the site
>would be accounted for--or so the agency selling the
>service proclaimed. I recall that there was talk at the
>time of seeing a "20-30% uplift in banner
>response" by including unclicked, but, as I said, it
>never materialised for me.
>
>Cheers.
>
>
>On 10:25:10 9 June 2003 Ashley wrote:
>>Hi Alex
>>
>>This is an interesting question and you're right not
>>something that we've covered (yet) in our Online
>Marketing
>>Benchmarks report. Will be in the update!
>>
>>You say "I'd experiemented with measuring them in
>the
>>past ..." - how do you track these unclicked
>>responses out of interest? Are you using a
>>campaign-specific URL - like a microsite or a
>>forward-slash sub-section? If not, and there has been
>no
>>click, then I'd imagine it is hard to track? For
>>forward-slash sub-sections I'd imagine many users go
>to
>>the root URL anyway, further under-reporting response
>>rates? Obviously where there has been a click (like
>with
>>Tradedoubler report you mention) then subsequent
>purchases
>>can be tracked years later if necessary using a
>cookie.
>>
>>"Unclicked banner responses" might be looked
>at
>>as proof of the positive branding effect of online
>>advertising? Increasingly I hear agencies talking
>about
>>metrics like 'time with brand' for online.
>Furthermore,
>>there are developments like the
>>"surround-session" advertising where site
>users
>>get exposure to an advertising brand for the duration
>of
>>their session. I haven't heard yet about much research
>on
>>the results for this, but in many ways I think this is
>a
>>much more interesting development than what we hear
>about
>>rich media and changing ad formats.
>>
>>Perhaps most interesting of all, and hardest to
>measure,
>>is the delayed-response effect *offline* as a result
>of
>>online brand exposure e.g. I see the M&S ad online
>so
>>I go and buy in the store. The web is delivering huge
>>value here but it is hard to measure accurately and
>yet a
>>crucial piece of information for all those e-commerce
>>managers pitching for increased budgets to invest
>online.