Previously, Econsultancy has discussed the visible impact that new video formats are having upon the online advertising sphere and is an area which we can easily see will implode within the digital environment as a whole over the next twelve months or so.
To get some front-line opinion of the marketplace, we spoke to Nick Bell, co-founder of the up-and-coming interactive video platform, Quick.tv, about this complex and often overlooked marketing medium.
To cut straight to the chase: what’s happening in the online video marketplace?
Over the past few years, online video has seen huge growth in terms of both deployment and views, but also revenue generated. Publishers and retailers have realised that video is the most effective communication method, as demonstrated by the long dwell times and recollection statistics... but the cost of production is still high and the accountability of standard play/pause/stop video is still low.
However, the cost of content delivery continues to drop, making professional playout more affordable and new production technologies allow content to be created more affordably. But despite this, most professional online video is originally produced for offline distribution, which continues to hinder the market, as this content is then 're-versioned' to be displayed in a smaller online window. This non interactive, linear content is completely at odds with the ethos of the internet.
Video is currently quite a difficult medium to engage users, do you think this will shift at all in the near future?
I think video is THE most engaging medium, I think the problem is measuring engagement and creating accountable content with strong calls to actions embedded within video. The one problem at the moment is that in most cases, there is no way to directly link viewings to sales or any other consequential action, something which will change with interactive video and how it’s adopted as a marketing and sales channel.
Do you think companies need to adapt and invest into video now (and face being left behind) or will they be able to take up the medium when/if it goes mainstream?
Those who join the party now will probably benefit more, but not to the exclusion of others later on, in most cases.
Which particular sectors do you think should be focusing on a greater engagement with video?
I think every industry sector can use video successfully, because it’s the best way to impart a message, irrespective of what that message may be.
The obvious sectors which can gain a huge uplift in this environment are e-tailers, publishers, production companies and agencies, however it’s easy to recognise that there are very few sectors which would not benefit from deploying more video, which is what makes this sector so exciting.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of online video?
It’s no secret that high-quality online video is more expensive to produce and deliver than text and graphic-based content. At this moment in time, for most cases, there is also still a large shortfall between direct revenue generated and costs. Pre and post-roll advertising solutions have proved to be a big turn-off for users, resulting in lost viewers and poor engagement rates. Equally, the branding aspect of video is very hard to measure, although this could be said about a great deal of online branding activity.
In its favour though, online video has proven time and time again to be a hugely engaging experience, and high demand from consumers can be gauged by looking at the rapid growth figures of usage. It’s just a matter of tapping into this massive potential.
Would you suggest that video has a better impact on branding than direct results?
In most current deployments, video is a branding activity, and looking at research, it works well in that respect.
It seems reasonable to say that a brand’s position may be set by using video: the impact can then be seen to surface through other media forms. This is because in many cases, the availability of video content is limited to a high-level message; a corporate video or TV ad, for example.
Equally, wherever we see this footage being re-versioned or specifically produced for direct results online, it is hugely effective, so in reality, both work well for branding exercises and are mutually compatible (when done correctly) and should therefore be deployed together within a coordinated strategy.
How effective do you feel video currently is against other online marketing strategies and how will this change, if at all?
Online video is the most effective online communication medium although it is still quite early in its development. By this, I mean that those who use it correctly swear by its efficiency, but many marketers are still holding back due to the cost of production. As costs reduce and accountability increases, alongside an increase of video being visibly effective, the use of the medium is extremely likely to rise.
What is the best measurement metric of video to assess its success?
The best measurement metric is the number of executions through a conversion or “call to action”.
If the objective of a video is to sell a product, then the best metric is to mirror a paid search campaign and report how many views have converted to click-throughs and sales.
If the objective is different from a direct sale, such as persuading the viewer to sign-up to an offer or mailing list, there needs to be a form within the video through which to apply, thus giving full accountability to the publisher. This is the same across all other response mechanisms: make them accountable through the developments and opportunities that are available through interactive video.
What kind of user engagement results have you seen with the various methods Quick.tv offers?
Different videos are published for different reasons, so there needs to be a wide variety of ways in which viewers can respond to what they see within the video, whether it’s a hotspot, voting, live data or product placement.
In all cases there has been a significant uplift in response rates where interactivity has been introduced into a video clip, compared with the same piece that has no interactive formatting. In some cases it’s been phenomenally greater.
It needs to be remembered that much depends on the quality, content and of course, the intended purpose or objective of the video. This returns to the point that the way in which the interactive elements are presented has an important bearing on results.
How do you envision the next twelve months will play out?
The use of online video will continue to grow and some costs will probably reduce, but the need to monetize the productions is likely to increase. The way in which video is published will therefore evolve: pre-roll ads are likely to diminish in favour of more clever ways to engage users and generate a return on investment.
What factors need to be considered before running a video marketing/advertising campaign?
Video is no different from any other format used in campaigns. With interactive technology, it is now possible to collect data using forms and voting, allow viewers to click straight through to products, create custom shopping baskets and embed live data such as pricing and availability... all within the video itself. My advice is to be mindful of your objectives and work backwards from there.
What advice would you give to those considering video advertising?
Don’t just take an offline video and stick it on the internet. Until recently, there was a TV ad running on the homepage of a major financial institution, in which the call to action was to visit their homepage.
My advice is also to be clear about your objectives, whether advertising or otherwise: consider what footage you already have and whether a re-edit or more is needed. Then, make the clip web-ready to optimise engagement, response rates and accountability, through the interactive and dynamic features that are currently available. Finally, publish wisely and try not to become too complacent when you see the great results start coming through...
Recommended reports
Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing
Econsultancy's Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefings, 
sponsored by Adobe, look at some of the most important trends affecting the marketing landscape in 2011. The third of these reports, published in December 2011, looks at the extent to which organisations use social data, what is preventing them from harnessing social data as effectively as they would like, their approach to social CRM and the role of social signals for determining search rankings.
Alternatively, see our Online Media Report or First Quarterly Digital Intelligence Briefing.
12:48PM on 29th July 2009
High Quality production need not be expensive - you're talking to the wrong people! 8-)
Owner at Digital Juggler
4:07PM on 29th July 2009
Good article and interesting interview, Nick sounds authoritative on this (handy given what his business does!).
At e-inbusiness we've been working with Clients for a while to help them understand the value of rich media, especially video content. It has to be said most of our conversation occur with fashion etailers and for obvious reasons: video is the best way online of demonstrating product quality and giving people a feel for how the product looks, moves, interacts with the body etc. Catwalk clips can be an excellent addition to flat images or basic zoom. Video has also been shown to help reduce return rates because people can make a more informed purchase decision in the first place.
There is an easy way to proove the ROI on this. Test a small product range with video content & use your analytics package to track video views. You can then evaluate the conversion of these pages with video and without video at the same time with an A/B test. Basic but effective.
We would never recommend Clients roll-out video across the product range - you need to work out which products will benefit the most. If you are unsure whether video will help, run a quick online customer survey and ask people how important additional features like video are. I'd be amazed if nobody said yes.
It will be interesting to see how quickly video becomes mainstream for online retailers.
thanks
james
cmo at strategic solutions
3:41PM on 4th August 2009
The one area that there is a work around is the accountability and linking action to a conversion. We work with Omniture. Omniture code can be included in the video and two things happen:
1) you get good analytics on video including stats on where engagment falls off within time segments
2) the tracking code allows linkage to activity just like any other source such as a banner ad. In other words the activity from the click through can be followed.
Most of the video player sources are including great analytics on the video plays. They can't follow the advertisers click through once the viewer leaves. That's were the linked to website has to have tracking from Omniture, Webtrends or another source.
I would love to hear more about the types of video advertising that works and resources for that. I don't know any sources that show me that pre- and post roll advertising is not effective. Can you help on the research.
12:17PM on 5th August 2009
You know what, everyone is missing the point, it is about quality content. You know TV people have been doing this for years - without such minutia coming in to it!
You cant create effective production based on minor changes in click throughs etc - trust me that is worse than making feature films based only on the opinions of the accountant! Rich Media is great and effective - if it is done right! The results are clear - do sales increase yes or no? Sales always increase. Having all these bells and whistles doesnt matter jack if the content isnt good.
Jackie
1:14PM on 7th August 2009
Hi Nick
Very useful overview . I think a further point is the emerging b2b video market which will be distinct from b2c. Business brands will be looking to utilise video on their web sites as an enhancement to their business development and lead generation activities mainly for client video testimonials, digital video case studies and digital video product overviews and video brochures. They will also be looking for alternatives to simply uploading onto youtube because by hosting on a video sharing site you are not only potentially losing control of the video and your brand- …. you are also having to share your brand impact with the youtube brand which is essentially arguably a consumer brand. Far better to host on your own dedicated video landing page with its own URL which you can control and measure in real time- and not have to share it with your competitors. There is a new web video direct marketing platform called FLIMP which allows you to do just that, and also to include call to action response links next to the video, allows you to distribute to target audiences and then track and monitor views and response by individual email address in real time on an online dashboard. . FLIMP is achieving average response rates of 27% - double the best average email results- and 14 times better than conventional direct mail. Indeed the whole area of web video for direct marketing is only just beginning to emerge - check out this example http://viewit.cc/?r=337E6F2A-D495-102C-B821-1231390065B2 - (though that is more of a b2c example.)
www.flimp.net
and I fully agree there is resistance to video because there is a perception of high cost- but it doesnt have to be . Its about being clever with your approach. You can repurpose and improve existing footage- get creative in the editing suite , introduce rich media graphics/animations and grab other creative images from your web site etc so its not just video. The main cost is a video crew on location .. if you can minimise this- and maximise their time - you can still create powerful quality video bites which work.- which is the other point - you dont want anything longer than a minute! Having said all that, business brands cannot afford to cut corners, and will need to ensure they are using professional video experts, because as the market develops then the quality will rise as brands compete to have better quality video than their rivals.
cheers Sean