Unicast

As you know, we recently welcomed MediaMind Technologies, Inc., a leading global provider of integrated digital advertising solutions and the EyeWonder video and rich media advertising unit to the DG family. We share DG’s excitement in broadening our team and scope. Unicast has been a pioneer of innovation in the interactive space, working with the world’s largest publishers on a global scale. Together with MediaMind and EyeWonder, we will further expand our interactive capabilities and the strong service-orientation DG has already established over the years.

The combination of MediaMind, Unicast, and EyeWonder brings together a highly qualified roster of professionals, a complementary footprint of offices worldwide, along with innovative technologies to connect advertisers and agencies with the most desirable audiences on a global basis.

While we integrate with MediaMind and EyeWonder under the MediaMind brand, we encourage you to continue follow our news updates at http://creativezone.mediamind.com/Blog/ or click here to subscribe.

A little more than a month has passed since the end of SXSW here in Austin, so we’ve all had plenty of time to reflect on the experience. I couldn’t help but notice how blatantly brand-saturated this year’s festival was – particularly the interactive portion. This article from Ad Age confirms I’m not the only one who thought so, and a very telling comment from a festival-goer caught my attention:

"Ultimately, everyone here recognizes we're being sold to," [he] said. "We'll take the free things, but I don't know if that's effective marketing."

This statement got me thinking about the barrage of brands we’re exposed to everyday, particularly online. Too often, digital ads follow a strict formula: commercial + logo + CTA. These days, that’s like handing someone a printed flyer at an event – your brand is there, but the engagement is low, and you’ll hear statements from consumers like the one above. More and more agencies are starting to recognize that the development of new technologies brings many opportunities for customer engagement. If you’re treating the Internet like another television, you’re not taking full advantage of the medium.

Tara DeMarco of Bazaarvoice suggests in a recent article that “gamification” will be the buzzword of 2011, as agencies seek out new ways to engage with and maintain customers. As she explains, gamification combines Fun Theory (the idea that you can get people to behave a certain way when you make the desired behavior fun) and the Participation Chain. The Participation Chain builds consumer interactions in a logical progression while continuously increasing engagement and value. This could be as simple as a game that rewards the player with a coupon, and then rewards the player again when she passes the game on to friends.

So instead of bombarding your increasingly savvy audience with your brand, why not create something that not only engages them psychologically, but is fun and promotes interest long after they’ve seen your company logo? This year, spend some time rethinking your ad executions, and take full advantage of the interactive possibilities that online ads offer.

Very similar to the quote of character Gary Wallace from John Hughes’ 1985 movie classic Weird Science, SXSW Interactive has no shortage of people and no shortage of parties. The panels aren’t bad either, when you can get to them early enough to get a seat. The Unicast party that kicked off the SXSW event was indeed worthy of being categorized as one of the great ways to kick off the conference. There was a great mix of professionals from Unicast, Springbox and the digital realm. It was pretty much standing room only for the duration. There were great conversations being thrown back and forth with a tremendous amount of optimism in regards to the future of rich media and the future of online video.

One of the panels I was able to catch, was a play on the Flash vs HTML5 battle. Well at least Apple has led us to believe that the battle lines have been drawn, but this panel emphasized that Flash and Html5 should just be recognized as the tools we work with and at some point down the road, they may work as interchangeably as Flash and JavaScript do now. The panel posed many of the limitations that Flash currently poses and in the same manner, outlined the limitations that HTML5 still faces especially in browsers like Internet Explorer. Speaker Elliot Chong did a good job of playing the advocate for Flash and pointed out that Flash is still moving to become more developer friendly in terms of usage, load times, backend support for bookmarking and performance overall. It seemed that the message on behalf of Flash was that, when done correctly, Flash still provides the most artfully creative units and websites on the web and HTML5 still has a ways to go before it catches up to Flash in this respect. Some people may say I am a bit biased towards Flash since I make my living out of managing a team that delivers some of the coolest Flash ad units on the web, but I will be more than happy to welcome the addition of HTML5 to the family and I can’t wait to see the possibilities that this new tool may unlock in the near future.

The average person doesn’t enjoy finding an expanding display ad across their favorite website, most people find it downright annoying. It’s gotten to the point where people have evolved in terms of how they browse the internet and many ignore these ads completely. This has resulted in low interaction rates across digital advertising as a whole. The average click through rate on a banner ad sits around 0.1%, which leaves advertising agencies struggling to justify the costs of these digital placements to its clients. A survey conducted across 100 different ad agencies showed that in Q4 of 2010, television and radio advertising grew as digital fell. I can see why a number as small as 0.1% can scare off advertisers but I feel that the logic is somewhat lacking.

The whole point of advertising is to raise brand awareness. The best way to raise awareness is to go where the people can see you. Just because the 140 million people who visit MSN.com everyday didn’t click on your ad or enter your sweepstakes doesn’t mean that they weren’t aware of your brand being on the page. Sure clients want high interaction rates, everyone in this industry wants that, but digital advertising is the only type of advertising that allows some sort of interaction. Doesn’t it still accomplish everything an ad on television or radio accomplishes by raising awareness? Shouldn’t any interaction simply be considered a bonus?

It seems as if advertisers have been equating not clicking with not seeing and that’s simply not the case. People who are running back to television are only moving backwards. In fact the DVR has now made television advertising a very dicey industry. It has created an environment where advertisers aren’t guaranteed that people have even seen the ad because in most cases, the ad is simply an afterthought as the user fast forwards to the next scene in Glee. Now if an advertiser spent that money to place a video ad on Hulu instead of on network television, they would be ensured that the user couldn’t skip their ad, showing off some of the control that advertisers have when they go digital.

The final shift in advertising from television to digital will come with a complete shift in audience. As more and more content comes to online applications such as Hulu, Netflix, ESPN3, and Google TV (just to name a few), you will begin to see more and more people leaving cable and television behind for the world of digital media. While this shift may take time, advertisers who are experimenting in the digital realm are getting the upper hand on the competition by finding out what works and what doesn’t when reaching out to people on the internet. And those advertisers who are being scared off by a click through rate of 0.1% need to realize the click through rate for television advertising is always 0.0%.

When we look back on 2010 I think many people will remember it as the year that Social Network Applications merged with geo location devices. According to one study “Venture capitalists have poured $115 million into location start-ups since last year.” With such high profile providers as Gowalla, Four Square and Facebook all allowing users to share their locations with other users.

But do people really want to use this new service? According to recent studies the short answer is no. Most people see geo location apps as an invasion of their privacy. Since I have not conducted any study myself I can only speak to why this new form of communication does not speak to me. The main reason is simple; I do not want people knowing where I am located. I am a private person and the idea of checking in at different locations just doesn’t interest me. In fact I find the idea kind of scary. Sure it presents the opportunity to meet new people or for friend to know where to come find you. But in my opinion it also presents a lot of safety issues such as letting people know when you aren’t home. Perhaps someday I will change my mind but for now I would much rather my life stay private.

Sunday night's Season 4 premiere of Mad Men brought in 2.9 million viewers and was the most watched episode of Mad Men ever, which means 2.9 million of you saw the PR stunt that Peggy Olson and Pete Campbell pulled off.

After fretting over possibly losing the Sugarberry Ham account, Peggy suggests that they hire two actresses to fight over a ham at a grocery store in order to generate press over the product. The stunt is a success and Pete and Peggy are awarded additional dollars to their advertising budget.

What this scene reminded me of is this – we are all looking for ways to get our brand or our clients’ brand out there without having to break the bank.

With the advent of social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, companies are jumping at the chance to generate buzz around their product. But is it really working?

According to a recent report that was released today by digital agency 360i, 90% of tweets come from consumers and only 12% of consumer tweets mention a brand. The top brands mentioned on Twitter are Twitter itself.

Furthermore, only 1% of consumer tweets that mention a brand are part of an active conversation with that brand, meaning that companies are failing to engage their consumers in a conversation.

So what does this mean for businesses both large and small?

Unfortunately in this case, showing up is not half the battle. Businesses need to build relationships with their consumers and take on a personality. As 360i states, “there remains a largely untapped opportunity for brands to create deeper connections with consumers via earned media and to learn more about what motivates them with online listening through Twitter.” The real value for companies who join social networking site is to create a conversation that allows brands to become a more meaningful part of people’s lives.

Everyone’s favorite site to watch full episodes of television on the web, Hulu made lots of news this week. One report has video game enthusiast rejoicing as it was announced that Hulu is close to signing a deal with Sony that would bring a paid version of the site to the Playstation. According to the Bloomberg report the Playstation version would still present users with the opportunity to watch both current and archival shows in their entirety. The deal would open Hulu up to a larger market and allow them to compete with Netflix.

In other Hulu news rumors continue to fly that the site is close to bringing Viacom programs back to the site. In mid March Viacom pulled two of Hulu’s most popular shows The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. However this time these shows may only be available in a new subscription based version of Hulu. In addition to adding Viacom shows it is also reported that Hulu may add shows by CBS to this subscription only service.

A lot of controversy has come up surrounding Apple’s recent change to its developer terms prohibiting Google and other third party affiliates from collecting analytical data from iPhone and iPad apps. We will leave it for the courts to decide, but it’s not completely clear if this is an attempt by Apple to monopolize an emerging market, protect their stake in the smart phone market from Google and others, or just Apple being “different” (which doesn’t seem to be so different anymore). Despite what tricks Apple may have up their sleeve, there are a few daunting realities surrounding this information collection that are no secret to all parties involved.

The sheer volume of data collection coming from mobile users is going to increase exponentially. With the growing popularity of mobile computing, marketers are going to want to start looking at things like location, time, and previous interactions within the mobile device.

The value of this data is going to increase. With new metrics being collected, data will be used to create more innovative ways of ad delivery, and of measuring success. In a dynamic online advertising environment where tiny changes to ad design or placement can mean a world of difference in performance, it forces marketers to buy in, or bust.

And lastly, Apple clearly wants to collect and do things with this data that it doesn’t want Google to know about. This is really no surprise from Apple, but does create artificial barriers to competition and stirs up even more bad blood between fierce competitors, who most certainly will be required to play nice at some point in the future. However, for the foreseeable future, Apple has the tablet market cornered, and doesn’t want to provide information to anyone who may infringe upon that.

Competitor AdMob’s CEO Omar Hamoui wrote in a blog post, “"Artificial barriers to competition hurt users and developers and, in the long run, stall technological progress."

This may be true Mr. Hamoui, but is it “an attempt to monopolize, combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations” as prohibited by the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890?

This will have to be left for Washington to decide, and with a law originally written in 1890 with no concept of “information” as a commodity or mass marketing in general, it could really go either way. In the meantime, the data keeps rolling in.

What do you do when Apple reports that two million iPads were sold in less than 60 days? You create the first-ever tablet task force, duh!

With the debut of iAd fast approaching on July 1, 2010, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) has created the Tablet Task Force to help create an infrastructure that would help support a variety of rich new advertising opportunities for the inevitable emerging technologies of tablets and e-readers. In the short period of time the iPad has been on the market, developers have created over 5,000 apps that take advantage of all its features and not to mention more than 200,000 apps already in the App Store that were created for the iPhone or iPod touch. The objectives of the Tablet Task Force are to explore and define the best practices in the area, build a solid foundation for ongoing growth and provide guidance on the development of ad standards.

“The ad market is developing for tablets and e-readers as the excitement builds for those devices.” said Bob Carrigan, CEO, IDG Communications Inc., Co-Chair of the Tablet Task Force and a member of the Executive Committee of the IAB Board of Directors. “Their growth will create new revenue for media companies, agencies and technology companies and new experiences for users.”

Although, IAB was the first to create a tablet task force, they won’t be the last to create a support group that will help developers answer all their questions, especially with the current controversy and skepticism surrounding applications such as iAd. In just the last month, Apple has had a number of potential antitrust cases arise regarding its developers terms to exclude analytics companies from collecting data on users.

One thing’s for sure, we wouldn’t love Apple without a little bit of controversy along with a little bit of smoke and mirrors. Let’s just hope that the Tablet Task Force will help bring clarity to this rapidly growing market. In the mean time, let’s kick back with a bucket of popcorn and a coke and see what is in store for us in the next few months.

For more information on the Tablet Task Force, and to download “tabvertising—iPad and other tablets: the advertising and marketing opportunities,” please go to: www.iab.net/tabvertising

On March 7, 2010, James Dillon and James Egan, who lead our global and publisher solution initiatives, had the opportunity to attend the AdMonsters Publisher Forum XXII where they met and dined with some of our industry’s biggest publishers. The event was held at the Hamilton Park Hotel & Conference Center in Morristown, New Jersey and drew in over a hundred leaders in the online advertising space whose roles focus on online advertising operations and advertising technology. Unicast was a proud silver sponsor of the event along side several companies such as Collective, Operative, and Adsoftware.

Jim Egan had this to say about the event "this was definitely a solid networking event with Publisher Ad Ops professionals, who are often times in the driver seat for making vendor decisions on the publisher side. I definitely felt it was a worthwhile investment and I'm looking forward to attending the next Publisher forum in August."

The majority of the agenda for this event is comprised of member-led sessions, workshops, and breakouts covering a wide variety of relevant topics; some examples include ad serving technology, inventory management, organizational structure, business process automation, ad operations policies, rich/streaming media, and case studies.

For more information on this event or to learn about other AdMonsters events coming soon please visit http://www.admonsters.com/events