Two essential tech specs for a site when designing banners are - flash versions of visitors and whether they have javascript enabled. The W3C stats show as low as 90% of users having javascript on - which means no matter what version of flash they have - 10% won’t see a flash advert (embedding code..) so you need a decent anim GIF or static JPG back up. I’m seeing more like 99% of users having javascript on with sites where I can get these stats. Likewise flash 8+ has 90+ penetration - whereas this is lower on w3c and most publishers are still mandating flash 6 or 7 versions of ads.

Essentially banners should be able to take advantage of flash 8 features and we shouldn’t have to put so much effort into capturing a small number of low-end (or ad avoiding...) users if these stats are similar to what local publishers are seeing.

The question is - are they? And either way - should we be putting effort into making back-up creative for those who are indicating, by turning javascript off, they probably will ignore it anyway?

Oh and what penetration will MS Silverlight have to get to before we can make silverlight banners? ;)

I was actually assuming javascript was necessary for _every_ flash banner ad as the banners are being served and embedded using javascript. Ever since Microsoft updated IE last year to deal with the EOLAS patent dispute any flash not embedded using javascript has the “click to use this control” message on it when you hover. Not a great look for advertising! Amazing how many - even quite large - sites still haven’t fixed this.

So my thinking around javascript figures was - even though flash 7+ penetration is at 96%+ (even conservatively) it is the lower javascript figure of 90% one has to use to estimate flash ad viewership.

So if local publishers / ratings bodies can give higher figures for javascript and flash versioning that’d be great. It is probably more useful at a per-publisher level rather than market wide as audience segment can vary it widely. e.g. It’d be nice if 60% of users were using firefox as my own site’s stats suggest - but no! ;)

95% of the ads I’ve worked on (the past couple of years this is) would be flash primarily - with animated GIF backups if absolutely necessary, but 50+% of the time static JPEGs as the alternative. There are very few placements out there that don’t accept flash and no one asks for non-flash banners if the spot can support them! ;)

The only major (local) static spots I can think of are on Trademe.* I did once receive a creative brief for a trademe advert that involved animation - nearly sent it through to production before I clicked and remembered that Trademe was static only. Had to disappoint the advertiser there! ;)

* When are we going to see diversified ad spots on this behemoth?

If Trade Me was going to make any minor alterations to display advertising, what would be acceptable to both advertisers and site-users?

I doubt whether there would be a serious or credible argument against dynamic ads within TradeMel; and a classic case for AB testing to establish efficacy.

CEO, IAB - 20 May 2007 03:21 PM

Actually I wasn’t clear. What I meant was what proportion of the ads you put together would be flash ads as opposed to animated gifs or static jpeg ads?

Cheers

Mark

I am a fan of the static gif the only advantage flash has over the gif is the ability to be able to interact with it.
I would use gifs 75% of the time over flash when it comes to ads.

Garth - 24 July 2007 02:17 PM

Do dynamic ads generate a higher CTR?  Perhaps TradeMe stays with static ads is from the user experience angle, that being, dynamic ads are a distraction to the user navigating the website?

Yeah, I am pretty sure that TradeMe only allows static banners for two reasons:

1) They strongly believe that animated banners are annoying and detract from the user experience
2) They have strict size requirements to keep page load times fast.

It will be interesting to see if they relax their attitudes to these when Sam Morgan moves on and Fairfax presumably gets more direct influence.

Interestingly, the best results we are seeing from flash placements within Trade Me are those with input fields for valid consumer benefit (mortgage calculator, airline departure/arrival locations, etc).  Practical usage wins out over gratuitous animation.  Movement doesn’t not necessarily lead to increased click-thoughs but can be relevant for brand positioning.  A case of working out what you’re trying to achieve and developing a suitable ad & placement schedule to deliver to your objectives.

That said, from the industry results I’ve been party to, Trade Me’s CTR from Tab & Tower static gifs have out-performed their flash equivalents (from other publishers) on a CPM basis every time.  But I don’t get to see the full campaign results from too many advertisers ... is anyone prepared to present any campaign results that dispute this claim?

That said, from the industry results I’ve been party to, Trade Me’s CTR from Tab & Tower static gifs have out-performed their flash equivalents (from other publishers) on a CPM basis every time.  But I don’t get to see the full campaign results from too many advertisers ... is anyone prepared to present any campaign results that dispute this claim?

I also have found better CTR from static gifs vs flash.

Update: early results in from the Trade Me move to internationally recognised advertising placements have been very positive.  Click results on the flash spots have been strong with some 10,000+ results from across the auction site and one ROS skyscraper in Trade Me Motors receiving a crazy 13,000 clicks.  It does appear that the introduction of Flash has not reduced placement effectiveness.

With only one week of metrics, it’s too early to gauge results, but so far both the banner and skyscraper positions are performing similarly, giving good choice to advertisers.

I contend that Trade Me ROS and home page placements will continue to out-click other publishers’ equivalent spots when compared on a CPM basis (eg. ROS skyscraper has a cpm of 75 cents).

I’ll update again after a month of results.

MG

MG - 13 July 2009 12:43 PM

Update: early results in from the Trade Me move to internationally recognised advertising placements have been very positive.  Click results on the flash spots have been strong with some 10,000+ results from across the auction site and one ROS skyscraper in Trade Me Motors receiving a crazy 13,000 clicks.  It does appear that the introduction of Flash has not reduced placement effectiveness

MG

Nice Move!! Have you seen much change in page views and bounce rate with the new design?

I doubt whether there would be a serious or credible argument against dynamic ads within TradeMel; and a classic case for AB testing to establish efficacy.

Me too.I can’t see anything that there will be anyone taking arguments about dynamic adsin TradeMe.
And I wonder why.

foxdrg
Simulation prêt

A case of working out what you’re trying to achieve and developing a suitable ad & placement schedule to deliver to your objectives.

Regards

Gunner

____
dossier surendettement