Obviously Yahoo has been following such a successful business model lately that anything the CEO says should be listened to carefully, since you know, they're doing so well....
every 6 months i TRY to advertise on yahoo search marketing ... every 6 months i abort because of the useless interface, lack of control and mind numbing stupidity of the whole set up (that is clearly run by bureaucratic monkeys) and instead give the money that i set aside for yahoo back to google.
maybe carol should look at her own lot before she comments on others.
And yet another old-hat industry competitor predicts Apple's failure based on the fact they've taken a different approach to an old familiar problem. News at 11. Stay tuned for follow-up.
When some animals are scared they piss themselves as a defense mechanism (or something).
What we see above from Yahoo is the corporate version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starnyc
She's dead wrong. Advertising professionals all use macs. Advertising professionals all want the most standardized branded environment. Advertisers want statistics. Advertisers want in App ads. Advertisers want micro-targeted, contextual ads. iAd delivers exactly what we want.
To do an online ad campaign we currently need to make up to 10 versions of the same Flash ad to work with different ad servers for different publications, different size requirements, and several different click tracking versions with different embeds. This extra production and management is very expensive and also leads to difficulty doing statistical analysis as the different ad serving platforms provide data in different formats.
Beyond the production savings and the huge, affluent audience, iAd also allows consumers to choose to let the ad take over the whole window and provide a totally immersive branding experience. This is what we've been looking for for years, and iAd makes it smooth and not intrusive to the end user.
From the media planning standpoint, iAd is a no brainer - it's totally stats and demographically driven and give the ability to micro-target, so it is HIGHLY efficient.
Bartz is talking out her rear - apps are increasingly being used to access information versus search engines, so the Yahoo/MS model will trend downwards as apps are obviously growing exponentially.
wait, isn't Yahoo the company which basically gave up on search because they could not compete and sold their soul to Microsoft and their crappy Bing engine? Yeah...the CEO does not have a clue what is going on.
every 6 months i TRY to advertise on yahoo search marketing ... every 6 months i abort because of the useless interface, lack of control and mind numbing stupidity of the whole set up (that is clearly run by bureaucratic monkeys) and instead give the money that i set aside for yahoo back to google.
maybe carol should look at her own lot before she comments on others.
Don't even bother considering Yahoo. For a website I was helping out with some SEO stuff, it was excruciatingly painful just trying understand what processes to go through with Yahoo.
On a sidenote, Apple does spend huge amounts of money on Yahoo and Google, even Bing, for paid ads to direct people to Apple.Com (and the various localised versions) and the official Apple Online Store.
Yahoo is teetering on the edge of irrelevancy. Although Bartz built (and managed) a great company - Autodesk - she has stepped into a sinkhole with this one. Sounds like a frustrated CEO lashing out at competition to me.
Recall what happened to the nay-saying CEOs of Dell, Palm, Nokia?
[QUOTE=starnyc;1715409]She's dead wrong. Advertising professionals all use macs. Advertising professionals all want the most standardized branded environment. Advertisers want statistics. Advertisers want in App ads. Advertisers want micro-targeted, contextual ads. iAd delivers exactly what we want.
Agreed. The ONLY important statistic is the 5/1 ratio for consumer's clicks. More, what, essentially, makes the Internet a pain when you don't have adblock software is the high number of low quality advertisement that plagues your browsing experience. Do you want that on the iPhone? Do you want to get a 500+ buck piece of hardware and have it hijacked by poorly designed ads?
Hell, no. People want useful, easy to use, pleasant experiences related to advertisement. Poor ads should stay on the TV, where we can shut them down and unplug the power cord!
So, either that person is doing the FUD dance, in which case, her comments are perfectly in line with her position (criticizing a system that endangers her company's primary source of revenue and trying to make advertisers wary of it), either she's not gifted with a very acute sense of business, in which case the (imho) inevitable successful outcome of Apple iAd venture should lead her to sit in some darkened room in front of a Katana, waiting for honor to dictate her the proper conduct. (Metaphor ripped off from Pratchett's Good Omens).
In the interview, Bartz took the opportunity to comment on Apple's newly launched iAd mobile ad network, which debuted in July. The Yahoo CEO predicted that Apple will fail because advertisers won't cooperate with the iPhone maker's policies
People [advertisers] may be very skeptical and clearly iAds are not mature at present. But if Apple can back up its new venture with numbers it will be successful. As much as advertisers will come if the numbers from the early adopters are enticing, Apple will also modify its approach to accommodate advertisers and make the process 'friendlier'. It is clear however, that Apple is targeting the higher end of the marketeers at the moment which may cloud some people's views of the service - we are talking major campaigns with high budgets. The other important thing to bear in mind is that iAds may extend to AppleTV services. I am not saying anything is a guaranteed success but if the new Apple TV with IOS becomes a strong seller the scope of iAds and its likelihood of success will change.
LOL, has she even GOT an iPhone or iPod. I see tons of ads on my iPod when I'm playing games. Trust me, advertisers will ADAPT. Advertisers are probably the best at adapting to various media and systems.
If they want to advertise on the iPhone, advertisers will come.
She's dead wrong. Advertising professionals all use macs. Advertising professionals all want the most standardized branded environment. Advertisers want statistics. Advertisers want in App ads. Advertisers want micro-targeted, contextual ads. iAd delivers exactly what we want.
To do an online ad campaign we currently need to make up to 10 versions of the same Flash ad to work with different ad servers for different publications, different size requirements, and several different click tracking versions with different embeds. This extra production and management is very expensive and also leads to difficulty doing statistical analysis as the different ad serving platforms provide data in different formats.
Beyond the production savings and the huge, affluent audience, iAd also allows consumers to choose to let the ad take over the whole window and provide a totally immersive branding experience. This is what we've been looking for for years, and iAd makes it smooth and not intrusive to the end user.
From the media planning standpoint, iAd is a no brainer - it's totally stats and demographically driven and give the ability to micro-target, so it is HIGHLY efficient.
Bartz is talking out her rear - apps are increasingly being used to access information versus search engines, so the Yahoo/MS model will trend downwards as apps are obviously growing exponentially.
And this is where the now-legendary Apple control freakiness pays off. First, deliver a product that the user truly enjoys using, ensure that it delivers a minimum benchmark for the apps serving it, create an easy-to-use SDK for developers with an acceptable revenue system, and then monetize the system with carefully controlled ad services that enhance, not detract from that user experience. WINs all around - the ads are decent, perhaps even cool, from sources pre-screened by Apple for profile and targeting, devs are assured of a good standard that means the ads will have a good chance of being viewed - allowing the ads to drive support of free or low-cost apps. Bartz has to weigh in on the most obvious threat to her failing tradition web ad services - kudos on calling out the success of Apple's approach as a potential failure - that speaks volumes to the threat they perceive.
I used to use Yahoo exclusively for search but I've been on Google for several years now. Same thing with their maps - now I'm using Google maps. Same thing with shopping etc. Get the point? Yahoo is dying.
LOL, has she even GOT an iPhone or iPod. I see tons of ads on my iPod when I'm playing games. Trust me, advertisers will ADAPT. Advertisers are probably the best at adapting to various media and systems.
If they want to advertise on the iPhone, advertisers will come.
I think this lady has a point. I think iAd will be around, but it will be a very small niche compared to the big boys in advertising.
The same small niche that Apple occupies in the PC segment, where they have a minority marketshare with the highest profitability? If so - I don't see a downside to that!
Comments
OH WAIT
maybe carol should look at her own lot before she comments on others.
What we see above from Yahoo is the corporate version.
She's dead wrong. Advertising professionals all use macs. Advertising professionals all want the most standardized branded environment. Advertisers want statistics. Advertisers want in App ads. Advertisers want micro-targeted, contextual ads. iAd delivers exactly what we want.
To do an online ad campaign we currently need to make up to 10 versions of the same Flash ad to work with different ad servers for different publications, different size requirements, and several different click tracking versions with different embeds. This extra production and management is very expensive and also leads to difficulty doing statistical analysis as the different ad serving platforms provide data in different formats.
Beyond the production savings and the huge, affluent audience, iAd also allows consumers to choose to let the ad take over the whole window and provide a totally immersive branding experience. This is what we've been looking for for years, and iAd makes it smooth and not intrusive to the end user.
From the media planning standpoint, iAd is a no brainer - it's totally stats and demographically driven and give the ability to micro-target, so it is HIGHLY efficient.
Bartz is talking out her rear - apps are increasingly being used to access information versus search engines, so the Yahoo/MS model will trend downwards as apps are obviously growing exponentially.
(...) And judging on how Yahoo is doing as a company, I am not very inclined to accept what she is saying. (...)
Yeah. I think you're obligated to climb out of your deathbed before you start predicting the demise of others.
every 6 months i TRY to advertise on yahoo search marketing ... every 6 months i abort because of the useless interface, lack of control and mind numbing stupidity of the whole set up (that is clearly run by bureaucratic monkeys) and instead give the money that i set aside for yahoo back to google.
maybe carol should look at her own lot before she comments on others.
Don't even bother considering Yahoo. For a website I was helping out with some SEO stuff, it was excruciatingly painful just trying understand what processes to go through with Yahoo.
On a sidenote, Apple does spend huge amounts of money on Yahoo and Google, even Bing, for paid ads to direct people to Apple.Com (and the various localised versions) and the official Apple Online Store.
Recall what happened to the nay-saying CEOs of Dell, Palm, Nokia?
Agreed. The ONLY important statistic is the 5/1 ratio for consumer's clicks. More, what, essentially, makes the Internet a pain when you don't have adblock software is the high number of low quality advertisement that plagues your browsing experience. Do you want that on the iPhone? Do you want to get a 500+ buck piece of hardware and have it hijacked by poorly designed ads?
Hell, no. People want useful, easy to use, pleasant experiences related to advertisement. Poor ads should stay on the TV, where we can shut them down and unplug the power cord!
So, either that person is doing the FUD dance, in which case, her comments are perfectly in line with her position (criticizing a system that endangers her company's primary source of revenue and trying to make advertisers wary of it), either she's not gifted with a very acute sense of business, in which case the (imho) inevitable successful outcome of Apple iAd venture should lead her to sit in some darkened room in front of a Katana, waiting for honor to dictate her the proper conduct. (Metaphor ripped off from Pratchett's Good Omens).
In the interview, Bartz took the opportunity to comment on Apple's newly launched iAd mobile ad network, which debuted in July. The Yahoo CEO predicted that Apple will fail because advertisers won't cooperate with the iPhone maker's policies
People [advertisers] may be very skeptical and clearly iAds are not mature at present. But if Apple can back up its new venture with numbers it will be successful. As much as advertisers will come if the numbers from the early adopters are enticing, Apple will also modify its approach to accommodate advertisers and make the process 'friendlier'. It is clear however, that Apple is targeting the higher end of the marketeers at the moment which may cloud some people's views of the service - we are talking major campaigns with high budgets. The other important thing to bear in mind is that iAds may extend to AppleTV services. I am not saying anything is a guaranteed success but if the new Apple TV with IOS becomes a strong seller the scope of iAds and its likelihood of success will change.
If they want to advertise on the iPhone, advertisers will come.
YHOO has decline 50% in value from what was an all time low
APPL has increased about 140% in value to an all time high!
Now Carol Bartz has the chutzpah to open up her ugly pie-hole?
1- The various parties will become used to the process, and so it will flow smoother, and
2- Apple will adapt to the real needs of advertisers if that should become necessary.
She's dead wrong. Advertising professionals all use macs. Advertising professionals all want the most standardized branded environment. Advertisers want statistics. Advertisers want in App ads. Advertisers want micro-targeted, contextual ads. iAd delivers exactly what we want.
To do an online ad campaign we currently need to make up to 10 versions of the same Flash ad to work with different ad servers for different publications, different size requirements, and several different click tracking versions with different embeds. This extra production and management is very expensive and also leads to difficulty doing statistical analysis as the different ad serving platforms provide data in different formats.
Beyond the production savings and the huge, affluent audience, iAd also allows consumers to choose to let the ad take over the whole window and provide a totally immersive branding experience. This is what we've been looking for for years, and iAd makes it smooth and not intrusive to the end user.
From the media planning standpoint, iAd is a no brainer - it's totally stats and demographically driven and give the ability to micro-target, so it is HIGHLY efficient.
Bartz is talking out her rear - apps are increasingly being used to access information versus search engines, so the Yahoo/MS model will trend downwards as apps are obviously growing exponentially.
And this is where the now-legendary Apple control freakiness pays off. First, deliver a product that the user truly enjoys using, ensure that it delivers a minimum benchmark for the apps serving it, create an easy-to-use SDK for developers with an acceptable revenue system, and then monetize the system with carefully controlled ad services that enhance, not detract from that user experience. WINs all around - the ads are decent, perhaps even cool, from sources pre-screened by Apple for profile and targeting, devs are assured of a good standard that means the ads will have a good chance of being viewed - allowing the ads to drive support of free or low-cost apps. Bartz has to weigh in on the most obvious threat to her failing tradition web ad services - kudos on calling out the success of Apple's approach as a potential failure - that speaks volumes to the threat they perceive.
I used to use Yahoo exclusively for search but I've been on Google for several years now. Same thing with their maps - now I'm using Google maps. Same thing with shopping etc. Get the point? Yahoo is dying.
LOL, has she even GOT an iPhone or iPod. I see tons of ads on my iPod when I'm playing games. Trust me, advertisers will ADAPT. Advertisers are probably the best at adapting to various media and systems.
If they want to advertise on the iPhone, advertisers will come.
Advertisers AND the pron industry.
I think this lady has a point. I think iAd will be around, but it will be a very small niche compared to the big boys in advertising.
The same small niche that Apple occupies in the PC segment, where they have a minority marketshare with the highest profitability? If so - I don't see a downside to that!