With Graph Search, Can Facebook Kill LinkedIn, Yelp–Even Google?

DSC00202

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg introduces Graph Search (Photo: Robert Hof)

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

Facebook took pains today to tell the world that its new social search serviceGraph Search, is only a very limited tool that it will roll out very slowly over a period of months and years.

But CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his search staff couldn’t help but reveal their enthusiasm for the vast possibilities. For all their professed modesty, what struck me at the company’s press event introducing the service was how specific and broad-ranging Zuckerberg and his Graph Search leaders were about what it could provide: just about everything, potentially, that every company from LinkedIn to Yelp to Foursquare to Match.com to … yes, even Google provides today.

That’s an exaggeration, of course, that even Facebook folks surely didn’t intend. All of those companies have distinct, well-developed services with extensive user bases that are unlikely to shrivel up no matter how good Graph Search turns out to be. In most cases, they will probably retain a durable advantage for years to come. And as Zuckerberg said, it’s very, very early for Facebook search, and search is a devilishly complex discipline to do well.

Still, to hear it from Facebook itself, Graph Search will offers ways to provide similar services, sometimes in potentially easier and more effective ways:

* Recruiting: One of the first examples Facebook provided today was that Graph Search could help in finding qualified candidates for jobs. For instance, Lars Rasmussen, the Facebook director of engineering who heads the Graph Search team, mentioned that he could find people from NASA Ames Research Center who are friends of Facebook employees.

As investors, who bid up LinkedIn’s share a fraction today, no doubt recognize, that company has a pretty good if not exclusive hold on recruiters. And given that finding friends who worked somewhere is a rather specific subset of qualified candidates for a position, there’s not much chance recruiters will abandon LinkedIn for Facebook anytime soon. But Facebook, already used in various ways by recruiters, could siphon off activities that might otherwise have gone to LinkedIn. … Read more at The New Persuaders. But to conclude …

So, to answer the question in the headline: No, Facebook won’t kill any of these companies, certainly not anytime soon. They’re too strong, Facebook has too much still to build and then to prove, and rarely does a company kill another healthy company no matter how good its products are.

Investors may be thinking as much, as they sold Facebook shares to the tune of a 2.7% drop in price today. But if anyone doubted Facebook’s ability to keep disrupting the status quo, they surely shouldn’t doubt it anymore. Even with its baby steps into the search business, Facebook has again set new terms of engagement in the battle for the soul, or at least the cash register, of the Internet.

About these ads

LIVE: Facebook Unveils Graph Search–Its Long-Awaited Internal Search Engine

DSC00201

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg at the introduction of Graph Search (Photo: Robert Hof)

Ever since Facebook invited piles of press people to an event this morning to “come see what we are building,” speculation about what it will reveal has reached a fever pitch.

Update: It’s all about search! See below for details. But for what it’s worth, investors are not impressed. Facebook shares are down 2% in midday trading. No doubt that’s a short-sighted view–this socially infused search service is a big deal, if only to show how Facebook will keep engaging people more and more deeply, not to mention provide a foundation for the kind of search ads that made Google king of the Web–but that’s the market for you.

There must be a couple hundred press here, plus a crowd of Facebook employees standing in the back of the room–a sure indication that Facebook considers this a big deal.

And now we are underway, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg introducing us once again to Facebook’s mission and the social graph. First he goes into Facebook’s early history, before the news feed that now dominates the service.

Now he’s introducing the third pillar of Facebook’s service beyond the news feed and Timeline. What’s most interesting is graph search.

So what is graph search? It’s not Web search. We’re not indexing the Web. We’re indexing our map of the graph. There are more than a trillion connections in this graph, with billions more added every day–likes, comments, photos, etc. Indexing this is a really hard problem and we’ve been working on it a long time.

Graph Search is privacy-aware, he says. Every piece of content has its own audience, and most is not public. You can only search for content that has been shared with you–a very tough problem to solve.

Let’s say you do a Web search for hip hop. You get links. Graph Search is different–it’s intended to provide answers: Which of my friends are in San Francisco?

One of the big design problems we had to solve was how to make this natural. We’ve come up with an interface we think works. The answer is filters–not! That’s a joke–he shows a screen full of filters that look ridiculous, of course, because they can’t scale up.

He shows a video of queries that show how they come up with answers as you type in words.

For this first beta version, he says, Facebook focused on four use cases: people, photos, interests, and places. There’s a lot more, but these are especially useful. …

Read about the rest of the event at The New Persuaders.

13 Questions For 2013 In The World Of Online Advertising

questionsCross-posted at my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

For the past few years, I’ve offered predictions here and on The New Persuaders for what’s likely to come in the next year. I viewed them more as an agenda for what to watch for in the next 12 months than as firm predictions.

But it was too easy sometimes to state the obvious so they’d end up right by year-end. So this year, I’m going to shake it up and throw out a few questions instead. I think I know the answers to some of them, but if many won’t be answered definitively by year-end, they remain top of mind for me and probably for many others in online media and advertising.

So in this, the first full week of the new year, here are some questions to which I hope to start finding answers (and if you’ve got ‘em, sound off in the comments below!):

* Will image advertising finally take off online? I have to believe that as people spend more and more time online instead of reading print publications and watching TV, brand marketers will want and need to reach them there with ads that are aimed at creating consideration for later purchases, not just eliciting an immediate sale like Google’s search ads and too many banner ads. We’re already starting to see signs of such advertising with the early success of Facebook’s Sponsored StoriesTwitter’s Promoted Tweets, and YouTube’s TrueView ads–not to mention the explosion of tablets, which provide a lean-back experience more compatible with image advertising. This won’t be a sudden change, since brand marketers and agencies don’t move quickly, but you can’t tell me there aren’t going to be increasingly compelling ways for brands to influence people online.

* Will native ads reach broad scale? Well, perhaps they will on platforms such as Facebook and–well, Facebook–that already reach hundreds of millions of people. Sponsored Stories clearly have gotten some traction, even on mobile devices. But marketers and agencies won’t create multiple versions of campaigns to serve every new ad format that publishers claim work better than banner ads. Which brings up a related question:

* Will any standards emerge around the social gestures that most of these native ads embody? That’s really the only thing that will ensure that marketers can reach scale across many sites. That wouldn’t be in the interest of big companies such as Facebook and Google, which benefit from proprietary ad formats that can reach their huge audiences. But standards, whether it’s banners of a particular size or ad networks, create a more liquid market that helps hundreds of publishers survive as they provide marketers scalable opportunities to reach big audiences. So are there atomic units of social gestures that could carry brand messages across multiple native ad formats without destroying the appeal of native formats? Maybe there’s a technological fix for this, but it’s clear that a lot more needs to be done.

* Will the long-predicted shakeout in ad tech companies finally happen? It didn’t really occur last year despite a few middling-big acquisitions by Oracle, Salesforce.com, and Google. This year, perhaps new Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer will corral a few to try to recharge the company’s ad business. Google, Adobe, and IBM have built out “stacks” of ad tech, but no doubt they can each fill out their offerings. Then there’s Facebook, whose ad exchange is likely to need fleshing out. But even if they each write checks for a few three-letter acronym startups apiece, don’t call it a shakeout. Given the rapid evolution of advertising technologies, and the reality that using data to refine advertising is still in its infancy, it’s a good bet that more companies will still be created than disappear. That should keep the Lumascape as crowded as ever.

* Can advertisers and publishers make ads more personal without scaring people? That’s the $64 billion question, and it likely won’t get answered in full this year. It’s easy for headline-hungry politicians to make a big deal out of Facebook’s latest privacy gaffe or the Wall Street Journal’s or the New York Times’ latest scare story about an ad that followed somebody all over the Web. That’s especially so since Facebook really does push the privacy envelope too far at times, and too many advertisers idiotically chase one more sales conversion at the cost of scaring off hundreds of others or inviting onerous legislation. But making ads more useful to each individual person is not only crucial to online commerce, it’s potentially better for most consumers as well–seriously, I don’t need to see another ad for a fitness center or a new credit card, but that ad for Camper van Beethoven’s new CD had me in a split-second. The answer lies in these two words, everyone: transparency and choice.

* Will mobile advertising work? Well, some of it already does, to hear Google and Facebook tell it. And while those already devalued digital dimes so far turn to pennies when it comes to ads on smartphones and tablets, this still feels more like growing pains than a crisis in online advertising. Sure, the screens are small and people don’t like to be interrupted in their mobile cocoons. So a different kind of advertising is probably needed–clearly, banners don’t cut it on a four-inch screen. But the value to advertisers of knowing your location and maybe the apps you’re using, coupled with knowledge of what your friends like–all with permission, of course–is huge. That permission may be really tough to earn. But if advertisers can offer tangible value, perhaps in the form of useful services related to what you’re doing or looking for or shopping for–and isn’t that the ultimate native ad?–people may loosen their hold on that information.

* Can Larry Page keep Google relevant in the social media age? So far, the no-longer-new CEO has at least kept Google’s mainstream ad business humming. Page has outlasted a year or so of missteps, missed opportunities, antitrust investigations, and bum vocal chords, and arguably emerged with a company that’s leaner, more focused, and more potent than ever. Not only does the recent antitrust victory appear to leave it free to compete unimpeded, but Android is doing better than ever even vs. a very strong Apple ecosystem and Google is about to emerge as a powerhouse in the other half of online advertising: display ads, whether on the desktop or on mobile devices. Page’s big challenge looms as big as ever, though: Can Google play in the social Web vs. Facebook/Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, and more? I don’t know, but this may be the year Page has to provide a more definitive answer.

* Will TV and Web video ads finally come together on Connected TVs, tablets, or other devices? Sure, at some point. Video is video no matter where it runs, and while personal computer users bristle at pre-roll video ads, I’m betting viewers are more amenable to various kinds of ads when they view video on Internet-connected TVs or tablets. And even on PCs, YouTube’s TrueView ads, which you can skip after a few seconds, have proven successful to the tune of several billion dollars last year. Traditional TV advertising will continue to thrive thanks to unassailable economics of the cable-content cabal. But given extensive work by Nielsen, comScore, and others to provide metrics that can extend across TV and the Web, the latter may finally get some serious coin from brand marketers–if not this year, pretty soon thereafter. Especially if Apple works its magic on the television.

* Will Facebook really tick us off with a new feature or privacy “improvement”? Is Mark Zuckerberg CEO of Facebook? Nonetheless, Facebook’s well-worn playbook of pushing beyond social comfort levels, then pulling back just a bit, means we’ll probably see privacy norms get stretched once again.

* Will Apple ever make a real splash in advertising? Don’t bet your iPad on it. I think even the post-Steve Jobs Apple still views ads the way a lot of Silicon Valley still does (mostly in error): ineffective, inelegant, and crass. Apple itself can make great ads, but selling them is an entirely different matter.

* Will Amazon make a real splash in advertising? Oh yeah. All the pieces are in place, from a huge shopping-focused audience to a nearly bulletproof technology infrastructure. Again, it won’t set the world on fire this year, but we’re likely to see the smoke.

* Will Marissa Mayer turn around Yahoo? Not this year. Still, I wouldn’t be surprised to see signs of a real turn for the first time in about five CEOs. But the real turnaround will take years–if Yahoo’s board has the patience. That’s still an iffy bet worth about as much as a share of Yahoo stock.

* Will I ever figure out the appeal of Reddit and BuzzFeed? Gosh, I hope so. I get that these guys attract massive traffic, but neither site does much for me. Reddit, in particular, seems so random that I guess it must be the channel-surfing of today’s generation, only with somewhat more worthwhile nuggets. But for pete’s sake, there’s so much noise for the signal you get, and even the most popular noise can be many hours, days, or even months old. Go ahead, call me a geezer who doesn’t get it. You wouldn’t be the first, and maybe you’re right. So I will continue to click over to them until I see the light, my brain explodes, or the next phenom looks more worth wasting my remaining years on.

I have a lot more questions, but I’ve got to stop before too much of 2013 is gone.

FTC Lets Google Off The Hook In Search Competition Case

Image representing Google as depicted in Crunc...

Image via CrunchBase

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

In a case that some people thought echoed the Justice Department’s landmark antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft in the 1990s, the Federal Trade Commission today announced it has closed its case against search giant Google. The upshot: Google essentially got off scot-free on the key issue of its search practices.

The deal concludes that the key issue that would have potentially rewritten how Google does search–whether the company engaged in unfair competitive practices with its industry-leading search engine–was not sufficient to require Google to make any changes, let alone pay any fine. Instead, it requires the company to take only voluntary measures that likely won’t have a significant impact on Google’s business. From Google’s own blog post on the deal:

  • More choice for websites: Websites can already opt out of Google Search, and they can now remove content (for example reviews) from specialized search results pages, such as local, travel and shopping;
  • More ad campaign control: Advertisers can already export their ad campaigns from Google AdWords. They will now be able to mix and copy ad campaign data within third-party services that use our AdWords API.

In a somewhat more significant part of the deal, Google also agreed to make its standards-essential patents available on so-called fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms without using injunctions to block their use by rivals.

Again, from Google:

In addition, we’ve agreed with the FTC that we will seek to resolve standard-essential patent disputes through a neutral third party before seeking injunctions. This agreement establishes clear rules of the road for standards essential patents going forward.

Here’s more from the FTC release: …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

Will Google Dodge An FTC Antitrust Bullet?

Image representing Google as depicted in Crunc...

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

The Federal Trade Commission‘s antitrust investigation of Google is about to come to a head, by most accounts. But it’s a complex case touching on several aspects of antitrust law and whether Google’s search and other activities violate any of them, and the implications for Google, its investors, and Internet users could be huge.

Two attorneys intimately aware of the case provided contrasting views at a webinar this morning conducted by the investment firm International Strategy & Investment and its senior managing director Bill WhymanGary Reback is an antitrust lawyer most famous for representing Netscape in its antitrust case against Microsoft in the 1990s. He now represents several vertical-search companies, such as NexTag, that have complained about Google practices. Geoffrey Manne is a lecturer in law at Lewis & Clark Law School and executive director of the International Center for Law & Economics,which receives financial support from Google and other companies. He has written extensively about his belief that there is no strong antitrust case against Google.

The main takeaway: Despite a Bloomberg story last week that said the FTC was wavering and unlikely to attack Google’s core search business–and another today that repeats that assertion–there’s no agreement by the two sides on what the FTC will end up doing. Reback seemed to acknowledge that Google might find a way to maneuver politically around the FTC to avoid a full-scale assault on the way it conducts its search business. But he also noted that the European Union is closely watching the outcome and may act on its own if the FTC does nothing more than a settlement on the more minor issues.

One key point on timing: Press reports say there’s a Dec. 3 meeting between FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz & EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia. What’s more, Leibowitz is expected to leave for private practice around the end of the year, so that could affect the case one way or another. And if it means anything, Bloomberg says Google CEO Larry Page met with the FTC today. …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

LIVE: Facebook Shares Soar As Q3 Ad Revenue Growth Accelerates

DAVOS-KLOSTERS/SWITZERLAND, 30JAN09 - Mark Zuc...

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg (Photo: Wikipedia)

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

After a rocky several months following its May IPO, Facebook finally provided some good news today as it reported third-quarter financial results that outpaced Wall Street expectations.

The key number: 36%. That’s the rate at which advertising revenues grew. And it’s noticeably higher than ad sales growth in the second quarter, which had flagged at 28%. Excluding the impact of foreign currency changes, ad sales would have risen 43% in the third quarter.

Mobile revenues, a key metric for a company that until recently had zero mobile ad revenues and offered little of note to its mobile users, were 14% of the total $1.09 billion in ad sales.

The other key number: 9%. That’s how much shares are rising in after-hours trading. Shares of FB rose a little less than 1%, to $19.50, in trading today. That’s still only a little over half of the IPO price.

* Update: Make that 20%+. After sleeping on it, investors like the results even better the next morning.

Facebook still faces many challenges, such as the need to provide a better mobile experience for users and advertisers. And thanks to rising expenses, including stock compensation and related costs–up 64% from a year ago–it’s actually losing money on a GAAP basis. But if advertising is returning, whether it’s from more interest in its social and mobile ads, in the Facebook ad exchange that’s getting a lot of attention, or even in the new Gifts e-commerce service, that’s good news.

We’ll hear more from CEO Mark Zuckerberg shortly when Facebook conducts its analyst earnings call at 2 p.m. Pacific. I’ll blog the highlights here, but you can also listen to the livestream.

The call begins. Zuckerberg will talk about the vision and strategy of the company–make the world more connected, etc. Three pillars to the strategy:

1) Build the best mobile product. This is the most misunderstood pillar. Mobile allows us to reach way more people, people spend more time on mobile devices, and monetization should be even better than on the desktop.

2) Improve the Facebook platform.

3) Strong monetization engine. On mobile, ads will be more like TV–more integrated into the core product experience, rather than on the side. We’re starting to see better ad products for people and better results for advertisers.

I want to dispose of this notion that we can’t make money on mobile. Until recently, Facebook didn’t even try. …

Read the rest of Zuckerberg’s comments and his Q&A with analysts at The New Persuaders.

Marissa Speaks! CEO Mayer Lays Out Where Yahoo Needs To Go

Marissa Mayer

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer (Photo: Wikipedia)

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

It’s a quarter that probably doesn’t matter much, but Yahoo eked out a small rise in profits on slightly higher sales in its third quarter.

It’s the first full quarter since CEO Marissa Mayer joined the company, and while investors are more concerned about the future, so far they like what they see in the last quarter. Shares are rising about 3% in after-hours trading following a decline of less than 1% today, to $15.77 a share.

Yahoo’s third-quarter revenues rose 2% to $1.09 billion, earning a 35-cent profit per share. Operating income came in at $150 million. Wall Street analysts were expecting net revenues of $1.08 billion, operating income of $180 million, and GAAP earnings per share of 26 cents. Including a onetime gain from the sale of shares of China’s Alibaba, Yahoo’s EPS was $2.64.

Those figures are minus the costs of acquiring traffic from website partners. Gross revenues fell 1% to $1.202 billion, a touch below analysts’ $1.206 billion estimate.

In particular, display ad revenue, Yahoo’s mainstay business, came in flat from a year ago at $452 million, but search ad revenues via its multi-year deal with Microsoft were better than expected, up 11% to $414 million.

And we’re underway on the analyst call with Mayer:

Mayer says she’s thrilled to be hear, naturally. She says she has been having a lot of fun. Why did I come to Yahoo? This job is tailor-made for me. Search, mobile, ads, home page, etc.–all things I built my career on.

She’ll talk about priorities and vision–great! First she addresses the people problem–that is, all the ones who have been leaving in droves for years. She says she has instituted new goals, metrics, etc. for people. True cultural change can’t be bought. The vast majority of what we’ve done hasn’t cost much, she says. …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

Advertising Experts: Ignore Google’s Earnings, It’s Doing Just Fine

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

After reporting disappointing third-quarter earnings, and giving investors a few extra hours to sell their shares to boot, Google saw its shares hammered before trading was halted. But while Motorola Mobility, which Google acquired for $12.5 billion in May, clearly is a big drag on the company, ad folks say its core business is just fine.

Bryan Wiener, CEO of the digital marketing agency 360i, a specialist in search advertising in particular, says Google’s core business still appears healthy. The only hitch, he says, is that mobile ad prices per click are still 30% to 50% lower than desktop clicks, but he says that gap is narrowing as mobile cost-per-click continues to rise.

The main issue is not so much that advertisers view mobile ads as less effective. There are actually two other issues.

First, there’s still less competition for mobile ad space. And since Google ads are sold by auction, less competition means lower prices.

Why is competition less? That brings up the second issue: It’s not yet clear precisely what impact mobile ads have. They don’t work exactly the same as desktop ads, where people customarily conduct a search, click on an ad, and then a certain percentage buy the product. That’s easy to track.

On their mobile phones, however, people are more often searching for a store, rather than looking to complete a transaction online. They may well end up buying in that store–some companies are starting to provide ways to track that connection, and marketers anecdotally know it’s happening–but separate databases for online and store activity still means it’s tough to close the measurement loop.

Wiener thinks that will get solved eventually. Even in the short term, mobile search ads that are still Google’s bread and butter are better positioned to show their value than mobile display ads, which may appear in hard-to-track apps and still aren’t standardized enough for marketers to spend big bucks to reach broad scale. That means Google for now is likely to fare better in consumers’ rush to mobile than, say, Facebook and Yahoo. “Everybody is still bullish on mobile search,” says Wiener. “But it’s still very early in the game.”

Looking ahead to the fourth quarter and beyond, says Wiener, “our clients are cautiously optimistic” about search ads in particular despite the uncertainty of the economy and the election. …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

3 Reasons Google Missed Q3 Earnings Estimates

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

Google’s shares plunged this morning by 9% after the search giant’s third-quarter earnings came in considerably lower than expected. The results were accidentally released hours earlier than expected, leading to a halt in the shares’ trading for a time.

Google earned a $9.03 per share profit before certain expenses, far below the $10.63 Wall Street consensus estimate, and down 20% from a year ago. GAAP profit was $6.53. Net revenues after paying partners for traffic were $11.53 billion, up 19% from a year ago. That also missed the Street’s estimate of $11.9 billion. Paid clicks, a key indicator, rose 33% from a year ago, and cost per click, another key measure but one whose meaning is murky, fell 15%.

So what happened? Here’s a quick assessment, which will be supplemented in a new post following the 1:30 p.m. Pacific earnings call:

* Costs jumped. They were up 71%, to $11.4 billion. It appears much of that increase came from Motorola Mobility, which Google acquired for $12.5 billion in May. After all, the acquisition added more than 20,000 employees. As Citi analyst Mark Mahaney said in a note to investors: “Bottom line divergence partly due to Amortization expenses, which came in at $317MM vs. our $197MM estimate. That contributed perhaps $0.40 of the EPS shortfall.” Update after the earnings call: But not just that. CFO Patrick Pichette specifically mentioned costs of selling the likely near-zero-margin Nexus 7 tablet Google released during the quarter–a single product line, so the company’s is clearly pushing it hard.

* Motorola losses were huge. The unit posted a $527 million loss on a GAAP operating basis. Mahaney again:  “Another major delta was Motorola, which generated $151MM Op Loss vs. our $28MM estimate.”

* Ad revenue didn’t set records. It was up 16% from a year ago. Although lower cost per click isn’t always an indicator of a problem, in this case, the fourth consecutive decline has investors wondering anew if it’s due to the lower prices mobile ads get or even competition from the likes of Facebook. …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

Mobile Ad Spending Doubles in 2012’s First Half

From my Forbes.com blog The New Persuaders:

Mobile ads drove a 14% rise in online advertising revenues, to $17 billion, in the first half of 2012, according to a report out this morning from the Interactive Advertising Bureau and PricewaterhouseCoopers.

According to the IAB’s latest half-year report (full pdf here), mobile ad revenue jumped 95%, to $1.2 billion, or or 7% of total online ad revenues. That’s up from 4% a year ago. The reason is fairly obvious, and something every company from Facebook to Google is struggling with: People are increasingly accessing online service through smartphones and tablets, thanks to the popularity of the iPhone, the iPad, and Android devices, and advertisers are following them there.

The 14% rise pales next to a 23% rise a year ago, though the IAB attributes last year’s jump to a recovery from the recession. Online ad spending continues to far outpace overall advertising spending, which rose less than 1%, according to both Nielsen and Kantar Media. Television remains the one relatively bright spot in traditional media, though its growth also remains far behind digital. Cable saw a 4% increase, to $10.9 billion, and broadcast rose 3.3%, to $11.1 billion.

Performance-based ads, those seeking to elicit an immediate purchase or other action, remain dominant, and even gained ground over more brand-oriented ads. Chief among these ads are search ads, which despite their 48% share of overall online ad revenues continued to gain as a category in the first half, rising 19% to reach $8.1 billion. That means search giant Google, which reports its third-quarter earnings a week from today, still reigns supreme in online ads.

Display ads rose only 4%, to $5.6 billion, reducing its share of overall online ads from 36% to 33%. Although the IAB didn’t mention it, no doubt part of the relatively slow growth is due to the rise of more efficient (that is, lower-priced) banner ads placed via real-time bidding through ad exchanges.

“Brand dollars are moving online, but at a slightly slower pace than the last two half-year reports,” Sherrill Mane, the IAB’s senior VP research analytics and measurement, said in a conference call this morning. That’s a problem, indeed perhaps evidence of a problem, for companies such as Facebook that are depending on brand marketers moving television and magazine ads online. …

Read the complete post at The New Persuaders.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 86 other followers