Web 2.0 innovation is working its way to banner advertising. This TechCrunch post about Tailgate focuses on transactional banner ads: Purchasing products through banners, and discussing the security issues this company is attempting to solve. The potential is clear; however, will users accept this form of information sharing? We are skeptical that large advertisers would take the initial plunge. This needs early adopters: acquisition-focused marketers looking for registrations, emails, and other non-transactional, yet secure, conversions. It could be a fantastic way to grow online communities.
Certainly this idea is something to build on. For more on that debate, be sure to visit the comments on the TechCrunch posting. Some interesting perspectives there.
We’ve also been tracking Google Gadget ads, a similar idea that allows you to create a tabbed experience within the banner ad itself. Gadgets ads are an interesting way to increase user engagement with branded content, without requiring the full commitment of a clickthrough. Still… while you can interact with a gadget ad, we have not yet seen an effective way to collect secure information for a direct purchase, user sign-up, etc.
Another intriguing banner ad strategy, Yahoo’s “smart ads” combine a single graphical element with localized text ads. Messaging is based on user behavior and localized targeting—behavioral targeting that is easier to control with test and learn budgets. Check out the demo for Yahoo smart ads.
I think it’s going to be a tough climb… people already have such a negative attitude towards ads, not to mention skepticism…
People don’t interact with those “interactive” banner ads already out there, like the “Shoot the target” for a free prize stuff… Why would they put in their CC info or click add-to-basket buttons?
Another thing to think about… People are used to looking for phishing sites and the like, I would think people could see the potential for some website to put up a “fake amazon shopping cart ad”... The ONE thing that people use to identify a website is it’s URL… where’s that sense of security in a banner ad? Not there. (yet)
Just my thoughts…
I agree there is a ways to go, but the interesting idea here really is giving people something they want to react with. Audience is key. You are right…some audiences are more skeptical then others. The transactional or gadget nature of the advertisement simply adds to that relevancy. By providing a way to interact, interested parties are more likely to do so.
For example, it’s 2009, you’re reading a review on CNET about the new IPod, there are links on that page to shop online. Why not dynamically insert a banner on that page where you can purchase it immediately? That adds value.
There is an interesting future here because security will be resolved. (We can at the very least assume it will be resolve for the sake of this line of thought). True, along the way there will be cases of fraud, etc. similar to early adoption of e-commerce..but in the long term, this idea will add to user interaction on web pages.
On the example you used on “shooting the target”, there is a reason those ads exist. believe it or not, those ads get the job done. It all depends on intent. Orbitz is a great example of this with their pop-up games on sites such as ESPN.com. The success of Rich-Media also supports the theory that users lean towards this type of interaction.