Tim Vanderhook is no fan of rich media ads. Earlier this week I spoke with the CEO of Specific Media (the folks behind all those X10 Wireless pop-unders we used to see everywhere); he said he’s skeptical of the value of rich media ads, and thinks they just cost too much.
“Sometimes they’re more expensive than the media,” he lamented. Vanderhook believes the actual cost of serving rich media is far less than the $1-5 CPMs rich media firms charge to serve them. “Fundamentally, that takes money away from the media spend.”
That doesn’t mean his own network doesn’t offer rich media. According to the company’s site, its premium ad network delivers “All standard IAB in-page display ad units with flash, rich media and pre-roll video.”
Of course some advertisers do see value in rich media advertising, and are willing to spend more for it. Plus, I suspect as ad management platforms integrate rich media ad serving (like DoubleClick, for instance), we could see those costs go down.
A class action lawsuit against an internet-connected pleasure device highlights the potential pitfalls a growing number of companies will face as they embrace ... read more
Google sparked a small firestorm last week as reports surfaced that its intelligent assistant device Google Home delivered an unsolicited advertisement to unsuspecting owners.
According to Internet Retailer's newly released The Best Digital Marketers in E-Commerce report, Target is the most effective marketer in online retail. So why is it struggling overall?
The rise of YouTube and digital video generally has a lot to do with the rise of the internet and the abundance of digital video content. But YouTube's ascendency is also the result of Google's savvy use of algorithms.