SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere Nutzervereinbarung und die Datenschutzrichtlinie.
SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere unsere Datenschutzrichtlinie und die Nutzervereinbarung.
BRAND ADVERTISING ONLINEJanuary 2011 IN GERMANY Is the ‘ClICk’ the rIght CurrenCy for DIsplay aDvertIsIng effeCtIveness? exclusively presented at Linda abraham ChriStOph SChuh Chief marketing Officer, comScore, inc. Chief marketing Officer, tOmOrrOw FOCuS aG mike Shaw karin rOthStOCk director, marketing Solutions, comScore, inc. head of research, tOmOrrOw FOCuS media ZOSia riCh research manager, marketing Solutions, comScore, inc.
H How Online Adver rtising WorksHow Online Adve ertising Wo orks: Measu uring Displ Ad Effe lay ectiveness in German nyBACKG GROUNDIn today economic y’s cally challen nging times, some adve ertisers and their agenciies, in the quest for qimmedia returns, a moving campaign spe from CP campaign that requir payment based on ate are c end PM ns re bthe nummber of deliveered ad imprressions to C CPC program where pay ms yment is bas sed on the number ofclicks on an ad. How n wever, the in ncreasing soophistication of online audiences has led fewer and fewer s aInternet users to clic on ads, to the extent that, as Dou ck o ubleClick rep ported in its 2 2009 Year-inn-Reviewbenchmark report, th average click-through rates acros its image, flash, and riich media ca he c h ss ampaignshad falle to just 0.1 en 11% in Germ many compa ared with 0.07% in the United Kingdo and 0.10 in the om 0%US. Mo markets in Europe sa a decrea in their CTR from 2008, with Ger ost aw ase C rmany seein a 15% ngdecline.Are low click rates evidence th display ad campaig have no had any im w hat gns ot mpact on coonsumerbehavioour? Or, dooes online display adv d vertising wo in a sim ork milar way to traditiona offline o aladvertis sing with m multiple exposures ov ver time ne eeded to effect a cha e ange in co onsumerbehavioour? many, as in oIn Germ other markets including t US, the Internet is no yet broadlly viewed as a useful s, the I ot smedium to promote branding (Fig gure 1). Fig gure 1: The In nternet is not proportionat tely used for Brand Adver rtising 63% T Total Measured Med Spend: dia dollar are rs $186 6B spen on nt Braand Marke eting On 23% online nly Online Med Spend: dia $118B B dolla are spent on ars n $26 6B Bra Marketing and Br rand $6 6BDirect Re esponse $2 20B 77% online dollars % $68B are spent on Direct t 37% Total Response dollars are Marketing spent o Direct on Resp ponse Mark ketingSource: Le ehman Brothers Think Equity Partners, US 20 s, P 008TV is th firmly root he ted front-run nner when co valuate whic medium to use for a branding ompanies ev ch ocampaig Many still view onlin as a dire ct response channel, most suitable for driving traffic or gn. ne m equickly increasing pu urchase inten (Figure 2) . nt PAGE 2
H How Online Adver rtising Works Figure 2: Which medi : ium is best fo branding campaigns? or c 4% 5% 5% 6% 9% Prom moting Loyalty 10% 7% 20% 10% 15% 32% Drivin Traffic / Purchase ng 15% Intentt 23% 21% Prom moting Conside eration 24% 70% 16% Gene erating Familia arity 47% 36% 25% Creatting Awarenes ss TV Magazine es New wspapers OnlineSource: B Bain & Company ‘In search of a premium alter y, rnative: an actio plan for online brand advertis on sing’ (2010)There is a clear disc s crepancy bettween the Int ternet metric that curren exist and those that branding cs ntly dadvertise require. In order to measure bra ers m anding campa aigns, advertisers look fo measures such as or sbrand aw wareness, re ecall, purcha intent, a ase and likelihood to recomm d mend, whilst the Internet tends tooffer immmediate mettrics such as ad impress s sions, click-th hroughs and interaction rates; none of which deffective provide m ely marketers wit what they need to jus th y stify or increase branding investmen online g nts(Figure 33). Figu 3: Which metrics are m ure m most suitable for measurin brand buil ng lding campaigns? ? 5 55% % panelists What bran get nds What brannds 45% want / nee ed 30% 23% 22% 20% % 19% 18 8% 16% 14% 12% 1 8% 7% 7% Source: Bain & Compan Building Brands Online: An Interactive Advertising Action Plan, 2009 ny, PThis pap reports the results of comScore research into the impact of online display ad per o e i e dvertisingleveraging comScor re’s proprieta panel of 2 million Internet user more tha 400,000 of whom ary f rs, anreside in Europe. Ad n dditional to th the Prem hat, mium Ad Network TOMO ORROW FOC CUS Media analysedthe click rates of mo than 8 billion display ads, served in Novemb and Dec k ore b y d ber cember 2010 on their 0premium network in Germany. mInstead of relying upon cookies to measure behaviour, comScore has obtaine explicit pe s e ed ermissionfrom a rrepresentativ cross sec ve ction of Intern users in countries ac net cross the glo obe to meas sure theironline acctivities over time. The re r esults presennted in this paper will dem p monstrate tha wholesale reliance at e PAGE 3
H How Online Adver rtising Workson click- -through rate as a mea es asure of disp play advertisi effectiven ing ness distorts marketers’ views of show onli compares to other me ine edia.The pheenomenon of cookie dele f etion poses a significant challenge an has rende c nd ered inaccura much ateof the co ookie-based research co onducted to date on the effectivenes of online advertising. Cookies e ssare sma pieces of code inserte into the c all ed computer bro owser of the user whose behaviour is being e eexamine in an att ed, tempt to uni iquely identi fy the compputer and thereby monit its activit While tor ty.conceptually an apppealing appr roach, the pr revalence of anti-spyware software (now built into most fbrowser allows Inte rs) ernet users very easily to delete their cookies as they see fit. Research co v o r onductedby comS Score and o others has shown that, because of cookie de , o eletion, any attempt to measurecompute users’ acti er ivity over time using cook kies alone will be subject to substant error leve as the w t tial elscookies are deleted, and this will typically und l derstate the impact of the advertising being meas e g sured. ERMAN ONLTHE GE LINE ADVER RTISING LAN NDSCAPEIn 2009, the German online indu , n ustry accoun nted for 16.5% of all advertising spen and was the third nd,largest a medium in Germany, folllowing TV and magazine according to the OV Online advertising m G es, g VKReport 22010/01. For the first time online surp r e, passed conssumer publicaations. Figu 4: 2009 Online advertis ure O sing spend in Germany n Affiliate Netwworks, € 308 million Conventio onal Online e S Search Marketin ng, Maarketing, €2,168 million €1,6 million 624Source: O OVK Statistic 200 – OVK Online Report 2010/0 09 01The Ge erman online advertising industry g e g grew by 12 2% to over €4 billion iin 20091, ex xceedingexpectattions. At €2.2 billion, con nventional o online advertising still acc counted for t the majority of grossadvertising sales in 2009, follo n owed by sea arch marketiing with €1.6 billion. Th affiliate networks’ he nsegment also topped €300 million for the first time. d tIncreasingly, adverttiser budget are migra ts ating to the online me e edium, with conventiona online aladvertising alone ac chieving a do ouble-digit sh hare of the media mix in many sector Online ad m rs. dvertisingin Germany is expeccted to have grown by 14 in 2010, reaching a to of €4.7 b illion1. 4% r otalZenithOptimedia rec cently reporte that, in 20 ed 010, Germany was the world’s third largest ad market in w mterms of ad spend, surpassed only by the U.S. and Japan. They also anticiipate that th global e y heInternet will grow by 48% betwee 2010 and 2013. The report further suggests th in 2013 television en d r hat t tinue to take the majority of market shwill cont hare worldwide while the Internet will account for 17.9% ofall ad spend, almos equaling that of news st spapers. Tak ken in combination, thes projection clearly se nsdemonstrate the faith that mar rketers and their agenccies have in the Interne as an ad n et dvertisingmedium.1 Source: O OVK Online Report 2010/01 PAGE 4
H How Online Adver rtising WorksIn econo omically diff ficult times, advertisers’ ability to co omprehensively and acc curately meaasure theeffective eness of adv vertising beccomes even more important. Typica ally, markete use click ers k-throughrates (CCTRs) to assess the effec ctiveness of an online caampaign. Hoowever, CTR are extrem Rs mely low,and hav continually declined ov the past f ve y ver few years. The markets listed in Figu 5 saw an average T l uredecline o 28% in jus one year. In Germany CTRs decre of st y eased by 15% in 2009 an are now at a level % nd aof only 00.11%, whils the averag CTR on ads hosted on Tomorro Focus site in Novem st ge ow tes mber andDecemb 2010 was just 0.07%. The market listed in Fi ber s . ts igure 5 saw an average d a decline of 28 in just 8%one year.In addition, accordin to DoubleClick, it se ng eems that CTRs are inv C versely corre elated to the relative e cation of the audience This measophistic eir es. ans that the few people who do c e click on ads are not snecessaarily represe entative of the people an advertis t ser wants to reach. Ma o arkets wher online readvertising spend is higher, and consumers see more campaigns, have even lo s d s c h ower CTRs. As usersbecome accustomed to conducting online ac d ctivities, it apppears that CTRs decline.. Figure 5: Worldwide Click-Throug Rates 5 gh 0,2 2% India 0,18% 0,16% Netherlands 0,14% 0,18% C China 0,12% 0,14% S Spain 0,12% 0,12% Fr rance 0,12% 0,13% 20 008 many Germ 0 0,11% 20 009 0,12% Italy 0,10 0% 0,1% % US 0,10 0% 0,1% % Canada 0,09% 0,1% % Aus stralia 0,07% 0,08% UK 0,07%Click-throu rates across Static Image, Flash and Rich Media formats ugh s hSource: Doubleclick DAR for Advertiser a cross-sectio of regions, January – Decem RT rs on mber 2008 / 200 09For the German Pr remium Disp play Network TOMORRO FOCUS MEDIA, w k OW S which serves about 4billion ad per month the averag CTR in 20 was 0.14 on avera (CTR-Re ds h, ge 010 4% age eport TF Med dia). Thisdata sho ows, that click rates in a premium network like TOMORRO FOCUS MEDIA are slightly e OW S ehigher t than the ave erage CTR in Germany but still quite low, ranging from 0.08% for a classic y, qskyscrap up to 0.8 per 86% for a bannderole ad (F Figure 6). Figure 6: Exa ample CTRs on TOMORRO FOCUS NETWORK 20 o OW N 010 Average Click Rates (on n TOMORRO OW FOCUS CTR in % Network 2010) Banderole Ad 0,8 86 Wallpaper 0,5 56 Panorama Ad 0,4 44 PAGE 5
H How Online Adver rtising Works Super Bann ner 0,1 15 Medium Reectangle 0,1 11 Skyscraper 0,0 08 Source: CTR-Analysis, TO OMORROW FO OCUS Media, Ja an-Dec 2010One fact that seem to be driv tor ms ving this is th at more and more branding campaig do not ha a call gns aveto action in the cre n eative. The task of thes ad forma is buildin up brand awareness loyalty, se ats ng d s,recommmendation etc instead of high click-thr c. rough rates. The new ove ersized ad fo ormats and video-ads v mportant step towards the Internet as a branding channel like TV.are an im s Figure 7: Exa ample for an Oversized Cr reative without direct call to actionSo, do lo CTRs me that the advertising is not effective? comSco research indicates th this is ow ean ore h hatnot the c case. The re esearch show that the u of CTRs to measure effectiveness results in marketers ws use e s mbasing ttheir conclus sions on acctivity that o ccurs, in most cases, for a mere 0.1% of all the ads fdelivered (and focus on peop who migh not even be in the ad d ses ple ht dvertiser’s ta arget segmen while nt),ignoring the effects that the othe 99.9% of the ads pote er entially have on consum e mers. In othe words, erthe CTR can be quite misleadin in evalua R ng ating campaign impact. It is essentia to establis a new al shcurrency in the nea future that is able to measure the success of advertising effects in branding y ar t e o gcampaig gns. To further confirm that conclu usion, we move from an analysis of CTRs an to an m a ndinvestiga ation of the c clickers them mselves.NATURA BORN C AL CLICKERS: STUDY DES S SIGNIn July 2 2007 in the UU.S., comSc core conduct ted the first study that ex s xamined how Internet us w sers clickon the a ads to which they have been expos h sed. The stu has sinc been upd udy ce dated to allo for an owanalysis of trends. c s comScore’s proprietary te p echnology pa assively meaasures all the digital activ of its e vitypanelists and collec complete URL/click s s, cts e stream data. The information collect . ted also included theactual creative used in the adve d ertising. With hout collectin any personally identifia ng able data, comScoreused its proprietary panel to ob bserve Intern users’ on net nline behavio and asso our ociated ad exposure, eincluding whether o not the panelists clic g or p cked on an ad. The ad exposure a d and click da were ataintegrate into a database and panelists’ sit visitation was categor ed te rised accordding to the comScoresite cate egories. PAGE 6
H How Online Adver rtising WorksThe pan nelists were ssegmented based on the weight of their monthly CTRs, form b e t y ming 3 groups: Heavyclickers (clicking on 4+ ads), Mod derate clicke (clicking on 2-3 ads) and Light clic ers o a ckers (clickin on just ng1 ad). Non-clickers ccomprised a fourth groupp. sults of the 2The res 2010 update showed th e hat, despite accounting for only 4% of the total Internet f lpopulatio the Hea on, avy clickers accounted for 63% of all clicks on display a o ads in the month. A mstaggering 88% of th U.S. Internet populatio did not click on any ad at all, (Figu 8). he on d ure Fig gure 8: Heavy clickers acc y count for a sm proporti of the U.S Internet po mall ion S. opulation 2% 3% % 7% 20% 26% 63% 88% 54% 19% 18% % Internet Po opulation % Clickers s % Clicks Non L Light Mod derate HeavySource: co omScore, Natur Born Clickers (US), August 2 ral s 2010Over tim comScor has obser me, re rved a meas urable declin in the num ne mber of user clicking on display rsads, furrther diminishing the imp portance of the click. Over a three year period the perce O d, entage ofInternet users who d not click in a month g rew from 68 in July 20 to 84% in March 200 and to do 8% 007 n 0988% in A August 2010 As the num 0. mber of click kers continue to decline, the click be es , ecomes prog gressivelyirrelevan as a key m nt measure of a successful ccampaign. Figure 9: Growth in U 9 U.S. non-clickers 88% 84% % 6 68% Jul 2007 ly March 2009 August 20 010Source: co omScore, Natur Born Clickers (US), July 200 – August 201 ral s 07 10Looking at a series o display ad campaigns in Germany a similar pattern emerg of d s y, p ges. Only 15 of the 5%total German online population actually click a ked on a display ad in August 2010. Heavy click A kers, whoaccounte for 3% of the German online popu ed f n ulation, generated 62% of the clicks (F Figure 10).The pro eavy clickers in German is about the same as in the U.S . and accounts for a oportion of he s ny t ssimilar p proportion of the clicks. This leads to questions such as who are these cliickers, and how does T htheir online behaviou compare to the overalll Internet pop ur pulation in Germany? PAGE 7
H How Online Adver rtising Works Figu ure 10: German heavy clicckers accoun for a small proportion nt of the Inte ernet population 3% 4% 8% 19% 27% 62% % 85% % 54% 20% % 18% % % Internet Po opulation % Clickers % Cli cks Non Lig ght Moder rate Heav vySource: co omScore Marke eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010 ust LING GERMA DISPLAY AD CLICKPROFIL AN Y KERSIf clicker as a grou were representative o the total German Inter rs up of G rnet populatio we woul expect on, ldtheir onlline behaviou patterns to mirror thos of the Ge ur se erman online population at large. com e mScore’sanalysis shows that this is not so. Heavy cliickers are, in fact, quite different acr s s n ross the boa ard—on amonthly basis, they spend two and a half tim more minutes online and visit a a mes m e almost three times asmany pa ages as nonn-clickers (Fig gure 11). Heeavy clickers are disprop s portionately sskewed commpared tothe muc larger nu ch umber of no on-clickers aand, as suc do not accurately r ch, represent th online hebehaviour of the Ger rman online audience. Figure 11: Tot minutes on tal nline per visitor 3.000 2.845 5 2.500 2.000 1.746 6 1.500 1.166 1.000 500 - Non-Clic ckers Light Clic ckers Heavy Clic ckersSource: co omScore Marke eting Solutions, Germany Augus 2010 stA simila pattern em ar merges when delving into site catego visitation (Figure 12), where the visitation n o ory ,profile o clickers is very differen from that o non-clicke This furth supports the fact that clickers of nt of ers. her sdiffer gre eatly from the overall poppulation in th online be heir ehaviour. The most dram e matic differences seenwere in time spent on gambling career ser g, rvices, and education. A possible hyypothesis th would hatexplain this is that cclickers tend to be youn d nger and une employed. Certainly, one can say th while C e hatclickers spend a sub bstantial amoount of time online, they are not representative o the audien most y of ncemarkete want to re ers each. If markketers target campaigns based on CT b TRs, they risk shifting the balance k etowards a specific ty of user who is unlikel y to embody the desired target segm ype w y ment. PAGE 8
H How Online Adver rtising Works Figure 12: Site cate egory distribu ution by composition indeex for cl lickers and n on-clickers compared to total Internet c t t 106 Se ervices 105 Search/Naavigation Enttertainment Portals P 104 Retaill Conversation Media nal Direct tories/Resourcees Telecomm munications Non Clickers Technology y 103 ormation Auctio News/Info ons Busine ess/Finance Community C 102 Travel Games Business to Bus B siness Auto omotive ISP 101 orts Spo Regional/Local Real Estate Educattion 100 Governmment Hea alth Career S Services Gambling 99 98 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 130 140 150 0 160 170 180 0 Heavy Clickers y Source: co omScore Marke eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010 ust Non-clic ckers represe the majo ent ority of Intern users an favour sit focused on services, search, net nd tes retail, ne ews and infoormation. Th are more focused on the functio hey e onality of the Internet an how it e nd fulfills a particular ne eed. They sppend less tim online tha clickers and navigate through pag more me an ges efficientl Typically those with less time, busy mothe for exam ly. ers mple, are les likely to click on ss campaig but clear would not be conside gns rly ered less imp portant; on the contrary, they would often be deemed the most va aluable segm ment for many advertisers y s. When lo ooking at the demograph profile of clickers and non-clicker we can se that there are few e hic d rs ee e differenc in their g ces gender profil Women a slightly more likely to be light cli ckers and males are le. are m o m slightly m more likely to be heavy clickers, howe o c ever the diffe erence is ver nominal. (F ry Figure 13) Figure 13: Clic F ckers are gen nder neutral Non-Clickers s Light Click kers Heavy Clic ckers12010080604020 0 M Male Female Ma ale Female M Male Female Source: co omScore Marke eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010 ust Taking t this further w can look at whether th age of a person has any impact o their prop we a he on pensity to click. In Figure 14, w can see th heavy cliickers tend to be younge over-index we hat er, xing highest amongst 18-34 ye olds, wit the oldest users far le likely to exhibit this behaviour. L ight clickers are also ear th ess b over- inddexed among younger users, but in gst nterestingly peak amongs users aged 55 and abo p st d ove. PAGE 9
H How Online Adver rtising Works Figure 14: Age impa acts on the propensity to click p Non-Clic ckers Light Cli ickers Heavy Clickers C150140130120110100 90 80 70 60 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55 4 5+ 18-2 25-34 35- 24 -44 45-54 55+ 5 18- -24 25-34 35 5-44 45-54 55+ omScore Marke Source: co eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010 ust RSTANDING HOW ONLIN AD EXPO UNDER NE OSURE CHA ANGES BEH HAVIOUR comSco has conducted a serie of ad effe ctiveness stu ore es udies across Western Eu s urope (Germmany, UK, France, and Spain) which sho that disp ) ow sing, despite a lack of clicks, can have a play advertis e ant, positive impact on consumer behaviour. When com significa n mparing the passively-o e observed behaviour of Interne users exp et posed to dis play ads wit that of a comparable set of non- th e -exposed users, mmatched on ddemographics and prior o online behaviour, comSco determin that: ore ned • Display ads lifted vis sitation to the advertiser’s website by 72% on ave e s erage • Display ads increase the likelih ed hood of cons sumers conducting a traddemark sear query rch using the advertiser’s branded te erms by an average of 94 a 4% Figure 15: Lift generated by display ads in Europe L d a e 94% 72% Adve ertiser Site Visitation V Trademark Searc Queries ch Source: co omScore “Whith the Click in Europe?” Febru her E uary 2010 Comparring these Eu uropean data with corres a sponding da in the U.S (49% lift in U.S. site visitation ata S. and 40% lift in the n % number of U.S. tradema search qu U ark ueries), the aggregation of European studies a n shows c consistently hhigher lifts am mong Interne users expo et osed to display advertisin ng. Addition comScor research, published in the Jou nal re urnal of Advvertising Re esearch (Fig gure 16), evaluate both the online and in-store sale impact ac ed es cross 139 ca ampaigns in the US ma n arket. On average it showed a average lift of 27% in online sales and 17% in offline sale e, an l n s n es—despite a CTR of 0.1%. PAGE 10
H How Online Adver rtising Works Figure 16 Dollar sales lift among h 6: s households exposed to on e nline advertis sing % Lift: 17% : $11,550 0 $9,905 % Lift: 27% $994 4 $1,263 Online ffline Of Co ntrol Test tSource: “W Whither the Click?” 139 comSco studies in th June 2009 Jo ore he ournal of Advert tising Research hcomSco has also evaluated th ability of c ore he campaigns to increase classic brand t c ding metrics, such asawareneess, favourab bility, and lik kelihood to re ecommend, all of which can be sign nificantly imp pacted bydisplay campaigns. Further, comScore has demonstrated that the quality of t s e the creative used inonline a has been shown to relate strong to the ef ads n gly ffectiveness of the adveertising. While certainbrands would not d dream of air ring a TV a before it passed cer ad rtain creative or persua e asivenessthresholds, the prac ctice of testin creative quality in digital has only recently b ng begun to unf fold, andmust als be incorpo so orated into th ad effectiv he veness equation.While coomScore is j just beginnin to expand its advertis ng d sing measur rement servic ces in Germ many, ourexperien in other markets sug nce ggests that th hese additional metrics can provide valuable new insight cinto how online adve w ertising works Depending on the bran the objec s. g nd, ctive of the ca ampaign as well as avariety o other facto that have proven to p of ors e play a role in the effectiv n veness of the campaign, such as e ,creative quality, and media place ement, inves stments in onnline branding advertising may well fa g g avourablycompare to TV in ter e rms of ROI. ARYSUMMAThis stu udy leads to several key conclusions with impo y s, ortant implicaations for alll stakeholde in the ersGerman and interna n ational digital eco-system First, the group of Internet users who click on display m. nads is sm and gett mall ting smaller. Second, the online beha e aviour of click kers is so dif fferent from the much tlarger group of non- -clickers that clickers sim mply do not represent th desired a he audience for the vastmajority of advertiseers. Third, th hese pattern s are observved not only in Germany but are consistent y y,across t globe. La a growin body of st the ast, ng trong eviden proves th online dis nce hat splay campa aigns canbuild bra ands through increasing consumer en h ngagement, whether it is site visitatio search activity, or s on,ultimately online as w as offlin sales. Cle well ne early, evaluat ting campaig effectivene using CT gn ess TRs is atbest shoort-sighted and, more like significan under-va ely, ntly alues the ability of the onnline channe to build elbrands. The major implication fo the indust is that if digital is to receive its fa share of branding or try airspend, ffocus must s shift away fro the click to new met om k trics that bet reflect bo the quality of the tter othcreative as well as th multiple ways in which online ads can build bra he w h ands. PAGE 11
H How Online Adver rtising WorksABOUT COMSCOR REcomSco Inc. (NAS ore, SDAQ: SCOR) is a globa leader in measuring the digital world and prefer al m e d rredsource o digital business analyti of ics. comScor helps its clients better understand, leverage an profit re c , ndfrom the rapidly evol e lving digital marketing lan m ndscape by providing dat analytics and on-demand p ta,software solutions fo the measu e or urement of on nline ads and audiences, media plann d ning, website eanalytics advertising effectivene s, g ess, copy-tessting, social media, search, video, mo m obile, cross-m media, e-commer rce, and a broad variety of emerging f o forms of digital consumer behaviour. comScore services, swhich no include th product su ow he uites of recen acquisition Nedstat, Nexius XPlor ARSGrou and nt ns N re, upCertifica are used by more than 1,600 clients around the world, including global le a, s e eaders such as hAOL, Ba aidu, BBC, Best Buy, Car Deutsche Bank, ESP Facebook, France Te rat, e PN, elecom, FinancialTimes, FFox, Microso MediaCor Nestle, St oft, rp, tarcom, Terr Networks, Universal M ra McCann, Veriz zonServices Group, ViaMichelin and Yahoo!. s dFor more information please visit www.coms e n, score.com or e-mail Mike Shaw at r emshaw@@comscore.c com .ABOUT TOMORRO FOCUS OWTOMOR RROW FOCU AG is on of Germa US ne anys leading publicly tra g aded interne groups. Th group et heoperates in three areas: trans s sactions, addvertising an technologies. The t nd transactions divisioncomprise HolidayCheck, a hote review and travel book es el d king portal an ElitePartn nd ner, a premiu dating umsite.The adv vertising division includes TOMORR ROW FOCUS Media, one of the prin S e ncipal Germa online anmarketin businesse Alongside group-own ng es. ned websites such as FOCUS Onlin Finanzen s ne, n100 andjameda, the business markets partner site such as CHIP Online FAZ.NET, GuteFrage es C e, , e.net andmeinesta adt.de. TOM MORROW FOCUS Med ia is the se F econd bigges Ad Netwo in Germ st ork many andreaches more than 6 60% of the German inter G rnet populati (internet facts 2010-I II). Since December ion D2009 the advertising division has also includ ADJUG Ltd, which operates two online mark e g ded o o ketplacesfor last-m minute adver rtising space in the UK an Germany e nd y.In the t technologies division, TO OMORROW FOCUS Technologies GmbH and CELLULAR GmbH W d Rprovide an extensive range of fix and mob ile internet services. e xedFor more information please visit www.tomo e n, orrow-focus.c com or e-mail Karin Roths stock atk.rothsto firstname.lastname@example.org . PAGE 12