Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Ad monitor case study

31 views

Published on

How to achieve the reach goal?

Published in: Marketing
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ad monitor case study

  1. 1. HOW TO ACHIEVE THE REACH GOAL? CASE STUDY:
  2. 2. X Brand is the leading domestic enterprises, The category range covers a variety of household cleaning products, its marketing network dotted all over the country. In this deck, we will use this case to give example on what are the 4 factors that have influence on reach. In the first half of 2017, X Brand is female 25-44 years old. With below chart, we can know that, under the same IGRP, X Brand reach has gap with market norm from 1+ to 6+. INTRODUCTION 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 1+ 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6+ 7+ 8+ 9+ 10+ Reach% Brand X Market Norm
  3. 3. MEDIA WEIGHT AND CHANNEL MIX ON TARGET IMP% FREQUENCY CAPPING 3 FACTORS WILL HAVE EFFECT ON REACH 24 REACH
  4. 4. MEDIA WEIGHT AND CHANNEL MIX
  5. 5. MEDIA RANK 23% 18% 16% 11% 8% 6% 5% 5% 3% 1% 0 20 40 Publisher 1 Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 4 Publisher 5 Publisher 6 Publisher 7 Publisher 8 Publisher 9 Publisher 10 Remark : based on Miaozhen 2017 Jan-Jun all clients tracking data 31% 26% 21% 5% 4% 4% 3% 2% 1% 1% 0 20 40 60 Publisher 1 Publisher 3 Publisher 2 Publisher 5 Publisher 4 Publisher 6 Publisher 8 Publisher 7 Publisher 9 Publisher 11 Imp.(Billion) Media Rank • Within 3 publishers they own more than 70% of the traffic. • Publisher 1 has the largest traffic, it owns varieties of resource itself. • PC and Mobile percentage is in line with industry trend 26% 74% Brand X PC Mobile
  6. 6. Brand X MEDIA WEIGHT AND CHANNEL MIX ⚫ In the first half of 2017, Brand X got more than 25 billion impression with 28 campaigns. More than 60% impression from Publisher 1 and Publisher 8 PC and Publisher 7 of mobile which is not in line with the media rank ⚫ IMP FRE (avg.) is more than 4 of each publisher, also find Publisher 3 CTR is too low PUBLISHER TOTAL IMP UV IMP FRE (avg.) IMP% TOTAL CLK Clicker CLK FRE (avg.) CLK% CTR Publisher 1 848,305,400 168,336,570 5.04 33% 18,106,670 12,037,109 1.50 35% 2.13% Publisher 8,7 770,518,907 141,457,744 5.45 30% 18,671,914 8,757,092 2.13 36% 2.42% Publisher 2,3 466,377,259 106,932,276 4.36 18% 10,497,354 6,796,153 1.54 20% 2.25% Publisher 3,2 361,504,628 78,038,578 4.63 14% 537,743 463,885 1.16 1% 0.15% Publisher 4 ,5 135,949,297 23,702,010 5.74 5% 3,704,211 2,210,855 1.68 7% 2.72%
  7. 7. THE COVERAGE COMPARISON 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 1+ 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ Media Coverage Capability on PC Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 1 Publisher 8 Publisher 7 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1+ 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ Media Coverage Capability on Mobile Publisher 3 Publisher 2 Publisher 1 Publisher 7 Reach Reach TA UV/CPM Publisher 1 capability is better under 1+Reach Publisher 1 capability is better under 1+Reach Publisher 2 capability is better under 3+Reach Publisher 7 & Publisher 3 capability are better under 3+Reach • Publisher 1 coverage capability is better on PC and Mobile; • On PC,Publisher 7 and Publisher 3 visitors are more sticky, can get better reach under 3+; • On Mobile, Publisher 2 visitors are more sticky, can get higher reach under 3+; • Publisher 7 PC ,8M doesn’t show good capability of reach building but brand x allocated many impressions. TA UV/CPM Publisher PC Mobile Publisher 1I 29% 34% Publisher 7,8 38% 27% Publisher 3 ,2 15% 14% Publisher 3,2 15% 19% Brand X media weight
  8. 8. ON TARGET IMP%
  9. 9. 21.80% 30.30% 27.30% 26.70% 27.20% 28.60%0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% HC MARKET NORM Publisher 1 Publisher 8 Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 4 Total Imp On Target Imp Brand X PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% – PC 52.00% 51.00% 49.00% 56.00% 46.00% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Publisher 1 Publisher 7 Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 5 Total Imp On target Imp PC • Brand X publisher on target imp% is higher than market norm in household cleaning category • Brand X publisher on target imp% is lower than all publisher market norm (lower than the best) PC PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% MARKET NORM – ALL THE CATEGORY TA: F25-44 Brand X PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% vs. HC CATEGORY MARKET NORM TA: F25-44
  10. 10. 67% 66% 62% 64% 59% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Publisher 1 Publisher 7 Publisher 3 Publisher 2 Publisher 5 Total Imp On Target Imp Brand X PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% – MOBILE 21.80% 31.80% 26.60% 31.40% 30.20% 34.30% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% HC MARKET NORM Publisher 1 Publisher 8 Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 4 Total Imp On Target Imp MOBILE • Brand X publisher on target imp% is higher than market norm in household cleaning category • Brand X publisher on target imp% is lower than all publisher market norm (lower than the best) MOBILE LIBY PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% vs. HC CATEGORY MARKET NORM TA: F25-44 PUBLISHER ON TARGET IMP% MARKET NORM – ALL THE CATEGORY TA: F25-44
  11. 11. FREQUENCY CAPPING
  12. 12. 47% 26% 44% 35% 40% 35% 26% 35% 36% 49% 16% 17% 19% 17% 16% 16% 15% 16% 21% 18% 13% 37% 15% 10% 12% 13% 34% 18% 14% 16% 7% 2% 4% 14% 12% 12% 5% 11% 2% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Publisher 1 Publisher 2 Publisher 3 Publisher 4 Publisher 5 Publisher 6 Publisher 7 Publisher 8 Publisher 9 Publisher 10 Brand X Campaign frequency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10% FREQUENCY ANALYSIS • The audience would be more stable and sticky with Hot Program, which there are higher frequency audience • Regular Buy should bring more unique visitors,but some campaign showed pretty high imp% in high frequency, it result in waste of resources, so need to control the frequency
  13. 13. In the first half of 2017, Brand X 1+ reach is lower than market norm, there is still room for growth. 1. MEDIA WEIGHT ⚫ In the first half of 2017, 99% traffic is same type of publisher, suggest to choose more media type to target different media audience to help reach more unique audience; 2. MEDIA MIX ⚫ In the first half of 2017,Brand X publisher almost covered all the mainstream media, in line with category choice; ⚫ After considering cost per reach, reallocate the budget to reach building website. ⚫ Publisher 7,8 doesn’t show good capability on building reach, recommend to reduce the budget 3. ON TARGET IMP% ⚫ In the first half of 2017, Brand X total on target imp% is higher than market norm, but can be improved compared with the best in the market; 4. BUYING TACTICS AND FREQUENCY CAPPING ⚫ The high frequency impression is pretty high, need to work out more strict frequency capping strategy and online track publishers’ performance; ⚫ Imp% in X publisher on mobile only at 35%, need to negotiate with publisher for compensation. FINDING AND IMPLICATION
  14. 14. http://www.ifmresearch.com/en/ Ricardo Glenn ricardo.glenn@infocusmekong.com T: (84) 909 680 530 M: (84) 909 680 530 Want to Learn More

×