Advertising Effectiveness: Portal Homepage Takeovers

2,607 views

Published on

An Advertising Effectiveness study of Valentine's Day homepage ads on Yahoo.com, MSN.com and AOL.com by advertisers ProFlowers and 1-800-Flowers.com.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,607
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
19
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
70
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Advertising Effectiveness: Portal Homepage Takeovers

  1. 1. Advertising Effectiveness on Publisher Websites:    A TNS Compete™ Case Study of Valentine’s Day  Ad Takeovers on Portal Homepages Ad T k P t lH March 23, 2009 , Copyright 2009 Compete, a division of TNS Media. All Rights Reserved
  2. 2. Table of Contents Purpose of Study & Methodology • Study Analysis • Key Findings • Compete Team Contact Info Compete Team Contact Info • Appendix •
  3. 3. Study Purpose & Methodology Study Objectives To develop clickstream‐driven insights into the consumer impact of Valentine’s Day homepage takeover advertising on  major portals.   Specifically, the study will: – Examine consumers exposed to the ads (and their associated clickthrough) compared with a control group  p ( g) p gp of consumers not exposed to the campaign – Quantify the effectiveness at building shopper consideration and purchase Methodology  Compete analyzed clickstream data from its community of 2 million U.S. internet users  From its master data set, Compete identified 2 groups of Portal Homepage consumers for comparison: 1) Exposed to Valentine’s Day advertising (visited a portal homepage on  a takeover day, between February  9 ‐ 13, 2009) 2) Control ‐ i it d 2) C t l visited a portal homepage on a non‐takeover day between February  9 ‐ 13 2009 (did t i it d i t lh tk d bt Fb 9 13, 2009 (did not visit during  exposed dates) Activity Timeframes Measured 1)    Same Day  Performed on the same day as visiting a portal homepage (High probability of ad impression) 1) Same Day – Performed on the same day as visiting a portal homepage (High probability of ad impression) 2)    Thru Feb 13th – Total campaign effect.  Includes Same Day as well as Lagged activities thru Feb 13th Sites 1)    Advertisers included ProFlowers.com and 1‐800‐Flowers.com ) 2)    Portal Homepages included Yahoo.com, AOL.com and MSN.com
  4. 4. Study Purpose & Methodology Continued Exposure to Valentine’s Day  Ad on Portal Homepage Lagged Actions Generic Search  Queries (flower‐ shopping related) Branded Search  Queries Direct Action Visited the   Visited a  Advertiser’s Site Competitive Site 
  5. 5. Study Analysis Study Analysis Specific Metrics in this Section Include: – Homepage Ad viewer share of shoppers and purchasers at advertiser sites – Demographics of ad exposed and control groups – Demographics of ad exposed and ad exposed with viewthrough groups – Brand queries of Valentine’s Day advertiser terms on the top 5 search engines – Generic queries of flower shopping‐related terms on the top 5 search engines Basis for Analysis Compete formed the analysis of this study around the comparison’s noticed between the Control and Exposed Groups.   Accordingly, much of the data is shown indexing the exposed group to the control to measure lift. Accordingly much of the data is shown indexing the exposed group to the control to measure lift
  6. 6. Homepage ad viewers comprised a significant  p percentage of shoppers and purchasers g pp p 21% of shoppers and 19% of purchasers at advertiser sites viewed a Valentine’s Day  • homepage ad Homepage Ad Viewer Share of Advertiser Traffic (Percentage of unique visitors along the conversion funnel.  Feb.  6 – 13, 2009)   Shoppers Purchasers 21% 19% Homepage Ad Viewers (as a share of visitors) Hompage Ad Viewers (as a share of purchasers)
  7. 7. The Valentine’s Day homepage ad control and  exposed groups had similar demographic make‐ups p gp gp p Gender, Age, and Income demographic measurements indicated similarities in the control  • and exposed user groups Demographic Breakdown – Control vs. Exposed (Percentage of consumers in each demographic bucket.  Feb. 6 – 13, 2009)   Read as: 26% of the exposed group was between the age of 35 - 44 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Female Male <$30K $30‐60K $60‐100K $100K+ 0‐24 25‐34 35‐44 45‐54 55+ Gender Income Age  Control  Exposed
  8. 8. Viewthrough visitors fit different demos than the  overall exposed group p gp Viewthrough visitors tended to be wealthier (+5ppts for those earning +$100k) than the  • overall exposed group Viewthrough visitors also tended to be slightly more male and in the 25‐34 and 45‐54 age  • bracket bk Demographic Breakdown – Exposed vs. Exposed Viewthrough Visitors (Percentage of consumers in each demographic bucket.  Feb. 6 – 13, 2009)   70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Female Male <$30K $30‐60K $60‐100K $100K+ 0‐24 25‐34 35‐44 45‐54 55+ Gender Income Age  Exposed Exposed ‐ Viewthrough
  9. 9. Ad exposure on portal homepages resulted in  stronger consideration of advertiser sites 1800Flowers.com ad viewers at AOL.com and MSN.com visited the advertiser roughly 2.5x  • more often than control Consideration Lift from Ad Exposure Read as: Yahoo! homepage ad viewers visited (Ad exposed group indexed to control .  Same Day and thru Feb. 13th, 2009)   ProFlowers.com1.9x more often than control 300  260  220  180  140  100  ProFlowers.com 1800Flowers.com ProFlowers.com 1800Flowers.com Viewthrough Lift ‐ Same Day Viewthrough Lift ‐ Thru Feb. 13 AOL.com MSN.com Yahoo.com
  10. 10. Ad exposure also resulted in significantly higher  purchase activity on advertiser sites   Homepage ad viewers at Yahoo.com visited advertiser sites 1.8x more often and purchased  • 2x more often than control Consideration vs. Purchase Lift from Ad Exposure Read as: Yahoo! homepage ad viewers (Ad exposed group indexed to control .  Same Day and thru Feb. 13th, 2009)   purchased 2x more often than control 200  180  160  140  120  100  Same Day Thru Feb. 13 Same Day Thru Feb. 13 Viewthrough Lift Purchase Lift AOL.com MSN.com Yahoo.com
  11. 11. Ad exposure generated strong searcher interest in  advertiser brands and the retail flower category gy Homepage ad viewers searched for the advertiser by brand name 2.5x more often and  • conducted a generic search query (flower shopping‐related) 5.4x more often than control Read as: Homepage ad viewers made 5.4x more generic (flower shopping- Search Lift from Ad Exposure related) queries than control (Ad exposed group indexed to control .  Thru Feb. 13th, 2009)   600  544  500  400  300  250  200  100  Branded Search Lift Generic Search Lift
  12. 12. Key Findings Portal homepage ads delivered a considerable lift in consideration and purchase to  • Valentine’s Day advertisers – Ad viewers at Yahoo.com were nearly twice as likely to visit advertisers and purchase  compare to non‐viewers i Portal homepage ads drove significant share of traffic to Valentine’s Day advertisers • – Roughly 20% of shoppers and purchasers at advertiser sites viewed a homepage ad Viewthrough visitors tended to be wealthier, as well as slightly more male and in the 24 35  Viewthrough visitors tended to be wealthier as well as slightly more male and in the 24‐35 • and 45‐54 age group than the overall homepage ad exposed group Thru  Metric  Same Day  Feb. 13th Viewthrough Lift AOL.com                169                    121  MSN.com                173                    144  Yahoo.com                161                   178  Purchase Lift Ph Lift AOL.com                117                    110  MSN.com                160                    135  Yahoo.com                197                   172  Search Lift Search Lift Branded Search  N/A                   250  Generic Search  N/A                   544 
  13. 13. Contact Information Jeremy Crane Ranjan Butaney Managing Director, Online Media & Search Senior Director, Business Development jcrane@compete.com rbutaney@compete.com 617‐933‐5675 617‐933‐5620 Alex Patriquin Alex Patriquin Senior Associate, Online Media & Search apatriquin@compete.com 617‐933‐5724

×