- Published by
- 8 Comments
By Tim and Elizabeth
Native ads are all the rage these days, seamlessly blending engaging content into the property’s environment. But to really understand why, we need to take a look at the history of online advertising. In the 90s, when the dot com boom was starting to take off, I was just entering high school in the Silicon Valley and I had the opportunity to briefly help (if you can call it that) at a banner ad company. They were rocking it, seeing very high click-through-rates (CTR) and charging just pennies per click. Back then, everyone and their mother was clicking, so even at just pennies, this company was rolling in the dough. They later sold for hundreds of millions of dollars before the dot com bust in the early 2000s.
But they weren’t the only ones raking it in. Just about every banner ad company was doing the same. Banner ads were seeing anywhere between 50-90% CTR! It was an insane time! As a result, the effective CPMs were also very high. For example, let’s say you ran a website with a 70% CTR on one banner ad and only made $0.05 per click. For every 1000 visitors, you were still making 1000 * 70% * $0.05 = $35 eCPMs!
Fast forward to today. The CTR on banner ads has plummeted to about 0.1%. So your eCPM is now 5 cents instead of $35! Advertisers are getting way fewer clicks and publishers are hardly making any money at all. Why? Consumers have banner-blindness. Banner ads are now standardized, so they look the same on every single site. It makes it easy to ignore ads even if they are relevant and well-targeted.
We see banner-blindness in our own network since we offer both banner and text ads. The latter looks native to the look and feel of a given newsletter, while the former is a traditional banner ad format. In our controlled studies, time and again, the text ads will always win doing 2-10x greater CTR than banner ads. Think about it — an order of magnitude difference in CTR is an order of magnitude difference in revenue. In other words, instead of making $10 with banner ads, you could be making $100. At first, this difference astounded me, but now it seems obvious. Native ads have high CTRs for a couple of reasons:
1) They look like they fit the content. Since users are actively reading the content, they are more likely to read the ad.
2) The look-and-feel required to be a native ad will differ from property to property, so users are not able to learn to ignore ads.
Advertisers get more engagement with native ads compared to banner ads on an eCPM basis. If you are a publisher and can choose your ad format, it’s a no-brainer to run native ads. Since they are more effective, advertisers should also be willing to pay more for these on an eCPM basis. Everyday, we hear about online newspaper companies struggling, because banner ads are just not paying them enough to make their business model work. By adopting native ads, media companies should be able to increase their revenue by an order of magnitude, and advertisers will pay for this, because it works better than banner ads.
Get ready for a new world. There’s a new way to get customers now, and everyone — marketers, agencies, ad exchanges and networks — will need to be prepared for this big change. Have questions or thoughts about what this new world will look like? Type them below.
Image used with permission from Microsoft