Pilot Radio Show Episode Launched!!
Well, I’ve finally done it. The first pilot episode of the radio show has been launched.. Now before you get all excited, I just want to let everyone know that the topics are mostly about current news in the webmaster industry. There are a few hidden tips, but the point of this episode was to try out some different ideas and formats. The goal is actually to have a live radio show broadcast, with a podcast and archive section after the show is done. I would LOVE to have a call in feature too, where webmasters/affiliates can call into the show and ask us questions or just say hi to our guests.
I know there are a lot of you that have been waiting for me to launch this so PLEASE post your comments and feedback about it. All criticism is accepted as usual.
I’ve also set up a podcast link too.
I’ll be adding the flash player onto my site very soon, but I figured I’d get the episode up first so everyone can have a listen.
Awesome! Listening now. Although I must say, the lighter you are clicking on and off is kind of getting to me…heh.
Sweeet!
I will be a regular listener.
Well since you say you want honest comments… I can’t help but say that these statements are completely unrehearsed. Honestly, did you just read one article about what you are talking about and assume it was 100% accurate?
First off, the guest states that 99% of Google’s revenue is from search… that is completely fucking ignorant. 99% of revenue is from text-based ads, not search… nearly half of Google’s revenue is from their content network (not search).
You better be ready to hate YPN like you hate Adsense now… do you not see the trend? Same thing happened with Adsense, payouts were crazy then they dropped. Why? It’s because people caught on, click-fraud became huge, more and more scams were upon us. Advertisers became aware of this so Google made it very easy to change content bids because they converted at a much lower rate than search bids. The same thing will happen to YPN, especially because they already have a hard enough time filling the inventory in their content network. Not to mention how they still serve ads to international countries, while advertisers are only paying for US traffic… a technology they already utilize for search but not for content? That is a fucked up business model… let’s just screw all of our advertisers, they wont notice.
Google video ads stupid? Are you serious? Over 30% of advertising online is brand advertising. Google accounts for ZERO percent of that. They have just opened the gates for extremely large budget brand advertisers who can’t do direct marketing (Coke for example) online. Not to mention the ability to streamline the process for mom and pop shops to implementing their commercials online. Video ads are going to be from $5 CPM to low $$ CPM… You won’t be complaining when you are earning a cut of that, I can guarantee that.
I have to stop at the first piece… this is retarded.
unreasearched* (not unrehearsed)
Hey Jrod-
I appreciate your comments, seriously. Sorry you got so upset too, heh, long day maybe? Anyhow, this first episode wasn’t really researched, we were just winging it over a few random topics. The future episodes will definitely have more researched news topics up for discussion. You aren’t the first to have pointed that out, so I hope that this pilot episode doesn’t leave a sour taste in your mouth or ruin the experience for you as a whole.
And by the way, there was no script or rehearsel, although next time I’ll be following a more in-depth schedule I suppose.
Matt, the co-host is actually a very good guy and to his credit, knows his shit. Whether or not someone agrees with him is their own choice.
Yes, I wasn’t clear on Google’s revenues. What I should have said is that Google derives 99% of its revenues from contextual advertising in some form.
As far as Google video ads are concerned, I was part of a team that designed and executed ads with sound and video back in the late 90s, and it didn’t do very well. It tended to annoy the user, which, based on the emails I’ve been getting is what is happening this time around as well.
As far as the branding BS goes companies like Coke have wised up to the fact that you can’t just throw lots of money around online and call it branding. The ad agencies (including the one I worked for) made millions in the early days convincing big companies to do just that. Since there is no call to action there is no metric for measuring success and therefore no way for the client to check on how well the campaign worked. It’s an ad agency’s dream.
Do you really think that a mom and pop shop are going to produce a video ad and put it on Google?
And I didn’t say that the big companies won’t pay the money for a while — I did say that these ads are going to annoy people. If you want to make a side bet on whether Google will have video ads a year from now, pony up.
This is exactly what Jon wanted to do with this show — foster debate and get people talking. I think it worked.
Perhaps you should be a guest on the show, and I’ll throw around the comments and personal attacks here afterword.
Matt,
First, my apologies for being personal. As far as Google ads, it’s irrelevant to base them off results in the late 90’s. We are in a much different market, technology has changed, consumer interest has done a complete 180 online and the internet market as a whole is in a whole new paradigm. I understand they were “annoying†back then, but it is much too early to tell for now. Even if that were the case, how many people do you know that say TV ads are annoying? 9/10 people I know will say they are, but does that make them ineffective? No, because if that were the case that market would collapse.
Mom and pop shops are some of the most weary online advertisers there are but there has to be a point, whether now or in ten years, when they realize the potential. It’s all part of the natural flow of change and innovation. Do you think ten years ago WSJ had one bit of worry that places like Craigslist.com would affect their business model? I doubt it, but like I said, it’s the change that WILL happen.
What’s the difference between brand marketers measuring metrics online and offline? Again, you can’t compare today’s market to the past. Technology is 100 times better these days, the targeting, tracking, and data analysis we have available was unconceivable in those days. All this plays a large part in the ability to run effective online campaigns. In the late 90’s most of this wasn’t available and companies got caught up in the hype and lost millions. Today we are building a much more stable internet market, learning from our mistakes, and using technology to the fullest to supplement our success. If that’s not the case then we would inevitably be doomed for another crash.
Brand marketers are already actively using video technology through companies like PointRoll, Unicast, EyeBlaster, etc. and seeing great results. The only difference is that they are primarily utilizing pre-roll inventory as opposed to Google’s CPC model. This isn’t something new, it’s just something that has been streamlined by Google to make it easier for more advertisers to enter this domain.
Again, sorry for being personal but these are my strong opinions on the matter. Unfortunately it is much too early to validate any opinions, but we will quickly see what is to come.
I liked your second comment much more than your first. I have a friend who is a marketing exec for a company that is very progressive about Internet branding, and I’m going to ask her what their plans are on video ads next week. I’ll get back to you. If she says I can mention the name of the company I will, otherwise I’ll give you a general idea. They are in the Fortune 100.
A couple of your generalizations are incorrect or irrelevant. A flash banner five or ten years ago may have been cruder, but it was no more or less annoying than one made today.
And if Mom and Pop companies are going to get on the Net they’re not going to dip their toe in the water by going through the expense of producing a video ad when they can put up $25 and try Overture.
No offense, but I hardly think you can compare video ads to Craigslist. Video advertising is certainly not a disruptive technology or process that would signal a shift. And I will forgive you for using the word paradigm. Once.
And a 20 meg video that interrupts your user experience will never cease to be annoying. Rumor has it (I only got this off two or three blogs I read so I want to be careful on the research) that that is why Google isn’t using them on its sites.
If you can come up with something that will change that, email me and I’ll bankroll you.
And I’d be curious to know which technologies that are being used on the Internet are 100 times better than they were 10 years ago.
I know my track record on predictions (pretty strong), but I don’t know yours. Either one could possibly be true, but I’ll go with mine.
In fact, I’d be willing to bet you a grand there are no Google video ads in a year.
I don’t mind your strong opinions, just don’t attack me personally you freaking loser (just kidding).
jrod805:
Video ads will always be annoying. Television is so much different and you simply cannot compare the two. There is so much competition on the web that if a web site starts using obtrusive advertising, namely video, people will simply go elsewhere to find their information. Television is much different because we can’t exercise this freedom on the same scale.
Matt, local businesses wouldn’t need to go out and spend tons of money with a production company. Take a look at any local TV station and count how many times you see a local commercial over an hour’s time. Plenty of businesses can produce cheap commercials, transitioning them online would simply be a matter of rendering them in a different format.
I can see where you are going with the video ads but like I said before, they have been in use for months now and showing great results. All the top ad networks such as VCM, Tribal, Advertising.com all support PointRoll, Unicast, or any of the other large ad serving technology that focus on video ads and consistently have new advertisers.
One more thing that it sounds like you may be unaware of is the fact that these ads will actually have a clickable link, so tracking campaign effectiveness won’t be a 100% loss and there will still be room for direct marketers. Not to mention the smarter ad agencies that do much more creative things to prove their campaigns are capturing the audience’s attention. A lot of times branders will simply rely on their banner ads to generate a click-through rather than worrying about the user remembering their brand. Doesn’t make sense at first, but what happens is now they have much more control over how they can portray their brand, not just from a banner but from an entire website. I’m sure you’ve noticed over the last year that there have been more and more companies doing things that involve user-generated content, or user interactivity on mini-sites. When done correctly this is by far more effective than having a brand awareness campaign that focuses on repetition of a banner ad with your name on it.
Anyway before I get too far off tangent what I am getting at is the fact that these video ads can prove to be quite effective. Marketers already shell out over $5 CPM on pre-roll inventory, the fact that a user has to click on the ad before the video is actually playing could prove to be much more cost-effective… the question is, how many people are going to click these ads? And how long before they are immune to them? Pre-roll inventory will play regardless, but if the consumer is aware of these ads, publishers will have to get creative with their ad placements to sustain user involvement (much like what Jon mentioned about people placing images next to YPN ads).
One more thing that has me wondering is the launch of these video-ads. Google is known for testing new formats all the time, and announcing it to the public. I didn’t hear much about these video ads, nor see any articles about publishers testing this new format. Unless I am the only one that missed this, why is it that Google was so confident to push this new product out without extensive testing in the real world?
Entrepreneur, what about Tivo? Or what about Firefox’s adblock or other extentions that will remove these ads in your browser?
You tell me what you would rather have. A video that starts playing automatically or a video ad that is only activated by a click? Which one is more intrusive?
I’m not even going to jump into this debate.. but I think some of you are on your way to write novels by the looks of the lenghthly responses here.
I wouldn’t consider myself to have much experience with advertising. But I can tell you that if these ads are going to be playing on webpages and requiring a download then i will be the first one to download a firefox extension to block them. 20MB is a lot if they are on every page you visit, this would mean that people would run out of bandwidth pretty quickly too.
Also, I myself have never seen a full sized video ad(not just a banner), and if I did I would be tempted to click it becuase it’s new, but that would be a one time thing, and I would never again click it. The fact that they are very rare to me indicates that they are not very effective.
God, I’m going to get flamed(go easy please).
Nothing personal.
jrod805:
I can’t see how a video activated by a click is going to work in the long run. People hate ads, and the more they become aware of them, the more they will learn to avoid them.
This is the same as what has happened to the 468×60 pixel banner ad today. People have gotten so used to this form of ad that we’re seeing a much lower CTR on it than we did 5 years ago. We all know that the most lucrative ads are the ones that are so well integrated with the site’s content, and in fact, don’t resemble ads at all.
Aren’t we forgetting about the cost of producing video ads? They’re INSANE.
You also mention the sucess that some of these companies have had with the implementation these ads. Again, I think this is due simply to their shock value, and the fact that people haven’t become accustom to them yet.
Now THAT is a great question:
why is it that Google was so confident to push this new product out without extensive testing in the real world?
I think that Google is under a lot of pressure from Wall Street to diversify its income streams. That’s what I was getting at with my 99% comment, even though I got it a little off.
That pressure plus their unease over Microsoft kicking their @ss is causing them to throw as much against the wall as they possibly can to see what sticks. I think video ads are a misstep. Many people do and many don’t. We’ll see what happens.
Then there’s Jon, Mr. Fostering Debate…lob in an occasional grenade and get out. Real freaking good.
Just busting you, Jon. I forgot to mention the fact that Google supposedly won’t run the video ads on its own sites. What do all of you think of that?
Great idea guys. Listened to the whole thing. Though I had to watch that my kids didn’t wander into the office. A little too much swearing for public consumption. Not all that informative, but entertaining. It was actually quite refreshing to hear real human voices talking about this business. Looking forward to more…
We are going to tone down the profanity a bit, but not by much. It’s just the way we speak when we are relaxed I guess, plus I’ve always thought that since we work for ourselves, with no bosses or co-workers, that our language is a bit different, and a lot more agressive. Profanity, when not used excessively is a great part of the English language.. I think depending on who the guest is, will also determine the amount of swearing used, some may be toned down, while a heated debate or topic may cause more of it to come out. Either way, I’m extremely greatful to all of the feedback the show has received.
Cool start I think, I dig the relaxed banter. I think, just in case it is someone new to your site who decides to listen from work or in front of their kids, just put a small disclaimer at the beginning of the show regarding the language, something fun like: “This ain’t your mama’s podcast - we swear, we step on toes and we’re the epitome of politically incorrect!”
Oh and stop clicking that darn lighter! That alone is a good reason to stop smoking! haha!