Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

July 2017 - Viewability Study by Augustine Fou

1.821 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Everyone has different numbers on viewability. So we did this study to get to the truth, using directly measured data, at impression-level granularity, with no sampling. It categorically shows good publishers have much better viewability -- e.g. 2X better than open exchanges.

Veröffentlicht in: Marketing
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

July 2017 - Viewability Study by Augustine Fou

  1. 1. August 12, 2017marketing.scienceconsulting group, inc. linkedin.com/in/augustinefou July 2017 Viewability Study Marketing Science analyzed 1 billion ad impressions in July 2017. The data was directly measured with javascript code in ad slots, on an impression level (not sampled). “Value” in the charts below means the percent of the ad that was in the viewport (the portion of the browser that is in-view or “above the fold”). Mobile is not specifically broken out in this study; but it was observed that mobile generally had lower viewability than non-mobile. KEY FINDINGS – UPDATED 1. Good publishers had an average of 91% viewability – i.e. 91% of the ads had greater than 50% of their pixels in view. Note that 83% had 91 – 100% of their pixels in view. Some good publishers also “lazy load” – i.e. wait for ad slots to come into view before calling the ad. 2. Ad networks also had viewability near the 70% target that most buyers are looking for. 3. Open exchanges however had a 41% average viewability; also note the much larger portion that had 1 – 10% of pixels in view. Good Publishers Ad Networks Open Exchange 91% viewable 66% viewable 41% viewable

×