Online Video Metrics Matter
•Als PPT, PDF herunterladen•
0 gefällt mir•323 views
Online video is about to reach parity with other media as a primary ad platform. But what are the right metrics to track and pay for?
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Empfohlen
Empfohlen (20)
Online Video Metrics Matter
- 1. Video Monetization: Metrics Matter Paul Zagaeski Principal Analyst, Online TV Adviser & GigaOm Pro Analyst Network June 2010
- 2. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Today’s Key Ideas Video viewing trends (the New TV) New TV is making money (are you?) Online viewers > engagement Engaging viewers is cheap! (or is it?) What does engagement mean exactly? Engagement Metrics: this ain’t your grandfather’s Arbitron Ratings Book
- 3. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Video Viewing Trends QuickTime™ and adecompressorare needed to see this picture. TV: just a box and lots of local broadcasters Cable/satellite: more channels, narrowcasting Web video: LOLCats give way to “TV experience online”
- 4. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski New TV Is Making Money Broadcast 1940s-1970s (ads) Cable/satellite 70s-90s (ads + subs) Web video 90s-00s (no one paying or buying ads) Online TV 00s (no one pays for LOLCats on YT) Paid Content 10s-future (ads + subs + PPV(?)) Pain: what does an ad buyer buy in New TV? QuickTime™ and adecompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 5. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Online Viewing>Engagement Web & mobile platforms give the viewer power— they can act! HSN=$billions Interaction rate 5-7x higher than for ads Lots of innovation, measurable results UbiSoft (Your Shape for Wii) competes with Wii Fit using online video Source: http://www.clickz.com QuickTime™ and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 6. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Engaging Viewers Is Cheap… …when it works (Nike Hyperdunk) Can also be impossible/too expensive What’s the cost? Rough scale CPM Display Ads $2.30-$2.45 CPM Online Video Ads $7-$8 ROS or in-banner video $15-$20 for pre-roll/premium pre-roll* *eMarketer/Credit Suisse/LiveRail/AdAge
- 7. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski What’s Engagement Mean? Ads online are in a completely new context versus ads on TV For the user: Where did I find this? Who helped me find it? What did I think while watching? What did I do during and after watching? For the brand: What format did we choose? Where are we putting this? What else appears with it? How did the viewer respond? Goal: Going viral! Means brand is probably maximizing all relevant metrics for the video—and you need metrics even when it’s an obvious success.
- 8. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Engagement Metrics Placement Sentiment Engagement Reach QuickTime™ and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 9. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Nike Ad Metrics Case My recent favorite “viral video” (Kobe & Hyperdunk) Measuring ad results of: Placement (6 > 250+) Sentiment (40% re-enacted) Engagement (35k comments) Reach/Exposure (375,000 hours) See case at http://corp.visiblemeasures.com/case-studies QuickTime™ and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 10. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski And Now You Know There’s New TV New TV is gaining ad revenue traction One reason: online viewer engagement, with great follow-on value brought to the brand Measuring that engagement is absolute requirement for your brand’s next success. QuickTime™ and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 11. copyright 2010 Paul Zagaeski Time For Q&A Later… By the way, check this article about barriers to online video ads http://techcrunch.com/2010/01/16/12- things-holding-back-online-video- advertising/ QuickTime™ and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 12. That’s all, folks! Paul Zagaeski (Twitter: paulzagaeski) Principal Analyst Online TV Adviser http://onlinetvadviser.wordpress.com Member of GigaOm Pro Analyst Network
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Your takeaways should be: There’s a new kind of TV that’s exploding across the Internet and spilling out to all kinds of new devices That New TV is starting to generate respectable revenues What’s different about New TV? In a word: engagement How much do brands have to pay for engagement? A lot, or a little, depending on how well they execute. What does this “engagement” stuff mean in practical terms? It’s really important to be able to measure viewer engagement properly to be successful next time.
- Trends seen in video viewership and consumption TV used to mean the box and the local TV stations Cable and satellite: more channels, more crap, but better audience targeting for the crap Web video: seriously crappy for about 5 years; gradually, quality and innovation is emerging (more ways for good content to show up and seek an audience) YouTube and hundreds of other "tube" sites have morphed User Generated Content used to be 90%; now could be under 40% Even a tube site is starting to look like a TV site Trend: more viewing of sites that extend existing TV network, and of stand-alone content sites, and of aggregators of movies, music videos, animation—professionally produced content that isn't necessarily intended to be on TV first In other words, we’re starting to focus on a new kind of TV experience that’s unique to the online world.
- Pain Train Pain for advertisers: placement used to be easy (buy network or buy national ads for local market placement) Now, placement and optimal ad revenue not just from "how many watched?” but other measures of interaction, feeling, and willingness to share Tracking the increase in video monetization/advertising Timeline/phases of monetization Broadcast: no viewer pays for anything on TV (casters sell audience to advertisers, casters buy content from makers) Cable/satellite: viewers pay for access to TV (casters sell audience to advertisers, buy content from makers, but get paid by cable/sat for content) Web video: no viewer pays for anything on the Internet (no pro content on the web) Online TV: The Tube sites explode, but viewers still don't pay (just watching LOLCats) Paid content: viewers not yet paying directly, but their subscription money to cable or Netflix starts to shift to online delivery of pro content (no one's paying for user-gen content!) Online subscriptions: Hulu Plus (with ads!), Netflix streaming Pay-per-view: iTunes Sources of intelligence about what a brand is buying or not getting when they buy (addressing pain!) Data providers: survey/collect viewing data, sell access and analysis (comScore, Visible Measures) Tools and plaform providers: Ooyala, others Companies and niches (online advertising blossoms) ScanScout: video ad network comScore: ranking video "content properties" by viewers and by videos viewed (different rankings); also rank ad networks by viewers reached. Methodology: panel of 2 million online users (crossover to cable/broadcast?) Annual conferences: Ad Tech, and others
- How viewers are responding to ads Do users "not watch" web video because there are ads? Not a lot of research, but unlikely (ad load isn't very high) Do users interact with ads? You bet Web and mobile give viewers power they never had before… Exception in Old TV, Home Shopping Network/Direct response ads = $billions! Proved viewers do act if motivated. Interaction rates online video ads: 5-7x more than for non-video ads (and about 100x more than for print) Innovations in marketing and advertising are sweeping into online video to create more ways to spark viewer engagement Plenty of examples. Typical example ripped from the recent headlines (July 9). UbiSoft used video of Jenny McCarthy promoting their Your Shape game to drive engagement, with outstanding results. According to ClickZ, by careful placement and content tailored to the intended audience of female fitness enthusiasts 25-49, agency DGB was able to measure much higher engagement rates on these videos than for typical video ads. Details in the Clickz article.
- How much does it cost to be successful engaging viewers? Google the words “online video CPM” and plan to spend a lot of time sorting through lots of conflicting and contradictory info. Safe to say that buying engagement can be super cheap -- if you blow the doors off a viral ad campaign, like the folks from Nike did a few months ago with the Hyperdunk video. Flipside: brands can end up spending as much or more online and not get the promised results. Data from eMarketer, AdAge, and LiveRail: Display ads with low interaction rates are less expensive than the average online video ad. Rough comparison: CPM Display $2.30-$2.45 — Online Video $7-8 ROS or in-banner, $15-$20 for pre-roll to premium pre-roll. However, the cost you pay isn’t the final metric to worry about. It’s how much engagement you got from viewers for the spend you made that matters. When there’s significant spread in up-front CPM like this, then the engagement metrics really matter.
- Importance of understanding how content is being consumed How ads on TV differ from ads online Ad load (was lower than TV, now increasing -- ABC just announced ad load doubling, Hulu will likely follow or has followed, where does YouTube fall?) Hulu has followed a "network TV model" (pre-roll plus interstitials) Most sites use a pre-roll plus video in-banner or sidebar always visible Some have popups during video play (hate that! Who doesn't hate that?) In-banner video or sidebars are easier to cope with. For the User How and where did I find this? How does it strike me? What do I do during and after watching? For the Brand Where did we put it? Where did users watch it? On what device? In what online or mobile context? What else is the viewer seeing? And then, how did the viewer respond? What did user do during? Rewind or stop? What did user do after? Share it, recommend it, comment it, replicate and re-post it? What else does the user do besides watch my content? What else does she watch, where else does she go online? With analytics, brands can grasp essential characteristics of those who watch, and track behavior related to the video. - Goal: Ad goes viral! Brands can create, test, promote, and leverage those viral dynamics to push brand messages. Ad Age uses Visible Measures to track Top 10 Viral Ads weekly Campaign metrics are an obvious requirement in the New TV context -- even if your video doesn’t go viral, you need to know what happened while it was out there, to plan for the next one.
- Key ENGAGEMENT metrics to help with advertising strategies Ideally, what you want is to know who's actually paying for stuff out of pocket now? Find those viewers, pot of gold—but would need to tie online behavior to buying behavior. That’s a holy grail for advertisers — and possibly an issue for those concerned about online privacy. Beyond the scope for today! The categories of metrics for evaluating online viewer engagement fall into four buckets Placement — where was the ad placed (and why did a brand pick those places?) Also, where else did the ad or video appear? How did it get there? Was it copied or turned into a user-generated version? Sentiment — what did the viewer think of the video? What emotions were triggered? How does evidence of user sentiment guide our thinking about how we’ve positioned our brand in this video? What evidence can we track of the strong positive and negative, or the “don’t care” responses to our video? Engagement — To me, this is the most surprising and surely unpredictable part of the online video metrics story, discovering how viewers choose to interact with the video and the brand. What behavior does the video trigger? Does the user watch the whole video, does she rewind it multiple times? Does she replay it periodically, favorite it, comment it, tweet it, share it? Does she get out her video camera and replicate it, or make a mash-up with it? Does she post it somewhere else? Who watched it there? Is she influencing others beyond just a small circle of family and friends? Reach/Exposure — Ultimately, how many cumulative impressions did the brand make via this video? How many hours were spent watching or otherwise interactiing with it? How does that compare to other brands doing similar campaigns? Knowing something, or a lot, about these forms of engagement is what has replaced analyzing the ARB (Arbitron Ratings Book) for New TV. If you can measure viewer interaction and draw conclusions from it, you can interpret and predict attitudes and behavior regarding your brand. That may tell you if you’re paying too much, or not enough, for online ads.
- Here’s a favorite case of viral success—Nike’s Hyperdunk video campaign (Hyperdunk is the shoe brand). I was bamboozled by this video for days and days—I kept trying to figure out how it was done. Was it an ad, was it a hoax? Typical viewer reaction. Incredibly viral — Nike placed this video in six locations - eventually it was posted to another 250 locations BY VIEWERS And 40% of those placements were re-enactments or other derivatives - folks really like this video and got engaged with it. Overall, this video was viewed 16 million times in the measurement period. Less than 40% of the viewing was on the six original sites—viewers by themselves extended measured reach by a factor of more than 2X. And viewers were engaged: there were 35,000 tracked comments. Most viewers rewound the video several times to see the “money shot” over and over. The result: viewers spent a total of 375,000 hours viewing this one video. Lots of exposure for the Nike brand for modest ad placement investment. You think this Nike team will have any trouble getting budget for their next campaign?
- Paul Zagaeski (Twitter: paulzagaeski) Principal Analyst Online TV Adviser http://onlinetvadviser.wordpress.com Member of GigaOm Pro Analyst Network Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulzagaeski