Google’s Video Ads, many CPMs To Go

14 thoughts on “Google’s Video Ads, many CPMs To Go”

  1. Awesome post, Om.

    Many publishers in traditional advertising (TV, radio, magazines) fear Google. If Google gets a hold of a medium, they drive down pricing.

    Imagine Google getting a hold of Business 2.0 and buying up all of the advertising inventory, then re-selling the ad space on each page to 100 different advertisers. That’s $60 an ad, and it will make the magazine look like a giant pixel-ad site (no doubt reducing the performance of the ads themselves).

    As Google becomes the method for purchasing ads, they will gain significant control over pricing. You say Business 2.0 doesn’t want to sell ads for $1,000? No problem — Google won’t do business with you, and the advertisers will simply follow suit as they continue to use Google as their distribution channel.

  2. If Google can earn the Dish Network and cable companies more revenue during off-times than the chat line, informercials, and txt message ringtone commericals can, they would have achieved their first goal.

    I don’t see Google replacing the primetime ads here, but as far as the remnant ads go, they may have a chance.

    Haven’t seen any of the Yoga-Blood pressure ads on here myself, but this post is now showing lots of ‘blood pressure’ induced AdSense 🙂

  3. The interesting part will be how Google tackles the high cost-of-creative associated with video advertising. This currently keeps many regional advertisers away from this media – but a solid system that allows advertisers to cost-effectively create video adverts would join all the dots for Google (and I am not sure Spotrunner have this yet).

    I have commented (http://blog.idiomag.com/2007/02/personalised-video-advertising/) on this issue a couple of times and will certainly be keeping my eyes open for Google’s offering…

  4. Good point. Outside of paid search (an idea they took from Overture) has Google released a product that really set the world on fire? Will they eventually have a few more hits? Hell yeah, with the talent they get and the cash flow they have, but I’m not going to jump up and down and do cartwheels for this…yet.

  5. I think the big issue is that Google is in the same boat as everyone else (all technology and media companies) when it comes to targeting ads on Television and Radio. I think the technology will be developed in house by these media companies as they don’t want to lose their valuable market share. I write about this here: http://themediaage.com/?p=15 .

  6. I think you’re getting yoga ads due to the word “om” coming up frequently on your site… Ok, so it’s not “om” in the context the keyword buyers are thinking but it’s not complete nonsense.

  7. Om, semi-related… aren’t those contextweb ads against Google’s TOS? Something about displaying other context-sensitive ads on the same page… or really any ads that resemble AdSense ads.

    I’m too busy to get the exact language. Also, you guys might be big enough earners to get around those things.

  8. @Amanda:
    I tend to disagree — linking the word Om to those ads seems rather far-fetched; I dont think “Om” appears that often to completely remove the other contexts — startups, mobile, advertising, IPOs and a bunch of other stuff.

  9. Oh, yea…now that’s what me and my 15 million SMB friends will be signing up for right away…the chance to compete against each other…for the right to pay more via competitive auctions for our TV, radio, and print ads…than it’d cost us for the ads if we placed them directly with our area media ourselves…

    I think not.

    Spotrunner and the other players in the “old school” ad industries have nothing to worry about from Google…not now, not next year, not ever.

    Kudos for them being willing to try, but with incompatable structures, this ain’t your mama’s bid-for-position pay-per-click.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.