How Ad Effectiveness Tools Can Help Optimize Your Media Strategy May 2012

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

How Ad Effectiveness Tools Can Optimize Your Media Strategy

May 2012

A look at how panel-based measurement can maximize your advertising effectiveness

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m2

Today’s presenters

• Alyssa Maine

• Marketing Coordinator, Marketing

• Nick Gaudio

• Associate, Advertising Effectiveness Solutions

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m3

Webinar logistics

• Today’s webinar will be recorded. You will be emailed a link.

• Please enter your questions in the Questions box. We will answer as many as possible at the end.

• If you have technical difficulties, try loggingback in or use a different browser

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m4

Agenda

• Webinar (25-30 min)• Who is Compete?

• Tunnel vision

• Compete Data Methodology

• Lurking leanings

• Ad effectiveness case study

• Q&A (10-15 min)

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m5

Introduction to Compete

• Founded in 2000, joined WPP/Kantar in 2008

• Passionate about understanding consumers to inspire great marketing

• Fastest-growing operating company within Kantar in terms of revenue and new customer growth

• World-class advertiser, agency and media clients

• Strategic partnerships to enable marketing optimization and provide holistic view of consumers

• Largest panel in the industry with 2.3 million US consumers

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m6

Tunnel vision

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m7

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m8

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m9

Artist: Peikwen Cheng

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m10

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m11

Data Methodology

• Bigger, more diverse, more actionable data

• When it comes to online panels, size matters

• Panel diversity is key

• Not all data are created equal

2.3 million

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m12

Site Side Analytics vs Panel Based Analytics

• How do Compete’s analytics compare with local analytics (e.g. Google Analytics, Omniture)?

Compete Local Log

Unique Visitors Yes Yes

Deleted Cookies Overstatement No Sometimes

Bots/Spiders/Agents No Sometimes

Pingbacks No Sometimes

RSS Update Traffic No Sometimes

US/International US, UK & France US & International

Estimation Method Panel-Based Cookies, IP Address, User Agent Strong

Demographical/ Behavioral Segments Yes Yes

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m13

Let’s recap what we learned• You still love your campaign analytics system

• You will not see the macro view in your tunnel

• A panel-based view provides vital awareness of out-of-funnel outcomes and market context

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m14

Lurking leanings

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m15

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m16

From a recent RFP:“For the past several years, <our client> has been challenged by how to measure the sales impact of their online media campaigns.  Through the use of <internal systems>, we're able to measure the e-commerce sales associated with banners--both the sales that resulted from a click (click-through) and the sales that resulted from people who merely viewed our banners (view-through).  The view-through sales far exceed the click-through sales, which is not surprising when one considers the volume of impressions we deliver, and the low click-trough rates associated with display campaigns.  However, this also leads to a fair degree of skepticism….

How many of those purchasers who merely viewed a banner made that purchase because they saw that banner?”

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m17

From a recent RFP:“For the past several years, <our client> has been challenged by how to measure the sales impact of their online media campaigns.  Through the use of <internal systems>, we're able to measure the e-commerce sales associated with banners--both the sales that resulted from a click (click-through) and the sales that resulted from people who merely viewed our banners (view-through).  The view-through sales far exceed the click-through sales, which is not surprising when one considers the volume of impressions we deliver, and the low click-trough rates associated with display campaigns.  However, this also leads to a fair degree of skepticism….

How many of those purchasers who merely viewed a banner made that purchase because they saw that banner?”

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m18

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m19

What we’re hearing from marketers

• 19

“I need to know the human reaction to my advertising.” There has to be a

better way…

“I need to minimize my waste.”

“Can I measure advertising beyond impressions and clicks?”

“I need to determine the correct advertising mix.”

“I need more information to make relevant connections to my consumers.”

“I can’t find cost-effective and simple-to-understand tools that allow me to accurately measure my advertising.”

“What is the value of impressions that never get clicked on?”

“Did my campaign help my competition?”

“I need 3rd party validation.”

“Will a social component help my advertising campaign?”

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m20

Compete’s ad effectiveness offerings

Ad Impact measures how exposure to online advertising impacts consumer behavior

Ad R/F measures the audience reached by an online advertising campaign

• 2.3 Million person panel, the largest in the industry

• Connected to other Kantar data assets

• 15,000 behavioral segments

Ad R/F Ad Impact

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m21

Ad Impact Case Study

Measuring the Impact of display advertising on behavior

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m22

Compete shines new light on online ROI

22

How much did this campaign impact visits to my site over time?

Did the campaign drive an increase in brand-term searches?

Were exposed consumers more likely to visit product-consideration sites?

Which segments were most likely to convert within this audience?

Did my social campaign have an impact?

Did my ad drive consumers to a competitor?

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m23

Ad Impact Methodology

Compete identifies all panelists who visited a publisher site and saw designated ads…

…and identifies others who visited the same publisher site during the same timeframe, but never saw a campaign ad…

…enabling precise measurement of behavioral “lift” by comparing the exposed group’s activities (search, site visit, KPI) with the control group’s activities.

Exposed group Control group

Control vs. exposed comparisons create a richer view of ad performance

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m24

Return on Investment

24

KPI activities on brand site

Branded search queries

Viewthrough to advertiser site

How much shouldI be spending to

drive branded searchbehavior?

What is the cost per exposed

consumerwho views throughTo the brand site?

What is the optimal level of exposures

required to drive a lift in KPIactivities and what is

the cost?

Key Brand Funnel Activities

How can I optimize and

scale future online

marketing efforts based

on my current campaign?

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m25

Agenda & Specifications

25

Agenda:1. Campaign Overall2. Performance by Tactic3. Frequency Performance

Metrics:Viewthough: Visitation to the advertiser site

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Upper funnel activity performed on brand site

Brand Search: Branded search query performed on an search engine*All activities were performance across the campaign period +4 weeks

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m26

Engagement: Viewthrough (Campaign Overall)

26

Takeaway:Approximately 7% of all consumers exposed to the display campaign viewed through to the advertiser site

Success:Overall campaign drove an additional 48 consumers to the brand site for every 1,000 consumers reached

Advertiser Site Visitation Rate FULL CAMPAIGN(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks)

+4.8%pt**

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

1.9%

6.7%

Control Exposed

Control Exposed

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m27

Engagement: Viewthrough (by Tactic)

27

Takeaway:When isolating performance by tactic, consumers exposed to retention placements were more likely to viewthrough to the brand site vs. all other placements

Implication:Baseline viewthrough rates on retention sites however were the strongest resulting in lower lifts. Exposure to awareness and BT placements were more influential in changing consumer behavior

Advertiser Site Visitation Rate By Tactic(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)

+3.4%pt**

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

+0.5%pt +7.4%pt** +2.5%pt**

0.7%

2.7%1.7%

10.9%

4.1%3.2%

9.1%

13.4%

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

Control Exposed

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m28

Dynamics: Viewthrough by Exposure Frequency

28

Takeaway:Visitation to the advertiser site was highly correlated with exposure to display ads; Exposure to retention placements consistently drove the strongest rates of viewthrough at each level of exposure vs. other placements

Action:Determine if the incremental lift achieved at each level of exposure is worth the cost

Advertiser Site Visitation Rate by Exposure Level to Ad(Viewthrough rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0

Average Rate of Exposures by Placement

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 impressions

5-7 impressions

8+ impressions

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m29

Engagement: KPI: Upper Funnel (Campaign Overall)

29

Takeaway:Exposed consumers engaged in upper funnel KPI activities at a rate nearly 2X greater than the control group

Success:Campaign was successful at increasing traffic to key product pages

KPI: Upper Funnel Activity Rate FULL CAMPAIGN(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks)

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

0.9%

1.6%

Control Exposed

+0.7%pt**

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m30

Engagement: KPI :Upper Funnel (by Tactic)

30

Takeaway:Awareness, BT and retention placements were most successful at changing shopping behavior post exposure

Implication:Despite similar deltas, Retention placements drove approximately 2X greater rates of activity among exposed consumers vs. all other placements; costs associated with these placements may not be as efficient

KPI: Upper Funnel Rate By Tactic(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

0.2%

1.4%

0.6%

2.5%

1.3%

1.8%1.5%

3.3%

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

Control Exposed

+1.1%pt** +0.4%pt +0.9%pt** +0.8%pt**

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m31

Dynamics: Upper Funnel KPI Activity by Exposure Frequency

31

Takeaway:Retention and BT placements continuously drove incremental gains in KPI activity with each impression served; Retargeting exposures were maximized after 2 exposures in which diminishing returns were obtained thereafter

Implication:Performance for retargeting placements could be optimized if frequency of exposures was reduced

KPI Activity Rate by Exposure Level to Ad(KPI rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0

Average Rate of Exposures by Placement

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 impressions

5-7 impressions

8+ impressions

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m32

Engagement: Brand Search (Campaign Overall)

32

Takeaway:Branded search rates increased 2X as the result of exposure to the display campaign (+122% lift)

Action:Display campaigns increase overall search behavior, make sure to maintain a strong SEM strategy

Brand Search Rate FULL CAMPAIGN(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

0.9%

2.0%

Control Exposed

Control Exposed

+1.1%pt**

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m33

Engagement: Brand Search (by Tactic)

33

Takeaway:Approximately 2% of all consumers exposed to retention, BT or retargeting placements engaged in a branded search query

Implication:Despite stronger rates of activity for the other placements, exposure to awareness placements were also influential in changing consumer behavior (3X increase in search queries)

Brand Search Rate By Tactic(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)

*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level

0.4%

1.4%

0.7%

1.3%1.2%

2.1%1.9%

2.4%

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

Control Exposed

+0.7%pt**+0.8%pt** +1.2%pt** +1.1%pt**

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m34

Dynamics: Brand Search Activity by Exposure Frequency

34

Takeaway:Retargeting placements were the most successful tactic in driving search behavior to for up to 4 exposures, thereafter retention yielded the strongest rates of search activity

Brand Search Rate by Exposure Level to Ad(Search rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0

Average Rate of Exposures by Placement

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 impressions

5-7 impressions

8+ impressions

Awareness Retargeting BT Retention

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m35

What is the ROI for Key Brand Funnel Activities

Despite the higher CPM paid for Retention placements, cost per viewthrough and cost per KPI activity performed was lower than both awareness and retargeting strategies.

BT placements were also success in driving key brand activities at a lower cost vs. all other placements• However BT placements had the lowest average rate of exposure

Awareness Retargeting BT RetentionCPM 2.10$ 5.10$ 3.60$ 6.55$ Exposure Frequency per UV 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0Reach per 1,000 83 143 200 125

Awareness Retargeting BT RetentionCPM 2.10$ 5.10$ 3.60$ 6.55$

Viewthrough to Advertiser Site 0.61$ 1.12$ 0.20$ 0.39$ KPI: Upper Funnel 1.94$ 1.98$ 1.20$ 1.59$ Brand Search 2.10$ 1.70$ 0.95$ 2.18$

Campaign Strategy Comparison - Cost Per Consumer

Campaign Basics

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m36

Overall Takeaways

• Ad Effectiveness tools such as Ad Impact can demonstrate the value of your media strategy

• Examination of impact of frequency and placement can help optimize performance

• True ROI can be established!

w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m37

Thanks!Questions?

Alyssa MaineMarketing Coordinator

Marketing617-933-5754

amaine@compete.comwww.compete.com

Nick GaudioAssociate,

Ad Effectiveness Solutions617-933-5647

ngaudio@compete.comwww.compete.com