[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: Re: [uk-netmarketing] RE: banner ads v PR
From: David Cabrera
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:12:00 -0000

PR and Banner (response) ads do very different things

Imagine you're watching East Enders and you see Ian Beale using the web site
killer4hire.com. Possible consumer takeout a) they must be value for money,
b) Cockneys use them so well hard, and c) if they accept the contract on
Phil Mitchell no job is to difficult for them

So you the viewer build up certain perceptions about killer4hire -
reputable, gets the job done, value for money - in other words a Bob the
Bullet type - we will fix them!

Then when Bob runs his banner ads with killer offers, he doesn't need to
explain who he is, he just communicates there's never been a better time to
hire a trained assassin

Hope this helps

----- Original Message -----
From: Rupert Staines <rupertatvalueclick [dot] com>
To: uk-netmarketing from chinwag <uk-netmarketingatlists [dot] chinwag [dot] com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 11:56 AM
Subject: [uk-netmarketing] RE: banner ads v PR

> Does it not depend on what your campaign objectives are ?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Niki Hunter [nikiatgsc-ltd [dot] co [dot] uk (mailto:nikiatgsc-ltd [dot] co [dot] uk)]
> Sent: 29 January 2001 15:14
> To: uk-netmarketing from chinwag
> Subject: [uk-netmarketing] banner ads v PR
> Does anyone know if there is any evidence as to whether banner ads are
> or less effective than PR activity? Does this differ between b2b and b2c
> sites?
> Niki

  RE: [uk-netmarketing] banner ads v PR, Rupert Staines

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]