uk-netmarketing Archive

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


Subject: UKNM: FW: BOUNCE uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com: Approval required:
From: Chinwag Help
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:38:53 GMT

-----Original Message-----
From: Chinwag [owneratchinwag [dot] com (mailto:owneratchinwag [dot] com)]
Sent: 21 November 2000 05:59
To: moderateatchinwag [dot] com
Subject: BOUNCE uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com: Approval required:


>From owneratmail [dot] chinwag [dot] com Tue Nov 21 05:59:23 2000
Received: from nyc-mx.truenorth.com (nyc-mx.truenorth.com [204.149.81.2])
by mail.chinwag.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA07538
for <uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 05:59:21 GMT
Received: from nyhub1.truenorth.com (nyhub1.truenorth.com [170.200.198.101])
by nyc-mx.truenorth.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id eAL5hhD13394
for <uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 00:43:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nssyfmailhost1.sydney.fcb.com ([170.200.198.101])
by nyhub1.truenorth.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with
ESMTP id G4D16D00.O4I for <uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com>; Tue, 21
Nov 2000 00:42:13 -0500
Received: from fcb.com ([170.200.130.94]) by
nssyfmailhost1.sydney.fcb.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15)
with ESMTP id G4CYEW00.98Z for <uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com>;
Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:42:32 +1100
Message-ID: <3A1A0B75 [dot] 4C1DB755atfcb [dot] com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 16:43:17 +1100
From: "Mike Zeederberg" <mzeederbergatfcb [dot] com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: uk-netmarketingatchinwag [dot] com
Subject: Re: UKNM: Brand-building banners
References: <200011201647 [dot] QAA23794atmail [dot] chinwag [dot] com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I was at a conference recently where this whole issue came up, and obviously
the sites that derive their revenue from banner ads were pushing the
"banners
build brands" approach very hard, now that click-through is gone (an
interesting change in mantra from "we are one of the few trackable
advertising
mediums and click through is everything"). Someone even went as far as
telling
me that in the US "someone" did some research on banners only and tracked it
using standard brand awareness tracking and that banners were proved to have
worked. Anyone else heard of this type of study, and if so, who did and what
the numbers were ?

Cheers
Mike

Sun's shining down here in Australia!


Robin Edwards wrote:

> I often find carefully targeted radio ads can be as entertaining as TV
ads.
> For example tuning in to Manx radio during the TT is a blast - adverts
> targeted at "average biker bloke/blokette" complete with, shock, adult
> language during the daytime! Hey, I can even recall the dodgy strap lines
> and it's been some two years since I was last in broadcast range.
>
> Could banners do the same if they were targeted well enough?
>
> Robin
>
> --
> Robin Edwards
> Clockworx
> T: +44 1543 252370 F: +44 1543 420761
> E: robinatclockworx [dot] co [dot] uk W: http://www.clockworx.com/ W2:
> http://www.shopworx.net/

[Sam says: msg chopped]


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spending too long reading these emails and not enough time working?
Could be time for a new job. For all the best jobs in IT, New media,
and E-Commerce, come to RevolutionVisit
at London Olympia 2 24/25 November.

See http://www.revolutionvisit.com/1 to find out more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to
http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or helpatchinwag [dot] com


Replies
  UKNM: Proof that Non-clicks are good too, Anne Holland

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