Intel exec: Mobile Web advertising more effective than in-app ads
July 20, 2010
Intel's mobile site
NEW YORK – An Intel executive revealed that the company's mobile Web advertising garners better click-through rates than in-application ads at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s Marketplace: Mobile conference.
Panelists talked about the effectiveness of mobile advertising that Intel ran and gave best practices based on what they learned from the campaign. The Intel executive revealed that in-browser banner interaction rates (94 percent) were higher than those for in-application ads (17 percent).
“The reason [the Intel] campaign was so successful is that it was thought of as a campaign, not a mobile campaign,” said Jeff Arbour, senior vice president North America at The Hyperfactory, New York. “It was just a campaign that happend to be executed in mobile channel.
“It is really time for brands to look at how to execute mobile from a long-term perspective and not just as a bunch of one-time runoffs,” he said.
The panelists stressed that crafting a successful mobile advertising campaign means having firm objectives, clear metrics for success and tactics consistent with the overall marketing strategy.
Beth Lubov Butrymowicz of Intel and Jeff Arbour of The Hyperfactory
The campaign was centered around promoting Intel’s 2010 Core processor family.
Hyperfactory was hired to devise a strategy for media, campaign, design and execution.
Intel used display and rich-media ads, which users could expand, drag and interact with to find the right processor for them. It also used basic banner ads that ran on mobile Web sites and in applications.
Advertisements ran on a number of mobile Web sites, including CNN and CBS.
The campaign also used search engine marketing to drive traffic to Intel’s mobile Web site.
Additionally, The Hyperfactory leveraged its relationship with Pandora to create an Intel promotion within the Internet radio service.
Effectiveness of mobile ads
Intel was able to compare the results from the different channels of its advertising campaign and discover which tactics were most effective.
The campaign saw lower bounce rates on mobile than with traditional Web advertising, possibly because mobile users are using their phones and searching for information with greater purpose than users on regular desktops.
Apparently, search engine marketing saw 67 percent bounce rates verses 89 percent for display advertising.
And, it saw the lowest bounce rates on iPhones (85 percent), Android (64 percent) and BlackBerry (71 percent) phones.
Intel took these results as a sign that more effort should be made to target the Android and BlackBerry platforms.
Behavioral targeting also proved an effective tactic for garnering high click-through rates.
When discussing the efficacy of search engine marketing, the presenters said that mobile search was growing and would constitute an important advertising tool in the future.
“Search volume is low, but trending up,” said Beth Lubov Butrymowicz, global media manager for Intel, Santa Clara, CA.
Measurement for mobile advertising campaigns needs to be dictated by the objectives determined at the initiative’s outset.
For example, because Intel used expandable, rich-media ad units as well as traditional ad banners and in-application advertising to promote Core processors, it was interested in understanding how consumers were interacting with those different ads.
For that reason, Intel gauged reaction to the rich-media display units by looking at interaction and completion rates.
The interaction rate examined how many users expanded the ad and dragged at least one element within it, and showed that consumers were interacting far more with in-browser ad units than in-application ad units.
Apparently, consumers that clicked on the ad and dragged at least one item was higher for in-browser advertising: 94 percent verses 17 percent for in-application ads.
The completion rates measured the number of consumers who worked through the entire ad, answering a series of questions intended to match them to the best-fit Intel processor.
Completion rates were much higher for rich-media units (10 percent) than standard units (3 percent).
In summing up the results of the campaign, the presenters emphasized that advertisers need to be cognizant of the costs associated with different ad units.
Expandable units are significantly more expensive than standard units.
The right mobile mix
There is no one answer for mobile advertising globally, because of fragmentation of devices, usage models, advertising inventory and measurement tools.
Advertisers need to devise campaigns in the context of the regions they are targeting.
For example, when Intel was promoting its processors in Indonesia, it focused on feature phones, because the vast majority of consumers use feature phones, rather than more advanced mobile technology.
Basic marketing rules still apply, according to Ms. Butrymowicz.
Summing up the lessons of the discussion, the presenters urged advertisers not to go mobile just for mobile’s sake, but instead only if it made sense in the context of their promotional strategy.
Advertisers should be very clear about their objectives, and work closely with partners to set parameters for the campaigns and optimize over time.
Finally, advertisers should not be afraid of sub-par results.
“It’s OK to fail,” Ms. Butrymowicz said. “If you go out and do mobile, and learn it doesn’t work for your target audience, it could be that they’re not on mobile, or perhaps execution wasn’t working for them.
“You can definitely learn from the experience,” she said.
Here is one of the slides presented during the panel of a campaign creative:
At the conclusion of the panel, Mobile Marketer's Peter Finocchiaro interviewed Ms. Butrymowicz and Mr. Arbour. Here is the video:
- Trackback url: http://www.mobilemarketer.com/cms/trackback/6846-1