Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

of 61

  • date post

    31-May-2018
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    217
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    1/61

    Online advertising& digital marketing report

    The Internet

    Commerce Briefing

    The Intermarket Group L.P.www.intermarketgroup.com

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    2/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 1

    This document is intended for electronic delivery

    Copyright 2002 by The Intermarket Group, L.P.

    All rights reserved.

    The entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by The Intermarket Group, L.P. and may not betranslated, reproduced, stored in another retrieval system, posted on a website, or transmitted in any form orby any means, beyond that permitted by your Customer License Agreement and by Sections 107 and 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without prior written consent from the copyright owner. The charts,

    tables and data provided in this report are all sourced from publicly-available information produced by theattributed sources and remain the property of and are copyright by their respective owners. Requests forfurther information or for reprint permissions should be addressed to: The Intermarket Group, L.P., P.O.Box 500126, San Diego, California 92150-0126, USA.

    The following uses of this document are strictly prohibited unless otherwise provided for in your CustomerLicense Agreement: Transmittal via the Internet or any other network Reproduction for sale or for further distribution Posting on a website or intranet site

    All information contained in this publication is believed to be obtained from reliable sources. Thepublication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter

    covered. It is sold with the understanding that neither the authors nor the publisher is engaged in offeringlegal, accounting or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, theservices of a competent professional should be sought.

    Published January 2002ISBN No. 1-882113-16-0

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    3/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 2

    Table Of Contents

    Table of Contents...................................................................... 2 List of Charts and Tables .......................................................... 3

    Section I. Online Advertising Market Sizeand Composition.................................................. 4

    Section II. Online Advertising Practices ...............................17

    Section III. E-mail Marketing Practices .................................28

    Section IV. Leading Advertisers and Brands.........................37

    Section V. Internet Users and Online Advertising ................42

    Appendix Data Sources and Contact Information...............58

    Other reports in the Internet Commerce Briefing series:Internet Population & Online DemographicsBusiness-to-Consumer E-commerce

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    4/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 3

    Charts and tables in this report

    1.01 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures (1/1996-9/2001)1.02 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Month (1999/2000)1.03 U.S. Share Of Online Advertising Expenditures (1998-2005)1.04 Global Online Advertising Expenditures By Region(2001/2005)1.05 DoubleClick Ads Served Worldwide By Quarter (1999-2001)1.06 Daily Banner Ad Impressions Per U.S. Internet User (2001-2005)1.07 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By Impressions1.08 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By Share OfImpressions1.09 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By Expenditures1.10 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Sector (1999-2001)1.11 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Sector (1998-2001)1.12 Online Advertising Expenditures Breakout For U.S.Consumer-Related Sector (Q3-2001)1.13 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Ad Type(2000/2001)1.14 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Pricing Scheme(2000)1.15 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Pricing Scheme(2000/2001)

    1.16 Estimated U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures (2001)1.17 Estimated Growth Of U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures1.18 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditure Growth (1998-2006)1.19 U.S. Digital Marketing Expenditures (2000-2006)1.20 U.S. Performance-Based Online Advertising Growth (2000-2005)1.21 Wireless Advertising Expenditures By Region (2000-2005)1.22 Online Share Of U.S. Advertising Expenditures (1996-2006)1.23 Total U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures (1999-2006)1.24 U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures By Media Category(2000/2001)1.25 U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures By Media Category(1996-2006)

    2.01 Top Reasons Companies Advertise Online2.02 Objectives Of Online Advertisements2.03 Media Used To Drive Traffic To Websites2.04 Effectiveness Of Select Media In Driving Traffic To Websites2.05 Effectiveness Of Affiliate Marketing vs. Online Alternatives2.06 Most Effective Advertising Media For Customer Acquisition2.07 Most Effective Advertising Media For Branding2.08 Sources Of Website Traffic Growth2.09 Online Banners Served By Size Of Ad (Q4-2000)2.10 Online Ad Dimensions Used By Advertisers (2000)2.11 Full Banner Ad Rate Card Pricing2.12 Average Rate Card Pricing For IAB Online Ad Units2.13 U.S. Online Ad Campaign Size By Sector2.14 Number Of Sites Purchased In U.S. Online Ad Campaigns2.15 Effectiveness Of Online Advertising By Type Of Placement2.16 Online/Offline Advertising Mix Among U.S. Online Retailers2.17 U.S. Advertiser Plans For Streaming Media Ad Expenditures2.18 Barriers To Increased Online Advertising Expenditures

    3.01 U.S. E-mail Message Volume (1999-2003)3.02 U.S. Opt-in E-mail Message Volume (1999-2003)

    3.03 Frequency Of Promotional E-mails Among Leading Retailers3.04 Types Of Permission E-mail Received By U.S. Internet Users3.05 E-mail Volume Of U.S. Internet Users At Home And At Work3.06 How Frequently Do U.S. Internet Users Check Their E-mail3.07 Proportion Of U.S. Internet Users' E-mail That Is Spam/UCE3.08 Reasons Internet Users Forward E-mail To Others3.09 Total U.S. E-mail Marketing Expenditures (1999-2004)3.10 U.S. E-mail Marketing Services Expenditures (1999-2003)3.11 E-mail Marketing By U.S. Small Business (2001/2003/2005)3.12 Payment Options Supported By E-mail Marketing Networks3.13 U.S. E-mail Marketing Allocation Of Expenditures, CustomerAcquisition vs. Retention3.14 Objectives For Opt-in E-mail Marketing Campaigns3.15 Internet User Open Rates For HTML Messages3.16 Formats Supported By Internet Users' E-mail Clients3.17 E-mail Format For Advertising Campaigns

    4.01 Leading U.S. Online Advertisers By Expenditures4.02 Leading U.S. Online Advertisers By Impressions4.03 Leading Websites By Online Advertising Revenue4.04 Leading U.S. Advertisers By Expenditures (All Media)4.05 Leading Dot.com Brands Among U.S. Decision-Makers

    4.06 Leading Technology Brands Among U.S. Consumers4.07 Leading E-commerce Brands Among U.S. Internet Users

    5.01 Communication Preferences Of U.S. Online Buyers5.02 How U.S. Internet Users Learn About Websites5.03 Primary Method For U.S. Internet Users To Learn AboutWebsites5.04 How U.S. Internet Users Search For Products Online5.05 How Online Shoppers Get To Websites5.06 Visibility Of Online Ads Among U.S. Internet Users At HomeAnd At Work5.07 Elapsed Time To Conversion For Online Ads5.08 U.S. Internet Users' Likelihood of Clicking On Banner Ads5.09 U.S. Consumer Attitudes About Clicking On Banner Ads5.10 U.S. Click-Through Rates For Banner Ads vs. Opt-in E-mail5.11 U.S. Click-Through Rate Comparison By Type Of Media5.12 U.S. Wireless Advertising Response Rates By Format5.13 U.S. Wireless Advertising Response Rates In SkyGo ServiceTrial5.14 Attitudes Towards Banner Ads Among U.S. Internet Users AtHome5.15 Attitudes Towards Banner Ads Among U.S. Internet Users AtWork5.16 U.S. Internet Users' Attitudes Towards Spam/UCE5.17 U.S. Internet Users' Attitudes Towards E-mail Marketing5.18 U.S. Internet Users Attitudes Towards Rich E-mail5.19 Internet User Preferences For Permission E-mail Volume5.20 Online Activities Of U.S. Internet Users vs. eCoupon Users5.21 Household Income Of U.S. Coupon Users5.22 eCoupon Use Among U.S. Internet Users By Category5.23 Redemption Of eCoupons By Category And Retail Channel5.24 U.S. Online Consumer Preferences For Coupon Delivery5.25 How Frequently U.S. Consumers Wish To Receive Coupons

    Via E-mail5.26 Visibility Of Online Ads By Format5.27 User Recognition Of Streaming Commercials

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    5/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 4

    Section I.Online Advertising MarketSize and Composition

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    6/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 5

    The year 2001 was unarguably among the most difficult and challenging yetfor the infant online advertising industry. After years of rapid growth, the industrywas hit for the first time by a double-digit decline in expenditures thanks to aslowing U.S. economy and a literal collapse of the dot com economy.

    Between 1996 and 2000, the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) estimates thatonline advertising expenditures grew by an average 142% per year, from $268million to more than $8.2 billion. Expenditures in Q4-2000 alone reached almost$2.2 billion, according to the association, before declining by 12% in the first-quarter of 2001. During the first three quarters of 2001, expenditures declined bya total of 8.4%, to $5.6 billion from $6.1 billion for the comparable period in 2000.Most analysts estimates of expenditures for the full year are just over $7 billion,representing a year-over-year decline of more than 10%.

    1.01 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures (1/1996-9/2001)Millions of dollars and percent change quarter-to-quarter

    1.02 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Month (1999/2000)Percent of total annual expenditures

    4 . 3 % 4 .

    7 % 6 . 0 % 6 .

    1 % 6 . 7 % 7 . 5 %

    7 . 8

    % 8 . 5 % 1

    0 . 0 %

    1 0 . 8

    % 1 3 . 1

    % 1 4

    . 6 %

    7 . 1 %

    7 . 6 % 9

    . 0 %

    8 . 0

    % 8 . 5 % 9 .

    3 %

    7 . 5 %

    7 . 7 % 9

    . 0 %

    8 . 1

    %

    8 . 4

    % 9 . 8 %

    0%

    5%

    10%

    15%

    20%

    Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jly. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

    Source: IAB, 4/2001

    1999 2000

    $ 3 0

    $ 5 2

    $ 7 6

    $ 1 1 0

    $ 1 3 0

    $ 2 1 4

    $ 2 2 7 $ 3

    3 6

    $ 3 5 1

    $ 4 2 3

    $ 4 9 1 $ 6

    5 6

    $ 6 9 2 $

    9 3 4 $ 1

    , 2 1 7

    $ 1 , 7

    7 7 $ 1

    , 9 5 3

    $ 2 , 1

    2 4

    $ 1 , 9

    8 6

    $ 2 , 1

    6 2

    $ 1 , 8 9

    3

    $ 1 , 8 6

    8

    $ 1 , 7

    9 2

    $0

    $500

    $1,000

    $1,500

    $2,000

    $2,500

    $3,000

    Q 1

    - 1 9 9 6

    Q 2

    - 1 9 9 6

    Q 3

    - 1 9 9 6

    Q 4

    - 1 9 9 6

    Q 1

    - 1 9 9 7

    Q 2

    - 1 9 9 7

    Q 3

    - 1 9 9 7

    Q 4

    - 1 9 9 7

    Q 1

    - 1 9 9 8

    Q 2

    - 1 9 9 8

    Q 3

    - 1 9 9 8

    Q 4

    - 1 9 9 8

    Q 1

    - 1 9 9 9

    Q 2

    - 1 9 9 9

    Q 3

    - 1 9 9 9

    Q 4

    - 1 9 9 9

    Q 1

    - 2 0 0 0

    Q 2

    - 2 0 0 0

    Q 3

    - 2 0 0 0

    Q 4

    - 2 0 0 0

    Q 1

    - 2 0 0 1

    Q 2

    - 2 0 0 1

    Q 3

    - 2 0 0 1

    Source: IAB, 10/2001

    -20%

    0%

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%Online Ad Expenditures Qtr. Over Qtr. Growth

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    7/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 6

    The United States dominates online advertising, accounting for approximately80% of all expenditures during 2001. Despite its outsized role in the industry, theU.S. share of global expenditures has been declining slowly over the years andthis trend is expected to continue. By 2005, the U.S. is expected to account forapproximately 70% of global expenditures compared to 88% in 1998. After theU.S., Europe is the second-largest online advertising market, accounting for 12%of expenditures during 2001. The Asia/Pacific region is expected to experiencethe greatest growth between 2001 and 2005, expanding from 6% of globalexpenditures in 2001 to 10% in 2005.

    1.03 U.S. Share Of Online Advertising Expenditures (1998-2005)Percent of global online advertising expenditures

    1.04 Global Online Advertising Expenditures By Region (2001/2005)Percent of global online advertising expenditures

    88%83% 81% 79% 75% 73% 72% 70%

    0%

    20%

    40%

    60%

    80%

    100%

    1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

    Source: eMarketer, 2000

    2%

    6%

    12%

    80%

    4%

    10%

    15%

    71%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Latin America

    Asia/Pacific

    Europe

    North America

    Source: eMarketer, 2000

    2001 2005

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    8/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 7

    610705

    800880

    950

    0

    300

    600

    900

    1200

    2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

    Source: AdRelevance, 2/2001

    1.05 DoubleClick Ads Served Worldwide By Quarter (1999-2001)Billions of ads

    The Internets largest online advertising network, DoubleClick, reports that theaggregate volume of banner ads that it served peaked during the fourth-quarter of2000 at 185 billion before declining to 181 billion in the first-quarter of 2001 and168 billion in the second-quarter.

    The number of daily banner ad impressions per Internet user has continued togrow, despite the decline in online advertising expenditures. AdRelevancepredicts that the typical Internet user will view an average of 705 banner ads perday during 2002, representing a 16% increase over 2001. The growth in totaldaily impressions per user is expected to slow over the next few years, accordingto the company, which predicts a 13% increase in 2003, 10% the next year, andonly 8% in 2005.

    1.06 Daily Banner Ad Impressions Per U.S. Internet User (2001-2005)Total impressions per user per day

    20.9 29.643.8

    77.2

    125.1

    149.0 162.0

    185.0 181.0

    168.0

    0

    50

    100

    150

    200

    250

    Q1-1999

    Q2-1999

    Q3-1999

    Q4-1999

    Q1-2000

    Q2-2000

    Q3-2000

    Q4-2000

    Q1-2001

    Q2-2001

    Source: Morgan Stanley, 8/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    9/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 8

    1.07 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By ImpressionsThousands of impressions, excluding house ads, for each period

    Impressions

    SectorWeek Ending

    9/10/2001 ShareWeek Ending

    11/4/2001 Share

    Retail 3,149,358 22% 4,422,044 20%Web Media 2,810,156 20% 7,199,377 32%Financial Services 2,476,339 18% 3,512,960 16%Travel 1,120,494 8% 1,048,978 5%Entertainment 1,109,916 8% 1,058,443 5%Consumer Goods 922,457 7% 1,000,076 4%Business-to-Business 785,788 6% 1,050,806 5%Telecommunications 541,662 4% 863,604 4%Hardware & Electronics 403,938 3% 339,562 2%Software 348,812 2% 1,113,697 5%Other 479,917 3% 692,073 3%

    Total 14,148,837 100% 22,301,620 100%Source: AdRelevance, 11/2001

    Online advertising is currently dominated by companies from the retail, media,and financial services sectors, according to data from AdRelevance. The threesectors combined accounted for approximately two-thirds of all impressions atdifferent measurement points during the second-half of 2001.

    1.08 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By Share OfImpressionsPercent of total impressions, excluding house ads, for each period

    3%

    3%

    4%

    7%

    2%

    6%

    8%

    8%

    18%

    22%

    20%

    3%

    2%

    4%

    4%

    5%

    5%

    5%

    5%

    16%

    20%

    32%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

    Other

    Hardware & Elec tronics

    Telecom

    Consumer Goods

    Software

    B-to-B

    Entertainment

    Travel

    Financial Services

    Retail

    Web Media

    Source: AdRelevance, 11/2001

    9/10/2001 11/4/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    10/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 9

    The breakdown of estimated online advertising expenditures by sector tracksfairly closely with estimated impressions, based on data from both the IAB andfrom CMRi. The two organizations, however, differ significantly in their estimatesof aggregate expenditures for each sector, with most IAB estimates between two-and four-times higher than those of CMRi.

    1.09 Leading Sectors For U.S. Online Advertising By ExpendituresTotal expenditures in dollars by all companies in each sector

    SectorAggregate Expenditures

    January - September 2001 Pct. of TotalRetail $432,553,803 23.7%Media & Advertising $363,323,644 19.9%Financial Services $260,633,494 14.3%Local Services & Amusements $200,131,636 11.0%Computers & Software $194,720,418 10.7%Public Transportation, Hotels, Resorts $103,007,919 5.6%Automotive, Accessories & Equipment $89,671,013 4.9%Government & Organizations $62,844,864 3.4%Telecommunications $61,724,212 3.4%

    Insurance & Real Estate $56,221,210 3.1%Source: CMRi AdNetTrackUS, 9/2001

    1.10 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Sector (1999-2001)Percent of total online advertising expenditures

    1.11 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Sector (1998-2001)Millions of dollars

    Period ComputingConsumer

    RelatedFinancialServices Media

    BusinessServices All Others

    Q4-1998 $131.2 $190.2 $124.6 $ 45.9 n/a $164.0Q4-1999 $284.3 $550.9 $302.1 $213.2 $124.4 $302.1Q4-2000 $454.0 $691.8 $281.1 $194.6 $129.7 $410.8Q1-2001 $340.8 $567.9 $246.1 $189.3 $113.9 $435.0Q2-2001 $336.2 $560.4 $242.8 $186.8 $149.4 $392.4Q3-2001 $340.5 $519.7 $215.0 $250.9 $179.2 $286.7

    Source: IAB

    2 0 % 2

    9 %

    1 9 %

    7 %

    2 5 %

    1 6 %

    3 1 %

    1 7 %

    1 2 %

    7 %

    1 7 % 2 1

    %

    3 2 %

    1 3 %

    9 % 6 %

    1 9 %

    1 9 %

    2 9 %

    1 2 % 1 4

    %

    1 0 % 1

    6 %

    N / A

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    50%

    60%

    Computing ConsumerRelated

    FinancialServices

    New Media BusinessServices

    All Others

    Source: IAB, 10/2001

    Q4-1998 Q4-1999 Q4-2000 Q3-2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    11/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 10

    Online advertisers in the consumer-related sector spent an estimated $1.65billion during the first three quarters of 2001 and $1.13 billion during the first-halfof 2001, according to the IAB. Retail- and mail order-related advertisingaccounted for one-half of total expenditures in the sector, followed by automobiles(12%), travel/hotels (11%), and music (9%).

    1.12 Online Advertising Expenditures Breakout For U.S. Consumer-Related Sector (Q3-2001)Millions of dollars

    1.13 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Ad Type (2000/2001)Percent of total online advertising expenditures

    48%

    28%

    4%

    3%

    3%

    1%

    4%

    2%

    7%

    35%

    25%

    3%

    7%

    3%

    5%

    2%

    3%

    17%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

    Banner And Tile Ads

    Sponsorships

    InterstitalsOthers

    e-mail

    Keyword Search

    Referrals

    Rich Media

    Classifieds

    Source: IAB, 10/2001

    2000 Jan. - Sep. 2001

    $11

    $56

    $102

    $124

    $135

    $135

    $564

    $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800

    Toys/Games

    Amusement

    Music

    Travel/Hotels

    Auto

    Other

    Retail/Mail Order

    Source: IAB, 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    12/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 11

    Source: IAB, 5/2001

    CPM Ads43%

    Performance-Based Ads

    10%

    "Hybrid" Ads47%

    The pricing model for online advertising changed only marginally between1998 and 2000, according to the IAB. The largest share of expenditures duringthat period were so-called hybrid ads which are based on some combination ofcost-per-thousand and performance-based pricing -- such as cost-per-click orcost-per-lead -- with straight CPM deals accounting for most of the remainingbalance.

    Performance-based ads have steadily expanded their share of overall onlinead expenditures, from 7% in 1999 to 10% in 2000. During the first nine months of2001, the share of performance-based ads jumped by 30% to 13% of allexpenditures. CPM ads also increased in spite of the soft market, to 48% of totalexpenditures, during the same period of 2001 while hybrid ads declined sharply to39% of expenditures.

    1.14 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Pricing Scheme (2000)Percent of total online advertising expenditures

    1.15 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures By Pricing Scheme(2000/2001)Percent of total online advertising expenditures

    43%

    10%

    47%

    13%

    48%

    39%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

    CPM Ads

    Performance-Based Ads

    "Hybrid" Ads

    Source: IAB, 10/2001

    2000 Jan.-Sep. 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    13/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 12

    GartnerG2 estimates that about 2,800 websites in the U.S. were supported atleast in part by advertising during 2001. Among those sites, however, the top 20 -- or less than 1% -- collectively received approximately 80% of the aggregaterevenue.

    Although online advertising expenditures declined sharply during 2001, theoutlook among most analysts is for a resumption of growth during 2002, albeit ata much slower pace than the 100% annual rate between 1996 and 2000. Themost plausible growth forecasts for expenditures during 2002 range from the highsingle-digits to the mid-teens.

    1.16 Estimated U.S. Online Advertising Expenditures (2001)Billions of dollars

    1.17 Estimated Growth Of U.S. Online Advertising ExpendituresPercent change from 2001 to 2002

    40%

    39%

    26%

    19%

    13%

    8%

    5%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

    Datamonitor

    Giga Information Group

    IDC

    Jupiter Media Metrix

    Meyers Mediaenomics

    Veronis, Suhler & Assoc.

    Forrester Research

    Source: As noted, 2001

    $8.6

    $7.9

    $7.6

    $7.5

    $7.3

    $6.0

    $6.0

    $5.7

    $5.4

    $4.7

    $0 $2 $4 $6 $8 $10

    Yankee Group

    Gartner Group

    Goldman Sachs

    Veronis, Suhler & Assoc.

    IDC

    Merrill Lynch

    Forrester Research

    Jupiter Media Metrix

    McCann Erickson

    Myers Mediaenomics

    Source: As noted, 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    14/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 13

    Online advertising expenditures are expected to roughly double over the nextfive years. The most conservative forecast -- from Forrester Research -- predictscompound annual growth of almost 11%, or a total of 67% for the period between2001 and 2006. Jupiter Media Metrix and Myers Reports both expect more rapidgrowth of 170% and 111% respectively for the five year period. Gartner Grouprecently predicted that U.S. online advertising expenditures would grow by 138%,from $7.9 billion in 2001 to $18.8 billion in 2005. The company also expects theannual rate of growth to slow to 15% per year by 2005.

    Jupiter predicted in addition that total spending for digital marketing --including web, online advertising, e-mail marketing and related services -- wouldreach $19.3 billion by 2006. Approximately one-half of that total, according to thecompany, is expected to be allocated towards customer retention-relatedcommunications. Forrester expects digital marketing expenditures in 2006 tototal $21 billion, $10 billion of which would go towards online advertising.

    1.18 U.S. Online Advertising Expenditure Growth (1998-2006)Billions of dollars

    1.19 U.S. Digital Marketing Expenditures (2000-2006)Billions of dollars

    $1.5 $2.0$3.7

    $6.2

    $9.5

    $13.8

    $19.3

    $0

    $5

    $10

    $15

    $20

    $25

    2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

    Source: Jupiter Media Matrix, 8/2001

    $ 2 . 1 $

    3 . 5 $

    5 . 4

    $ 5 . 7 $ 6

    . 8 $ 8 . 6 $

    1 0 . 6 $

    1 2 . 9 $

    1 5 . 4

    $ 1 . 3 $

    2 . 8

    $ 7 . 6

    $ 6 . 0

    $ 6 . 3 $ 7

    . 1 $ 8 . 0 $ 9

    . 1

    $ 2 . 4 $

    4 . 3

    $ 4 . 7 $ 5

    . 3 $ 6 . 1 $ 7

    . 3 $ 8 . 4 $

    9 . 9

    $ 1 0 . 0

    N / A

    $0

    $4

    $8

    $12

    $16

    $20

    1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Source: As noted, 2001

    Jupiter Media Metrix Forres ter Research My ers Mediaenomics

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    15/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 14

    1.20 U.S. Performance-Based Online Advertising Growth (2000-2005)Billions of dollars

    Wireless advertising is little more than embryonic in its evolution for a varietyof reasons, including limitations in current form factors -- such as small screensizes, and difficulties with data entry -- limited-bandwidth, high-latencyconnectivity, and consumer resistance to the general concept. Ovum predicts,however, that the market will begin to gain some momentum during 2002, withtotal worldwide revenues of slightly more that $1 billion.

    Commercial messages can be communicated to wireless users through avariety of forms and methods, including: Alerts and other types of time- or location-sensitive notifications Commerce-enabled e-mail messages that allow the recipient to purchase by

    clicking on an advertisement Links embedded in an advertisement that enable the recipient to click over

    the senders website or respond by clicking or calling Time- or location-sensitive discounts or coupons that recipients can redeem Sponsored content such as city guides, stock quotes, or news headlines Traditional telemarketing pitches targeting mobile wireless phone users

    1.21 Wireless Advertising Expenditures By Region (2000-2005)Millions of dollars

    Region 2000 2002 2003 2005North America $4mn $363mn $1,212mn $4,558mnEurope $2mn $443mn $1,522mn $5,979mnAsia/Pacific $7mn $409mn $1,271mn $4,705mnMiddle East/Africa $0 $10mn $60mn $528mnLatin America $0 $0 $20mn $631mn

    Source: Ovum, 2000

    $1.1 $1.4$1.9

    $2.5$3.2

    $4.122% 23%

    25%27% 28%

    30%

    $0

    $2

    $4

    $6

    $8

    2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

    Source: Jupiter Media Metrix, 7/2001

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    Performance-based Expenditures Percent Of Total Expenditures

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    16/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 15

    The share of total U.S. advertising expenditures allocated to online media hasgrown steadily, from only 0.2% in 1996 to almost 2.5% in 2001. Myers Reportsexpects that growth to continue and predicts online advertising will account foralmost 5% of total spending by 2006.

    The Kelsey Group estimates that the approximately 10 million small andmedium-sized businesses in the U.S. spend an average of $4,700 per year onadvertising, marketing, and promotional services across all local media. In 2000,this translated to approximately $33 billion spent by these companies on yellowpages, newspapers, direct mail, coupons, websites, banners, and other locally-targeted advertising and promotional media. The company predicts thatspending for local online media among this group will expand from 2% of totaladvertising expenditures in 2000 to more than 5% in 2006.

    Although online advertising expenditures are expected to resume their growthagain in 2002, Myers predicts that overall spending for offline advertising willcontinue to decline through 2003 before growth resumes again in 2004. Thecompany expects spending for most offline media to remain stagnant for theforeseeable future, with growth driven primarily by television and radio.

    1.22 Online Share Of U.S. Advertising Expenditures (1996-2006)Percent of total advertising expenditures

    1.23 Total U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures (1999-2006)Billions of dollars

    0.2%0.5%

    0.9%1.3%

    2.1%2.4%

    2.7%3.2%

    3.7%4.2%

    4.9%

    0%

    1%

    2%

    3%

    4%

    5%

    6%

    1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

    Source: Myers Reports, 8/2001

    $186.9$200.7

    $192.0 $188.1 $187.3 $191.3 $192.0 $192.4

    $100

    $150

    $200

    $250

    1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

    Source: Myers Reports, 8/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    17/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 16

    During 2001, Myers estimates that expenditures across all offline mediadeclined by 4.3% over 2000 to $192 billion. The biggest declines in spendingduring the first nine months of 2001 occurred among national newspapers (-21.5%), national spot radio (-18.6%) and spot television (-17.9%), according toCMR. Cable television, outdoor, and Sunday magazines were the only mediawith ad growth during the same period.

    CMR estimates that ad spending among magazines declined by 5.1% duringthe first nine months of 2001. The Publishers Information Bureau (PIB) estimatesthat magazine advertising revenue declined by 4.5% for the entire year and thattotal ad pages declined by 11.7% from 2000. Among the different magazinecategories, PIB estimates that declines in ad revenue were greatest forbusiness/finance titles (-31.5%), outdoor/recreation (-21.4%), and news-weeklies(-18.6%). The fastest growth in ad revenues was among mens magazines(+15.7%), teen magazines (+14.9%), and womens health titles (+8.5%).

    1.24 U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures By Media Category(2000/2001)Millions of dollars

    ExpendituresMedia Jan.-.Sep. 2001 Jan.-Sep. 2000 % ChangeNetwork Television $14,058 $15,279 -8.0%Magazines $11,895 $12,533 -5.1%Spot Television $10,773 $13,123 -17.9%Cable Television $7,843 $7,679 2.1%Sunday Newspapers $7,471 $8,139 -8.2%Daily Newspapers $5,892 $6,269 -6.0%Syndication-National $2,406 $2,326 3.4%National Newspapers $2,190 $2,788 -21.5%Outdoor $1,853 $1,807 2.6%National Spot Radio $1,613 $1,981 -18.6%Sunday Magazines $792 $766 3.4%Network Radio $622 $699 -11.0%

    Source: CMR, 12/2001

    1.25 U.S. Offline Advertising Expenditures By Media Category (1999-2006)Millions of dollars

    Media 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Newspapers $46,958 $48,400 $49,368 $49,862 $49,363 $49,363 $48,623 $48,136Broadcast TV $41,448 $45,902 $41,926 $40,796 $39,752 $40,397 $39,627 $37,982Cable TV $11,153 $13,418 $14,344 $15,390 $16,998 $19,017 $20,841 $23,281Radio $16,744 $19,088 $17,752 $17,042 $16,701 $17,369 $17,369 $16,848Yellow Pages $12,463 $12,712 $12,458 $12,333 $12,210 $12,088 $11,907 $11,669Magazines $15,508 $17,834 $17,299 $16,780 $17,116 $17,544 $17,719 $18,251Outdoor $1,840 $2,153 $2,174 $2,131 $2,088 $2,130 $2,151 $2,173Other $40,800 $41,208 $36,675 $33,741 $33,066 $33,397 $33,731 $34,068Total $186,914 $200,716 $191,997 $188,074 $187,296 $191,304 $191,968 $192,406

    Source: Myers Reports, 8/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    18/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 17

    Section II.Online AdvertisingPractices

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    19/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 18

    Branding is the principal objective behind most online marketing efforts,according to AdRelevance. The company reports that more than 60% of allonline ads are related in some way to brand building and that 45% are designedprimarily to build brand awareness. Only one-third of online ads are specificallyintended to drive either sales or website traffic, according to the company.

    Myers Reports estimates that 85% of companies who advertise onlinenevertheless do so at least in part to drive website traffic -- the most-frequentlymentioned objective -- followed closely by general branding, which was cited by82% of advertisers. Among major U.S. companies surveyed by the Associationof National Advertisers, one-half said that developing or improving brand loyaltywas the primary objective behind their online advertising during 2000, up from40% the previous year.

    2.01 Top Reasons Companies Advertise OnlinePercent of companies that advertise online

    2.02 Objectives Of Online AdvertisementsPercent of online ads

    71%

    72%

    75%

    82%

    85%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Targeting: Sponsorship Opportunities

    Branding: Sponsorship Opportunities

    Branding: Integrated Marketing

    Brandbuilding

    Drive Traffic To Site

    Source: Myers Reports, 2/2001

    Source: AdRelevance, 1/2001

    Branding,Awareness

    45%Direct

    Response, DriveTraffic19%

    DirectResponse, Drive

    Sales14%

    No Strategy6%

    Branding,Positioning

    15% Branding,Feature/Benefits

    1%

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    20/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 19

    2.03 Media Used To Drive Traffic To WebsitesPercent of respondents; multiple responses accepted

    2.04 Effectiveness Of Select Media In Driving Traffic To WebsitesEffectiveness on a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (great)

    32%

    46%

    48%

    48%

    52%

    52%

    58%

    60%

    60%

    66%

    96%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Sponsorships

    Affiliate Programs

    Radio

    Newspapers

    Television

    Direct Mail

    Opt-in E-mail Lists

    Magazines

    Public Relations

    E-mail To Customers

    Online Banner Ads

    Source: Forrester Research, 2001(n=50 marketing managers)

    2.5

    2.6

    2.6

    2.7

    2.7

    2.8

    3.1

    3.2

    3.4

    3.8

    4.1

    0 1 2 3 4 5

    Opt-in E-mail Lists

    Newspapers

    Radio

    Sponsorships

    Magazines

    Online Banner Ads

    Public Relations

    Television

    Direct Mail

    Affiliate Programs

    E-mail To Customers

    Source: Forrester Research, 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    21/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 20

    Forrester Research reported that a majority of marketing executives fromonline retailers it surveyed in 1999 believed affiliate marketing was among themost effective methods for generating sales and building their online brands. Theonly online alternative that most survey respondents thought outperformedaffiliate marketing was e-mail to current customers. Fifty-seven percent ofrespondents thought that affiliate marketing was superior to offline advertising,77% felt the same about sponsorships and 78% for portal deals.

    An analysis by affiliate marketing consultants Fiore and Collins estimated thatthe cost of acquiring new customers during 2001 was approximately $9.00 eachfor affiliate programs. In contrast, they estimated the cost increased to $21.00per new customer for online advertising and $24.00 per new customer for e-mailmarketing.

    Affiliate programs generated approximately 13% of online retail sales during2000, according to Forrester. By 2003, the company predicts that such programswill account for 21% of online sales to consumers.

    2.05 Effectiveness Of Affiliate Marketing vs. Online AlternativesPercent of online retailer marketing executives

    5%

    10%

    15%

    17%

    29%

    63%

    5%

    7%

    7%

    6%

    14%

    25%

    90%

    83%

    78%

    78%

    57%

    13%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Banners

    Portal ShoppingAreas

    Portal Deals

    Sponsorships

    Offline Advertising

    E-mail To CurrentCustomers

    Source: Forrester Research, 1999

    Better About The Same Worse

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    22/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 21

    Targeted e-mail, banner ads, and linking arrangements with partner sites were themost widely used advertising media among both pure-play Internet retailers as well asthe more established multi-channel retailers, according to a 2000 survey byPriceWaterhouseCoopers. When it comes to assessing which media are most effectivefor acquiring new customers and for building brand recognition, thePriceWaterhouseCoopers survey found significantly different approaches. A largeplurality of pure-play Internet retailers indicated that targeted e-mail was the mosteffective in acquiring new customers followed in distant second by television advertising,off-site links, and search engine placement. The multi-channel retailers, in contrast,employed a broader mix of media with roughly the same proportion of companiesindicating that targeted e-mail, portal/ISP/community site deals, magazine advertising,direct mail, and off-site links were all highly effective in acquiring new customers.

    2.06 Most Effective Advertising Media For Customer AcquisitionPercent of companies surveyed

    Although the role of search engine placement and its effectiveness was ranked low bythe Internet retailers surveyed by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, search engines anddirectories were rated as either excellent or very good for website promotion by 48% ofcompanies surveyed by ActivMedia. Other favored methods of promotion, according toActivMedia, are off-site links and buttons (23%), online PR and press releases (17%),reciprocal ads and links (16%), affiliate programs (10%), and paid banner ads (6%).

    Among larger sites -- those processing more than 500 orders per month -- only 36% ratesearch engines and directories as excellent/very good compared to 67% of mid-levelsites (100 to 500 orders per month) and 54% of smaller sites. High volume sites weremore likely than others to focus their promotional efforts on offline media and on on-going e-mail communications with existing customers.

    5.6%

    5.6%

    44.4%

    2.8%

    2.8%

    5.6%

    5.1%

    7.7%

    10.3%

    10.3%

    12.8%

    17.9%

    17.9%

    n/a

    n/a

    n/a

    0% 20% 40% 60%

    Television Advertising

    Magazine Advertising

    Links on Partner Sites

    Direct Mail

    Targeted E-mail

    Portal/ISP/CommunitySite Deals

    Catalog CrossPromotion

    Search EnginePlacement

    Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers

    Pure-Play Internet Retailers Multi-Channel Retailers

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    23/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 22

    Source: Jupiter Media Metrix, 6/2001

    Seasonality46%

    OnlineAdvertising

    17%InternetPopulation

    Growth37%

    2.07 Most Effective Advertising Media For BrandingPercent of companies surveyed

    Four-in-five (79%) major U.S. companies surveyed by the Association ofNational Advertisers used online advertising during 2000. Among thosecompanies, 92% used banner ads, 75% used search engine positioning, 70%used sponsorships, and 67% used e-mail marketing.

    Although effective advertising and marketing efforts are important for success in theonline space, Jupiter Media Metrix contends that only 17% of website traffic growth isattributable to online advertising. Seasonality is the most important source of increasedtraffic, accounting for 46% of growth, according to the company, followed by simplegrowth in the overall Internet population, which contributes 37% of traffic growth.

    2.08 Sources Of Website Traffic GrowthPercent contribution to overall website traffic growth

    11.1%

    11.1%

    5.6%

    5.6%

    11.1%

    5.6%

    16.7%

    2.6%

    2.6%

    5.5%

    7.7%

    7.7%

    10.3%

    10.3%

    12.8%

    15.4%

    15.4%n/a

    n/a

    n/a

    0% 10% 20% 30%

    Outdoor Advertising

    Targeted E-mail

    Banner Ads

    Magazine Advertising

    In-Store Cross Promotion

    Portal/ISP/Community Site Deals

    Links on Partner Sites

    Direct Mail

    Television Advertising

    Catalog Cross Promotion

    Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers

    Pure-Play Internet Retailers Multi-Channel Retailers

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    24/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 23

    The traditional banner ad accounted for more than one-in-three (36%) onlineads served during the fourth quarter of 2000, according to AdRelevance, whilethe vertical banner was barely on the radar screen with its 1% share. By mid-year2001, the vertical banner had doubled its share to about 2% -- or approximately280 million impressions between January and June -- even though it was stillavailable on only 21% of the sites tracked by AdRelevance. During the sameperiod, the share for full banners declined to slightly more than 30%.

    2.09 Online Banners Served By Size Of Ad (Q4-2000)Percent of all online banner ads served during quarter

    2.10 Online Ad Dimensions Used By Advertisers (2000)Percent of online advertisers

    1%

    1%

    4%

    6%

    16%

    16%

    20%

    36%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

    Vertical Banner

    Short Banner

    Tall But ton

    Medium Button

    Micro Button

    Short Button

    Half Banner

    Full Banner

    Source: A dRelevance, 7/2001

    16%

    25%

    14%

    13%

    6%

    3%

    14%

    80%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Micro Button

    Short Button

    Medium Button

    Tall Button

    Vertical Banner

    Short Banner

    Half Banner

    Full Banner

    Source: A dRelevance, 10/2000

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    25/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 24

    2.11 Full Banner Ad Rate Card PricingDollars per thousand impressions

    AdRelevance reports that full, non-negotiated rate card pricing for onlinebanner ads declined during 2000 and then held steady during the first-half of2001 at an average CPM of just below $30.00. Although few advertisers actuallypay the published CPM rates, the company points out that they serve as astarting point for negotiation and are useful for identifying trends in site pricingstrategy.

    The average full banner CPM hit a low in the fourth-quarter of 2000 at justover $28.00 before ticking upwards to $29.37 in the first- and second-quarters of2001. The vertical banner remained the most expensive among the standard IABunits, according to AdRelevance, at $35.00 per thousand impressions while theincreasingly popular 88 x 31 pixel micro button was the least expensive at a CPMof $11.85. The company reports that many advertisers are now leveraging thesmall size and low price of the micro button ads to saturate the web with tinybrand awareness messages.

    2.12 Average Rate Card Pricing For IAB Online Ad UnitsDollars per thousand impressions

    30.52 31.0928.28 29.3730.00

    26.00 25.00 25.00

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    Q1-Q2 2000 Q3-2000 Q4-2000 Q1-Q2 2001

    Source: A dRelevance, 7/2001

    Mean CPM Rate Median CPM Rate

    $11.85

    $16.94

    $19.54

    $22.81

    $27.64

    $29.37

    $35.29

    $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50

    Micro Button

    Medium Button

    Short Button

    Tall Butt on

    Half Banner

    Full Banner

    Vertical Banner

    Source: A dRelevance, 7/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    26/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 25

    The online advertising market is comprised of many advertisers who schedulesmaller campaigns and a relatively small number of very large advertisers whoaccount for the bulk of activity, according to research by AdRelevance. Themedian campaign during the fourth-quarter of 2000 was 27,000 impressions andmore than one-half (55%) of all advertisers made buys for only one site. Only 1%of online advertisers purchased impressions on 100 or more websites.

    The company also found that the number of impressions purchased variedsignificantly between sectors, with campaigns in the hardware and electronicsand the financial services sectors running more than three-times as manyimpressions as the overall average.

    2.13 U.S. Online Ad Campaign Size By SectorMedian number of impressions in thousands

    2.14 Number Of Sites Purchased In U.S. Online Ad CampaignsNumber of companies

    18

    27

    29

    29

    33

    40

    61

    67

    94

    114

    186

    0 50 100 150 200

    Retail

    B-to-B

    Entertainment

    Web Media

    Travel

    Automotive

    Consumer Goods

    Software

    Telecommunications

    Financial Services

    Hardware And Electronics

    Source: AdRelevance, 2/2001

    58

    126

    86

    171396

    450

    961

    1,397

    2,053

    2,692

    10,065

    0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000

    200+ Sites

    101 To 200 Sites

    76 To 100 Sites

    51 To 75 Sites26 To 50 Sites

    16 To 25 Sites

    9 To 15 Sites

    5 To 8 Sites

    3 To 4 Sites

    2 Sites

    1 Site

    Source: AdRelevance, 2/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    27/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    28/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 27

    Source: Yankee Group, 2001

    Plan To BuyLess9%

    Plan To BuyAbout The

    Same35%

    Plan To BuyMore56%

    Streaming media is expected to post the fastest growth during the next fewyears among the different varieties of online advertising media, according toYankee Group, expanding from only $44 million in 2000 to $3.1 billion by 2005. Asurvey of online advertisers and their agencies conducted by the company inearly 2001 found that more than one-half (56%) of respondents plan to increasetheir spending on streaming media advertising. A related survey also found thatadvertisers believed streaming media advertising was second only to e-mail interms of effectiveness.

    2.17 U.S. Advertiser Plans For Streaming Media Ad ExpendituresPercent of agencies/advertisers who use streaming media ads

    A 2001 survey of marketing executives and their agencies by Myers Reportsfound that budget limitations were the most common barrier to companiesincreasing their online advertising expenditures. More significant, however, werethe large number of executives who expressed concerns about various aspectsof online advertising performance and performance benchmarking. Almost one-half or marketing executives and 57% of agencies cited low click-through rates asa barrier to their increasing spending and more than one-third of each wereconcerned about low conversion rates, high cost-per-thousand ad rates, anddifficulties in measuring return on investment.

    2.18 Barriers To Increased Online Advertising SpendingPercent of each type of executive

    MarketingExecutives

    AgencyExecutives

    Budget limitations 58% 92%Low click-through rates 49% 57%High CPMs 45% 44%Cant measure ROI 38% 40%Low conversion rates 33% 35%Inadequate research 32% 48%Webs branding abilities 30% 43%Lack of measurement standards 29% 40%Inadequate sales competence 27% 27%Fragmentation of market 23% 26%Bandwidth limitations 19% 21%Poor stewardship of schedule 6% 15%Creative standards not compatible 3% 17%

    Source: Myers Reports, 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    29/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    30/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 29

    E-mail is the most popular online activity, with surveys indicating that morepeople use e-mail than any other online service, including surfing the web. IDCestimates that at the end of 2001 there were approximately 137 million e-mailboxes among U.S. users at work and another 102 million among users at home.

    Opt-in e-mail marketing and similar types of permission marketing are the onlyappropriate approaches for integrating e-mail into a digital marketing effort. Opt-in e-mail message volume is growing at roughly twice the rate of overall e-mailmessage volume, according to most analysts, and is expected to account forabout one-in-five e-mails by 2003. Including opt-in, there are three principal typesof permission-based e-mail: House List Messages -- These include company newsletters, promotions,

    and various types of updates sent to a companys own e-mail list Sponsored E-mail Messages -- Stand-alone newsletters, bulletins, and e-

    zines which carry advertising and are sent regularly to subscribers whorequest them

    Opt-in E-mail Messages -- Messages sent to generic lists of individuals whohave indicated an interest in receiving e-mail related to specific topics

    3.01 U.S. E-mail Message Volume (1999-2003)Billions of messages per year

    3.02 U.S. Opt-in E-mail Message Volume (1999-2003)Billions of messages per year

    394

    536

    677

    840

    1,035

    0

    200

    400

    600

    800

    1,000

    1,200

    1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

    Source: eMarketer, 2001

    40.164.1

    101.2

    159.1

    227.0

    10.2%12.0%

    14.9%

    18.9%21.9%

    0

    50

    100

    150

    200250

    300

    350

    1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

    Source: eMarketer, 2001

    0%

    5%

    10%

    15%

    20%

    25%

    E-mail Messages Sent Opt-in Messages As A Share Of All E-mail

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    31/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 30

    3.03 Frequency Of Promotional E-mails Among Leading RetailersNumber of e-mails sent per month

    Retailer February 2001 January 2001 December 20001-800-FLOWERS.COM 3 3 3800.com 2 2 5

    Amazon.com 1 1 1BananaRepublic.com 3 4 4BarnesandNoble.com 2 2 5ClickRewards 2 2 5FTD.com 2 1 2Microsoft 2 3 5MSN 4 4 9NetFlix 9 -- --Outpost.com 5 5 5Sears.com 4 7 --Victorias Secret 4 3 2Williams-Sonoma 0 1 2Wine.com 5 4 5

    Source: Iconocast, 2001

    Almost two-thirds (65%) of Internet users are interested in receiving activitystatements by e-mail and 44% their bills by e-mail, according to NFOWorldGroup. More than one-half (54%) already receive online versions of offlinepublications by e-mail and 13% have actually cancelled one or more printsubscriptions in favor of the digital counterpart. Valentine Radford found that thenumber of online consumers who actually enjoy receiving electronic newslettersperiodically has remained steady at about four-in-five over three different surveysconducted during 2000 and 2001.

    NFO also reports that almost three-in-four (71%) Internet users alreadyreceive permission e-mail from online retailers announcing special offers. AMarch 2001 survey of Internet users by Jupiter Media Metrix found that 85% ofonline buyers were either very likely or somewhat more likely to return to a siteafter receiving an e-mail message from a retailer.

    3.04 Types Of Permission E-mail Received By U.S. Internet UsersPercent of Internet users

    27%

    38%

    47%

    49%

    55%

    55%

    57%

    71%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

    Offers From Local Retailers

    Local News

    Weather

    Entertainment

    Travel

    Humor

    Household Tips, Recipies, Crafts

    E-tailer Special Offers

    Source: NFO World Group, 8/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    32/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 31

    3.05 E-mail Volume Of U.S. Internet Users At Home And At WorkNumber of messages received per day

    The average Internet user receives 11 e-mails at home per day and 24 e-mailsat work, according to a June 2001 survey by the Gallup Organization. Themedian number of daily e-mails received at home and at work are 8 and 12respectively.

    By 2006, Jupiter Media Metrix predicts that the average Internet user willreceive approximately 4,200 e-mails per year, more than 40% of which will bespam or UCE (unsolicited commercial e-mail).

    3.06 How Frequently Do U.S. Internet Users Check Their E-mailPercent of Internet users

    Cluttered e-mail boxes and spam have already become an issue for manyInternet users. Although the largest share of users report that only 10% or less ofthe e-mail they receive is spam, almost 40% indicated in the Gallup survey thatone-third or more of their e-mail is spam and almost one-in-five indicated that amajority of the messages they receive are spam.

    2%

    8%

    13%

    17%

    12% 11% 12% 12%13%

    0%

    5%

    10%

    15%

    20%

    25%

    30%

    < 1Hour

    1 to 2Hours

    3 to 4Hours

    5 to 6Hours

    7 to 8Hours

    9 to 10Hours

    11 to 15Hours

    16 to 20Hours

    > 20Hours

    Source: Gallup Organization, 6/2001

    4 2 %

    2 8 %

    1 0 %

    9 % 6 %

    1 % 2 % 2 %

    2 7 %

    1 9 %

    1 3 %

    1 0 % 1 2

    %

    2 % 8 % 6 %

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    50%

    60%

    5 OrLess

    6 To 10 11 To 15 16 To 20 21 To 30 31 To 40 41 To 50 MoreThan 50

    Source: Gallup Organization, 6/2001

    Users At Home Users At Work

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    33/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 32

    3.07 Proportion Of U.S. Internet Users E-mail That Is Spam/UCEPercent of all e-mail received each week at home and at work

    Word of mouth is one of the most common means by which Internet userslearn about new websites and it is the key to any viral marketing effort. ForresterResearch estimates that 53% of Internet users learn about sites by word of mouthand Jupiter Media Metrix estimates that 45% of online consumers choose e-commerce sites based at least in part on word of mouth. Almost one-in-five(18%) Internet users use word of mouth as the primary means of learning aboutnew sites, according to IMT Strategies.

    The most common reasons why Internet users forward e-mails on to othersare they are either relevant to the recipients interests or they are consideredamusing.

    3.08 Reasons Internet Users Forward E-mail To OthersPercent of Internet users

    Source: Gallup Organization, 6/2001

    31% To 40%11%

    51% To 70%10%

    91% To 100%1%

    71% To 90%

    7%

    41% To 50%10%

    21% To 30%15%

    11% To 20%16%

    10% Or Less

    30%

    1%

    4%

    4%

    6%

    7%

    35%

    41%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

    Prize/Coupon/Reward

    New Technology

    Cool

    Informative

    Work-Related

    Funny

    Relevant

    Source: IMT Strategies, 9/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    34/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    35/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 34

    Source: Forrester Research, 2000

    CustomerRetention

    66%

    CustomerAcquisition

    34%

    3.11 E-mail Marketing By U.S. Small Business (2001/2003/2005)In millions

    2001 2003 2005Businesses using e-mail marketing 1.6mn 3.7mn 4.6mnE-mail marketing expenditures $398mn $1,319mn $2,238mn

    Source: Kelsey Group, 5/2001

    The Kelsey Group predicts that small businesses in the U.S. will aggressivelyadopt e-mail marketing over the next four years. The company estimates that11% of small businesses spent approximately $211 million on e-mail marketingduring 2000. That share is expected to expand to 16% of small businesses in2001 and 42% in 2005 when they are predicted to spend an estimated $2.2 billionon e-mail marketing.

    3.12 Payment Options Supported By E-mail Marketing NetworksPercent of e-mail marketing networks

    3.13 U.S. E-mail Marketing Allocation Of Expenditures, CustomerAcquisition vs. RetentionPercent of total e-mail marketing expenditures

    38%

    53%

    100%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Cost PerAcquisition

    Cost Per Click

    Cost Per Thousand

    Source: Opt-in New s, 3/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    36/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    37/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 36

    Source: Jupiter Media Metrix, 7/2001

    Text Only40%

    HTML And Text60%

    Source: Opt-in New s, 3/2001

    HTML E-mail34%

    Text E-mail66%

    Substantially more than one-half (60%) of Internet users today use e-mailclient software that is capable of supporting HTML e-mail, according to JupiterMedia Metrix. Opt-In News, however, reports that two-thirds of the e-mailcampaigns among marketing executives it surveyed in March 2001 employed textmessages. Although the open rates and click-through rates are generally higherfor HTML e-mail than text messages, many Internet users at work have text-onlymessaging software such as Lotus Notes. In addition, IT administrators areincreasingly blocking HTML e-mail and e-mail attachments to protect theirsystems from mail-borne viruses and other types of malicious code.

    3.16 Formats Supported By Internet Users E-mail ClientsPercent of Internet users

    3.17 E-mail Format For Advertising CampaignsPercent of e-mail advertising

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    38/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 37

    Section IV.Leading Advertisersand Brands

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    39/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 38

    The ranks of leading online advertisers are dominated by companies from theretail, financial and entertainment sectors, according to both CMRi andAdRelevance. Online retailer Amazon.com and the eBay trading community areranked, not surprisingly, among the top five online advertisers in terms of bothimpressions and expenditures during the first nine months of 2001.

    4.01 Leading U.S. Online Advertisers By ExpendituresTotal expenditures in dollars for online advertising

    Rank AdvertiserExpenditures

    Jan.-Sep. 2001 Sector1 eBay Inc. $35,731,219 Retail2 General Motors Corp. $35,520,684 Automotive3 Providian Financial Corp. $23,581,190 Financial4 Amazon.com Inc. $22,884,132 Retail5 Classmates Online Inc. $21,831,884 Entertainment6 Barnes & Noble Inc. $21,595,465 Retail7 AOL Time Warner Inc. $19,242,581 Entertainment

    8 JP Morgan Chase & Co. $18,011,060 Financial9 BankOne Corp. $17,295,526 Financial

    10 Vivendi Universal $15,963,171 EntertainmentSource: CMRi AdNetTrackUS, 9/2001

    4.02 Leading U.S. Online Advertisers By ImpressionsThousands of impressions during quarter, excluding house ads

    Rank AdvertiserImpressions

    Q3-2001 Sector1 Amazon.com Inc. 12,316,972 Retail2 Columbia House 5,438,788 Entertainment3 eBay Inc. 5,746,873 Retail4 BarnesandNoble.com 4,902,329 Retail5 Orbitz 5,040,898 Services6 Classmates Online Inc. 4,909,343 Entertainment7 Cassava Enterprises 4,042,223 Entertainment8 Bertelsmann AG 3,814,016 Entertainment9 AOL Time Warner Inc. 3,433,876 Entertainment

    10 Providian Financial Corp. 5,559,735 FinancialSource: Jupiter Media Metrix, 10/2001

    During 2000, four-in-five (79%) major U.S. companies used online advertising,

    up from 66% in 1999, according to the Association of National Advertisers. Theaverage amount spent by these companies during 2000 was $2.4 million,accounting for an average 2.9% of their total advertising budgets. Theassociation also reports that the average company increased its spending foronline advertising by 24% between 1999 and 2000.

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    40/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    41/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 40

    4.05 Leading Dot.com Brands Among U.S. Decision-MakersCoreBrand Power score for each company/brand

    Company/Brand Name

    Q2-2000CoreBrand Power

    Score (1) Type of Company

    America Online 34.8 ISP/ContentLycos 32.1 PortalPriceline.com 31.7 E-commerceAmeritrade 31.2 FinancialExcite 26.7 PortalAlta Vista 26.5 SearchEarthlink Network 24.0 ISPJuno.com 23.0 ISPMindspring Enterprises 22.2 ISPGo Network 20.4 PortalEgghead.com 20.0 E-commerceiVillage 16.6 ContentCDnow.com 14.9 E-commerceZDnet 14.8 ContentHotBot 13.5 SearchAbout.com 11.7 PortalWingspan.com 9.5 Financial

    (1) The CoreBrand Power score gauges how familiar and favorable a company is to key businessdecision-makers comprised of vice presidents or higher at the top 20% of U.S. corporations.

    Source: Corporate Branding, 12/2000

    Among American consumers, more than 90% are familiar with the IBM andMicrosoft brands, according to Forrester Research, which is significantly higherthan their individual market penetration rates at 17% and 40% respectively.Similarly, Yahoo! is recognized by 86% of consumers but less than one-in-three(29%) have actually used the online portal.

    4.06 Leading Technology Brands Among U.S. ConsumersTrust measured on a scale of 1 (distrust a lot) to 5 (trust a lot) and market penetration measuredamong all U.S. consumers

    Company/Brand NameConsumer

    TrustMarket

    Penetration Type of CompanyAmazon.com 4.52 9% E-commerceApple 4.41 7% TechnologyHandspring 4.41 1% TechnologyGateway 4.38 10% TechnologyDell Computer 4.35 10% TechnologyIBM 4.33 17% TechnologyPalm 4.29 3% TechnologyAOL 4.28 18% ISPeBay 4.22 10% E-commerce

    Yahoo! 4.16 29% PortalNapster 4.14 8% EntertainmentE*Trade 4.13 2% FinancialEarthlink 4.09 4% ISPMicrosoft 4.05 40% TechnologyMSN 4.01 15% ISP

    Source: Forrester Research, 2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    42/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 41

    Forrester also found that Internet users generally recognized more brandsthan offline consumers. This was especially true for online brands such asAmazon.com and Yahoo!, but also applied to brands unrelated to the Internet.For example, the brand recognition for Yahoo! was 25% higher among onlineconsumers than among offline consumers while 12% more online consumersrecognized the Sony brand, 15% more for the Motorola brand, 16% more forMitsubishi, and 19% more for Circuit City.

    4.07 Leading E-commerce Brands Among U.S. Internet UsersPercent of Internet users who recognize brand

    24%

    26%

    30%

    30%

    42%

    43%

    44%

    44%

    51%

    52%

    52%

    54%

    54%

    61%

    61%

    62%

    65%

    69%

    73%

    82%

    83%

    86%

    92%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Autobytel.com

    Drugstore.com

    Buy.com

    Travelocity.com

    Bluelight.com

    KBkids.com

    Egghead.com

    CDnow.com

    GAP.com

    Walmart.com

    Landsend.com

    JCPenney.com

    Dell.com

    CompUSA.com

    eToys.com

    Bestbuy.com

    Priceline.com

    Ticketmaster.com

    Toysrus.com

    Gateway.com

    eBay.com

    BarnesandNoble.com

    Amazon.com

    Source: Odyssey, 2000

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    43/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 42

    Section V.Internet Users and OnlineAdvertising

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    44/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    45/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 44

    Gartner Group reports that brand value and past experience play a significantrole in Internet users choices about which sites they decide to patronize. Thecompanys research has found that 59% of online buyers typically limit theirpurchases to only a handful of sites that they find familiar and comfortable.

    If Internet users are unsure about which website to visit when shopping online,typing the desired product name into a search engine is the most frequentlymentioned method for determining where to go. Search engines and e-mail arealso common means of learning about new websites.

    5.03 Primary Method For U.S. Internet Users To Learn AboutWebsitesPercent of Internet users

    1%

    1%

    1%

    2%

    2%

    2%

    3%

    4%12%

    13%

    29%

    18%

    < 1%

    < 1%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

    Online Discussion Groups

    Outdoor Ads

    E-mail Newsletter

    Direct Mail

    E-mail From A Company

    Hardcopy Catalog

    Radio

    Television

    Personal Conversation

    Banner Or Other Web AdNewspaper Or Magazine Ad

    Link From Another Site

    E-mail From A Friend

    Search Engine

    Source: IMT Strategies, 2000/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    46/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    47/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 46

    11%

    34%

    13%

    4%

    11%

    8%

    9%

    61%

    11%

    38%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

    8 To 30 Days

    1 To 7 Days

    1 To 24 Hours

    30 To 59 Minutes

    0 To 29 Minutes

    Source: AdKnow ledge, Q3-2000

    Clickthrough-to-Conversion View-to-Conversion

    Internet users are more likely to notice online ads and respond to them whenthey are at home rather than at work, according to the Online PublishersAssociation. More than one-half (53%) of Internet users surveyed for theorganization by Millward Brown also indicated that they were more likely to buyonline from home compared to only 18% who were more likely to buy at work.Survey respondents were, however, almost three times more likely to noticebusiness-related ads while at work than when they were online at home.

    5.06 Visibility Of Online Ads Among U.S. Internet Users At HomeAnd At WorkPercent of Internet users

    5.07 Elapsed Time To Conversion For Online AdsPercent of Internet users who respond to online ads

    12%

    34%

    11%

    12%

    48%

    53%

    57%

    65%

    41%

    13%

    32%

    22%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Click On Ads

    Notice Ads ForBusiness Products &

    Services

    Notice Ads ForConsumer Products

    & Services

    Notice Online Ads

    Source: Online Publishers Association/MBIQ Media Consumption Study, 11/2001

    More Likely At Work About The SameMore Likely At Home

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    48/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 47

    Among Internet users who click on online ads and who ultimately convert --either by registering, requesting information, or completing a purchase -- themajority (61%) take less than 30 minutes to do so, according to a Q3-2000analysis by AdKnowledge. Almost one-in-five (19%) take one day or longer toconvert after their initial click-through.

    AdKnowledge also found that one-third (32%) of total conversions actuallyentailed no click-through by users. Those individuals simply visited advertiserwebsites by typing in a URL or through some other method after viewing anonline ad. The elapsed view-to-conversion time among this group of Internetusers was significantly longer than among users who actually clicked on ads.

    Among the various online activities that Internet users engage in, ForresterResearch found that individuals were most likely to click on a banner ad whilethey were researching a product or using a search engine. Conversely,individuals were least likely to click on a banner ad while they were reading news.

    5.08 U.S. Internet Users Likelihood of Clicking On Banner AdsPercent of Internet users

    Activity

    Extremely

    Likely Likely UnlikelyReading News 6% 39% 55%Researching Products 9% 59% 35%Shopping for Products 6% 65% 29%Using a Search Engine 6% 81% 13%

    Source: Forrester Research, 2000

    5.09 U.S. Consumer Attitudes About Clicking On Banner AdsPercent of Internet users responding to question: How likely are you to click on a banner ad

    60.3%

    47.7%

    31.5%

    17.7%

    25.1%

    19.7%

    25.5%

    21.3%

    26.6%

    21.1%

    42.4%

    58.7%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

    When Shopping ForA Particular

    Product

    When Shown ADiscount

    When Offered AFree Product

    When ResearchingConsumer Products

    Source: Forrester Research, 2001

    Likely Neutral Unlikely

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    49/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 48

    Click-through rates for online banner ads have declined steadily, from an average0.71% in January 1999 to 0.31% in December 1999 and 0.29% during the first-half of2000, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. Most analysts during 2000 and 2001 estimatedthat click-through rates changed little during that period, but their estimates of averageclick-through rates were significantly higher than Nielsen/NetRatings at 0.5% to 1%.

    AdKnowledge reports that click-through rates in the second quarter of 2000 for adstied to specific search keywords were measurably higher than ads with Run-of-Site(ROS) placement. The results for ads with keyword placement on portal sites were morethan twice that with ROS placement; on news/content sites and other non-portal sites,click-through rates with keyword placement were approximately 50% higher than withROS placement, according to AdKnowledge.

    5.10 U.S. Click-Through Rates For Banner Ads vs. Opt-in E-mailPercent of Internet users who click on each type of ad

    2%

    1%

    1%

    7%

    1%-2%

    0.6%

    0.5%

    1%-2%

    2%-20%

    10%-15%

    5%-15%

    5%-15%

    12.5%

    2.5%-10%

    0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

    FloNetwork

    Aberdeen Group

    Jupiter MediaMetrix

    Winterberry Group

    Tower Group

    Forrester Research

    24/7 Media

    Source: As Noted, 2000

    Banner Ads Opt-in E-mail

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    50/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 49

    The click-through rates for opt-in e-mail messages is approximately ten-timesthat for banner ads, according to most analysts. MindArrow reports that theaverage click rate for opt-in e-mail, based on an analysis from 2000, was 5.4%compared to 0.4% for banner ads and 1.5% for postal direct mail. The responserate for rich media banners was almost ten-times higher than regular banners,according to MindArrow, at an average 3.8%.

    Several studies, however, indicate that a high click-through rate does notautomatically correlate with a high conversion or buy rate. AdKnowledge found thatcampaigns generating the highest click-through rates also generated the mostconversions only 14% of the time; put another way, this means that more than four-out-of-five times the campaign with the highest click-through rate generated a lower ultimateconversion rate than campaigns with lower click-through rates.

    5.11 U.S. Click-Through Rate Comparison By Type Of MediaPercent of recipients who respond to message

    Among mobile wireless Internet users, 91% indicated that they would be eithersomewhat or highly influenced by wireless advertisements, according to a survey

    conducted by WindWire in late 2000. The same survey estimated averagewireless advertising response rates at 19% for click-through and 12% for call-through. The rich graphic ad format generated the highest response rate,according to WindWire.

    5.12 U.S. Wireless Advertising Response Rates By FormatAverage call-/click-through rate

    10%

    24%

    21%

    0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

    Interstitial

    Rich Graphic

    Rich Text

    Source: WindWire, 2000

    0.4%

    1.5%

    3.8%

    5.4%

    0%

    2%

    4%

    6%

    8%

    10%

    Banner Ads Direct Mail Rich MediaBanners

    Opt-in E-mail

    Source: MindArrow , 2000

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    51/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 50

    A trial among 1,000 mobile wireless users in Boulder, Colorado by SkyGoduring early 2001 experienced overall click-through rates of between 15% and25% for wireless push ads. Three percent of the participants made a purchase asa result of viewing an ad and 7% said they would use wireless coupons at thepoint of purchase. Advertisers participating in the trial paid between $25-75/CPMfor basic run of service ads and between $75-150/CPM for permission-basedads to a highly targeted opt-in audience.

    This does not mean, however, that companies have free reign to sendunsolicited advertising to mobile wireless users. A majority of mobile wirelessusers surveyed by Boston Consulting Group (BCG) were not willing to acceptuntargeted push advertising. The same individuals, however, would be interestedin personalized, user-specific offers. Almost one-half (46%) of users surveyed byJupiter Media Metrix expressed no interest in receiving ads on their wirelessphones or PDAs; 36% were interested in receiving ads in the form of subsidizedcontent or access and 35% via subsidized devices.

    5.13 Wireless Advertising Response Rates In SkyGo Service TrialPercent of wireless ads delivered

    2.9%

    15.0%

    64.0%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

    Ads Resulted InOn- Or Off-line

    Purchase

    Ads Resulted InAction/Planned

    Action

    Opened Ads

    Source: SkyGo, 2/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    52/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 51

    The majority of Internet users both at home and at work generally believe thatthere is too much advertising online today. Among users at home, three-in-fourfind online ads annoying and 70% believe that they provide little or no usefulinformation. Sixty percent of users at work report that few if any online ads offeranything relevant to them.

    5.14 Attitudes Towards Banner Ads Among U.S. Internet Users AtHomePercent of online consumer households

    5.15 Attitudes Towards Banner Ads Among U.S. Internet Users AtWork

    Percent of Internet users at work

    55%

    70%

    25%

    45%

    30%

    75%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Make it easy tofind important

    information

    Provide essentialinformation

    Are annoying

    Source: V alentine Radford, 3/2001

    Disagree Agree

    13%

    40%

    62%

    87%

    60%

    38%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Has Adertising IRemem ber For A

    Long Time

    Has Advertising ThatIs Relevant To Me

    Has Too MuchAdvertising

    Source: Online Publishers Association/MBIQ Media Consumption Study, 11/2001

    Agree Disagree

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    53/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 52

    Although a substantial majority (87%) of Internet users dislike receiving spamor other varieties of unsolicited commercial e-mail (UCE), Gallup reports thatmore than one-in-ten (13%) either do not mind or actually find it interesting anduseful on occasion. In the competition for most annoying practice, online pop-up ads beat out spam by almost two-to-one (65% vs. 34%), according to Gallup.

    Greenfield Online reports that new Internet users are generally more receptiveto e-mail marketing efforts than veteran users. A majority (54%) of users whohave been online for less than one year find e-mail useful for learning about newproducts compared to 44% of veteran users, according to Greenfield. On the flip-side, a majority of veteran users (53%) think that they receive too many e-mailoffers and promotions versus one-third on new users.

    5.16 U.S. Internet Users Attitudes Towards Spam/UCEPercent of Internet users

    5.17 U.S. Internet Users Attitudes Towards E-mail MarketingPercent of online consumer households

    4%

    9%

    45%

    42%

    0%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

    Really Like To Receive Spam

    Sometimes Find It Interesting

    Have No Strong Feelings Either Way

    Find It Annoying But Don't Hate It

    Hate Spam

    Source: Gallup Organization, 6/2001

    18%

    21%

    31%

    33%

    54%

    15%

    39%

    45%

    53%

    44%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

    I often buy things a dvertised to m e through e-mail

    I delete most e-mail ads without readingthem

    I wish it were easie r to unregister from e-mail o ffers

    I receive too ma ny e-mail offers andpromotions

    E-mail is a great way to find out about newproducts or promotions

    Source: Greenf ield Online, 8/2000

    Users Online More Than Four Years

    Users Online Less Than One Year

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    54/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 53

    Among online consumers, 60% prefer HTML e-mail over text e-mail and 80%like to receive rich media e-mail, according to Valentine Radford. Many of theindividuals who enjoy rich media, however, prefer that e-mails provide links to thecontent rather than embed it into the message itself.

    The delivery frequency preferences of opt-in e-mail recipients are divided fairlyevenly with 30% interested in receiving messages several times per week, 31%interested in once per week and 34% desiring delivery only twice per month orless frequently. Among the different delivery options, once per week was themost popular, with 31% of recipients specifying that option.

    5.18 U.S. Internet Users Attitudes Towards Rich E-mailPercent of online consumers

    5.19 Internet User Preferences For Permission E-mail VolumePercent of opt-in e-mail subscribers

    5%

    6%

    10%

    31%

    12%

    18%

    18%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

    Don't Know

    Less Than Once AMonth

    Once A Month

    Every Other Week

    Once A Week

    Couple Times AWeek

    Daily

    Source: NFO Interactive/FloNetwork, 2000

    28%

    40%

    20%

    72%

    60%

    80%

    0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

    Prefer receiving alink to rich media

    Prefer HTML e-mailover text

    Enjoy rich media e-mail

    Source: Valentine Radford, 3/2001

    Disagree Agree

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    55/61

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    56/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 55

    The use of eCoupons is most common in shopping for groceries, followed in adistant second and third place by books and health-related products, according toNPD. The company estimates that the highest redemption rates for eCoupons,however, are for toys, music, and books, where 80% or more of coupons areultimately redeemed.

    NPD reports that overall redemption rates for eCoupons are much higher thanfor coupons related to mailorder catalogs. In many product categories, eCouponsare redeemed at rates comparable to those for retail stores, although the specificrates within each category can vary significantly between the two channels.

    5.22 eCoupon Use Among U.S. Internet Users By CategoryPercent of eCoupon users

    5.23 Redemption Of eCoupons By Category And Retail ChannelPercent of coupons redeemed within each category

    Item Online CatalogRetailStore Phone Other

    Apparel 39% 2% 45% 1% 13%Beauty 58% 1% 29% 11% 1%Books 83% 1% 4% -- 12%Electronics 60% 1% 23% -- 16%Fast Food -- -- 96% -- 4%Groceries 4% -- 94% -- 2%Health 55% -- 42% -- 2%Music 80% 1% 4% -- 15%Restaurant 2% 14% 81% -- 2%Toys 87% -- 12% -- 1%

    Source: NPD Group, 2000

    13%

    13%

    14%

    14%

    16%

    17%

    26%

    30%

    32%

    59%

    0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

    Restaurant

    Electronics

    Apparel

    Toys

    Fast Food

    Beauty

    Music

    Health

    Books

    Groceries

    Source: NPD Group, 2000

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    57/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 56

    Source: Valentine Radford, 3/2001

    E-mail55%

    Snail Mail16%Newspapers

    29%

    .

    5.24 U.S. Online Consumer Preferences For Coupon DeliveryPercent of online consumers

    The majority (55%) of coupon users who are also online now prefer to receivecoupons via e-mail, according to Valentine Radford. Only 29% prefer to clip their

    coupons from newspapers and only 16% prefer to receive them through the mail.Companies should nevertheless exercise restraint, however, inasmuch as asubstantial majority of online consumers prefer to receive eCoupons via e-mailonly occasionally. Less than one-in-four (22%) indicated an interest in receivingthem often or very often.

    5.25 How Frequently U.S. Consumers Wish To Receive Coupons ViaE-mailPercent of online consumers

    9%13%

    35%

    28%

    16%

    0%

    10%

    20%

    30%

    40%

    50%

    60%

    Very Often Often Sometimes Seldom Never

    Source: Valentine Radford, 3/2001

  • 8/14/2019 Internet Commerce Briefing: Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    58/61

    Online Advertising & Digital Marketing Report

    The Internet Commerce Briefing | 57

    Online ads which contain rich media -- such as audio or video -- are, notsurprisingly, more visible than conventional banner ads, according to Arbitron.This may be due at least in part to the novelty of such ads which are still fairlyrare. Data from Arbitron also indicates that Internet users with broadband accessare somewhat more likely than dial-up users to have seen an online ad withstreaming audio and were almost twice as likely to have seen a streaming videocommercial.

    5.26 Visibility Of Online Ads