Study Suggests More Bang for Advertisers' Bucks With iAds

[MacRumors]

Ad Age reports on the results of a recent survey commissioned by Apple and soup company Campbell's claiming that Apple's iAd mobile advertising program results in greater brand recognition among consumers at considerably less cost than traditional television advertising.

Those exposed to one of Campbell's iAds were more than twice as likely to recall it than those who had seen a TV ad. Indeed the five-week study, conducted by Nielsen, showed that consumers shown an iAd remembered the brand "Campbell's" five times more often than TV ad respondents and the ad messaging three times more often.

According to the survey, consumers who viewed the Campbell's iAd were four times more likely to purchase Campbell's products than consumers who viewed Campbell's television commercials.

Apple's interest in the study is obviously geared toward convincing companies to make the significant financial commitment (reported to be $1 million for the first wave of advertisers) to the iAd program. But while the initiative was a significant outlay of cash for Campbell's, it paled in comparison to the $25 million spent on traditional television advertising during a two-month period.

The study was put in place to validate mobile, a relatively new medium for the marketer. While Ms. Gordon would not share budgets for iAd, she said it was a "sizable investment" and Campbell's biggest play in mobile to date. Ms. Gordon says Campbell's is discussing further iAd campaigns and ways to optimize efforts.

By comparison, Campbell's spent $25 million on soup brands in network and cable TV in October and November, according to Kantar Media.

Data on the Campbell's iAd campaign reveal that the ad generated approximately 53 million impressions, with about 1% of users clicking through to explore the interactive content within the ad. In addition to a number of multimedia aspects, the ad also allowed customers to submit their email addresses to Campbell's to receive coupons good on the company's products.

But despite the broad reach of Apple's iOS ecosystem, television represents a significantly larger market with a broader range of demographics, meaning that television advertising will certainly remain a key component of companies' marketing efforts. But early evidence is showing that those companies willing to tap into the mobile advertising market via iAd could see significant benefits in terms of brand visibility and consumer attitudes.

Article Link: Study Suggests More Bang for Advertisers' Bucks With iAds

 

[ArchaicRevival]

In due time iAd, in due time.

The more handheld devices become complex, the more focus on advertising will be. That's how YouTube was born!

 

[sbrhwkp3]

Of COURSE iAd's are more effective.

What do you think is more memorable; listening, or interacting?

Great for Apple. If we're going to have ads, they might as well be relevant, and, dare I say, fun.

 

[Anaemik]

I still think that iAds is going to result in some interesting typos and auto-corrections for a while to come.....

 

[j-a-x]

I put iAds in the free version of my app. Only problem is, iAd only shows ads about 3 percent of the time. I hope more advertisers sign up because right now it might be good for advertisers but it's not great for app developers like me.

By the way if you try my app and you see an AdMob ad instead of iAd, it's because there was not an iAd available to be shown (AdMob is currently my fallback plan).

I do like iAds, I think they look good and are more interesting than average ads, which encourages people to click on them. There just aren't enough of them at this point.

 

[Stella]

iAds are still adverts, and I'll still continue to avoid them as much as possible.

If people like them, then thats up to them - click anyway!

 

[aajeev]

Make sense...

Can't speak for others. But if I was on my iphone and just chilling. And a Ad comes up that looks like a game (or interactive format), I'll play with it.

 

[lewis82]

I have yet to see an iAd, and I've been using an iPod touch for 3 years. Not that effective in my case

 

[0815]

I put iAds in the free version of my app (see signature). Only problem is, iAd only shows ads about 3 percent of the time. I hope more advertisers sign up because right now it might be good for advertisers but it's not great for app developers like me.

But they still make more money as AdMob - I replaced in some of my apps AdMob with iAds and income went up.

I guess the reason is, that many people click on the iAd just to see the ads because they are so much better, interactive and entertaining and it doesn't yank you out of the application. What good are ads that show all the time but nobody clicks on them? iAds are fun to watch and interact with. (showing AdMob when iAd is not available is something I am considering)

 

[fswmacguy]

Because iAds are fun, intuitive, and very visually appealing. Other mobile ad content providers cannot say the same. I'd take iAds over the alternative static image ads (or Google's ads) any day.

 

[baryon]

iAd sounds good but I've never seen one. Can anyone point me to a free app that would have one?

 

[zenio]

iAds!

No Thanks, but I love how it makes my Apple stock climb.

I will pay extra to get rid of those horrid ads. Always.

 

[Popeye206]

I put iAds in the free version of my app (see signature). Only problem is, iAd only shows ads about 3 percent of the time. I hope more advertisers sign up because right now it might be good for advertisers but it's not great for app developers like me.

By the way if you try my app and you see an AdMob ad instead of iAd, it's because there was not an iAd available to be shown (AdMob is currently my fallback plan).

I do like iAds, I think they look good and are more interesting than average ads, which encourages people to click on them. There just aren't enough of them at this point.

Interesting point. I can see where this is an issue for the developers who are looking for the Ad revenue to support their apps.

I think it's just a matter of time. My observation on iAds is they tend to be better quality ads and this may be why it's taking so long for companies to jump on.... also, the ROI's have not been established, although reports like this are starting to show some results that will get advertisers interested.

In the long run, I think it will be lucrative. Especially for Ads that are more interactive and entertaining.

BTW... Apple's web site show's a huge number of iAd sales positions open. So, I'm sure the effort is ramping up now that the early adopter mode is well under way. Good for you... more ads coming I'm sure.

 

[aajeev]

Because iAds are fun, intuitive, and very visually appealing. Other mobile ad content providers cannot say the same. I'd take iAds over the alternative static image ads (or Google's ads) any day.

Exactly, I have more or less trained my self to mentally block out those static ads. As in, I know there is a rectangular box on the screen, but hell I can never recall what it is...

 

[locovaca]

..a recent survey commissioned by Apple ...

Yup, no conflict of interest here, move along, move along.

 

[Photics]

iAd sounds good but I've never seen one. Can anyone point me to a free app that would have one?

Critique has house advertisements and iAds...
http://itunes.apple.com/app/critique/id412438930

It's the cool app about cool apps. It has reviews of some of the best iPhone / iPod Touch apps.

 

[Full of Win]

Pointless, in that as far as I can tell, it did not compare other mobile banner ads. Throw in AdMob/Google and just some old Plain-Jane banner ads to see how iAd stacks up.

Also, has this been peer reviewed for publication? What are the M&M? Abstract? Discussion? Did they prove or disprove the null-hypotheses of this study? Until I see these, this so-called 'study' is just a load of hot air and self-serving tripe.

 

[ThomasJL]

iAds are iAnnoying.

 

[sjo]

consumers who viewed the Campbell's iAd were four times more likely to purchase Campbell's products than consumers who viewed Campbell's television commercials.

So basically consumers who choose to view an add are more likely to buy the product than consumers who are randomly exposed to adds?

What a shocking piece of information! Gotta run to buy me some iads now!

 

[Laird Knox]

this so-called 'study' is just a load of hot air and self-serving tripe.

Oh, you mean marketing.

 

[Consultant]

iAds are interesting, the ads in The Daily are great too.

 

[electric]

What a joke

I commissioned a study that suggests I should get a raise at work. My boss did not agree with the study.

 

[michaelcyee]

Ads? What ads?

*hugs trifecta of iAdkiller, SBAdBlockToggle, and Firewall IP*

 

[jayducharme]

It's all about the interactivity. People will remember something they interact with far more easily than something they simply watch. The trick (as Jobs has noted) is to find a way to make people WANT to interact with the ad.

 

[BC2009]

iAds are the whole reason I purchase iOS devices. What a great feature!

Seriously, while iAds are are far more interesting than standard ads, more often than not I opt for the paid app just so I don't have to see the ads taking up any of the limited screen real estate.