Future looks bright for video ads
Runt of the advertising litter to grow up fast
The outlook for the future is even more positive with online video advertising in the US alone expected to be worth $4.3bn by 2011.
Despite these significant expectations for the US market, the format is still in the embryonic stages in Ireland, with the main broadcaster RTE only providing video streaming since June of this year.
"It is very early days for advertising around streaming video content, but we expect that it will become a popular format by Christmas and will be widely used in 2008," said Aisling McCabe, sales and business development manager for RTE.ie.
Video ads are delivered in two formats: Rolling over traditional banner ads can make them play video content, or ads are simply presented at the start or end of video content accessed by users online.
The latter format has been adopted by RTE, with 15-second ads appearing at the start of every second video stream, meaning users won't necessarily have to put up with ads on every video they access. Ford was the first to use the service with an ad for its Mondeo car.
Stephen McCormack, chief executive of Wildwave, a firm that provides and distributes online video channels, explains that the online video format offers advertisers a different way to engage with their target market.
"Video advertising is very attractive as you can get more attention and more interaction from the viewer than with banners or Google ads," he said.
The launch of sites such as YouTube has seen TV viewers flock online in search of new content. However, while the short burst of content available on video sharing sites such as YouTube is free, professionally-produced programmes online tend to come on a pay-per-view basis, a major disadvantage compared to traditional television.
McCormack said advertising offers a means to even the odds. "There is less of a willingness among internet users to pay for content online and carrying advertising presents a way to deliver this content for free," he said.
The past year or so has seen several video streaming providers, some legal and some not so legal, pop up and become popular among users. The provider creating the most buzz at present is the legal, and therefore advertiser-friendly, Joost. The service, pronounced "juiced", has over one million subscribers already, no small feat considering it has not officially been launched yet.
Viacom, which owns MTV and Paramount Pictures, and Wallace and Gromit creators Aardman animations are among the media companies committed to the format.
With Irish advertisers demanding more means to deliver video content online, providers like Joost may be just what they need to quench their thirst.
© 2007 ENN
A site dedicated to hosting (just) ads could be actually successful. Today, consumers use the text-web to search for product information prior to purchase ("Pull-Advertising").
Vendor Ads and "How-To Use Product X" tutorial videos could be useful to people evaluating products (and existing owners).
Push advertising is wasteful because it can't be precisely targetted. For instance, I'm only interested in seeing car commercials every 10 years or so, and will personally never buy feminine hygene products.
Yes, I know, I'm hanging my head in shame right now.
"you can get more attention and more interaction from the viewer"
Oh you'll get my attention all right. I will do my utmost to get a filter add-on for my browser, or remember to not go to that site anymore if I can avoid it. At the very least, you'll gt a mouthful of names and words you wouldn't want a child to hear, all carefully directed in your general direction, give or take the precision of an ICBM.
Media and marketing directors are all of the same ilk : they believe with fanatical strength that people want their "products", but they would most probably go nuts if they actually had to see ads like us in all the everyday activities that they have.
The day I will accept ads in every aspect of my life is the day they have giant screens along golf courses that yell "targeted" ads to the players all day long.
Go and make a coffee
If I'm going to get video adverts forced down my throat before I can access a website then, if its a site I really want to access, I'll go and get a coffee or go for a pee or something. If it's streaming adverts whilst I'm using the site then I wont use the site at all because it would drive me mad.
What's this crap that McCormack came up with: "carrying advertising presents a way to deliver this content for free,"
Free?? Its my bandwidth and I PAY for it. If I choose to go to YouTube and watch crappy (illegally uploaded) videos and use up my bandwidth then that is my choice. Using my bandwidth up to deliver video adverts to me for products I don't give two figs about is not my choice (Is it actually "stealing" my bandwith?).
Any site that forces video ads on its end users should be treated in the same way as sites that insist on playing the site owners taste in music (usually crap) all the time you are there. Delete them from your favourites and go elsewhere.
Also when McCabe stated "we expect that it will become a popular format"... popular with who?
So, video is the future eh?
echo "127.0.0.1 video.spam.cnuts.com >> /etc/hosts
.. and other methods which will prevent it from running as soon as it becomes an annoyance.