1. Branding and Cost Effectiveness of Rich Media in Online Advertising Presented by: Andrew Latzman, Dynamic Logic Marc Ryan, Nielsen//NetRatings June 20 th, 2003

2. 2 AdRelevance Methodology: Quarterly survey of top publishers –Approximately 1000 publishers surveyed Rate card information collected –Un-Negotiated –Run of Site Rates collected for all standard IAB sizes and new rich media technologies –Banners, buttons, rectangles, squares, skyscrapers –Generic Flash, Forms, Eyeblaster, Shoshkeles, Unicast, PointRoll, Eyewonder, Klip-Ad, Enliven, Bluestreak, Java

3. 3 Dynamic Logic Ad Effectiveness Group A* Group B* Did they see the advertisement? Yes No Both groups are surveyed about their attitudes toward the brand in the ad at the SAME time Do the results indicate a difference? Yes or No? Since the only statistical difference between groups A and B is the presence of the banner, we can attribute the lift to the ad Control / Exposed Methodology

4. 4 Rich Media’s Share of Ad Impressions The amount of rich media in the average advertiser’s campaign has increased dramatically over the course of the past year. Source: Nielsen//NetRatings

5. 5 Rich Media’s Share of Ad Impressions Source: Nielsen//NetRatings

6. 6 Sites Hosting Rich Media Top 10 Site Categories Serving Rich Media Impressions Source: Nielsen//NetRatings

7. 7 Cost vs. Effectiveness Considerable variety in the format of online ads available –Banners, Skyscrapers and Buttons present advertisers with many different creative options Additionally, different rich media technologies available –The rich media options are typically more expensive QUESTION: Does a more expensive ad unit lead to more branding effectiveness? –To enable clean comparison, each format and technology is analyzed using only ONE exposure

8. 8 Benchmark for Comparison + 5 + 2 + 3 Benchmark used is MarketNorms database –Over 800 campaigns with 880,000+ respondents –For analysis, only those with one exposure included

9. 9 Ad Format Examples Skyscraper 120 x 600 Banner 468 x 60 Leaderboard 728 x 90 Large Rectangle 336 x 280 Button 120x60 Rectangle 180 x 150

10. 10 Rich Media Examples

11. 11 Effectiveness by Format: Awareness Index of Performance vs. Benchmark Source: MarketNorms 2003 Best at Increasing Awareness of Brands

12. 12 Effectiveness by Format: Association Index of Performance vs. Benchmark Source: MarketNorms 2003 Best at associating messages or sponsorships with brands

13. 13 Effectiveness by Format: Persuasion Index of Performance vs. Benchmark Source: MarketNorms 2003 Best at persuading favoring of brands and stimulating intent

14. 14 Effectiveness by Format: Composite Index of Performance vs. Benchmark Source: MarketNorms 2003 Best overall performance

15. 15 Effectiveness vs. Cost One Impression Only Cost per Effectiveness Point Source: MarketNorms 2003, Nielsen//NetRatings Most Cost Effective

16. 16 Rich Media Effectiveness - Composite Index of Performance vs. Benchmark Source: MarketNorms 2003 Top Rich Media Providers Most Effective

17. 17 Effectiveness vs. Cost Source: MarketNorms 2003, Nielsen//NetRatings Top Providers are worth the cost, but Non-Rich Media Cost Effective too Cost per Effectiveness Point

18. 18 Creativity –Clever and original designs most effective often regardless of format or technology employed Frequency of Exposure –Powerful variable in building awareness and persuading –Next step in analysis is to incorporate cost of multiple exposures in building brands through marketing Analysis does not control for two major variables

19. 19 Bigger Still Better –Larger and newer formats effectively utilize more real estate to communicate and persuade –Effectiveness is worth additional cost as seen in greater ROI per branding point Rich Media Outperforms Static units –Top Providers developing ad units that beat benchmarks considerably –Higher cost is justified by returns –Non-rich media, while less effective can still be very cost effective Conclusions