Archive for the ‘Advertising’ Category

Are you ready for the new form of advertising on wearables? New programmatic ad platform seems promising despite early state of the category.


Although this early stage of wearables and smartwatches is still questionable, mobile ad exchange TapSense has already announced “the industry’s first programmatic ad platform for Apple Watch” with full Apple Pay integration, new ad formats and “hyper-local targeting.”

“Wearables and Internet of Things (IoT) are the next frontiers in the mobile revolution. We are excited to announce industry’s first programmatic ad platform for Apple Watch developers and brands,” says Ash Kumar, TapSense’s CEO. “While most of our competitors are focused on banner ads and legacy platforms, we are focused on innovation and next generation platforms. Apple Watch has the potential to be a category disruptor similar to iPod or iPhone and we believe that it provides great opportunities for brands and developers to deliver engaging experiences to consumers.”


Everything seems quite promising. However, the consumer smartwatch adoption is still not enough with waning consumer interest according to some surveys.

There are numerous Android Wear devices in the market already including watches from Motorola and LG that have gained critical favor. Yet Apple is really the market maker — even if Apple Watch 1.0 doesn’t sell very well it has raised awareness and increased interest to the category.

According to a recent survey from Quartz, about 80 percent of respondents said they were not intending to buy the Apple Watch, while 20 percent of respondents were potentially interested in it. It could still mean millions of Apple Watch sales. Also, there is a huge possibility that consumers’ interest will increase once they see and touch the Apple watch.

So it sounds reasonable for companies like TapSense to step forward and try to figure out what’s likely to work and what won’t with ads. There is no doubt that it would create another platform for ads with many different formats and context like smartphones.



Google has announced a change in its AdWords rules in that businesses can no longer include their phone number in the advertisement’s text starting in April. The company has updated its policy, which now states that its call extension feature, must be used. Here’s what’s changing:

In the next few weeks, Google will no longer allow phone numbers to be used in the ad text of new ads. Advertisers who still want to promote phone numbers in their AdWords advertising can use the call extensions feature. This feature lets advertisers add a phone number to their ad so customers can call them directly as well as tracking how many calls they receive. Google is posting this alert now to provide adequate lead time to make ad changes.


pay_per_click_advertising_agencyIn April 2013, ads that are using phone numbers in their ad text will be disapproved before the March 2013 policy change. Although Google monetizes all those clicks and taps on phone numbers, the company is making this change mainly to foster a safer, more consistent user experience across desktop, tablet, and mobile devices. After all, with the increase in mobile usage, many people search on Google for a business with the sole intention of calling them. So this change affects not only anyone advertising on Google, but also users.

When a customer clicks the phone number (call extension) on a mobile device which is capable of making a phone call, advertisers are charged the same as for a standard click on the ad. Note that phone numbers are clickable only on devices that allow a user to click and call (so, for example, ads will not show a clickable phone number on iPod Touch devices).


It should be taken for granted that 9 of 10 phones sold are high-end devices. There is a growing number of smartphones in today’s fast-moving world. Each passing day more people are accessing the web through a mobile device than through computer and more Android mobiles are activated than babies born. So mobile search queries has grown five times more in the past two years. According to statistics, almost quarter of all searches comes from mobile devices (20% of all telecom, 30% of all restaurant, 25% of all movie searches).


A recent survey of global TV habits has indicated that nearly one in five people uses a smartphone to watch television in the toilet. The researchers also has revealed that consumers are increasingly watching programmes ‘on the go’ : 16% use smartphones in the bathroom and 10% watch shows on a tablet in the toilet.


Apple filed a lawsuit against Amazon for false advertising. Their claim was that Amazon was improperly using the App Store trademark to promote Amazon’s Android Appstore and misleading users by branding the Appstore for Android. On Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2013, Amazon won the battle over the term “app store.” According to U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton, Apple did not provide enough evidence for their claim.


Judge Hamilton wrote, “Apple has failed to establish that Amazon made any false statement (express or implied) of fact that actually deceived or had the tendency to deceive a substantial segment of its audience.” The judge continued with, “The mere use of “Appstore” by Amazon to designate a site for viewing and downloading/purchasing apps cannot be construed as a representation that the nature, characteristics, or quality of the Amazon Appstore is the same as that of the Apple APP STORE.”

However, this is only a part of the whole story, just one claim out of six that Apple has against the major online retailer. Apple’s complaint has been going on since March of 2011. The rest of the claims are in regards to trademark infringement and those claims have not been decided on yet.


The Android Appstore began when Amazon started selling applications for the Kindle Fire and other devices running Google’s Android software. According to Apple, they filed many complaints to Amazon before taking legal action. They reached out three times, but Amazon did not respond. This led Apple to file the claim in the courts.

Have you ever thought why wheat farmers don’t advertise their products on TV as the mobile phone network operators such as Vodafone and Orange or car dealers do? The fact is that because advertising is useful only in industries in which companies have at least some market power (as it is in monopoly, oligopoly and monopolistic competititon in economic terms). Market power can be defined as the ability of a producer to raise prices.

Certainly, the main aim of advertising is to get people to buy more of a seller’s product at the going price. So only a company that has some market power, and therefore can charge a price that is above marginal cost, can gain from advertising. After this logic, it is not hard to see why many companies spend so much money on it. However, the main question which comes to the mind is why advertising works even though the money spent on advertising is often regarded as a waste of resources by the society. Although many advertising creates a puzzle in the minds, much of it is straightforward by informing potential buyers clearly about what sellers are offering. So companies believe that money spent on such promotions increase their sales and they would be in a bad situation if they stopped advertising when their competitors continue to do it.

But what information is given when an actress or sportsman acclaims the virtues of a car or if David Beckham wears H&M brand of boxers? Surely, nobody believes that the actress or sportsman is an expert on car or David Beckham really buys his boxers from H&M. Why are consumers still influenced by ads that do not accord with the reality and not provide any information about the product? One answer is that consumers are not as rational as economists suppose. Their judgements, or even tastes, can be influenced by many irrelevant things such as which celebrity has been hired by the company to endorse its product.

On the other hand, another answer shows that consumer response to advertising is not entirely irrational since ads can serve as indirect signals about the product and company. For example, if you need furniture removals and turn to the Yellow Pages including a lot of small listings and several large display ads, you most probably rationally call one of the firms with a big display ad. Because the big ad probably connotes that it’s a successful company — otherwise, it wouldn’t spend so much money for the larger ad.

Let’s apply the same principle to the ads with celebrities. You don’t really believe that David Beckham prefers H&M boxers to all other more expensive brands; however the fact that the company is willing and able to pay David Beckham tells you that it is a major company and most likely to stand behind its product. According to this reasoning, an expensive advertisement is a venue for the company to put the quality of its products in the eyes of consumers.

After all, it won’t be truism to say that ads only work by manipulating weak-minded consumers especially if we consider the huge amount of spending on advertising. Seemingly, it is an economically productive activity for many companies.

We all know that sex is everywhere; not only in romantic movies but also sometimes in a big billboard that includes an advertisement of your favourite perfume brand, sometimes on the wall next to the moving staircase in the tube station and so on. Surely, sex sells but have you ever asked the question of why?

Beautiful women and charismatic men, in sexy clothes or most of the times naked giving a smell of sex, seems a very useful tool to advertisers and brand managers. Because according to a research, looking at them makes you more stupid. The findings come from tests on people who were hooked up to monitors to record their brainwaves while they were looking at some adverts.

Especially, ads with pictures of attractive models significantly lower levels of activity in the areas of the brain which are involved in making decisions. Therefore, they make people buy without rationally thinking it through. According to study author Dr Ian Cook, a scientist at the University of California; some advertisers wish to seduce, rather than persuade, to buy these specific brands.

“These results suggest ads employing non-rational influence images could lead to less behavioural inhibition, which could translate to less restraint when it comes to buying products.” said Dr Cook.

Although there are still many adverts which use “logical persuasion” technique, relying on facts such as nutritional statistics or how many miles a car does to the litre; the advertisements which use non-rational influence with sexy models shouldn’t be underestimated. They are almost everywhere and make even ‘routine’ products seem more attractive.

It has been more than 1 month since I put my last post. But I have a valid reason for this discontinuity, not an excuse. I have arrived to London for my master degree and been trying to settle down. This is the first time in London and I hope it won’t be the last time. And for at least 1 year, I will be writing from London. I think it will be a good chance not only for me but also for you. Because in London I have a chance to reach different sources as well as experiencing different markets so I will be able to share sometimes interesting but sometimes maybe not so interesting matters.

Everyday in the tube, I am reading the newspaper “Metro” distributed freely and sometimes I see interesting news from marketing, brand management, social media and so on, which is worth to sharing. This headline above is from this newspaper.

Definitely, Google is the ultimate brand of the internet era. It is a brand which most of the time makes us surprised with its thinking way out of the box. However, a few days ago Google embraced a more traditional form of retail technology for the first time in its history.

The world’s first “Google store” was opened in the less glamorous setting of PC World in Tottenham Court Road. Unfortunately, I have not been there yet although it is only 10 minutes away from my university. But I am planning to go as soon as possible.

The 285 sq ft pop-up shop — within a shop — only sells Google’s Chromebook laptop and a few accessories such as headphones. It is planned to run for three months up to Christmas. However, Google might follow its great rival Apple in opening permanent stores around the world if this experimental shop becomes successful.

On the other hand, very few people were aware of Google shop — officially known as “the Chromezone” — and there were certainly no queues round the block in contrast to huge Apple Store in Regent Street.

Arvin Desikan, head of consumer marketing at Google UK, said: “It is our first foray into physical retail. This is a new channel for us and it’s stil very very early days. It’s something Google is going to play with and see where it leads.”

Emphasizing that the company’s research had shown 80 per cent of laptop sales are through shops, he added: “We found anecdotally that when people tried the device and played with it, that made huge difference to their understanding of what the Chromebook is all about. People will be able to go in and have a play with the devices. We want to see whether people understand what this device is all about and monitor their reaction when they try it out.”

To date the Samsung-made Chromebook has only been available in the UK online from Amazon and PC World. It costs £349 for the wi-fi only version and £399 for wi-fi and 3G.

A second pop-up store is expected to oepn at Lakeside shopping centre in Essex on October 7 and more pilot shops are planned around the world in the coming months. A spokeswoman said: “We’ve put a lot of effort into making it feel welcoming, homely and, dare I say it, ‘Googley’.”