[whatshisface]

>without taking share from other media

Why, from the mass market perspective (mp3, not vinyl), does traditional media need to go on at all? In the absolute limit of global ultra-draconian GDPR-style laws the capabilities of internet advertisements will at best be reduced to those of TV spots. If TV advertisements haven't already merged with TV over IP and the data market (and thereby become indistinguishable from online video advertisements), they'll just be replaced as ATT, Comcast, Amazon, Netflix, and the rest shift more and more to online platforms.

As far as I can see, unless advertisement gets regulated back in to the stone ages (not that I'd be personally opposed to that...), it's going to be down to Google, Google competitors, and highway billboards before long.

[rossdavidh]

I realize I'm kind of missing your point, but in my hometown of Austin, TX lots of billboards are advertising billboards, a charity (probably for a tax writeoff), or else have had the same ad for so long (often something like a concert that has already happened) that it's clear the billboard company is not getting paid anymore. I think billboards are stuck in the same downward ad revenue spiral as a lot of other traditional media.

[soared]

Charity billboards are likely PSAs that brands use to test the effectiveness of a billboard. You find two very similar towns, each with a walmart. Buy a billboard in each town, but in town A put up a walmart ad, in town B put up a charity/PSA billboard. Over simplifying, but if sales in town A increase more than town B then the billboard is effective.

[rossdavidh]

Interesting possibility, but wouldn't it be cheaper to just not buy any billboard ads in that town?

[soared]

I honestly don’t know. I’ve only read about this type of testing and a friend does it for direct mail at work but I’ve never used it. I think in digital or direct mail that you have the ability to track those users, which I guess doesn’t apply with billboards.

[Spooky23]

Weird, in my town it’s the opposite. Heavy rotations of ads on billboards, and a variety of topics from retail, politics, political influence and brand awareness.

[rossdavidh]

Interesting, I wonder if it depends on the characteristics of the city, somehow?

[harry8]

Paying for a tv spot with an audited and reliable audience estimate seems to be less fraudulent than any digital ad spend I've heard of with all those phantom bot clicks and impressions. Also you have the advantage of knowing the context of your ad rather than being surprised to be displayed on "John Doe's Racist Blog (tm)"

[soared]

But you could buy 10x the impressions on an Apple TV for the price you’d pay on traditional tv. So if fraud is less than 90% it’s probably a better deal to do connected tv.

[harry8]

Maybe but let's think it through. Why do you think it is 10x cheaper? (Is it, I don't have numbers, please link them?) Is the market really so inefficient?

Apple is looking to maximise its revenue and will put up prices as far as they can in accordance with that. ie discounts are to get more revenue now and/or in the future. Why is traditional tv able to charg 10x more?

[hmm_really]

Its not cheaper per impact, however you need to buy bigger numbers, millions typically.