[ClumsyPilot]

So you entire argument is "I refuse to actualy engage with any of the presented facts and claims, big and rich institutions can't be wrong".

The author could have presented a cure for cancer and you woild have dismissed him just the same.

Before 2008 banks were handing multiple mortgages to strippers.

Does that mean that major banks with entire departments filled with analysts running their risk analysis and loans efforts can be debunked in a couple thousand words?

[kbos87]

My argument is based on having worked in performance based advertising for years and seen first hand that it works.

Anyone who has direct experience in the space has seen the never ending stream of the same pedestrian arguments from people who have no idea what they are talking about.

For most organizations with a professionalized paid acquisition team, the returns aren’t fuzzy or something that a CMO could justify if it wasn’t producing real returns. The campaigns I worked on drove millions of dollars in incremental revenue every month. Turn it off, the revenue stops. Not some obscure attribution question.

[dazc]

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

[kbos87]

Counterpoint - most of the arguments against paid acquisition from people who don’t have direct experience are a classic Dunning-Kruger example.

[dazc]

I find some people will accept there are some situations where paid acquisition results in cannibalisation of acquisition they were going to get anyway. Conversely, there will be examples that prove paid acquisition is the best money you could ever spend.

Then there are people who dismiss everyone as not knowing what they are talking about.