E-mail, Social Lead Nonprofit Event Marketing

AccuList’s direct marketing services support both event marketers and nonprofit marketers, and, of course, there’s an overlap since many nonprofits use events for fundraising. In that arena, a recent survey of 500 nonprofits by Eventbrite, a leading event management and ticketing services provider, offers some interesting benchmarks. The "2019 Eventbrite Pulse Report" found that nonprofits use multiple event formats besides those geared exclusively to fundraising; in fact, just 32% reported hosting galas and fundraisers aimed at tapping donors. Instead, events for cause, community and educational promotion were cited by 78%, as well as networking events, training and workshops, food and drink events, and arts and entertainment events. Of course, revenue production was still seen as key to success regardless of event goal. And when it comes to event revenue, ticket sales, sponsorships and grants/donations were the top sources reported. However, while ticket sales were seen as a key revenue driver by most (75%), the portion of revenue delivered by ticketing varied widely—from 80%-100% of event revenue for just 15% to less than 20% of revenue for a larger quarter of those surveyed. This underscores the need for both diverse revenue sources and more effective marketing to deliver attendance. On that point, nonprofit event organizers said their most effective marketing tactics were e-mail (34%); word-of-mouth and referrals (24%); and social media marketing (22%). In social media, nonprofits relied most on organic posts (23%), paid Facebook ads, and video (9%). Among the tactics deemed less effective in the survey were third-party listings, search engine optimization (SEO), and display ads. Looking at the year ahead, the top 2019 challenge, cited by 73%, was reaching new attendees. And that is the kind of targeted marketing issue AccuList can help address! For more from the survey, see https://www.acculistusa.com/e-mail-social-lead-nonprofit-event-marketing/

Over Half of Online Display Ads Unseen, Per Google

Online advertisers potentially throw away half their budgets paying for display ads that go unseen, per a new Google study. Business Insider recently reported that Google's analysis of its own display ad platforms found a whopping 56.1% of all impressions served could never have been actually seen because they were served outside of the browser window. Of course, if advertisers buy on a cost-per-click basis they are not paying for those lost impressions, but expected response is slashed regardless. What are the factors determining viewability per Google's study? Page position is an obvious issue. Google found that the most viewable ad position is right above the page fold (the lowest point on the page before a user has to scroll) rather than right at the top of the page as many advertisers assume. Above the fold is still not always viewable, but it’s the most likely place for an ad to be seen. Another factor impacting viewability is ad size. Bigger is better, and vertical ads garner the highest viewability rates, probably because they stay on the page longer as a user scrolls. The targeted content vertical also makes a difference to viewability. Sites associated with the most captive engagement levels—reference, online communities and games—have far higher viewability scores than content about food and drink, news or real estate, for example. For details of Google's online ad viewability statistics, see the Business Insider article at http://www.businessinsider.com/google-display-ad-viewability-study-2014-12

How B2B Can Succeed With Native Advertising

Native advertising has big fans in consumer online marketing, and business-to-business marketers are being urged to take the plunge. B2B strategists who resist embracing native ads after disappointing results from traditional banners and pop-ups should consider these statistics provided in a recent MarketingProfs article by Helen Grimshaw: 52% of people who click on native ads have purchase intent, compared with only 34% for banner ads; 70% want to learn about products through content rather than traditional advertising; and 75% of publishers already offer some type of native advertising. Just to be clear, native advertising is a form of paid media that seamlessly integrates with a site to add value to the user experience. So native ads work best, Grimshaw advises, if the B2B campaign masters two strategic elements: placement and relevancy. As an example of successful placement, Grimshaw cites Relendex, a secured peer-to-peer lending company, which created co-branded online pages with Property Week magazine, a commercial property publication with a large audience of lenders and borrowers. The partner pages used semantic ad targeting technology to serve up educational links to Relendex's site. Grimshaw's example of smart relevancy comes from Delta Airline's TechOps division, a full-service aviation maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) company. TechOps got the word out that it offered MRO services for any airline, not just Delta, by placing native ads with Flightglobal, an online news and information provider for the aviation and aerospace industries. The campaign used semantic search technology to create links between Flightglobal's articles and Delta TechOps's related content. For more detail on results, read http://www.marketingprofs.com/opinions/2014/26145/why-b2b-marketers-need-to-embrace-native-advertising

Surprise! Consumers Prefer Big, Interruptive Web Ads

The online ad industry might want to rethink its trend toward native ads that fade into the background of Web pages. Consumers, as it turns out, prefer in-your-face ads that take over their computer screens, at least according to a new study on high-impact ads reported in AdWeek. The study, conducted by Ipsos ASI on behalf of Undertone, surveyed more than 3,000 panelists last September, examining a slew of the home-page takeover-type units and comparing their impact with standard banners. The take-over ads became popular a few years ago as Web publishers sought bigger brand budgets. Although these intrusive ad types may be favored by the Interactive Advertising Bureau and the Online Publishers Association, they are now out of vogue with many advertisers, who are gravitating toward native units that look and feel like Web content. Surprisingly, it was the big, interruptive ads that received likability scores 30% to 49% higher than standard display units in the Undertone study. People were 90% more likely to agree that these full-screen units are "an ad people will talk about" compared to other display ads, and 86% found them to be more entertaining. Similarly, respondents were 79% more likely to find these ads "unique" and 78% more likely to credit these ads with "making me want to learn more about the product or brand." For the full story, go to http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/people-prefer-big-interruptive-web-ads-155165