Scrollads talks viewability as Metric
The Media Rating Council(MRC) made the guideline of viewability: at least 50% of advertisement be appeared upon web browser for at least 1 second after rendering.
As an advertiser, viewability can be a golden metric to determine good ads, because 100% viewability means no matter what ad would be seen by a user. Also, from the perspective of a publishers, it may not be harmful too.
By this metric, the Scrollads has disadvantages on the market. According to the one of Google’s research, above the fold has 68% viewability while below the fold has 40% viewability in average.
However, one question raises on here: Does ensuring viewability have a positive impact on advertising?
Reality of Viewability
In order to maintain the viewability as high as 100%, it is inevitable that either too many ad will pop-up or the ad will follow the user while the user is scrolling up and down. These things can negatively affect the ad itself and the brand of the ad. For the worst case, it can even lead to ad blocking.
For the publishers who get paid by impression, they need to increase CPM about 100% if they aim for 100% viewability. However, in reality, the amount of CPM increased by high viewability is about 20~30%. Therefore, in order to get the same revenue as before, they need to increase inventory or at least do something.
Furthermore, for the advertisers who give money based on CPA or CPI, they do not want to invest too high viewability after passing certain viewability. Generally speaking, they need to pay a premium to get their ad on above the fold, meaning high viewability. However, since they are based on CPA or CPI, it is difficult to get what they paid.
Ad viewability vs Article viewability
As far as viewability, the Scrollads is lower than the default banner. However, it should be noted that compared with the standard banner, number of clicks increased more than three times, which resulted in higher conversion rates.
To be honest, the viewability that the Scrollads pursues is the viewability of the original article. For the user’s perspective, the text is more important than the advertisement. But why is the Scrollads that pursues the viewability of the original article more effective than others like the result of the above?
The result of confusion is advertising effect
When we talk about the advertising, we only think about in the perspective of advertiser or publisher, but the person who consumes the ads are the user. Therefore, we ended up with the combination of human emotion and technology. The invasiveness of ads has quite a fresh simulation and get quite an attention, but it has two drawbacks, unpleasantness and irritability. Adding advertising creativity up on these two drawbacks, the result is more confusing.
The Scrollads focuses on user’s emotion and user experience. I hope that these two are more important points for mobile advertising. For this reason, we believe that the soft invasiveness, small starting effect, and natural disappearance are important, and then ad content should be followed up.
As a result, first step for mobile ads is to emotionally reach out to the user and then delivers the message in the next step. Therefore, our goal is to design this emotional approach using the technology, Scrollads.
The process by which users recognize the Scrollads
- If you feel that you are less invasive than the existing ads when you first get in touch with them.
- If you did not recognize Scrollads as ads at first,
- If you are more and more aware of the ads as you scroll through them,
- If you were not able to decline the ad during the scrolling process,
- If you were interested in a variety of ad content,
- If the message is engraved on you at the end of the scroll,
Our goal is achieved.
That is because we designed the Scrollads with a funneled user experience.
(PS: The effectiveness of the ads is not determined solely by sight.)