Smarter Commercials

I just saw on TV a commercial for AT&T highspeed internet. Basically the commercial was trying to convince me that their service is faster than whatever service I have and that I should make the switch. But here is the thing. I already have my internet from AT&T. In fact they provide my cable as well.

I feel that if I am going to see a commercial or ad, it might as well be pertinent to my life. This is why I don't mind the targeted ads online. Online advertisers have figured out the game. An ad tailored to the viewer is more likely to result in a sale.

With modern digital cable it is more and more possible to customize commercials to the viewers.

It would require cooperation between the cable providers and the television networks. The providers would need to put forward the technology backbone and the networks would need to change they pitch themselves to potential advertisers.

Let's imagine a hypothetical toy retailer. They are looking to expand their advertising. They already have commercials on all the channels specifically targeting kids. They have a choice between two networks. Network A will just try to show their commercial to all viewers and charge accordingly. Network B will only show the commercial to some viewers, but can get away with charging less (because they can show other commercials to other viewers). The catch is that network B will be showing their commercial specifically to families that have a history of watching kid friendly networking.

It would be simple for cable companies to collect viewing histories to help target commercials. Combine this with other traditional ways of collecting information (like browser cookies) and commercials could be shockingly well targeted.

How effective is it to show commercials for feminine hygiene products to a bachelor, or toy commercials to someone without kids? What if you could be confident that commercials for retirement planning would be showed to people in the age range that they would be considering retirement?

That AT&T commercial, rather than trying to sell me their internet, instead could have been a commercial thanking me for using their service.  Imagine seeing a commercial along the lines of "Thank you for using XXXX as your cell phone service provider. We are dedicated to giving you the best service at the lowest price possible. As always, if you have questions or comments, please feel free to contact us." No information would even need to be gathered for such a commercial. The cellphone company would just need to cross-reference their customer database with the customers of whichever cable services have these 'smarter commercials' in order to figure out who to target.

There is not much preventing this from becoming a reality. There would likely need to be some additional technical upgrades made to existing cable systems, but I think the increased efficiency in advertising would more than make up for the cost. The biggest concern many people may have is the 'invasion of privacy.' The thing is companies don't need to gather any additional information. Referring back to the opening of this post, presumably AT&T knows I receive my internet through them. Is it an invasion of my privacy if they use this information that they already know to customize a commercial for me? Once again, ultimately, if I am going to be watching a commercial, it might as well be pertinent to my life.

Ad Delay

Ads are fairly common on the internet. They also tend to be the way that some sites make the majority of the income that keeps them running. This is part of the reason why I do not normally use extensions such as Ad Block. There have even been a few times where I have seen ads that have been useful for me.

The problem is, today many ads are flashy and contain dynamic content. Loading these ads can take up valuable memory and bandwidth. More importantly, on an older or slower computer (such as a netbook), they can temporarily freeze up the computer.

These ads have pushed me to using Ad Block on my netbook, and that is not good for anyone. Because of the design of these ads, sites and the companies who make the ads are 'loosing out.'

But what's the solution. Less dynamic ads are less likely to have people click on them. Is it a lose-lose situation? I don't think it has to be. If web browsers, sites, and ad makers worked together they could be tagged as low priority. Before the computer would attempt to load the ad, the site would need to be completely loaded first. Furthermore it would only load if there was free CPU time to do so.

So perhaps if ads were voluntarily delayed, they wouldn't be blocked. The big reason many people block ads is because of the performance hit. Remove the performance hit and remove the need to block ads.

To encourage advertisers to take this road, extensions like ad block could perhaps be able to make an exception for delayed ads in the preferences.

Anyway, it just seems to me that people are loosing money that they don't have to.

Pick your Fast Food Franchise

An entrepreneur, lets say Mr. Smith, wants to open up a fast food restaurant. He has already picked out a location and decided he wants to go with a franchise. However, our hypothetical investor is not married to any given franchise but has narrowed it down to three selections.

The location is in a high traffic area and near a traffic light that tends to have long reds. So Mr. Smith rents out the location two months early. He won't be opening up early but will be launching a clever campaign. Luckily he has the starting capital to afford the rent. The reason he is renting the building early is because of the sign he is going to post out in front.

The sign would read simply:

"

Text (XXX) XXX-XXXX with your pick of franchise

Franchise A, Franchise B, Franchise C 

The winning franchise will open here in two months

"

If properly promoted it could generate a fair degree of opening day hype. Hopefully the process would choose a franchise that would be more likely to appeal to the local customers. The people who would be texting in would be the people that would be more likely to be regular customers.

Now, if Mr. Smith was feeling adventurous he could even charge people to text. Some people (I would guess more teenagers, who go to school near the location, than other demographics) might be willing to pay to select the franchise.

Now I will admit that Mr. Smith would be taking a major gamble with the entire endeavor. Most people will not care. Mr. Smith doesn't need a lot of people to care, but he does need enough people to be interested. If interest did not pass a critical mass Mr. Smith would be just throwing his rent money away.

However, I have never heard of this being done before, and if Mr. Smith was the gambling type it might be worth the risk.