Events
Event Date Location

 CSO Perspectives on Data Protection and Privacy

09/23/2014 San francisco CA

OMMA Premium Display @ Advertising Week

09/30/2014 New York NY

OMMA RTB (Real-Time Buying) @ Advertising Week

10/02/2014 New York NY

The Hub Brand Experience Symposium

10/07/2014 - 10/08/2014 New York NY

OMMA RTB (Real-Time Buying)

10/14/2014 London

OMMA Chicago

10/21/2014 - 10/22/2014 Chicago IL

iMedia Breakthrough Summit: The Next Wave of Marketing

10/26/2014 - 10/28/2014 Stone Mountain Georgia

Ad Age Data Conference

10/28/2014 - 10/29/2014 New York NY

CIO Perspectives Houston

11/11/2014 San Jose CA

DEMO Fall 2014 

11/18/2014 - 11/20/2014 San Jose CA

digital-media

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Social Media Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, ideas and blogs about Advertising and Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, ideas and blogs about Lead Generation Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Mobile Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketer's Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Technology Business and Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Subscribe To Latest Posts
Subscribe

Time Out On Time Spent: Digital’s Delta Is More Like Two Times TV’s

MediaPost

Here’s a surprising counter to those Mary Meeker-ish assertions that digital media doesn’t get its fair share of ad budgets, relative to the time consumers spend using media. But keep in mind that the counter-argument comes from a source that doesn’t buy into the original premise in the first place.

“While we have long quibbled with the notion that time with media should equate to [ad] spending on media, it is worth noting that by our estimates, total spending on TV advertising amounted to $63 billion in 2013. Meanwhile, total spending on digital advertising amounted to $43 billion,”  Brian Wieser wrote in a report to Wall Street investors this morning. Wieser, who is an analyst at Pivotal Research Group, and used to be the head of forecasting at Interpublic’s Magna Global unit, knows something about how and why advertisers allocate their ad budgets on media. His main point is that based on the most recent estimates from Nielsen, “digital”  is actually reaping a disproportionate share of advertising relative to consumer usage.

By Wieser’s estimate, digital ad spending currently represents 68% of TV’s total, but is generating only 35% of consumer time spent. “If time did equate to money,” he writes, “either too much is being spent on  Internet advertising or too little is being spent on TV.”

But as already noted, Wieser says he doesn’t accept that premise, and instead recommends that a “more accurate” way of thinking about ad spending is that it’s always a “function of ‘least-bad’” alternatives for a given marketer.

In this scenario, Wieser says demand for digital media is often driven by long-tail marketers — small businesses and e-commerce marketers — that view the Internet as delivering an effective ROI. Large mainstream consumer brands, by contrast, remain more focused on “engagement-based” and “awareness-based” goals that are unlikely to be surpassed by TV’s “perceived effectiveness in this regard, but also because of the relatively broader use of the medium and ease with which reach and frequency may be accomplished on TV.”

In other words, the allocation of advertising budgets is not a simple, one-size-fits-all logic. Different advertisers use their allocation of media differently, and much of the growth of digital ad spending is a function of brands that likely may not have used TV much, if at all, in the first place. The bottom line is that the sum total of all those allocations currently gives a disproportionate weight toward digital, not TV.

Mobile Facts To Keep In Mind – Part 1

Monday Note

By the end of 2014, many news media will collect around 50% of their page views via mobile devices. Here are trends to remember before devising a mobile strategy. (First of a two-part series.)

In the news business, mobile investments are on the rise. That’s the pragmatic response to a major trend: Users shift from web to mobile. Already, all major media outlets are bracing for a momentous threshold: 50% of their viewership coming from mobile devices (smartphones and tablets). Unfortunately, the revenue stream is not likely to follow anytime soon: making users pay for mobile content has proven much more difficult than hoped for. As for advertising, the code has yet to be cracked for (a) finding formats that won’t trigger massive user rejection, and (b) monetizing in ways comparable to the web (i.e. within the context of a controlled deflation). Let’s dive into a few facts:

Apps vs. WebApps or Mobile sites. A couple of years ago, I was among those who defended web apps (i.e. encapsulated HTML5 coding, not tied to a specific OS platform) vs. native apps (for iOS, Android, Windows Phone). The idea was to give publishers more freedom and to avoid the 30% app store levy. Also, every publisher had in mind the success enjoyed by the FT.com when it managed to put all its eggs in its web app and so retain complete control over the relationship with its customers.

All of the above remains true but, from the users’ perspective, facts speak loudly: According to Flurry Analytics, apps now account for 86% of the time spent by mobile users vs. 14% for mobile sites (including web apps.) A year ago, the balance was 80% for apps and 20% for mobile web.

Trend #1: Native apps lead the game
at the expense of web apps and mobile sites 

One remark, though: the result must take in account the weight of games and Facebook apps that account for 50% of the time spent on mobile. News-related usage leans more to mobile as there is not (yet) demand for complex rendering as in a gaming app. But as far news applications are concerned, we haven’t seen major breakthroughs in mobile web or web apps over the last months and it seems development is stalling.

News vs. the rest of the app world. On a daily total of 2hrs 50mn spent by mobile users (source: eMarketer), 2% to 5% of that time is spent on news. Once you turn to growth, the small percentage number starts to look better: The news segment is growing faster (+64% Y/Y) than messaging and social (+28%) or gaming and entertainment (+9% each); the fastest usage segment being the productivity apps (+119%) and that’s due to the transfer of professional uses from the desktop to the mobile.

Trend #2: On mobile, news is growing faster
than game or social 

…And it will grow stronger as publishers will deploy their best efforts to adjust contents and features to small screens and on-the-go usage and as mobile competitors multiply.

Click to read more…

Are UK B2B media businesses becoming more focused on overseas events?

The Media Briefing

One of the more obvious ways UK B2B media firms have tried growing is to buy up or launch new events in countries with higher growth rates and less developed markets.

In a morning briefing on Top Right Group’s 2013 results last month, the word “events” came from CEO Duncan Painter’s mouth many a time – with particular emphasis on Latin America, China, and Asia.

For Top Right Group, events were providing most of the growth last year – the i2i events segment grew 13 percent on an organic basis – but how are things faring for some of its competitors?

We took a look through some annual reports to find out:

  1. Whether these companies are generating more of their money from their events
  2. Whether that international expansion translates to the bottom line.

Reed Elsevier

Although Reed’s events revenue is increasing, from £707 million in 2011 to £862 million last year, its rest of world revenue as a percentage of the whole dropped off considerably last year, from 71 percent over the two years 2011 to 2012, to 57 percent in 2013. UK revenue was up from 29 percent to 43 percent, however.

Reed also launched more events last year than in 2012 – 37 to 30, respectively.

Centaur Media

Centaur’s events revenue has increased from £21 million to £26 million from 2012 to 2013, and its UK revenue also increased from £60.4 million to £64.3 million. Global revenue excluding the UK was also up 48 percent to £7.7 million last year.

Informa Plc

Events revenue for Informa dipped by over £165 million from 2011 to 2012, but appears to have stabilised, increasing slightly from £413.7 million to £414.7 million last year. On the global stage revenues have been declining, from £1.1 billion in 2011 to £973 million in 2012. UK revenue took a dip from 2011 to 2012 of 12 percent year-on-year, but increased to £159.4 million last year.

Continue reading

Publishing in the drive-by media era

Digiday

There’s a recurring question among publishers as they try to catch up to consumers’ changing media habits: How does one convert readers who arrive through social and content-discovery channels into “repeat customers”? But for traditional publishers trying to catch up to the likes of BuzzFeed, Business Insider and Complex Media, this way of thinking is self-defeating. It creates an unattainable goal while more flexible competitors seize bigger shares of Web traffic and advertiser dollars.

Direct traffic, while highly valued, is little more than a myth. Once upon a time, there was direct traffic and referral traffic — and referral traffic was mostly search results. Then referral traffic expanded to include traffic from social media. Just as with search, social spawned a paid counterpart. Content recommendation and extension platforms like StumbleUpon, Digg, Outbrain and Taboola all came along and created new doors for traffic to walk through.

For any given publication, the same visitor can come through many channels. The same reader might visit a site five different ways in the course of a week — or even in the same day. Given that readers come in through so many channels, it’s difficult to measure conversion accurately.

Social and content discovery platforms typically have evolutionary life cycles and go through significant changes. The challenge for publishers is to be nimble enough to adapt to changes and diversify the ways they reach readers.

Meanwhile, however, apps have won over the mobile Web, which also has significant implications for publishers who still want to “acquire” visitors. Nielsen’s recent Cross-Platform Report shows that 89 percent of mobile monthly time spent is on apps. And only a select few categories of apps dominate: games, social media and communications platforms are the true victors in the fight for attention on mobile devices.

Additionally, the amount of time spent on mobile devices continues to grow while time spent with traditional media shrinks. Mobile has become the “second screen” during leisure time and the first screen for many business activities. Instead of browsing the Web the way they might on their desktops, users consume media from their news feeds and stay within app environments instead of using a browser.

As consumer time spent on mobile increases, publishers need to prioritize their presence on those mobile platforms. And if conversion is difficult on desktop, it will be even harder on mobile where users are even less likely to directly visit URLs.

Naturally, publishers dream of organic traffic, the kind that has an acquisition cost of zero. The more they cling to this dream, the harder time they will have competing for traffic.

Click to continue reading

Modern Advertising Needs the Confidence To Say No

MediaPost

As the advertising world’s eyes return from Cannes, the increasing complexity of our business becomes clear. We have 17 categories,  including branded content, innovation, product design and activation, and we have the proof few of us needed that the world of marketing is getting more elaborate.

For more than 10 years, we’ve talked about media fragmentation, the wandering gaze of the consumer, the scarcity of attention and being paralyzed by stimuli. But we’ve never spoken about fragmentation for the marketer, the bewildering array of new options they face, and the difficulty in keeping focus and finding clarity.

As an industry, we need to address marketers’ impossible mission: Making informed decisions about a toolkit that involves a myriad of new and ever-changing channels, technologies and platforms.

Several dimensions of new

In the post digital age, we have a bewildering array of options:

  • We have new “channels” like digital outdoor, content marketing, native advertising, and branded utility.
  • We have media platforms like Vine, Twitter, Instagram, Secret, SnapChat and Pinterest.
  • We have new technology like addressable TV, iBeacons, personalized video rendering, and augmented reality, to name a few.
  • We have new advertising techniques like vending machine-based ideas, real-time marketing, the all new “social media newsroom”, growth-hacking sprints and working with incubators.

It’s all so abundant, and so much of it cheap. We have new ad tech companies offering $50,000 of free services for a trial. Flying a drone and filming it is a cheap viral hit. We can stick hashtags on ads, and it’s free. We’ve found that with new technology, we can produce campaigns bereft of an idea and hitch them to bandwagons for transport. How can anyone say no to anything in this landscape?

How to decide?

There are two huge challenges for marketers: With limited budgets and time, how can they prioritize? And with so much of it being new, how can they learn enough to make informed decisions?

The scale of this challenge has brought about incredible fear. Marketing staff face the dreaded scenario of the CEO asking what they are doing with the “app du jour” that their nephew has downloaded, or why they haven’t done what their competitor just did with augmented reality, QR codes, Shazam, Vine or any one of a million other new options.

Click to read more

From Google to Amazon: EU goes to war against power of US digital giants

The Guardian

Within the salons of the Elysée Palace, along the corridors of the European parliament and under the glass dome of the Reichstag, Old Europe is preparing for a new war. This is not a battle over religion or politics, over land or natural resources. The raw material that Paris, Brussels and Berlin are mobilising to defend is the digital environment of Europe’s inhabitants; their enemies are the Silicon Valley corporations that seek to dominate it.

Coal, gas and oil powered the industrial revolution, but in the digital era, data is replacing fossil fuels as the most valuable resource on Earth, and the ability to collect and interrogate it has created organisations with a power that can at times seem beyond the control of nation states. Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google represent, in the words of Germany’s economy minister Sigmar Gabriel, “brutal information capitalism”, and Europe must act now to protect itself.

“Either we defend our freedom and change our policies, or we become digitally hypnotised subjects of a digital rulership,” Gabriel warned in apassionate call to action published by the Frankfurter Allgemeine. “It is the future of democracy in the digital age, and nothing less, that is at stake here, and with it, the freedom, emancipation, participation and self-determination of 500 million people in Europe.”

In France, economy minister Arnaud Montebourg believes Europe risks becoming a “digital colony of the global internet giants”, and ministers have called for Google to contribute to the cost of upgrading the country’s broadband infrastructure. Gabriel says Germany’s cartel office is currently examining whether Google should be regulated as a utility, like a telecoms supplier – the group has 91.2% market share of search in Germany.

He believes that, as a last resort, there may be a case for “unbundling” Google, separating its search arm from mobile, or YouTube, or services such as email.

As a first step, he is in favour of regulation that allows competitors to use the Google platform fairly. The pushback against Amazon has also begun: as of last year, the online retailer can no longer stop independent sellers on its German website from offering their own goods cheaper elsewhere, including on their own websites.

European regulators have also begun to take action. In May, the European court upheld a plea by a Spaniard, Mario Costeja González, who wanted pages hidden from any Google search for his name in the EU. Judges decided the past transgressions of private individuals have a right to be “forgotten”. The threats that ruling poses to freedom of the press are now being debated, but it was a watershed moment, representing Europe’s first major regulatory strike against the search and software colossus.

On 11 June, the European commission‘s competition regulator, Joaquín Almunia, wrote to colleagues to warn that his investigation into Google’s search rankings could be reopened, after new complainants had stepped forward. On the same day, he announced a potentially wide-ranging inquiry into tax avoidance, starting with a focus on three companies: Apple and its international headquarters in Ireland, and Starbucks and its head office in the Netherlands (the third company being carmaker Fiat). On Thursday, a leak from Brussels suggested Amazon, which operates through a European HQ in Luxembourg, was also being dragged into the net.

“In the current context of tight public budgets, it is particularly important that large multinationals pay their fair share of taxes,” Almunia said. His intervention was widely interpreted as a politically motivated act. It almost certainly was.

There are those who believe that Jean-Claude Juncker, the former Luxembourg prime minister who has just been elected as the next president of the European commission – despite vocal opposition from David Cameron – is out to get Google.

Click to continue reading

Microsoft, Apple, and Google battle for the mobile enterprise

CITEworld

The past three months have seen a whirlwind of announcements for enterprise mobility. MicrosoftApple, and Google all had their respective developer conferences. It’s never been clearer: All three are positioning themselves to battle for dominance of the mobile business market.

Although BlackBerry also squeezed in an announcement about its new partnership with Amazon that will bring the Amazon Appstore to BlackBerry 10 devices, the company is struggling for relevance as consumers continue to eschew the platform. While BlackBerry will continue to be a player in high-security markets, it’s unlikely to recapture a dominant position in the overall enterprise space now that end users have much choice and control over what devices they want to use at work.

What’s interesting is that Microsoft, Apple, and Google are all approaching the enterprise market in different ways. Each is playing to its strengths.

The incumbent

Apple has already managed to secure much of the enterprise mobility market. There are many factors that led to Apple’s dominance, but some key ones include Apple’s early introduction of enterprise security features in iOS, an ongoing expansion of those features, having a more mature platform on the market sooner than Android and Windows Phone, a closed ecosystem that resists malware, and the premium user experience that has been the hallmark of Apple for the last decade or more.

Apple has another big advantage: It’s always retained complete control of iOS as a platform. Apple has strict control over the hardware, OS, and app ecosystem that defines iOS. Microsoft and Google have both relied on third parties to create devices that run their platforms. Although both companies are, in their own ways, taking some steps to rein in the platform fragmentation that this has created, minimizing the impact of that fragmentation isn’t going to happen overnight.

Even if Google’s efforts with Android L succeed in tamping down security-related fragmentation, Apple may still have an edge here in terms of end user support. There have been just eight iPhone models ever made (likely to become ten this fall) and just seven iPads. That makes things much easier for helpdesk and other support professionals to troubleshoot than the wide swath of Android devices that BYOD users may bring into the office.

Windows tablets and phones may fare better than Google from a support perspective because many IT departments already support and troubleshoot Windows PCs and transferring those support skills onto mobile devices may be easier and more efficient.

Being the incumbent in the race, Apple also has the advantage of inertia — organizations that have managed to standardize around iOS are likely to see an advantage in staying the course. Part of that is because the institutional knowledge and solutions to secure and integrate iOS are already present, which means generally lower overhead in mandating or preferring iOS over other platforms.

Click to continue reading

B2B Marketing Technology Spend 2014

IDG Connect 0811 300x141 B2B Marketing Technology Spend 2014

QEDbaton’s B2B Marketing Technology Spend Report 2014 gives an overview of the latest trends. When looking at customer-facing technologies, the report shows a migration of B2B marketers away from digital advertising and moving towards social media marketing. The offerings that marketers are investing more in are content marketing, sales enablement, events and webinars, and email marketing. When it comes to managing the marketing data, business intelligence is a getting bigger and bigger, as well as marketing analytics. These two categories are going to continue to see increases in investments. Another big trend that the report touched on was customer data platforms. This has been something that has been discussed a lot lately because as technology is advancing, customers want their experience to be completely customized for them with real-time information. As technology continues to expand, these marketing tactics will expand too and the challenges for marketers to keep up with demands will increase.

B2B Video Marketing

According to Demand Metrics’s B2B Video Marketing report, 69% of B2B professionals have used video for B2B marketing purposes. 31% of B2B professionals have not begun to use video in their marketing strategies, but are planning to do so in the future. The most important video marketing objectives were to increase brand awareness, increase lead generation, and increase online engagement. Although video is becoming a bigger priority for marketers, still only 15% feel that they are very successful, but 67% feel they are somewhat successful, which is a good step. The reasons for marketers not being very successful could be because of some of the obstacles that they face, such as lack of budget, lack of in-house resources, and creating compelling content. The use of video is still somewhat new, and it’s only going to continue to grow over time. Marketers will get better with it as time goes on and they are able to test new strategies.

Click to see more

The great tech lull of 2014

CITEworld

One of the things that really struck me about Google I/O this year was how much of it felt like a retread of old ideas.

Android TV? That sounds like the resurrection of Google TV, which wasannounced at the 2010 show. Android Wear and Nest? Recall the connected-everywhere vision of Android @Home, the big deal of the 2011 show. Android “L” is just the next version of Android — it’s got a lot of important new design elements and promised enterprise security features, but it’s an incremental release of an already immensely successful product. Google’s new attention to providing cloud infrastructure to third-party developers, while useful, is simply following down the same path Amazon pioneered with AWS a few years back.

I had a similar sense watching Apple’s developers’ conference earlier this month. Our writer Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry drew a lot of flak for his criticism of WWDCand how he thought it reflected on Tim Cook’s leadership as operations guy rather than visionary. I have a lot more admiration for Cook — his reorganization of Apple to be more open and less controlling, and able to concentrate on multiple huge complicated projects at once, are remarkable changes that bode well for the company’s future.

But I understand what Gobry was getting at. What’s the big vision? How does Apple see the future, and what products will it create or enable to help bring us into that future? This is the company whose last three hit products revolutionized the recorded music industry, created the smartphone industry, and threatened the consumer PC industry with irrelevance. (Not to mention, Apple was arguably the inventor, or at least the great popularizer, of the personal computer in the first place.) Instead we got a bunch of disparate ideas and some connective tissue that may or may not be used to construct products that we may or may not want.

Part of the “meh” comes from a misunderstanding of what these conferences actually are. Because Apple and Google have done so much to revolutionize technology for everybody, we sometimes forget that these are conferences for developers — the people who build the next generation of products that will wow and delight us. They’re not for the rest of us, really.

But still. There’s a sense right now that big technology companies and startups alike are casting around for the next big thing.

Everybody seems to agree that the next wave of computing will involve a bunch of previously dumb devices becoming smarter with new kinds of sensors and processing power provided largely by cloud services, and getting connected up in some fashion. This data will be collected and compiled and used to provide custom-tailored services, even to the point of anticipating your desires before you have them.

This is what’s behind Apple’s HomeKit and CarPlay, Google’s acquisitions of Nest and Dropcam its new connected car and TV initiatives, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella’s talk of “ubiquitous computing and ambient intelligence,” and Internet of Things and big data efforts by enterprise giants from Cisco to SAP to Salesforce. Not to mention hundreds of startups.

Continue reading

How marketers can navigate the new ‘over the top’ video ecosystem

Digiday

Consuming video content is a very different experience today than it was five years ago, with many more options beyond traditional cable. For one, watching a video online is now a reliable, easy and truly mobile experience, due to the strength of broadband infrastructure. Content is now legally available over the Internet from a variety of “over the top” services (OTT), services like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go and Amazon Instant Video, to name a few.

Cued by the greater number of alternative options, cable subscribers and advertisers are turning a critical eye to traditional video distribution. Transforming the cable industry by leveraging OTT technologies and new business models will create happier consumers, more profitable advertising, and a more efficient system overall. Here’s how:

OTT enables cable-free content
OTT refers to delivery of video, audio and other media over the Internet without a traditional pay-TV operator or free-to-air broadcaster being involved in the control or distribution of the content. OTT allows a consumer to watch a single program or episode easily. Originally, OTT video was streamed to PCs. It’s now delivered via set-top boxes such as Roku, Apple TV, Chromecast, Amazon Fire TV or via game consoles. This move has happened in parallel with increasing consumption of media on mobile devices.

The distinguishing factor for OTT is the degree to which cable companies participate. In the traditional model, a cable company sells both content and distribution channels. However, in the OTT model, a third party (like Netflix) sells the content, and the consumer uses the Internet (which they purchased from a cable company) to access it. The name over the top refers to the fact that content distribution occurs “on top” of existing infrastructure.

OTT is changing consumer behavior
Consumers can now reliably access their content wherever they can access the Internet, and they have shown that they are happy to pay for the privilege. While there is still a prime time for television consumption, viewers are the ones setting the schedule and choosing what they watch, not cable providers.

Due to the increased number of legal options, the development of set-top boxes like the Roku 3 and the ever-rising costs of cable, many consumers are opting to become “cord cutters” — severing ties with their cable companies and enjoying all of their media through OTT services. And we’re even seeing the emergence of “cord nevers” who choose to go completely TV-free.

Click to continue reading