Ad Network Marketing Myths That Can Lead to Poor Campaign Decisions

Even if a dashboard includes a large amount of data it can still lead to a bad decision if someone interprets it in accordance with an attractive myth.

Eight of these beliefs may lead advertisers and publishers astray, since in each case there is a better approach—an exact question or test—that links the report to business results.

Myth 1: More Impressions Mean Stronger Performance

It’s reassuring to look at impressions since they are easy to count. A dashboard displaying millions of impressions seems to show proof of reach. However, an impression does not indicate whether the ad was actually seen or ignored, nor does it show that the ad placement matched the buyer’s intent. While reach without a response can be useful when the aim is awareness, it cannot take the place of performance.

The inclusion of CTR and viewability provides context which raw counts do not. A low CTR does not always indicate a failure, and a high number of impressions does not always mean success. It all depends on your objective and the position of the ad. Therefore, a branding campaign and a direct response campaign cannot be evaluated in the same way.

Numbers which increase without any action give you very little information regarding performance.

Find out what the reach you purchased actually achieved. Divide the traffic according to placement and creative, and then compare the response with the subsequent actions. In the case where impressions increase but engagement and conversions remain unchanged over a number of placements, the higher impression figures might be masking underperforming slots.

Reallocate the budget to the slots where people are responding and eliminate those slots which only add volume. Since ad networks differ greatly in their placement mixes, the results of this split test tell you more than the total figures alone.

Myth 2: The Cheapest Clicks Always Save Money

It may seem efficient when you look at it in a spreadsheet and it can give the impression that you’ve discovered an advantage while your competitors end up paying too much for the same click. However, this sense disappears when you look at what happens after the click has been made A click that never results in a lead or a sale is a cost that brings no return.

The fact that prices are low usually has more to do with the context than with quality on its own. Traffic from one area can cost much less than traffic from another since the level of competition and the buying power vary.

Additionally, remnant placements and broad rotations are cheaper because the user’s intent is less strong. This does not prove that cheap traffic cannot be effective; it only shows that the cost per click cannot tell you whether it is effective.

Evaluate the result. While you should take the cost per click into account, you must assess the campaigns based on cost per acquisition and return on ad spend. Conduct small, focused tests by region and placement, keeping the creative elements unchanged so that you can make a clear comparison. Keep CPC in view, but judge tests by cost per acquisition by learning the fundamentals outlined in this guide to CPA marketing for beginners.

A source that generates clicks at half the cost but requires four times as many clicks to make a sale is not actually saving you money. On the other hand, a source that costs more per click but converts steadily should receive a larger budget. Decisions should be based on cost per acquisition. 

Myth 3: Every Click Comes From A Real Buyer

It is reasonable to suppose that every click shows interest, but in reality a portion of the clicks in programmatic supply do not come from people who might actually make a purchase. These clicks are caused by bots and by test traffic as well as by accidental taps on very aggressive advertisements. You cannot detect this just by looking at the totals.

Poor pockets can be hidden within standard results. In one instance a conversion may take place while in another instance in the same campaign spending is wasted without a single meaningful session. It is then that you fail to see the difference.

Find out from the network how it filters out invalid traffic and what reports are available according to placement and device. Then compare these reports with your own tracking data and look for any patterns that deserve further investigation, for example clicks that have no time on site or conversion paths that never move on.

You needn’t become a fraud analyst, simply develop the habit of pausing any placements that show spending without any engagement and retaining those that show actual sessions. Looking into unexplained delivery helps ensure that your future bid decisions are based on meaningful data.

Myth 4: Pop Ads Are Always Bad For Brands

Pop ads have a bad reputation. A great many marketers link Pop Ads with the kind of aggressive advertisements that were used years ago and believe that using them in any way will damage trust. This attitude considers the format to be destiny. Yet the way in which the ads are carried out is just as important as the format itself.

A pop-under which triggers once per user session in order to display a relevant offer is very different from one which triggers with every page view for an unrelated offer; response is influenced by targeting and frequency as well as by the relevance of the creative and the fit of the landing page.

The same format may seem acceptable in one situation and intrusive in another. Affiliate networks frequently test pop traffic since it can be purchased in large quantities and divided by geographic location, but the results still depend on the controls rather than on the label of the format.

Platforms such as Galaksion offer pop and display options side by side. When evaluating ads network marketing, examine each format's delivery and controls rather than assuming quality from its label

Don’t base your thoughts on what you think pop advertising can or cannot do. Instead, carry out a narrow test: select one geographical area and one offer, using one landing page. Fix a strict frequency limit that you could justify to a user, and then observe the bounce behaviour and conversion rate according to where the ads are placed. If complaints increase or engagement falls without a corresponding rise in sales, cease that placement.

But if a small number of placements result in steady levels of action without any complaints, keep those placements separate and increase them only slowly. Evaluate the performance of pop advertising in the same way that you assess any other ad slot—on the basis of measured responses and user cost.

Myth 5: Push Ads Only Suit Narrow Niches

Push Ads achieved early success in a number of performance sectors, which is why so many teams still limit them to those areas. They believe that Push Ads has no application in the areas of retail or software or finance. This belief confuses historical performance with inherent limitations. A method of delivering ads shouldn’t be tied to a particular sector.

The response is determined by how well the message matches the particular moment. When someone gives their consent for push notifications, it means they have agreed to receive notices from a particular site or service; it does not mean that they have asked for your advertisement. Your ad disrupts that agreement. The headline and image must still present a relevant offer; merely having permission is not enough to ensure attention or a conversion. Broad statements and vague curiosity-driven hooks tend to lose their effectiveness quickly.

Do push notifications outside your comfort zone, but do so with care. Create small segments based on geo and device and use different creatives for each of these segments. Make your headlines clear and specific so that people know exactly what they will get when they tap.

Monitor the entire process from click through to the landing page and then to action, not just the click. In the case where health tips lead to trials with one group while price alerts result in sales with another, you have a signal that is worth scaling. If taps don’t result in stays, adjust the approach before blaming the format.

Myth 6: Paid Media And SEO Pull In Opposite Directions

Teams tend to regard paid advertising and organic search as competitors for budget, with paid advertising being seen as quick but expensive and SEO being viewed as slow and free. This division results in separate planning efforts in which each team ignores the findings of the other, causing both teams to make less effective decisions.

Paid tests can be used to guide organic content priorities, and improvements made to organic pages can in turn boost the efficiency of paid campaigns. For instance, the responses received from search and social media can indicate which topics attract attention before you decide to produce long articles.

So long as legal permissions and support from the platforms are available, visitors to organic pages can be used to build audiences for lookalike audiences or for retargeting. Although data on paid engagement can help in deciding what topics to cover in future content, it does not prove that a page will earn backlinks or allow an audience to be qualified for retargeting without proper permission.

Nothing mentioned here means that paid promotion raises search engine rankings or that SEO work reduces media costs by itself. The common insights gained are useful in reducing waste.

Shared data works better than separate guesses.

Place the two calendars side by side. Apply paid results to identify two or three themes that managed to draw people into taking action. Start by developing or enhancing organic content based on those themes, and then use that content to pre-qualify traffic and try out new headlines.

Make sure who is responsible for what is clear so that the paid strategy doesn’t aim only at vanity clicks and the SEO strategy doesn’t target topics that no one will pay for. The advantage lies in focus, not in any kind of magic overlap.

Myth 7: More Ad Units On A Blog Mean More Income

For publishers who are concentrating on blog monetization, the addition of ad slots is similar to tapping into a pipe. Increasing the number of display units, pop-up slots and push prompts should result in higher revenue. Up to a certain stage this reasoning is valid, but beyond that point the user experience begins to reduce the same metrics which support income in the long term.

Since heavy layouts can slow down pages and disrupt reading, particularly when ads cause the content to be pushed down, readers tend to leave more quickly and visit less frequently. Advertisers see this as weak session performance and therefore reduce their bids for those ad spaces. Organic discovery also suffers when pages are difficult to use, leading to a smaller audience that can be monetized later on; the short-term increase in RPM is then offset by having fewer loyal readers.

A few strong slots usually win over many weak ones.

Treat the content as a reader would, not as a seller would. Put your most important posts on a phone and note how many people read them before reaching the first paragraph. When advertisements prevent the text from being seen, get rid of the less effective element and then check sessions and return visits together with revenue.

Make only one change to the layout at a time and retain the successful versions for several weeks. A simple page that is able to hold people’s attention provides both search engine optimisation and sales with more scope to perform.

Myth 8: Winning Campaigns Can Run Untouched

It's tempting to keep a winner alone since getting things going seems to be the difficult part. Spending goes on and the results remain stable for a spell before people's attention turns to other matters. Afterwards the response gradually weakens without any obvious warning. This kind of change is normal since auctions keep on changing and audiences never respond in the same way to the same creatives.

One reason is creative fatigue; once people have seen the same image and headline repeatedly, they begin to notice it less. Another factor is bid pressure, since competitors go into the same ad spaces and drive prices up.

Changes brought about by the seasons and the news cycles can also affect people's preferences on a weekly basis. There is no single refresh rule that suits all accounts because the volumes and budgets vary so greatly.

Create a review routine that matches the way you spend money; campaigns with a high level of spending require frequent checks on their placement, whereas those with low spending need longer periods before reaching a judgment. Stop those that are clearly losing and continue to run the ones that are successful, adding one new element at a time so that you can see what caused the figure to change.

Make a note of the dates when changes are made so that you can connect any drops with specific edits or changes in the market. Rather than making infrequent and hasty overhauls, it is better to carry out small and continuous tests.

Instead of making assumptions, good media buying should ask questions that can actually be answered using the available data. Before you commend the reach, check the viewability. Before you praise a click, you should price the sale. Before you place any trust in averages, filter the placements. 

Match the format to the context and the message to the audience, then pass on the insights between paid and organic channels. Make sure that the layouts of your blog are easy to read and review your live campaigns on a schedule that you can keep up with. If you carry out those fundamental tasks well, the following decision will be easier than the previous one.