• by March 30, 2004

Key brand metrics for three advertisers' online campaigns rose significantly with the use of a real-time media optimization tool, according to a study conducted by Advertising.com using audience segmentation research from Dynamic Logic. The study used Advertising.com's proprietary AdLearn technology, and recruited survey respondents from within each advertiser's target audience. Brand impact and audience profile surveys were conducted by Dynamic Logic; Advertising.com applied Dynamic Logic surveys to optimize the campaigns in real-time.

The study, completed in February, maintains that a "golden audience" can be located for advertisers, identified by brand impact and audience segmentation surveys. The golden audience measure is based on demographic and behavioral segmentation.

Advertising.com declined to identify the three advertisers that participated in the study, offering only generic labels and general industry categories. The study employed the metrics of brand favorability (Advertiser A/Web media); purchase intent (Advertiser B/consumer electronics); and unaided brand awareness (Advertiser C/packaged goods). All three campaigns ran exclusively online. Advertiser A's campaign ran from Sept. 17-Oct. 30 and had 2,800 respondents; Advertiser B's campaign ran from Dec. 19-Feb. 4 with 2,900 respondents; and Advertiser C's program ran from Nov. 10-Dec. 23 with more than 3,500 respondents.

"For Advertiser C, the goal was to increase unaided awareness for an existing product that hasn't had a lot of marketing support in the past," said Kate Sawicki, media supervisor, Interpublic Group of Cos.' Zentropy Partners, Minneapolis, Minn. While a coupon was offered during the campaign, the priority was to optimize toward branding. Advertiser C had never run an online campaign.

"At the very beginning of the campaign, our advertising was increasing unaided awareness, but after 25 days in the market, Advertising.com's optimization had been so effective that the lifts were 358 percent greater than the lifts when we started," Sawicki said. The campaign ran on five properties, and was live from Mon. to Fri. 10 a.m.-2 p.m., a relatively tight media window.

"Advertising.com's optimization product is something that no one else is offering. I really look forward to the day that something like this can be executed across all sites," Sawicki said.

What's unique, she says, is that the metrics are optimized in real- time. "Traditionally, in the middle of a campaign, the only results we have access to are direct response metrics, and they're not indicative of our ability to move consumers along the purchase cycle," Sawicki said, adding: "They don't tell me about purchase intent or awareness."

Ultimately, Advertising.com's optimization delivered a 150 percent improvement in marketing costs for Advertiser A; a 650 percent lift for Advertiser B; and a 47 percent improvement for Advertiser C.

The reduction in marketing costs was also impressive. In the case of Advertiser A, it cost $5 to reach 1,000 people prior to optimization; post- optimization, that figure was $2 per 1,000. The cost to reach Advertiser B's ideal audience was reduced from $100 per 1,000 to $13 per 1,000: "By being able to target the right people, it achieved a 40 percent lift in purchase intent," said Lauren Weinberg, manager of marketing research, Advertising.com. For Advertiser C, the cost per point lift per 1,000 consumers was reduced from $4.87 to $3.31 per 1,000.

"The main finding of this study is that we can efficiently optimize campaigns to achieve branding objectives," Weinberg said. "Now we can work on brand-building goals at the same time as reducing marketing cost."