• by David L. Smith , September 9, 2002

Nielsen//NetRatings reported last week that less than 10% of marketers use pop-ups. The trade press, including MediaPost, iMedia and others seemed to jump on the slant that inferred that pop-ups are turning out to be a smaller factor than initially thought. We disagree with that conclusion.

In the first place, 10% is a significant number. For example, as of last spring, only 10% of online ads were branding oriented. According to eMarketer, an April 2001 Nielsen//NetRatings study reported that only 11% of online ads were branding oriented. Again, according to eMarketer, DoubleClick reported that only 10% of online ads were branding oriented. This does not mean that branding on the Internet won’t have a significant future.

Only one ad size has more than 10% of the market, according to NetRatings. That’s the 468x60 weighing in at 35% of all banners as of spring 2002. The next is the 120x60 at 6% and the 475x89, 120x600 and 120x90 at 4%. Pop-ups on this measure would be 2%. This certainly does not mean that the 120x600 is a size to bet against for the future. It and the 250x250, along with the other newer IMUs, are the hottest creative units going as far as growth. Pop ups will continue to grow and be hot. Especially if true creative talents are turned loose on the unit.

Safa Rashtchy, Senior Research Analyst Internet Media and Marketing for US bancorp Piper Jaffray, recently issued a report, and he too believes that “pop-ups are here to stay,” as stated in his newsletter, Silk Road Weekly.

“For advertising to be effective, it has to be intrusive” Rashtchy wrote. Whether we like it or not, pop-ups are a “lean forward” device. Rashtchy went on to say, “Obviously, there is a fine line beyond which advertising may alienate consumers, and we believe the online advertising industry is still experimenting with different levels of intrusion to find the right balance. Just like any medium, there will be the extreme cases where both the quantity and quality of advertising will be excessive and distasteful. This shouldn't distract us from the fact that mainstream publishers can also use the pop-ups in an effective and appropriate way.”

Rashtchy opined three reasons why they are “here to stay”:

1. Pop-ups are highly effective. We know that they get higher click-through rates. Their conversion rates are high also. Yes, some people hate them, but not so much that it affects the traffic on the sites serving them.
2. Major advertisers like Orbitz, Dell, Providian, Morgan Stanley and Columbia House are among the top ten users. This shows a trend. It won’t be long before other major advertisers use pop-ups too.
3. Sites banning pop-ups are in a minority and have good reason to ban them (e.g., Google and iVillage who do not want to interrupt the user experience). This is not likely to spread to the majors, according to Rashtchy. And he makes a good point. After all, aren’t the highly effective rich media takeover ads that have zoomed across sites like Yahoo!, The New York Times and CBS MarketWatch also pop-ups, albeit much more creative than the X-10 camera ads (which we cannot forget, still worked like crazy).

To get the full report, go to http://www.gotoanalysts.com/rashtchy.

We agree with Rashtchy. In all forms of media, intrusiveness has won the day. After all, what’s more intrusive than a TV spot?