Response to Dartmouth Research on why "mobile ads don't work."

Extra Extra! Pesky Newsletters!

I must confess, I have this bad habit of subscribing to industry newsletters, but to my defense, I often delete them from my in box. This leads me to this blog post, other day was rather different, I got my usual newsletter from AdWeek, but this one in particular caught my attention. The headline was:

The Top 7 Reasons Why Mobile Ads Don't Work Dartmouth study sheds light on mobile vs. Web...

Walter White aka "Heisenberg"

Hmm, ok like the all so infamous Walter White of Breaking Bad told his Narc brother-in-law Hank, "You got me"! 

This definitely caught my interest. Then after reading it, I realized that Dartmouth, those Ivy Leaguer's...., were basing their information on wrong assumptions. The biggest mistake was equivocate mobile advertising to web advertising... Hmmm big fail.  

Mobile advertising is a stark contrast from the perspective that advertisers are 90-95% app and game studios which use "performance-based" advertising, rather than brand "impression-based" advertising.

Let me explain the differences- on mobile, most advertisers are actual apps looking for an install (performance-based), while on web most advertisers are brands which are looking to fill "impressions"  or running a branding type campaign and not requiring an action but rather all they care about is views. 

So now that I've explained some of the discrepancies that immediately glared out, let me go ahead and breakdown Dartmouth's top 7 reasons below.

Dartmouth researcher's study sheds light on the mobile Web and app users who don't click on ads. On a high level from the study, here are the top seven reasons they steer clear of the ads on smartphones and tablets (with some Adweek commentary thrown in also yours truly, ClickGenie breaking it down)

ClickGenie- Another glaring mistake Dartmouth made was they didn't separate mobile web and native app traffic. Huge difference! Mobile web pertains to traffic produced by a user using mobile search  or browser based entry on mobile device, verse native traffic which comes from a user's "native app." Below's an illustration showing the differences.

Infographic courtsy of MGDadvertising

Infographic by MGDadvertising

Dartmouth Research Questions:

1. The screen is too small, per 72 percent of survey participants. Mobile marketers everywhere will want to bang their heads against the wall over that one. And for tablet marketers, the researcher believes most respondents were thinking of their smartphone usage more so than their time on an iPad or Nexus 7.

ClickGenie- This assumption is just lame, screen too small? I don't think they've ever heard of "click-slip or tap-slip" while a user is playing a game or using a mobile app. Again, this is reason #3 why Dartmouth should've considered native app traffic and not mobile web. Furthermore, Mobile ad click-through rates are double that of online web advertising according to Chitaka an industry leader on digital advertising.

2. People are just too busy for ads, according to 70 percent surveyed. You mean on-the-go consumers don't have time to kill? No shocker here, either—outside maybe actually not being No. 1. 

ClickGenie- Yes although true, this assumption is wrong if you take into account "native app" usage. Have a look at time spent on native apps:

Infographic by MDGadvertising

3. After tapping an ad and going to the landing page, 69 percent of respondents hate it that they cannot easily return to the content they were reading or watching. This interfacing problem can probably be successfully addressed by technologists, can't it?

ClickGenie- Again, this is why brand advertising on native apps aren't as effective as performance-based advertisers that require a download.

4. Too hard to get online with cell phones, said 60 percent. There's a 3G joke in here somewhere. 

5. Per 54 percent, it's too frustrating when mobile consumption is interrupted. From TV to T-Mobile, some things never change.

6. Ads take too long to load, stated 53 percent. Once again, this one seems fixable long-term on a technological level and can probably be creatively circumvented in the meantime.

ClickGenie- Dartmouth has failed to "define" what type of ads? Video ads much longer to load than standard banner ads. The most common ad in the mobile space is the 320 x 50 banner ad which loads instantly. Another thing, get with the times people its all about 4G!

7. Consumers are just not in the mood for ads, said 42 percent. Fantastic marketing content could change this attitude, couldn't it?

ClickGenie: Hmm ok, that's why mobile advertising keeps growing month-over-month, and year-over-year? According to our same friends that wrote this article, AdWeek, Mobile advertising spend jumped 111% to $3.4 billion during 2012, per an Interactive Advertising Bureau report. Accounting for 9 % of all digital ad revenue last year. It marked the second consecutive year of dramatic mobile growth, after seeing a 149%  year-over-year increase in 2011, according to the IAB.

To summarize, in order to make a claim, like Dartmouth has attempted to make, that mobile ads don't work, it is better to define mobile traffic. As I have laid out for you, their are major difference between the nature of mobile advertising and online advertising. Not to mention the surmountable difference in app traffic verse mobile web traffic, so this gives the research injustice when bundling the two together and come to the conclusion that mobile ads don't work. Sorry Dartmouth, you get a D- on this research project and the reason I gave you a D- was simply because you at least took the time to address an assumption.