Internet media properties (offering ad-supported video content) are beginning to find themselves competing directly with broadcast and (ad-supported) cable networks for ad dollars.  For most marketers who already advertise on national television, online (video) advertising represents a welcome new touchpoint for their TV creative and has begun to blur the budgetary distinctions between television and Internet media buying.  With so much cannibalization of traditional TV budgets by online alternatives, many ad buyers have begun to simply budget for “video” when developing their media plans.

If you’ve never bought online video inventory before, you’ll be happy to know there are some fantastic options out there.*  One of the best is Hulu.com – offering a solid value to both consumers and advertisers with its slick interface, professional content, and a relatively low advertisement/entertainment ratio.  Other notable offerings include AOL TV, CNN.com, ESPN.com, MSN Video, and Yahoo Music. 

All of these offerings share the same fundamental platform – streaming video.  Accordingly, they all face the same inherent limitations of website advertising; click for details.
Here are some general differentiators between website delivery (i.e., streaming) and DeskSite delivery:

• Limited Targeting: Consumers are able to access most video content (hosted by major portals) without ever providing any details about themselves, thus demographic profiles are generalized or projected and specific age or gender targeting is not possible. 

• Grossly Inaccurate Metrics: Without cookie data, it’s impossible to tell whether a consumer has seen your ad multiple times or not at all.  Therefore, it’s impossible to control or even measure reach and frequency variables.

• Poor Media Experience: Even with a broadband connection, both sound and video quality are severely diminished relative to a DeskSite channel’s fidelity levels.  In fact, a quantitative comparison to ‘streaming’ will typically show anywhere from a 200% to 500% difference in bit rates for both sound and video feeds.  While full screen playback is possible, streaming video must be watched in a relatively small window (in order to maintain acceptable picture quality).  The loading of a consumer’s video selection is never immediate and is usually followed by buffering delays, followed by occasional interruptions, stalls, freezes, or even complete drops.  Instantly alternating from one video selection to the next is not possible with website video delivery.

The video quality of streaming will certainly improve in the coming years, eventually equaling that of TV; however, the real problems for marketers relying on streaming video will only get worse.  This goes back to a fundamental inability to track web surfers (without cookie data).  Today, more than 50% of US web users regularly delete cookies or block them entirely.  To make matters worse, this percentage is measurably increasing every quarter, and is the proverbial “elephant in the room” of web-based advertising.  A key feature of online advertising was supposed to be absolute measurement, but this has not been a reality for several years now.  Simply stated, not a single major website can accurately determine their number of unique users.  In fact, given the high percentage of consumer cookie blocking/deletion, their ‘unique user’ claims are really nothing more than gross estimates that could potentially be off by double-digit percentages – nobody really knows.  In other words, you will be accurately charged for the total number of ad views delivered, but your reach and frequency specifications cannot be implemented or measured.

Of course, websites also cannot tell you the age of the person watching your ad, nor if they are a male or female.  Many of the major portals still permit users to skip ads by simply clicking on the desired video again after your ad starts (which stops your ad and starts the entertainment video instead).  Others have way too many ads (per minute of video), and blindly ignore relevant user activity; e.g., a consumer clicks on a clip but then clicks away after only a few seconds.  Should only 3-seconds of content trigger an ad again?

The biggest problem, of course, traces its roots back to the biggest problem in advertising: Relevancy.  A teenage male watching a news clip on MSN.com is just as likely to see an ad from Maybelline as an ad from EA Sports.  Even at ESPN.com, the 42 year-old male can still be forced to sit through a video game ad for teenagers instead of hearing about a new lease special from Mercedes.

This lack of relevancy was supposed to end with television, yet it’s still alive and well on the Internet.  We solve all of these problems and much more.