1. How Ad Effectiveness Tools Can Optimize
Your Media Strategy
A look at how panel-based measurement can maximize your advertising effectiveness
May 2012
w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

2. Today’s presenters
• Alyssa Maine
• Marketing Coordinator, Marketing
• Nick Gaudio
• Associate, Advertising Effectiveness
Solutions
2 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

3. Webinar logistics
• Today’s webinar will be recorded. You will be emailed
a link.
• Please enter your questions in the
Questions box. We will answer as many
as possible at the end.
• If you have technical difficulties, try logging
back in or use a different browser
3 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

4. Agenda
• Webinar (25-30 min)
• Who is Compete?
• Tunnel vision
• Compete Data Methodology
• Lurking leanings
• Ad effectiveness case study
• Q&A (10-15 min)
4 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

5. Introduction to Compete
• Founded in 2000, joined WPP/Kantar in 2008
• Passionate about understanding consumers to inspire great
marketing
• Fastest-growing operating company within Kantar in terms of
revenue and new customer growth
• World-class advertiser, agency and media clients
• Strategic partnerships to enable marketing optimization and
provide holistic view of consumers
• Largest panel in the industry with 2.3 million US consumers
5 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

6. Tunnel vision
6 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

7. 7 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

8. 8 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

9. Artist: Peikwen Cheng
9 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

10. 10 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

11. Data Methodology
• Bigger, more diverse, more actionable data
• When it comes to online panels, size matters
• Panel diversity is key
• Not all data are created equal
2.3 million
11 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

12. Site Side Analytics vs Panel Based Analytics
• How do Compete’s analytics compare with local analytics (e.g.
Google Analytics, Omniture)?
Compete Local Log
Unique Visitors Yes Yes
Deleted Cookies Overstatement No Sometimes
Bots/Spiders/Agents No Sometimes
Pingbacks No Sometimes
RSS Update Traffic No Sometimes
US/International US, UK & France US & International
Estimation Method Panel-Based Cookies, IP Address, User
Agent Strong
Demographical/ Behavioral Segments Yes Yes
12 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

13. Let’s recap what we learned
• You still love your campaign analytics system
• You will not see the macro view in your tunnel
• A panel-based view provides vital awareness of out-of-funnel outcomes
and market context
13 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

14. Lurking leanings
14 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

15. 15 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

16. From a recent RFP:
“For the past several years, <our client> has been
challenged by how to measure the sales impact of
their online media campaigns. Through the use of
<internal systems>, we're able to measure the e-
commerce sales associated with banners--both the
sales that resulted from a click (click-through) and the
sales that resulted from people who merely viewed
our banners (view-through). The view-through sales
far exceed the click-through sales, which is not
surprising when one considers the volume of
impressions we deliver, and the low click-trough rates
associated with display campaigns. However, this
also leads to a fair degree of skepticism….
How many of those purchasers who merely viewed a
banner made that purchase because they saw that
banner?”
16 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

17. From a recent RFP:
“For the past several years, <our client> has been
challenged by how to measure the sales impact of
their online media campaigns. Through the use of
<internal systems>, we're able to measure the e-
commerce sales associated with banners--both the
sales that resulted from a click (click-through) and the
sales that resulted from people who merely viewed
our banners (view-through). The view-through sales
far exceed the click-through sales, which is not
surprising when one considers the volume of
impressions we deliver, and the low click-trough rates
associated with display campaigns. However, this
also leads to a fair degree of skepticism….
How many of those purchasers who merely
viewed a banner made that purchase because
they saw that banner?”
17 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

18. 18 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

19. What we’re hearing from marketers
“Can I measure “I need to determine
advertising beyond the correct “I can’t find cost-effective and simple-
impressions and advertising mix.” to-understand tools that allow me to
clicks?” accurately measure my advertising.”
“I need 3rd party
“I need to know the validation.”
human reaction to my
advertising.”
There has to be a
better way… “Will a social component
“Did my campaign help help my advertising
my competition?” campaign?”
“What is the value of
“I need to minimize
“I need more information to impressions that never get
my waste.”
make relevant connections to clicked on?”
my consumers.”
19 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m •19

20. Compete’s ad effectiveness offerings
Ad R/F Ad Impact
Ad R/F measures the Ad Impact measures how
audience reached by an exposure to online advertising
online advertising campaign impacts consumer behavior
• 2.3 Million person panel, the
largest in the industry
• Connected to other Kantar data
assets
• 15,000 behavioral segments
20 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

21. Ad Impact
CaseStudy
Measuring the Impact of
display advertising on behavior
21 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

22. Compete shines new light on online ROI
Did my ad drive Did my social
consumers to a campaign have an
competitor? impact?
How much did this Which segments were
campaign impact visits to most likely to convert
my site over time? within this audience?
Were exposed consumers
Did the campaign drive an more likely to visit product-
increase in brand-term consideration sites?
searches?
22 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 22

23. Ad Impact Methodology
Control vs. exposed comparisons create a richer view of ad performance
Compete identifies all panelists who visited a …and identifies others who visited the same
publisher site and saw designated ads… publisher site during the same timeframe, but
never saw a campaign ad…
Exposed group Control group
…enabling precise measurement of behavioral “lift” by comparing the exposed group’s activities
(search, site visit, KPI) with the control group’s activities.
23 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

24. Return on Investment
Key Brand Funnel Activities
What is the cost
per exposed
How much should
consumer
I be spending to Branded search
queries who views through
drive branded search
To the brand site?
behavior? Viewthrough to
advertiser site
KPI
activities
on brand What is the
How can I optimize and site optimal level of exposures
scale future online
required to drive a lift in KPI
marketing efforts based
activities and what is
on my current campaign?
the cost?
24 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 24

25. Agenda & Specifications
Agenda:
1. Campaign Overall
2. Performance by Tactic
3. Frequency Performance
Metrics:
Viewthough: Visitation to the advertiser site
Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Upper funnel activity performed on brand
site
Brand Search: Branded search query performed on an search engine
*All activities were performance across the campaign period +4 weeks
25 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 25

26. Engagement: Viewthrough (Campaign Overall)
Takeaway:
Approximately 7% of all consumers Advertiser Site Visitation Rate FULL CAMPAIGN
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks)
exposed to the display campaign
viewed through to the advertiser site
+4.8%pt**
Success: 6.7%
Overall campaign drove an additional
48 consumers to the brand site for
every 1,000 consumers reached
1.9%
Control Exposed
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
26 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 26

27. Engagement: Viewthrough (by Tactic)
Takeaway:
When isolating performance by tactic, Advertiser Site Visitation Rate By Tactic
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)
consumers exposed to retention
placements were more likely to
viewthrough to the brand site vs. all +3.4%pt** +0.5%pt +7.4%pt** +2.5%pt**
other placements
13.4%
Implication: 10.9%
Baseline viewthrough rates on 9.1%
retention sites however were the
strongest resulting in lower lifts.
Exposure to awareness and BT 4.1%
2.7% 3.2%
placements were more influential in 1.7%
0.7%
changing consumer behavior
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
27 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 27

28. Dynamics: Viewthrough by Exposure Frequency
Takeaway: Advertiser Site Visitation Rate by Exposure Level to Ad
Visitation to the advertiser site was (Viewthrough rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)
highly correlated with exposure to
Average Rate of Exposures by Placement
display ads; Exposure to retention Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
placements consistently drove the 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0
strongest rates of viewthrough at each 20%
level of exposure vs. other 18%
placements 16%
14%
12%
Action:
10%
Determine if the incremental lift
8%
achieved at each level of exposure is
6%
worth the cost 4%
2%
0%
Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+
impressions impressions impressions
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
28 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 28

29. Engagement: KPI: Upper Funnel (Campaign Overall)
Takeaway:
Exposed consumers engaged in KPI: Upper Funnel Activity Rate FULL CAMPAIGN
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift, campaign + 4 weeks)
upper funnel KPI activities at a rate
nearly 2X greater than the control
group +0.7%pt**
1.6%
Success:
Campaign was successful at
increasing traffic to key product pages
0.9%
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
29 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 29

30. Engagement: KPI :Upper Funnel (by Tactic)
Takeaway:
Awareness, BT and retention KPI: Upper Funnel Rate By Tactic
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)
placements were most successful at
changing shopping behavior post +1.1%pt**
+0.4%pt +0.9%pt** +0.8%pt**
exposure
3.3%
Implication:
Despite similar deltas, Retention 2.5%
placements drove approximately 2X
1.8%
greater rates of activity among 1.5%
1.4%
exposed consumers vs. all other 1.3%
placements; costs associated with 0.6%
these placements may not be as 0.2%
efficient
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
30 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 30

31. Dynamics: Upper Funnel KPIActivity by Exposure Frequency
Takeaway:
Retention and BT placements KPI Activity Rate by Exposure Level to Ad
(KPI rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)
continuously drove incremental gains
in KPI activity with each impression
Average Rate of Exposures by Placement
served; Retargeting exposures were Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
maximized after 2 exposures in which 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0
10%
diminishing returns were obtained 9%
thereafter 8%
7%
Implication: 6%
Performance for retargeting 5%
placements could be optimized if 4%
3%
frequency of exposures was reduced
2%
1%
0%
Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+
impressions impressions impressions
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
31 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 31

32. Engagement: Brand Search (Campaign Overall)
Takeaway:
Branded search rates increased 2X Brand Search Rate FULL CAMPAIGN
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)
as the result of exposure to the
display campaign (+122% lift)
+1.1%pt**
Action:
Display campaigns increase overall 2.0%
search behavior, make sure to
maintain a strong SEM strategy
0.9%
Control Exposed
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
32 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 32

33. Engagement: Brand Search (by Tactic)
Takeaway:
Approximately 2% of all consumers Brand Search Rate By Tactic
(Rate for exposed vs. control and lift campaign + 4 weeks)
exposed to retention, BT or
retargeting placements engaged in a
branded search query
+0.8%pt** +0.7%pt** +1.2%pt** +1.1%pt**
Implication: 2.4%
Despite stronger rates of activity for 2.1%
1.9%
the other placements, exposure to
1.4%
1.3%
awareness placements were also 1.2%
influential in changing consumer 0.7%
behavior (3X increase in search 0.4%
queries)
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
Control Exposed
*Statistically significant difference at a 90% confidence level
**Statistically significant difference at a 95% confidence level
33 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 33

34. Dynamics: Brand Search Activity by Exposure Frequency
Takeaway:
Retargeting placements were the Brand Search Rate by Exposure Level to Ad
(Search rate by exposure level campaign + 4 weeks)
most successful tactic in driving
search behavior to for up to 4 Average Rate of Exposures by Placement
exposures, thereafter retention Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
yielded the strongest rates of search 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0
5%
activity
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Control 1 impression 2 impressions 3-4 5-7 8+
impressions impressions impressions
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
34 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m 34

35. What is the ROI for Key Brand Funnel Activities
Despite the higher CPM paid for Retention placements, cost per viewthrough and cost per
KPI activity performed was lower than both awareness and retargeting strategies.
BT placements were also success in driving key brand activities at a lower cost vs. all other
placements
• However BT placements had the lowest average rate of exposure
Campaign Basics
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
CPM $ 2.10 $ 5.10 $ 3.60 $ 6.55
Exposure Frequency per UV 12.0 7.0 5.0 8.0
Reach per 1,000 83 143 200 125
Campaign Strategy Comparison - Cost Per Consumer
Awareness Retargeting BT Retention
CPM $ 2.10 $ 5.10 $ 3.60 $ 6.55
Viewthrough to Advertiser Site $ 0.61 $ 1.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.39
KPI: Upper Funnel $ 1.94 $ 1.98 $ 1.20 $ 1.59
Brand Search $ 2.10 $ 1.70 $ 0.95 $ 2.18
35 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

36. Overall Takeaways
• Ad Effectiveness tools such as Ad Impact can demonstrate the value of
your media strategy
• Examination of impact of frequency and placement can help optimize
performance
• True ROI can be established!
36 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m

37. Thanks!
Questions?
Alyssa Maine Nick Gaudio
Marketing Coordinator Associate,
Marketing Ad Effectiveness Solutions
617-933-5754 617-933-5647
amaine@compete.com ngaudio@compete.com
www.compete.com www.compete.com
37 w w w . c o m p e t e . c o m