|
waldo pepper posted:My favorite technique is the insurance companies that advertise stuff like "customers who switched saved an average of $300," because it's this great example of skewed sampling. Even if your insurance is more expensive for 90% of people, you can still make it sound like you're offering the better deal. Some marketing dude must have gotten a nice promotion for coming up with it. They can also create that number by providing introductory rates that change after a year or so. Speaking of, I kind of hate the cable companies around where I'm at for that stuff. You can get Internet and TV for $25/month (for one year, then it goes up by about $70)!
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
My wife used to work in apparel, and I've posted this elsewhere. All the clothes come from mostly the same place. It's just where you buy it thay dictates the price. They do vary the quality a bit but not enough to justify $40 tshirts and poo poo. I don't find the "sale" method scummy because it's up front about it if you pay attention you can get th deal. I just find those click bait ones ridiculous because only an absolute dullard intentionally clicks on them. As someone mentioned, absolutely it makes them money because even one click is practically a profit. It's embarrassing that it works that way. Insurance is definitely up there too (but not my insuranxe of course, you should buy my insurance lol)
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
I always hate when ads use the line "_____ million people can't be wrong!" Because yeah, large amount of people can totally be wrong. Especially if the only common thread between them is they bought your stupid product or fell for your lovely scam. Its not like you asked several million random people what they think and they all unanimously said good things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
"Natural flavors" invariably meaning "flavored like something that occurs in nature" (i.e. artificial flavors). Don't know if this fully applies but at my alma mater I used to be one of the dorkuses that would fundraise for what were essentially university slush funds. One of the programs they asked us to talk about (that in my experience got a lot of people to donate) were the night-escort safety services they provided to students, and which we were told were funded entirely by our donations. With such services normally factored into a university's regular budget (to my understanding), and in a university system that especially lately has come under fire for sexual assaults and poor consideration for student safety in general - the whole thing felt like I was holding my classmates' safety for ransom. There were also the students that were calling library science alumni to fundraise for a program that no longer offered library sciences as a major.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
John Quixote posted:"Natural flavors" invariably meaning "flavored like something that occurs in nature" (i.e. artificial flavors). Actually, advertising laws are quite strict about this--you can't call it a natural flavor unless it was actually extracted from a natural source. Any natural source is fair game, though, so e.g. extract of beaver anus can be listed as "natural flavors" in candy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
waldo pepper posted:
Jastiger posted:I just find those click bait ones ridiculous because only an absolute dullard intentionally clicks on them. As someone mentioned, absolutely it makes them money because even one click is practically a profit. It's embarrassing that it works that way. Gabriel Pope posted:Actually, advertising laws are quite strict about this--you can't call it a natural flavor unless it was actually extracted from a natural source. According to a food chemist I talked to, almost all the time 'natural flavors' are listed they extract a particular chemical with high purity and then add it to the product. So the only difference between natural and artificial flavoring is whether you start with an orange or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Oxyclean posted:Not downright scummy, but never a fan of when you see "2 FOR 5$" in big, then something like "or 2.79 each" in small below. Chain grocery stores seem to be big offenders of this and take it to the next level by offering things like "10/$10" when you don't need to actually buy 10, they are just $1 each. Its much more scummy because you don't get a better price by buying multiple.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Chadina posted:Chain grocery stores seem to be big offenders of this and take it to the next level by offering things like "10/$10" when you don't need to actually buy 10, they are just $1 each. Its much more scummy because you don't get a better price by buying multiple. In my experience that's what people expect, though? Working convenience stores, you get people all the time saying "Hey this says two for a dollar, so one is only 50 cents, right?" Then you have to point out the lil' price and they get pissed. Seems less scummy to offer the sale price no matter the quantity you buy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Chadina posted:Chain grocery stores seem to be big offenders of this and take it to the next level by offering things like "10/$10" when you don't need to actually buy 10, they are just $1 each. Its much more scummy because you don't get a better price by buying multiple. Other grocery stores actually take it in the other direction. I remember seeing poo poo like $0.25 stuff being sold "on special" at 3 for $1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
I seem to get a lot of spam mails advertising things like "try our new whatever free of charge!", the last one I got was for some sort of dental bleach pen. Sometimes I open up the mail to see what kind of scam they run; that particular one had the terms "if you try out our free two weeks' worth of bleach pen you commit to buying a set of three months, 80 euros in total UNLESS you jump through these impossible on-fire hoops we juggle rapidly before your eyes". Don't advertise things for free when they're not, it's most annoying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Elkyrie posted:I seem to get a lot of spam mails advertising things like "try our new whatever free of charge!", the last one I got was for some sort of dental bleach pen. It annoys me how the games you get from PS+ are advertised as free. Not only are they not free, they're so not free that if you stop paying for PS+ you'll lose access to PS+ games you've already payed for. It's a good service but it's kind of the opposite of free (not free).
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Scammers deliberately make these clickbaits/419s as sketchy as possible, so that the only people they deal with in person are guaranteed to be extremely gullible. http://research.microsoft.com/apps/mobile/publication.aspx?id=167713 Elkyrie posted:I seem to get a lot of spam mails advertising things like "try our new whatever free of charge!", the last one I got was for some sort of dental bleach pen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Can someone explain how things like adsense work to generate profit? Because I'm fairly certain that people just ignore the ads and they're wasted revenue. For example, the number one person on Youtube is Pewdiepie, and unfunny, grating European man who makes literally millions of dollars from the advertisements attached to his let's plays of which at least 90% of his popularity comes from people too young to spend any money online in the first place. I don't get it. It's like these ad folks are paying in funbucks for as much as there's any real consumer out there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Old people. Old people cannot identify ads. They cannot identify PUPs. Before you say but Zeus surely they arent all that dumb! You're right but a bigass portion of them are. I have to explain how to print out emails about twice a day. Or I suppose very young people who are also not paying any goddamn attention.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
I don't know if this counts as advertising, but I know you've seen this on your Facebook feed at one time or another. It's a video with a caption like, "A baby meets a puppy for the first time - you won't believe what happens next". You know what actually happens? Not a loving thing. It's just a baby playing with a puppy. The baby doesn't ride the puppy. The puppy doesn't eat the baby. And then it ends abruptly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:I don't know if this counts as advertising, but I know you've seen this on your Facebook feed at one time or another. It's a video with a caption like, "A baby meets a puppy for the first time - you won't believe what happens next". I'm a big fan of Fapworthy, Pornhubs parody of those clickbait sites: http://i.imgur.com/UdJvB1S.png (Slightly  pics and text.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
I do not have the slightest idea of the context of this ad or even when it's selling and I fear knowing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
'Non-Toxic' are the most common weasel words I used to see when I worked in Toy Retail. People will write it on loving anything. Everything has the potential to be toxic. But if the product we were selling wasn't safe, we wouldn't be allowed to sell it. Also 'Chemical Free' on anything is bullshit given that just about everything is made of some sort of chemical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Also, speaking of sales, is it just me, or is everything at department stores like Kohl's always on sale, constantly? Like, to the point where things aren't technically even sale prices anymore? One of the part-time professors at my school actually works at Kohl's corporate, and explained this one. There's a legal minimum on how many days an item must be sold at retail, and Kohl's and other retailers in that segment sell just about everything for the absolute minimum number of days to maintain those prices as the "retail prices" even though the majority of the year it's on sale. People still come in on short notice and buy stuff at retail, so that's just extra margin for them then. The "honest pricing" not working has already been explained, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
I wish I could get the balance sheets of those companies that pay for youtube ads and the like. I get that the marketing company is paid per "click" but of course, they are being paid to sell a product. The stupid scam poo poo I get, they are out to get money no matter what. I'm talking about the links actually selling a product or service for legitimate companies, I wonder how much of a return they get. Like that Pewdiepie reference above, they pay out a ton of money to the dude I'm sure, but how much do he companies employing the marketers actually MAKE from that channel? I know the traditional answer is "a lot" but part of me can't help but think that these companies lose money out the rear end to these marketers and just consider it a "cost of doing business", when in reality they would be better off throwing the money in a fire. I mean, lets think about it. What is the going pay rate for one click on a youtube ad? Lets say is $.05 (I have no idea). So Pewdiepie (he's #1 remember!) gets $7M views a day according to some rough calculations. Lets say a full HALF click on the ad that he has posted there for some game or something. That is $175K in revenue just from people clicking the ad. Now, those are not all intentional clicks, or they are clicks to just get the stupid thing out of the way so they can get to the content. Lets be generous and say half of those that clicked actually wanted to click the ad and visit the website, so 1.75M people are actually going to the site to look at the ad. So far the company has paid out $350,000 to get 1.75M views on their ad from people actually interested in their product. Per day. What I want to know is, how many of those people actually make a purchase based on a youtube ad, and what kind of margin is the marketing company getting. My guess, and I wish some goon who knows about this would chime in, is that the company makes money on this, but something like 80% of all profits go to the marketing company as the middleman here, tasked with tricking our eyeballs into seeing their poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:I don't know if this counts as advertising, but I know you've seen this on your Facebook feed at one time or another. It's a video with a caption like, "A baby meets a puppy for the first time - you won't believe what happens next". I see my baby boomer relatives post these all the time on my Facebook. It's kind of annoying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:I want to meet Dentist #10 and hear his opinion. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
"Ionic" "Quantum" "Magnetic" "Organic" "Toxins" "Energies" "Cleanse" "GMO"
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Youtube ads I'm no expert, but I did read up on this a while back: 1) Youtube has two models - pay per click and pay per view. Pay per click rates are in the multiple-dollar range; pay per view rates are more in the $2-5-per-1000-views-max range. Youtube does not count skipped ads as a view unless you watch a significant chunk of it (either 30 seconds or half the ad, whichever is less), so those 7 million views are cut wayyyy down by people with adblock/people who click "skip ad". My understanding is that video ads are never pay-per-click - only those text popup ads. Clickthrough rates are exactly what you'd expect based on those numbers - generally less than one person in a thousand clicks on ads. 2) Youtube ad space is auctioned - there's no set prices per click/view. Instead, the advertiser sets a maximum bid and an allowance - say "I'll pay up to 2.50 per click, and up to $100,000 total". The ad then competes ebay-style with other advertisers, with the bid ceilings modified by relevance. For instance, if you were selling phone cases, Youtube might set your bid ceilings at 2.50 for a review of your actual phone case, 2.00 for a phone review, and .25 for some schmuck's Let's Play. 3) Youtube is the marketing company, and they make 55% of what the advertiser pays in; the youtuber gets the remainder. Youtubers can also sign up with third-party ad networks like Machinima.com, who have their own monetization structures that are broadly similar. So - accurate statistics on adblock use are hard to come by, but according to this report, 54% of males surveyed between 18 and 29 reported using ad-blocking software, compared to a global rate of ~5% of all users. Males 18-29 is probably pretty representative of Pewdiepie's viewership, so let's go ahead and use 50%. So 7 million views becomes 3.5 million. I subjected myself to one of his videos, and got only one ad - a banner ad along the bottom for an LG 34UC97 - a 34", curved widescreen monitor costing ~1300 bucks. I figure that's two demographics matches - gamers and douchebags; but there's no reason to think people watching Pewdiepie eat disgusting jellybeans are in the market for a new monitor, let alone would spend $1300 bucks for one. On the other hand, a $1300 monitor has a pretty good profit margin so the maximum bid is probably pretty high, around $10 per click or so. I expect LG's maximum bid would be set in the $2-3 range for similar content from a nobody, but #1 youtube channel probably drives the adjusted bids way up, and competition ensures that the winner probably pays close to their adjusted maximum bid. Let's say LG is paying $8 per click. One click per thousand viewers is 3500 viewers, so LG would be paying $28,000 for that ad placement per day. If LG has a 50% profit margin, they need to sell ~43 monitors to break even. Google's Adwords conversion rate (the people who click on an ad and then buy something) for electronics is 4.79% - so if they get comparable performance, on average they sell 168 monitors for a $81,200 profit. Youtube takes 28000*.55= $15,400 Pewdiepie is left with 28000-15400= $12,600 That comes out to $4,599,000/year, which is close to the $4M he reportedly made in 2013.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Mister Kingdom posted:I don't know if this counts as advertising, but I know you've seen this on your Facebook feed at one time or another. It's a video with a caption like, "A baby meets a puppy for the first time - you won't believe what happens next".
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
My local grocery store uses a "sale" to cover a price increase. For example, an item will regularly be $1, then it will be "on sale" for $1.25 -- and when it "comes off sale" it will be $1.50.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 10:02
|
|
|
Phy posted:I thought the Chevy truck commercials about "It's built with high-strength steel! Like this submarine! Not hoity toity aluminum, like Ford!" were bad, but they managed to dig deeper and find A Truck Will Get You Pussy And A Compact Sedan Won't. poo poo, man. Guess I won't be in the market for a Sonic, Spark, Cruze, or Verano any time soon. Considering a chevy truck goes for like 50 thousand loving US dollars now and a small chevy car goes for 12, they probably don't give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
Tsubasa2004 posted:Youtube Advertising Wizardry While it makes limited sense spelled out like that, it still feels like someone looked at Owellian Bureaucracy Nightmares, and decided "Hey, maybe we can make a profit on this mess..." And I'll never be convinced that the lion's share of the customers these ads profit from are imaginary. Sidebar, that statement earlier in the thread about how the average American views itself not as poor, but rather embarrassed and inconvenienced wealthy might just be one of the most profound statements I've heard in a very long time. It certainly explains a lot about our laissez-faire "Screw you, got mine" attitude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:While it makes limited sense spelled out like that, it still feels like someone looked at Owellian Bureaucracy Nightmares, and decided "Hey, maybe we can make a profit on this mess..." And I'll never be convinced that the lion's share of the customers these ads profit from are imaginary. If people didn't see returns on YouTube advertising it wouldn't happen and would most certainly not used by major companies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
The Moon Monster posted:It annoys me how the games you get from PS+ are advertised as free. Not only are they not free, they're so not free that if you stop paying for PS+ you'll lose access to PS+ games you've already payed for. It's a good service but it's kind of the opposite of free (not free). What? You don't lose access to any games you've paid for directly even if you bought them at a discount, and if you mean losing access to the "free" games you get access to those again if you re-up your Plus account. It's pretty explicit in all the materials for Plus, it's kind of the opposite of scummy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Advertising directed towards children is pretty much the scummiest kind IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
The fact that: a: Pewdiepie exists and makes any money at all makes me fear for the human race as a whole b: that he is a millionaire makes me want to go on a killing rampage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:Considering a chevy truck goes for like 50 thousand loving US dollars now and a small chevy car goes for 12, they probably don't give a poo poo. I was thinking about this the other day. Why are trucks so loving expensive? It's less everything than a car. Over half of the truck is a large empty space for putting things in. You can't say the engine, because you can get a v8 hemi in a Charger or challenger for under $30k gently caress trucks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Tiny Lowtax posted:I was thinking about this the other day. Why are trucks so loving expensive? It's less everything than a car. Over half of the truck is a large empty space for putting things in. You can't say the engine, because you can get a v8 hemi in a Charger or challenger for under $30k Because Americans are morons. I wish they taxed vehicles here the way they do in Europe. Tax it by engine size.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Tiny Lowtax posted:I was thinking about this the other day. Why are trucks so loving expensive? It's less everything than a car. Over half of the truck is a large empty space for putting things in. You can't say the engine, because you can get a v8 hemi in a Charger or challenger for under $30k Popularity and marketing I imagine. There are a poo poo load of dudebros with more money than sense so they buy gigantic trucks for far more than they're actually worth. See, having a truck and being successful is manly so what is a better indicator of your manliness than a gigantic truck you paid an assload of money for? The people I know that actually need trucks usually have older ones they've had for basically ever that are pretty beat up and look like they've actually, you know, been used for things trucks are supposed to be used for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Tiny Lowtax posted:I was thinking about this the other day. Why are trucks so loving expensive? It's less everything than a car. Over half of the truck is a large empty space for putting things in. You can't say the engine, because you can get a v8 hemi in a Charger or challenger for under $30k Because rednecks like to go out in the woods and climb rocks and kick mud everywhere. It leads to slightly less redneck people wanting a truck to go hauling around in the sticks and on dirt roads with, which leads down to suburban parking lot queens like you see on TV. It's just like how big drag racing cars eventually translated down to people cruising in camaros and mustangs back in the ye olden times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
If you have to kidnap my son and send me one of his fingers for every week I don't buy your stupid product then maybe your stretchy garden hose isn't all that great to begin with????
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Zartosht posted:Advertising directed towards children is pretty much the scummiest kind IMO. Once I learned that products aimed towards kids usually have the mascots looking downward, with the idea being they make eye contact with the small child walking next to mom, the cereal aisle became a much creepier place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Bullshit made up 'sciency sounding' words for beauty products. As kids we used to make jokes about Pantene's products by calling every shampoo they brought out a 'Frizzium Z Complex' .
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
veedubfreak posted:The fact that: Did you know that c: he's pretty good-looking too? Pewdiepie is proof that Satan prevailed over God in the eternal war for humanity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2015 18:39
|
|
