I read today that Sensis has finally decided to play nice with Google as opposed to trying to compete against them and losing badly.
http://www.bandt.com.au/news/A4/0C05B6A4.asp
It's not a bad move - back in February I touched on Sensis's problems - http://mimelbourne.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-vulnerable-is-sensis-right-now.html
When I wrote this I copped a bit of heat from some Telstra/Sensis people, which was never really clarified. It was implied what I was saying made no sense, however in hindsight I think it actually did make perfect sense ...
I raised 5 key areas they needed to sort out in 08 - my comments as of today are in bold
1. Do they maintain a search engine that cannot compete against Google let alone a MSHOO joint play ... or do they walk away from SEM or look to offer Yahoo or MSN a search distro deal across their network and rev. share?
They have walked and handed it to Google in what is no doubt a revshare similar to the above scenario.
2. How can they adapt Yellow to become more appealing to users? How do they adapt the way advertisers pay to be in Yellow given Google has changed the way many SMEs want to pay for leads
The Google alliance will probably help but doesn't solve the issue that Yellow isn't relevant in 2008
3. Can Whereis hold itself against Google Maps. What can it do better than its competitors - it's not enough to simply match them.
I think this product will be put to sleep in 09 given what has happened today. Yellow will now use Google Maps.
4. What does Sensis actually mean to consumers? Do you retire the brand or simply push it to the background?
Pushed to the background would be my bet now they have backed away from search and conceded to Goog. The media assets are under the Telstra Media stable so it appears they are moving towards the more trusted parent brand.
5. Do they walk away from search and maps and focus on mobile - an they have a pretty sophisticated offering to give the market now the walled garden approach has been abandoned.
They have walked from search and they will walk from maps. They are still making good headway with mobile and have a pretty solid first mover advantage still. However, they need wider distribution that they presently have, so this is the key challenge in this space.
"Bruce Akhurst, chief executive of Sensis, said: "This agreement combines Sensis' strong capabilities in advertising sales and local business content and Google's strong capabilities in online search and mapping technology."
If this isn't conceding defeat I'm not sure what is ...
There's no shame to losing to Google in these 2 specific areas. What Sensis/Telstra has done is a smart obvious move that makes more sense given the climate right now.
Showing posts with label Sensis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sensis. Show all posts
Monday, November 3, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Yahoo! challenges Google with Bigpond mobile deal? Really?
The Oz is reporting Yahoo! and Bigpond striking a deal for Yahoo! to power the Bigpond Mobile on deck search - http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24326440-26077,00.html
"The multi-year deal between Yahoo7 and Telstra's Sensis division means Yahoo's oneSearch technology will replace Sensis's search technology on 4.4 million Telstra BigPond 3G-enabled phones.
"Revenue from display and search advertising that appears on the mobile search service -- which will be accessible through a co-branded button on the content menus of all Telstra 3G phones -- will be shared between Yahoo7 and Sensis.
"The partnership will eventually be expanded to include Sensis's Yellow and Trading Post classified searches and Telstra BigPond content.
"Yahoo7 chief executive Rohan Lund said the deal was the most significant for the company in the mobile space and would give Yahoo's advertisers access to a much bigger audience."
Is this really much of a big deal. It definitely doesn't amount to a challenge to Google. Let's not forget Google is flogging Yahoo! in search globally and even more in AU.
People trust Google - they use it on their PC and will also use it on their mobile. It's questionable how much incremental traffic this will bring Yahoo! search and also about the real value/visbility it will give to its advertisers. It makes for nice PR but will it deliver much to their consumers - user/advertiser.
It's interesting to see the deals Lund is looking to strike - he is looking to build Yahoo! audience through distribution deals. It's not a bad play - it's generally cheaper than ATL marketing - and the new eyeballs generated can be added to the topline figure the large guys still like to throw around (we have 5m users etc) despite most marketers not caring anymore about topline network numbers.
Also, does this mean Telstra is putting Sensis search to bed? It's been a rough 4-5 years for Sensis search - it might make more sense to utilise Yahoo!'s better technology and enter into a revshare deal with them on advertising. Would cut a sh*tload of salary cost and they could no doubt negotiate a pretty good deal with Yahoo! as Sensis/Bigpond Internet distro could increase Yahoo!'s total search audience in AU by 50-100%.
"The multi-year deal between Yahoo7 and Telstra's Sensis division means Yahoo's oneSearch technology will replace Sensis's search technology on 4.4 million Telstra BigPond 3G-enabled phones.
"Revenue from display and search advertising that appears on the mobile search service -- which will be accessible through a co-branded button on the content menus of all Telstra 3G phones -- will be shared between Yahoo7 and Sensis.
"The partnership will eventually be expanded to include Sensis's Yellow and Trading Post classified searches and Telstra BigPond content.
"Yahoo7 chief executive Rohan Lund said the deal was the most significant for the company in the mobile space and would give Yahoo's advertisers access to a much bigger audience."
Is this really much of a big deal. It definitely doesn't amount to a challenge to Google. Let's not forget Google is flogging Yahoo! in search globally and even more in AU.
People trust Google - they use it on their PC and will also use it on their mobile. It's questionable how much incremental traffic this will bring Yahoo! search and also about the real value/visbility it will give to its advertisers. It makes for nice PR but will it deliver much to their consumers - user/advertiser.
It's interesting to see the deals Lund is looking to strike - he is looking to build Yahoo! audience through distribution deals. It's not a bad play - it's generally cheaper than ATL marketing - and the new eyeballs generated can be added to the topline figure the large guys still like to throw around (we have 5m users etc) despite most marketers not caring anymore about topline network numbers.
Also, does this mean Telstra is putting Sensis search to bed? It's been a rough 4-5 years for Sensis search - it might make more sense to utilise Yahoo!'s better technology and enter into a revshare deal with them on advertising. Would cut a sh*tload of salary cost and they could no doubt negotiate a pretty good deal with Yahoo! as Sensis/Bigpond Internet distro could increase Yahoo!'s total search audience in AU by 50-100%.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Trading Post states long term goal: "Become Australia’s favourite place to buy and sell"
So said Sensis CEO Bruce Akhurst today.
"Sensis CEO Bruce Akhurst today (26 May) said his aim was to make Trading Post the number one online auction site in Australia.
"On top of the two million people that already use tradingpost.com.au each month, there are an additional 3.4 million Australians using online auctions that are not currently using Trading Post," Akhurst said. "And while auctions have only just started on tradingpost.com.au, our aim is to build up the number of items available and become Australia’s favourite place to buy and sell."
I think it's a tough task.
According to Netview
Ebay users - 5.212m
Trading Post users (taking a de-dup'd figure of Trading Post and Trading Post - Auto) - 827k
Sensis is saying they have 2m unique users on Trading Post - however no Neilsen data backs this up.
Regardless, that's a fair gap. I understand a mission is meant to be an ambitious, almost impossible goal ... but pegging back 4m plus users from a service that is one of the most loved ... tough!
Screenshot above of the Netview de-duplicated figure.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
The rise of the premium Ad Network
Australia is primed for the rise of the premium Ad Network. Like SEM it is the one area that has massive growth opportunities with agency-scale advertisers and is a relatively clean space in most instances.
One thing Ad Networks do well is get local advertisers on high quality, premium international sites with strong and loyal AU IP eyeballs. Think tripadvisor, last.fm, Mini Clip, iVillage ... these are category leading sites who are on the bleeding edge of innovation and have strong brands that users identify with. What these sites allow marketers to achieve is more thorough presence in relevant areas and improved overall reach. They give the advertiser more choice. As the web becomes more mainstream these international sites will become more well known (as Google has more and more say over what is deemed as most relevant) and marketers will expect their agencies to be evaluating them against the big 5's options.
As someone who puts together digital strategies for clients, the more choice I have to evaluate the more confident I am in that I am answering the brief in the best possible way.
On top of this is Ad Networks can help advertisers get on premium local sites without dedicated representation for sales. Again, this is very liberating for advertisers as it offers even more choice, more eyeballs, more options.
What has been great this year has been a much more concerted push by the Ad Networks to offer further value. Primarily in the areas of selling a network of sites across specific categories and also offering sophisticated targeting options.
Category or vertical based ad networks are fantastic as they offer the advertiser the chance to reach a wider group of consumers across a wider variety of sites, but have control over the sites they choose and the ability to tailor a message to the context. Platform 9's content network as well as the Google Content Network are great examples of this and provide the opportunity to reach potentially a brand new audience in environments they trust. The key attractions here are reach, cost and relevance. Reaching a SME in a relevant environment used to cost you upwards of $60CPM ... now you can reach them for $6 with higher reach and response. Tempest's affiliation with Glam Media now means there are now 100+ odd additional options as well as using Vogue.com.au to reach this audience. Our reliance on a selected number of sites has been removed - in essence, restoring the balance and nurturing a health digital ad market.
And you can get quite specific with some the networks.
If I'm looking for people who are involved in grassroots local football leagues on the Eastern Seaboard I can now target them with minimal wastage. A few years back this would have been a costly and labour intensive exercise ... now thanks to a smartly crafted network I can pinpoint this audience. A premium Ad Network has aligned a large number of small grassroots sports sites (think sporting clubs, facilities etc) to create a impressively sized audience with new to market targeting options. Not a bad option for a football boot if they can target those people who are playing in a local football league within a relevant environment.
These areas offer a lot of value as they allow you to tap into consumers 'passion points' (for want of a better term) online. And they do it in a way that offers the advertiser the opportunity to manage the activity in terms of trafficking, reporting and billing just like a major local network.
What does this mean? It means the big 5 aren't really competing against eachother anymore, they're competing against hundreds of thousands of sites who now are equipped to service Australian advertisers and organised sufficiently to deliver.
Combine these audiences and numbers wise they offer the opportunity to reach equal or better volumes to the major networks ... which for the advertiser is a massive positive. It by no means replaces the need to consider larger networks, it moreso gives one more options to consider and allows for innovative ways to use the two in combination.
Then there's behavioural targeting/retargeting ... different concepts but essentially both have the same intent: utilising technology to serve more relevant ads to consumer. With sufficient networks behind them both of these formats are exciting as they offer another area to add to the digital mix. Yes, some of the main networks are playing in this space (Yahoo and Media Smart in particular) however they are competing against some strong players (such as AdConion).
Begs the question, maybe instead of investing in systems to monetise their remnant inventory some of the major publishers (aside Media Smart who already play in this space) should have been looking to extend their reach and relevancy in key high yield areas by providing local representation to premium smaller sites?
More options, more sites, more contexts, more executions, more reach - all things that can benefit the entire industry.
And lets not forget that it is now entirely viable for advertisers to CREATE the content and with digital the reliance on publishers for eyeballs and engagement is decreasing ... but that's a whole other topic.
One thing Ad Networks do well is get local advertisers on high quality, premium international sites with strong and loyal AU IP eyeballs. Think tripadvisor, last.fm, Mini Clip, iVillage ... these are category leading sites who are on the bleeding edge of innovation and have strong brands that users identify with. What these sites allow marketers to achieve is more thorough presence in relevant areas and improved overall reach. They give the advertiser more choice. As the web becomes more mainstream these international sites will become more well known (as Google has more and more say over what is deemed as most relevant) and marketers will expect their agencies to be evaluating them against the big 5's options.
As someone who puts together digital strategies for clients, the more choice I have to evaluate the more confident I am in that I am answering the brief in the best possible way.
On top of this is Ad Networks can help advertisers get on premium local sites without dedicated representation for sales. Again, this is very liberating for advertisers as it offers even more choice, more eyeballs, more options.
What has been great this year has been a much more concerted push by the Ad Networks to offer further value. Primarily in the areas of selling a network of sites across specific categories and also offering sophisticated targeting options.
Category or vertical based ad networks are fantastic as they offer the advertiser the chance to reach a wider group of consumers across a wider variety of sites, but have control over the sites they choose and the ability to tailor a message to the context. Platform 9's content network as well as the Google Content Network are great examples of this and provide the opportunity to reach potentially a brand new audience in environments they trust. The key attractions here are reach, cost and relevance. Reaching a SME in a relevant environment used to cost you upwards of $60CPM ... now you can reach them for $6 with higher reach and response. Tempest's affiliation with Glam Media now means there are now 100+ odd additional options as well as using Vogue.com.au to reach this audience. Our reliance on a selected number of sites has been removed - in essence, restoring the balance and nurturing a health digital ad market.
And you can get quite specific with some the networks.
If I'm looking for people who are involved in grassroots local football leagues on the Eastern Seaboard I can now target them with minimal wastage. A few years back this would have been a costly and labour intensive exercise ... now thanks to a smartly crafted network I can pinpoint this audience. A premium Ad Network has aligned a large number of small grassroots sports sites (think sporting clubs, facilities etc) to create a impressively sized audience with new to market targeting options. Not a bad option for a football boot if they can target those people who are playing in a local football league within a relevant environment.
These areas offer a lot of value as they allow you to tap into consumers 'passion points' (for want of a better term) online. And they do it in a way that offers the advertiser the opportunity to manage the activity in terms of trafficking, reporting and billing just like a major local network.
What does this mean? It means the big 5 aren't really competing against eachother anymore, they're competing against hundreds of thousands of sites who now are equipped to service Australian advertisers and organised sufficiently to deliver.
Combine these audiences and numbers wise they offer the opportunity to reach equal or better volumes to the major networks ... which for the advertiser is a massive positive. It by no means replaces the need to consider larger networks, it moreso gives one more options to consider and allows for innovative ways to use the two in combination.
Then there's behavioural targeting/retargeting ... different concepts but essentially both have the same intent: utilising technology to serve more relevant ads to consumer. With sufficient networks behind them both of these formats are exciting as they offer another area to add to the digital mix. Yes, some of the main networks are playing in this space (Yahoo and Media Smart in particular) however they are competing against some strong players (such as AdConion).
Begs the question, maybe instead of investing in systems to monetise their remnant inventory some of the major publishers (aside Media Smart who already play in this space) should have been looking to extend their reach and relevancy in key high yield areas by providing local representation to premium smaller sites?
More options, more sites, more contexts, more executions, more reach - all things that can benefit the entire industry.
And lets not forget that it is now entirely viable for advertisers to CREATE the content and with digital the reliance on publishers for eyeballs and engagement is decreasing ... but that's a whole other topic.
Monday, February 18, 2008
IAB/PWC: Online Ad Growth currently at 19.5%
The IAB and PWC have released their Online Advertising Expenditure Report for the 12 months ending 31/12/07 and the results are interesting. If you compare Q4 2007 with Q4 2006, we're seeing growth of 19.5%
Usually these reports are greeted by all involved with requisite high fivery and back slapping ... but I would hazard a guess that when the last lot of data arrived the champagne would have stayed on ice.
Overall the industry is still experiencing solid growth - it's up 34.5% year on year. Display accounts for 28%, Classifieds 26% and Search 46%.
However these stats need to be analysed further. A common mistake many make is assuming ALL areas of online media are experiencing this 34.5% growth ... they're not.
Search is driving the growth, up 56% YOY (ie 06 to 07). Display was only up 21% from 06 to 07 ... this would be a concern to many, especially when you consider the industry had 56% growth from 05-06.
It is easy to assume 21% growth was not anticipated by most players, especially when numerous publishers I came across were forecasting 50% growth in their display business. I would hate to be a sales director at the moment looking at actual versus forecast.
Display, when you compare only Q4 06 to 04 07 is up 14% - compared to 29% for search. This shows minimal growth in what is generally the biggest quarter of the year. 14% growth would be celebrated by most media, but for online it's well below what is expected.
Adding more woe to the larger publishers is the fact more display dollars are going to what they refer to as 'the tail' ... ie anyone who isn't in the big 5. Some estimate this is 50% or more of total display spend ... which differs from a few years ago where the big 5 accounted for 75%+ of all display revenues.
Don't get me wrong, digital is still growing at fantastic rates ... but I think these results are a welcome reality check for many involved. For online to grow it is simply not enough to sit back and enjoy a category wide surge in spend ... the real winners moving forward, who see their own revenues increase higher than the overall industry, will be the ones who innovate and push forward what the definition of 'digital' media is ... from integration to video to content, search, mobile, digital outdoor, performance, analytics and beyond. This is something the industry as a whole needs to do - from publishers to media agencies to creative agencies and really starts at how digital is positioned within these environments. Those who have integrated digital, who have the right staff and the right learnings and the right experience are in the box seat.
For search the news is probably rosier than their display friends - now many are learning of the branding benefits and Google are seeing some great results in terms of expanding their product offering and the immediate advertiser benefits. One would predict that search can maintain current market growth domestically for the next 2 years. The issue for Yahoo! and MSN is that Google dominates this area.
I'm interested to get anyone elses opinion on the new IAB data ..
Usually these reports are greeted by all involved with requisite high fivery and back slapping ... but I would hazard a guess that when the last lot of data arrived the champagne would have stayed on ice.
Overall the industry is still experiencing solid growth - it's up 34.5% year on year. Display accounts for 28%, Classifieds 26% and Search 46%.
However these stats need to be analysed further. A common mistake many make is assuming ALL areas of online media are experiencing this 34.5% growth ... they're not.
Search is driving the growth, up 56% YOY (ie 06 to 07). Display was only up 21% from 06 to 07 ... this would be a concern to many, especially when you consider the industry had 56% growth from 05-06.
It is easy to assume 21% growth was not anticipated by most players, especially when numerous publishers I came across were forecasting 50% growth in their display business. I would hate to be a sales director at the moment looking at actual versus forecast.
Display, when you compare only Q4 06 to 04 07 is up 14% - compared to 29% for search. This shows minimal growth in what is generally the biggest quarter of the year. 14% growth would be celebrated by most media, but for online it's well below what is expected.
Adding more woe to the larger publishers is the fact more display dollars are going to what they refer to as 'the tail' ... ie anyone who isn't in the big 5. Some estimate this is 50% or more of total display spend ... which differs from a few years ago where the big 5 accounted for 75%+ of all display revenues.
Don't get me wrong, digital is still growing at fantastic rates ... but I think these results are a welcome reality check for many involved. For online to grow it is simply not enough to sit back and enjoy a category wide surge in spend ... the real winners moving forward, who see their own revenues increase higher than the overall industry, will be the ones who innovate and push forward what the definition of 'digital' media is ... from integration to video to content, search, mobile, digital outdoor, performance, analytics and beyond. This is something the industry as a whole needs to do - from publishers to media agencies to creative agencies and really starts at how digital is positioned within these environments. Those who have integrated digital, who have the right staff and the right learnings and the right experience are in the box seat.
For search the news is probably rosier than their display friends - now many are learning of the branding benefits and Google are seeing some great results in terms of expanding their product offering and the immediate advertiser benefits. One would predict that search can maintain current market growth domestically for the next 2 years. The issue for Yahoo! and MSN is that Google dominates this area.
I'm interested to get anyone elses opinion on the new IAB data ..
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
How vulnerable is Sensis right now ...
Given Sensis Mediasmart is now known as simply 'Mediasmart' you have to wonder what Telstra's plans are for the business and how it fits into it's overall digital plans.
If you look at the traffic to the core Sensis businesses, the story isn't great. Not only are most of these environments not considered particularly 'essential' line items on schedules, they are flatlining badly traffic wise.
The core Sensis online businesses have been Yellow, White, Whereis and Sensis Search.
Every single one of these businesses is down on traffic year on year.
There is a lot said about people abandoning their print White and Yellow Pages and moving online - presumably to the digital Yellow and White pages.
From this data it shows that this probably isn't the case. The broad assumption may be true - but Sensis is by no means holding this audience as they migrate online.
So where are they going? Well ... Google is the safe bet.
Note the blue line on the graph - that shows the growth of Google Maps year on year ... 500%. Whereis - which had a first mover advantage is LOSING share. The main concern for Sensis would be that not only does Google have better mapping technology and takeup - they can apply strong business listings to said maps (Google threw True Local a lifeline and the match is a pretty solid one) and start to trump Yellow. And no doubt eventually they will setup something that rivals White (which Maps already does if you look at the Business listings element of White).
08 poses a few key challenges for Sensis ...
1. Do they maintain a search engine that cannot compete against Google let alone a MSHOO joint play ... or do they walk away from SEM or look to offer Yahoo or MSN a search distro deal across their network and rev. share?
2. How can they adapt Yellow to become more appealing to users? How do they adapt the way advertisers pay to be in Yellow given Google has changed the way many SMEs want to pay for leads
3. Can Whereis hold itself against Google Maps. What can it do better than its competitors - it's not enough to simply match them.
4. What does Sensis actually mean to consumers? Do you retire the brand or simply push it to the background?
5. Do they walk away from search and maps and focus on mobile - an they have a pretty sophisticated offering to give the market now the walled garden approach has been abandoned.
EDIT: All data for this post was sourced from Neilsen Netview, December 2007.
If you look at the traffic to the core Sensis businesses, the story isn't great. Not only are most of these environments not considered particularly 'essential' line items on schedules, they are flatlining badly traffic wise.
The core Sensis online businesses have been Yellow, White, Whereis and Sensis Search.
Every single one of these businesses is down on traffic year on year.
There is a lot said about people abandoning their print White and Yellow Pages and moving online - presumably to the digital Yellow and White pages.
From this data it shows that this probably isn't the case. The broad assumption may be true - but Sensis is by no means holding this audience as they migrate online.
So where are they going? Well ... Google is the safe bet.
Note the blue line on the graph - that shows the growth of Google Maps year on year ... 500%. Whereis - which had a first mover advantage is LOSING share. The main concern for Sensis would be that not only does Google have better mapping technology and takeup - they can apply strong business listings to said maps (Google threw True Local a lifeline and the match is a pretty solid one) and start to trump Yellow. And no doubt eventually they will setup something that rivals White (which Maps already does if you look at the Business listings element of White).
08 poses a few key challenges for Sensis ...
1. Do they maintain a search engine that cannot compete against Google let alone a MSHOO joint play ... or do they walk away from SEM or look to offer Yahoo or MSN a search distro deal across their network and rev. share?
2. How can they adapt Yellow to become more appealing to users? How do they adapt the way advertisers pay to be in Yellow given Google has changed the way many SMEs want to pay for leads
3. Can Whereis hold itself against Google Maps. What can it do better than its competitors - it's not enough to simply match them.
4. What does Sensis actually mean to consumers? Do you retire the brand or simply push it to the background?
5. Do they walk away from search and maps and focus on mobile - an they have a pretty sophisticated offering to give the market now the walled garden approach has been abandoned.
EDIT: All data for this post was sourced from Neilsen Netview, December 2007.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Google: $16b revenues projected in 08 and they haven't even started
Great article in the New Yorker about Google and their increased lobbying to US political heavy hitters - http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/01/14/080114fa_fact_auletta
Most interesting
- Google is on track for $16b of revenues in 08
- Google performs 400 billion searches a year
The most intruiging thing about Google is, when you really think about it they haven't even really began to scratch the surface on what is possible for them. Sure, they own search and control the largest video sharing site, but what is really exciting is what they can do when they merge the amazing functionality of maps, earth, search, content network, video, UGC, checkout etc and create a beast that takes what we know as 'search' to new and amazing places.
Recently maps seem locally to have been enhanced ten fold in terms of functionality (ie finding businesses, directions etc) that make Sensis's technology look absolutely archaic. Personally, I think Google is the number one threat to Sensis's cash cow directories business and has a very good chance of swallowing it up within a few years.
Everyone always watches Google - but watch out especially in 08.
Most interesting
- Google is on track for $16b of revenues in 08
- Google performs 400 billion searches a year
The most intruiging thing about Google is, when you really think about it they haven't even really began to scratch the surface on what is possible for them. Sure, they own search and control the largest video sharing site, but what is really exciting is what they can do when they merge the amazing functionality of maps, earth, search, content network, video, UGC, checkout etc and create a beast that takes what we know as 'search' to new and amazing places.
Recently maps seem locally to have been enhanced ten fold in terms of functionality (ie finding businesses, directions etc) that make Sensis's technology look absolutely archaic. Personally, I think Google is the number one threat to Sensis's cash cow directories business and has a very good chance of swallowing it up within a few years.
Everyone always watches Google - but watch out especially in 08.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
