Why? Brands with a social media presence engage their customers. This engagement brings customers closer to the brands.

Because Xspots are dynamic, they also provide advertisers with opportunities to bring customers closer. Four dynamic features with which you may already be familiar include:

• Auto-optimization React automatically to viewer preferences and get the best performance by optimizing an Xspot while it’s running.
• Message targeting Deliver the right message to the right viewer at the right time using geographical and other targeting methods.
• Rapid response Respond to breaking news or date-specific offers by changing creative on the fly without re-trafficking ad tags.
• Interactivity Increase engagement opportunities with links, forms, coupons, surveys, social media sharing actions, and other interactive features.

Now, advertisers have a new way to build rapport between customers and their brands. Xspots can include dynamic widget overlays that contain built-in animation and intelligence, such as XML, RSS, and other live feeds. As the Xspot plays, the widget continues to update in real time.

The possibilities are virtually limitless.

For example, a political Xspot might include a Twitter widget that streams the candidate’s most recent Tweets as the Xspot plays.

Or, as the following innovative demo Xspot illustrates, a lottery ad might include a widget that updates daily to show winning numbers.

More information

Interested in learning more about what dynamic Xspots can do for your ad campaign? Visit our Industries page now.

Mixpo customer? Learn more today about adding widget overlays to Xspots by signing in to your account, opening the Client Resources home page, and then searching for “widget.”

Graphical display of views/impressions ratio

The data is in.

Video ad views result in a lift in branded search queries and visits to and time spent on advertisers’ websites.

That’s the conclusion of recent research studies by comScore, Microsoft, and others.

So it’s in any advertiser’s self interest to make sure that the online video ads they run attract as many views as possible.

Based on data that tracks hundreds of campaigns across numerous industry segments, here are 3 tips for increasing any video ad’s active view rate:

Use a compelling starting image

The starting image is the image that viewers see before they play a video ad. The more compelling that image, the more viewers the video ad attracts.

• Video ads in the tourism and politics/advocacy segments with compelling starting images have attracted active view rates as high as 4.3 percent (compare to an industry benchmark view rate of 1.43 percent for tourism and 1.77 percent for politics/advocacy).

Beckon viewers with words

Include words on the starting image that make viewers an offer they can’t refuse. Or, ask viewers a question they can’t resist answering.

• Video ads in the financial segment with compelling starting image text have attracted active view rates as high as 7.3 percent (compare to an industry benchmark view rate of 2.98 percent).
• Video ads in the auto segment with compelling starting image text have attracted view rates of 3.38 percent (compare to an industry benchmark view rate of 2.54 percent).

Auto-optimize

The way to squeeze the best active view rate out of a video ad campaign is auto-optimization.

Auto-optimization means rotating different video ad versions through the same Player. After a specified number of impressions, the platform automatically runs the version with the best active view rate.

This gives advertisers the opportunity to effortlessly test different creative within the context of running a campaign. For example, an advertiser might compare the performance of:

• Three versions with different starting images.
• A version where the starting image includes an offer and a version where the starting image poses a question.

Auto-optimization not only helps advertisers improve video ad performance. It also gives them valuable information to carry forward into the design of subsequent campaigns.

Chart showing viewer engagement over the length of a video ad

As studies increasingly show (for example, see comScore’s Whither the Click in Europe?, this .Foxnet-comScore study, this VideoEgg-comScore study, and these reported results of a Nielsen IAG-Microsoft study), engaging video ads, even in the face of minimal clicks, effectively drive visits to advertisers’ websites and increase the number of trademark searches.

Given this data, click-through rate is not a terribly meaningful measure of an online video ad campaign’s success. But if not click-through, then what?

Here are some ways researchers are answering this question.

Dwell time

Using data sets from comScore and Eyeblaster, Microsoft found a “clear connection between the amount of time that a user spends actively engaging with an online ad and a consumer’s subsequent online behaviour with that brand.” Higher dwell scores mean more branded search queries and more visits to and engagement with the brand website.

Engagement mapping and view-through conversions

For several years, online marketers have been struggling with the disconnect between the knowledge that consumers visit multiple sites before conversion and metrics that focus on the last-seen or last-clicked ad.

For example, a study conducted by Microsoft’s Atlas Institute of advertising campaigns run by 250 advertisers across thousands of sites showed that most consumers make contact with advertisers months before they actually convert. Using a 90-day history window, consumers experienced a median of 18.5 ad events.

In response, Atlas introduced Engagement Mapping technology that allows advertisers to fold all types of events, including passive events such as views and impressions, into their ROI calculations.

Google recently announced view-through conversion reporting on the Google Content Network, which allows advertisers to tie conversions to display ad views within a 30-day window even when no clicks occur.

Engagement rate and conversion activity

In a June, 2009 benchmarks review, DoubleClick suggested that “the objective of rich media ads isn’t always to drive clicks.” Therefore, engagement metrics, such as interaction rates and times and video completion are important success measures.

In addition, DoubleClick argued, conversion activity can happen within an ad unit itself. For example, while watching a video ad, viewers might open and submit a lead capture form, take a poll, locate the nearest retail outlet, or play another video.

A wealth of data

In the Mixpo platform, you have access to a wealth of real-time data related to the performance of video ad campaigns. For example, you can:

• See how much of your video ad viewers watch on average and what percentage of viewers watch the entire ad.
• Track clicks, views, and interactions individually, or see an overall engagement rate that divides the total of all of these measures by the number of impressions to calculate an engagement percentage.
• Track conversions, either by counting actions viewers take within a video ad or subsequent visits they make to the advertiser’s website.

How do you see it?

Let us know what you think. What results should advertisers expect from video ad campaigns? What metrics should they use to judge campaign effectiveness?

At Mixpo, we’re always refining our performance analytics to give you the data you need. Recently, we added a Domain filter to the Dashboard that allows you to compare impressions, views, clicks, exposure, viewer locations, and even Xspot placement across publishers.

Example: Compare Xspot Position maps

Suppose you’re seeing large differences in engagement rates between publisher sites. Xspot placement may explain it.

Compare the following Xspot Position maps. The first, for the publisher with a lower engagement rate, shows the Xspot running primarily below the fold. In contrast, the second map, for the publisher with a higher engagement rate, shows the Xspot running above the fold.

Publisher 1: Xspot running primarily below the fold

Publisher 2: Xspot running above the fold

Example: Compare Viewer Location maps

Suppose you’re seeing loads of impressions for one publisher but few views or clicks. Another publisher has fewer impressions but a significantly higher views-to-impressions ratio. Audience targeting may explain it.

Compare the following two Viewer Location maps for an Xspot targeting a Montana audience. The top map suggests that the Xspot is being served to all viewers regardless of their locations, which results in a lot of wasted impressions. The bottom map suggests that the Xspot was better targeted at the appropriate local audience.

Publisher 1: Xspot served to all viewers

Publisher 2: Xspot served to viewers by location

More performance analytics enhancements are on the way, including an analysis of performance data by designated marketing area (DMA). Check back soon for details.

More information

Mixpo subscribers can learn more about the Domain filter by visiting the Reports page, and then clicking Can I monitor Xspot performance by domain?