TOMORROW FOCUS and comScore announced Results of ‘Brand Advertising Online in Germany’ Study at DLD Conference: Low Click-Through Rates Lead to Under-Valuation of Online As Brand Building Channel

1. BRAND ADVERTISING ONLINE
January 2011
IN GERMANY
Is the ‘ClICk’ the rIght CurrenCy for DIsplay aDvertIsIng effeCtIveness?
exclusively presented at
Linda abraham ChriStOph SChuh
Chief marketing Officer, comScore, inc. Chief marketing Officer, tOmOrrOw FOCuS aG
mike Shaw karin rOthStOCk
director, marketing Solutions, comScore, inc. head of research, tOmOrrOw FOCuS media
ZOSia riCh
research manager, marketing Solutions, comScore, inc.

2. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
How Online Adve
ertising Wo
orks: Measu
uring Displ Ad Effe
lay ectiveness in German
ny
BACKG
GROUND
In today economic
y’s cally challen
nging times, some adve ertisers and their agenciies, in the quest for
q
immedia returns, a moving campaign spe from CP campaign that requir payment based on
ate are c end PM ns re b
the nummber of deliveered ad imprressions to C
CPC program where pay
ms yment is bas sed on the number of
clicks on an ad. How
n wever, the in
ncreasing soophistication of online audiences has led fewer and fewer
s a
Internet users to clic on ads, to the extent that, as Dou
ck o ubleClick rep
ported in its 2
2009 Year-inn-Review
benchmark report, th average click-through rates acros its image, flash, and riich media ca
he c h ss ampaigns
had falle to just 0.1
en 11% in Germ many compa ared with 0.07% in the United Kingdo and 0.10 in the
om 0%
US. Mo markets in Europe sa a decrea in their CTR from 2008, with Ger
ost aw ase C rmany seein a 15%
ng
decline.
Are low click rates evidence th display ad campaig have no had any im
w hat gns ot mpact on coonsumer
behavioour? Or, dooes online display adv
d vertising wo in a sim
ork milar way to traditiona offline
o al
advertis
sing with m multiple exposures ov
ver time ne eeded to effect a cha
e ange in co onsumer
behavioour?
many, as in o
In Germ other markets including t US, the Internet is no yet broadlly viewed as a useful
s, the I ot s
medium to promote branding (Fig
gure 1).
Fig
gure 1: The In
nternet is not proportionat
tely used for Brand Adver
rtising
63% T Total Measured Med Spend:
dia
dollar are
rs $186
6B
spen on
nt
Braand
Marke eting
On 23% online
nly
Online Med Spend:
dia
$118B
B dolla are spent on
ars n
$26
6B Bra Marketing
and
Br
rand $6
6B
Direct Re
esponse $2
20B
77% online dollars
%
$68B
are spent on Direct
t
37% Total Response
dollars are Marketing
spent o Direct
on
Resp ponse
Mark keting
Source: Le
ehman Brothers Think Equity Partners, US 20
s, P 008
TV is th firmly root
he ted front-run
nner when co valuate whic medium to use for a branding
ompanies ev ch o
campaig Many still view onlin as a dire ct response channel, most suitable for driving traffic or
gn. ne m e
quickly increasing pu
urchase inten (Figure 2) .
nt
PAGE 2

3. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Figure 2: Which medi
: ium is best fo branding campaigns?
or c
4%
5% 5% 6%
9% Prom
moting Loyalty
10%
7% 20%
10% 15% 32%
Drivin Traffic / Purchase
ng
15% Intentt
23%
21% Prom
moting Conside
eration
24%
70% 16% Gene
erating Familia
arity
47%
36%
25% Creatting Awarenes
ss
TV Magazine
es New
wspapers Online
Source: B
Bain & Company ‘In search of a premium alter
y, rnative: an actio plan for online brand advertis
on sing’ (2010)
There is a clear disc
s crepancy bettween the Int
ternet metric that curren exist and those that branding
cs ntly d
advertise require. In order to measure bra
ers m anding campa aigns, advertisers look fo measures such as
or s
brand aw wareness, re
ecall, purcha intent, a
ase and likelihood to recomm
d mend, whilst the Internet tends to
offer immmediate mettrics such as ad impress
s sions, click-th
hroughs and interaction rates; none of which
d
effective provide m
ely marketers wit what they need to jus
th y stify or increase branding investmen online
g nts
(Figure 33).
Figu 3: Which metrics are m
ure m most suitable for measurin brand buil
ng lding
campaigns? ?
5
55% % panelists What bran get
nds
What brannds
45% want / nee
ed
30%
23% 22% 20%
% 19% 18
8% 16%
14% 12%
1
8% 7% 7%
Source: Bain & Compan Building Brands Online: An Interactive Advertising Action Plan, 2009
ny, P
This pap reports the results of comScore research into the impact of online display ad
per o e i e dvertising
leveraging comScor re’s proprieta panel of 2 million Internet user more tha 400,000 of whom
ary f rs, an
reside in Europe. Ad
n dditional to th the Prem
hat, mium Ad Network TOMO ORROW FOC CUS Media analysed
the click rates of mo than 8 billion display ads, served in Novemb and Dec
k ore b y d ber cember 2010 on their
0
premium network in Germany.
m
Instead of relying upon cookies to measure behaviour, comScore has obtaine explicit pe
s e ed ermission
from a rrepresentativ cross sec
ve ction of Intern users in countries ac
net cross the glo
obe to meas
sure their
online acctivities over time. The re
r esults presennted in this paper will dem
p monstrate tha wholesale reliance
at e
PAGE 3

4. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
on click-
-through rate as a mea
es asure of disp
play advertisi effectiven
ing ness distorts marketers’ views of
s
how onli compares to other me
ine edia.
The pheenomenon of cookie dele
f etion poses a significant challenge an has rende
c nd ered inaccura much
ate
of the co
ookie-based research co onducted to date on the effectivenes of online advertising. Cookies
e ss
are sma pieces of code inserte into the c
all ed computer bro owser of the user whose behaviour is being
e e
examine in an att
ed, tempt to uni iquely identi fy the compputer and thereby monit its activit While
tor ty.
conceptually an apppealing appr roach, the pr revalence of anti-spyware software (now built into most
f
browser allows Inte
rs) ernet users very easily to delete their cookies as they see fit. Research co
v o r onducted
by comS Score and o others has shown that, because of cookie de
, o eletion, any attempt to measure
compute users’ acti
er ivity over time using cook kies alone will be subject to substant error leve as the
w t tial els
cookies are deleted, and this will typically und
l derstate the impact of the advertising being meas
e g sured.
ERMAN ONL
THE GE LINE ADVER
RTISING LAN
NDSCAPE
In 2009, the German online indu
, n ustry accoun
nted for 16.5% of all advertising spen and was the third
nd,
largest a medium in Germany, folllowing TV and magazine according to the OV Online
advertising m G es, g VK
Report 22010/01. For the first time online surp
r e, passed conssumer publicaations.
Figu 4: 2009 Online advertis
ure O sing spend in Germany
n
Affiliate
Netwworks,
€ 308 million
Conventio
onal
Online
e
S
Search Marketin
ng,
Maarketing, €2,168 million
€1,6 million
624
Source: O
OVK Statistic 200 – OVK Online Report 2010/0
09 01
The Ge erman online advertising industry g
e g grew by 12 2% to over €4 billion iin 20091, ex xceeding
expectattions. At €2.2 billion, con
nventional o
online advertising still acc
counted for t
the majority of gross
advertising sales in 2009, follo
n owed by sea arch marketiing with €1.6 billion. Th affiliate networks’
he n
segment also topped €300 million for the first time.
d t
Increasingly, adverttiser budget are migra
ts ating to the online me
e edium, with conventiona online
al
advertising alone ac
chieving a do
ouble-digit sh
hare of the media mix in many sector Online ad
m rs. dvertising
in Germany is expeccted to have grown by 14 in 2010, reaching a to of €4.7 b illion1.
4% r otal
ZenithOptimedia rec cently reporte that, in 20
ed 010, Germany was the world’s third largest ad market in
w m
terms of ad spend, surpassed only by the U.S. and Japan. They also anticiipate that th global
e y he
Internet will grow by 48% betwee 2010 and 2013. The report further suggests th in 2013 television
en d r hat t
tinue to take the majority of market sh
will cont hare worldwide while the Internet will account for 17.9% of
all ad spend, almos equaling that of news
st spapers. Tak
ken in combination, thes projection clearly
se ns
demonstrate the faith that mar rketers and their agenccies have in the Interne as an ad
n et dvertising
medium.
1
Source: O
OVK Online Report 2010/01
PAGE 4

5. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
In econo omically diff
ficult times, advertisers’ ability to co
omprehensively and acc curately meaasure the
effective
eness of adv vertising beccomes even more important. Typica ally, markete use click
ers k-through
rates (CCTRs) to assess the effec ctiveness of an online caampaign. Hoowever, CTR are extrem
Rs mely low,
and hav continually declined ov the past f
ve y ver few years. The markets listed in Figu 5 saw an average
T l ure
decline o 28% in jus one year. In Germany CTRs decre
of st y eased by 15% in 2009 an are now at a level
% nd a
of only 00.11%, whils the averag CTR on ads hosted on Tomorro Focus site in Novem
st ge ow tes mber and
Decemb 2010 was just 0.07%. The market listed in Fi
ber s . ts igure 5 saw an average d
a decline of 28 in just
8%
one year.
In addition, accordin to DoubleClick, it se
ng eems that CTRs are inv
C versely corre
elated to the relative
e
cation of the audience This mea
sophistic eir es. ans that the few people who do c
e click on ads are not
s
necessaarily represe
entative of the people an advertis
t ser wants to reach. Ma
o arkets wher online
re
advertising spend is higher, and consumers see more campaigns, have even lo
s d s c h ower CTRs. As users
become accustomed to conducting online ac
d ctivities, it apppears that CTRs decline..
Figure 5: Worldwide Click-Throug Rates
5 gh
0,2
2%
India
0,18%
0,16%
Netherlands
0,14%
0,18%
C
China
0,12%
0,14%
S
Spain
0,12%
0,12%
Fr
rance
0,12%
0,13% 20
008
many
Germ
0
0,11%
20
009
0,12%
Italy
0,10
0%
0,1%
%
US
0,10
0%
0,1%
%
Canada
0,09%
0,1%
%
Aus
stralia
0,07%
0,08%
UK
0,07%
Click-throu rates across Static Image, Flash and Rich Media formats
ugh s h
Source: Doubleclick DAR for Advertiser a cross-sectio of regions, January – Decem
RT rs on mber 2008 / 200
09
For the German Pr remium Disp play Network TOMORRO FOCUS MEDIA, w
k OW S which serves about 4
billion ad per month the averag CTR in 20 was 0.14 on avera (CTR-Re
ds h, ge 010 4% age eport TF Med
dia). This
data sho ows, that click rates in a premium network like TOMORRO FOCUS MEDIA are slightly
e OW S e
higher t than the ave erage CTR in Germany but still quite low, ranging from 0.08% for a classic
y, q
skyscrap up to 0.8
per 86% for a bannderole ad (F
Figure 6).
Figure 6: Exa
ample CTRs on TOMORRO FOCUS NETWORK 20
o OW N 010
Average Click Rates (on
n TOMORRO
OW FOCUS CTR in %
Network 2010)
Banderole Ad 0,8
86
Wallpaper 0,5
56
Panorama Ad 0,4
44
PAGE 5

6. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Super Bann
ner 0,1
15
Medium Reectangle 0,1
11
Skyscraper 0,0
08
Source: CTR-Analysis, TO
OMORROW FO
OCUS Media, Ja
an-Dec 2010
One fact that seem to be driv
tor ms ving this is th at more and more branding campaig do not ha a call
gns ave
to action in the cre
n eative. The task of thes ad forma is buildin up brand awareness loyalty,
se ats ng d s,
recommmendation etc instead of high click-thr
c. rough rates. The new ove
ersized ad fo
ormats and video-ads
v
mportant step towards the Internet as a branding channel like TV.
are an im s
Figure 7: Exa
ample for an Oversized Cr
reative without direct call to action
So, do lo CTRs me that the advertising is not effective? comSco research indicates th this is
ow ean ore h hat
not the c
case. The re esearch show that the u of CTRs to measure effectiveness results in marketers
ws use e s m
basing ttheir conclus sions on acctivity that o ccurs, in most cases, for a mere 0.1% of all the ads
f
delivered (and focus on peop who migh not even be in the ad
d ses ple ht dvertiser’s ta
arget segmen while
nt),
ignoring the effects that the othe 99.9% of the ads pote
er entially have on consum
e mers. In othe words,
er
the CTR can be quite misleadin in evalua
R ng ating campaign impact. It is essentia to establis a new
al sh
currency in the nea future that is able to measure the success of advertising effects in branding
y ar t e o g
campaig gns. To further confirm that conclu usion, we move from an analysis of CTRs an to an
m a nd
investiga
ation of the c
clickers them
mselves.
NATURA BORN C
AL CLICKERS: STUDY DES
S SIGN
In July 2
2007 in the UU.S., comSc
core conduct ted the first study that ex
s xamined how Internet us
w sers click
on the a ads to which they have been expos
h sed. The stu has sinc been upd
udy ce dated to allo for an
ow
analysis of trends. c
s comScore’s proprietary te
p echnology pa assively meaasures all the digital activ of its
e vity
panelists and collec complete URL/click s
s, cts e stream data. The information collect
. ted also included the
actual creative used in the adve
d ertising. With
hout collectin any personally identifia
ng able data, comScore
used its proprietary panel to ob
bserve Intern users’ on
net nline behavio and asso
our ociated ad exposure,
e
including whether o not the panelists clic
g or p cked on an ad. The ad exposure a
d and click da were
ata
integrate into a database and panelists’ sit visitation was categor
ed te rised accordding to the comScore
site cate
egories.
PAGE 6

7. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
The pan nelists were ssegmented based on the weight of their monthly CTRs, form
b e t y ming 3 groups: Heavy
clickers (clicking on 4+ ads), Mod
derate clicke (clicking on 2-3 ads) and Light clic
ers o a ckers (clickin on just
ng
1 ad). Non-clickers ccomprised a fourth groupp.
sults of the 2
The res 2010 update showed th
e hat, despite accounting for only 4% of the total Internet
f l
populatio the Hea
on, avy clickers accounted for 63% of all clicks on display a
o ads in the month. A
m
staggering 88% of th U.S. Internet populatio did not click on any ad at all, (Figu 8).
he on d ure
Fig
gure 8: Heavy clickers acc
y count for a sm proporti of the U.S Internet po
mall ion S. opulation
2%
3%
%
7% 20%
26% 63%
88%
54% 19%
18%
% Internet Po
opulation % Clickers s
% Clicks
Non L
Light Mod
derate Heavy
Source: co
omScore, Natur Born Clickers (US), August 2
ral s 2010
Over tim comScor has obser
me, re rved a meas urable declin in the num
ne mber of user clicking on display
rs
ads, furrther diminishing the imp
portance of the click. Over a three year period the perce
O d, entage of
Internet users who d not click in a month g rew from 68 in July 20 to 84% in March 200 and to
do 8% 007 n 09
88% in A August 2010 As the num
0. mber of click
kers continue to decline, the click be
es , ecomes prog
gressively
irrelevan as a key m
nt measure of a successful ccampaign.
Figure 9: Growth in U
9 U.S. non-clickers
88%
84%
%
6
68%
Jul 2007
ly March 2009 August 20
010
Source: co
omScore, Natur Born Clickers (US), July 200 – August 201
ral s 07 10
Looking at a series o display ad campaigns in Germany a similar pattern emerg
of d s y, p ges. Only 15 of the
5%
total German online population actually click
a ked on a display ad in August 2010. Heavy click
A kers, who
accounte for 3% of the German online popu
ed f n ulation, generated 62% of the clicks (F
Figure 10).
The pro eavy clickers in German is about the same as in the U.S . and accounts for a
oportion of he s ny t s
similar p
proportion of the clicks. This leads to questions such as who are these cliickers, and how does
T h
their online behaviou compare to the overalll Internet pop
ur pulation in Germany?
PAGE 7

8. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Figu
ure 10: German heavy clicckers accoun for a small proportion
nt
of the Inte
ernet population
3%
4%
8% 19%
27% 62%
%
85%
%
54% 20%
%
18%
%
% Internet Po
opulation % Clickers % Cli cks
Non Lig
ght Moder
rate Heav
vy
Source: co
omScore Marke
eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010
ust
LING GERMA DISPLAY AD CLICK
PROFIL AN Y KERS
If clicker as a grou were representative o the total German Inter
rs up of G rnet populatio we woul expect
on, ld
their onlline behaviou patterns to mirror thos of the Ge
ur se erman online population at large. com
e mScore’s
analysis shows that this is not so. Heavy cliickers are, in fact, quite different acr
s s n ross the boa
ard—on a
monthly basis, they spend two and a half tim more minutes online and visit a
a mes m e almost three times as
many pa ages as nonn-clickers (Fig
gure 11). Heeavy clickers are disprop
s portionately sskewed commpared to
the muc larger nu
ch umber of no on-clickers aand, as suc do not accurately r
ch, represent th online
he
behaviour of the Ger rman online audience.
Figure 11: Tot minutes on
tal nline per visitor
3.000 2.845
5
2.500
2.000 1.746
6
1.500 1.166
1.000
500
-
Non-Clic
ckers Light Clic
ckers Heavy Clic
ckers
Source: co
omScore Marke
eting Solutions, Germany Augus 2010
st
A simila pattern em
ar merges when delving into site catego visitation (Figure 12), where the visitation
n o ory ,
profile o clickers is very differen from that o non-clicke This furth supports the fact that clickers
of nt of ers. her s
differ gre
eatly from the overall poppulation in th online be
heir ehaviour. The most dram
e matic differences seen
were in time spent on gambling career ser
g, rvices, and education. A possible hyypothesis th would
hat
explain this is that cclickers tend to be youn
d nger and une employed. Certainly, one can say th while
C e hat
clickers spend a sub bstantial amoount of time online, they are not representative o the audien most
y of nce
markete want to re
ers each. If markketers target campaigns based on CT
b TRs, they risk shifting the balance
k e
towards a specific ty of user who is unlikel y to embody the desired target segm
ype w y ment.
PAGE 8

9. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Figure 12: Site cate
egory distribu
ution by composition indeex
for cl
lickers and n on-clickers compared to total Internet
c t t
106
Se
ervices
105 Search/Naavigation
Enttertainment
Portals
P
104 Retaill
Conversation Media
nal
Direct
tories/Resourcees Telecomm munications
Non Clickers
Technology y
103
ormation Auctio
News/Info ons
Busine
ess/Finance Community
C
102 Travel Games
Business to Bus
B siness
Auto
omotive ISP
101 orts
Spo
Regional/Local
Real Estate Educattion
100 Governmment
Hea
alth
Career S
Services Gambling
99
98
70 80 90 100 110 120
0 130 140 150
0 160 170 180
0
Heavy Clickers
y
Source: co
omScore Marke
eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010
ust
Non-clic ckers represe the majo
ent ority of Intern users an favour sit focused on services, search,
net nd tes
retail, ne ews and infoormation. Th are more focused on the functio
hey e onality of the Internet an how it
e nd
fulfills a particular ne
eed. They sppend less tim online tha clickers and navigate through pag more
me an ges
efficientl Typically those with less time, busy mothe for exam
ly. ers mple, are les likely to click on
ss
campaig but clear would not be conside
gns rly ered less imp
portant; on the contrary, they would often be
deemed the most va aluable segm
ment for many advertisers
y s.
When lo ooking at the demograph profile of clickers and non-clicker we can se that there are few
e hic d rs ee e
differenc in their g
ces gender profil Women a slightly more likely to be light cli ckers and males are
le. are m o m
slightly m
more likely to be heavy clickers, howe
o c ever the diffe
erence is ver nominal. (F
ry Figure 13)
Figure 13: Clic
F ckers are gen
nder neutral
Non-Clickers
s Light Click
kers Heavy Clic
ckers
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
M
Male Female Ma
ale Female M
Male Female
Source: co
omScore Marke
eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010
ust
Taking t this further w can look at whether th age of a person has any impact o their prop
we a he on pensity to
click. In Figure 14, w can see th heavy cliickers tend to be younge over-index
we hat er, xing highest amongst
18-34 ye olds, wit the oldest users far le likely to exhibit this behaviour. L ight clickers are also
ear th ess b
over- inddexed among younger users, but in
gst nterestingly peak amongs users aged 55 and abo
p st d ove.
PAGE 9

10. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Figure 14: Age impa
acts on the propensity to click
p
Non-Clic
ckers Light Cli
ickers Heavy Clickers
C
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55
4 5+ 18-2 25-34 35-
24 -44 45-54 55+
5 18-
-24 25-34 35
5-44 45-54 55+
omScore Marke
Source: co eting Solutions, Germany, Augu 2010
ust
RSTANDING HOW ONLIN AD EXPO
UNDER NE OSURE CHA
ANGES BEH
HAVIOUR
comSco has conducted a serie of ad effe ctiveness stu
ore es udies across Western Eu
s urope (Germmany, UK,
France, and Spain) which sho that disp
) ow sing, despite a lack of clicks, can have a
play advertis e
ant, positive impact on consumer behaviour. When com
significa n mparing the passively-o
e observed
behaviour of Interne users exp
et posed to dis play ads wit that of a comparable set of non-
th e -exposed
users, mmatched on ddemographics and prior o
online behaviour, comSco determin that:
ore ned
• Display ads lifted vis
sitation to the advertiser’s website by 72% on ave
e s erage
• Display ads increase the likelih
ed hood of cons sumers conducting a traddemark sear query
rch
using the advertiser’s branded te erms by an average of 94
a 4%
Figure 15: Lift generated by display ads in Europe
L d a e
94%
72%
Adve
ertiser Site Visitation
V Trademark Searc Queries
ch
Source: co
omScore “Whith the Click in Europe?” Febru
her E uary 2010
Comparring these Eu uropean data with corres
a sponding da in the U.S (49% lift in U.S. site visitation
ata S.
and 40% lift in the n
% number of U.S. tradema search qu
U ark ueries), the aggregation of European studies
a n
shows c
consistently hhigher lifts am
mong Interne users expo
et osed to display advertisin
ng.
Addition comScor research, published in the Jou
nal re urnal of Advvertising Re esearch (Fig
gure 16),
evaluate both the online and in-store sale impact ac
ed es cross 139 ca
ampaigns in the US ma
n arket. On
average it showed a average lift of 27% in online sales and 17% in offline sale
e, an l n s n es—despite a CTR of
0.1%.
PAGE 10

11. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
Figure 16 Dollar sales lift among h
6: s households exposed to on
e nline advertis
sing
% Lift: 17%
:
$11,550
0
$9,905
% Lift: 27%
$994
4 $1,263
Online ffline
Of
Co ntrol Test
t
Source: “W
Whither the Click?” 139 comSco studies in th June 2009 Jo
ore he ournal of Advert
tising Research
h
comSco has also evaluated th ability of c
ore he campaigns to increase classic brand
t c ding metrics, such as
awareneess, favourab
bility, and lik
kelihood to re
ecommend, all of which can be sign nificantly imp
pacted by
display campaigns. Further, comScore has demonstrated that the quality of t
s e the creative used in
online a has been shown to relate strong to the ef
ads n gly ffectiveness of the adveertising. While certain
brands would not d dream of air ring a TV a before it passed cer
ad rtain creative or persua
e asiveness
thresholds, the prac
ctice of testin creative quality in digital has only recently b
ng begun to unf fold, and
must als be incorpo
so orated into th ad effectiv
he veness equation.
While coomScore is j just beginnin to expand its advertis
ng d sing measur rement servic ces in Germ
many, our
experien in other markets sug
nce ggests that th
hese additional metrics can provide valuable new insight
c
into how online adve
w ertising works Depending on the bran the objec
s. g nd, ctive of the ca
ampaign as well as a
variety o other facto that have proven to p
of ors e play a role in the effectiv
n veness of the campaign, such as
e ,
creative quality, and media place ement, inves
stments in onnline branding advertising may well fa
g g avourably
compare to TV in ter
e rms of ROI.
ARY
SUMMA
This stu
udy leads to several key conclusions with impo
y s, ortant implicaations for alll stakeholde in the
ers
German and interna
n ational digital eco-system First, the group of Internet users who click on display
m. n
ads is sm and gett
mall ting smaller. Second, the online beha
e aviour of click
kers is so dif
fferent from the much
t
larger group of non- -clickers that clickers sim
mply do not represent th desired a
he audience for the vast
majority of advertiseers. Third, th
hese pattern s are observved not only in Germany but are consistent
y y,
across t globe. La a growin body of st
the ast, ng trong eviden proves th online dis
nce hat splay campa aigns can
build bra
ands through increasing consumer en
h ngagement, whether it is site visitatio search activity, or
s on,
ultimately online as w as offlin sales. Cle
well ne early, evaluat
ting campaig effectivene using CT
gn ess TRs is at
best shoort-sighted and, more like significan under-va
ely, ntly alues the ability of the onnline channe to build
el
brands. The major implication fo the indust is that if digital is to receive its fa share of branding
or try air
spend, ffocus must s shift away fro the click to new met
om k trics that bet reflect bo the quality of the
tter oth
creative as well as th multiple ways in which online ads can build bra
he w h ands.
PAGE 11

12. H
How Online Adver
rtising Works
ABOUT COMSCOR
RE
comSco Inc. (NAS
ore, SDAQ: SCOR) is a globa leader in measuring the digital world and prefer
al m e d rred
source o digital business analyti
of ics. comScor helps its clients better understand, leverage an profit
re c , nd
from the rapidly evol
e lving digital marketing lan
m ndscape by providing dat analytics and on-demand
p ta,
software solutions fo the measu
e or urement of on nline ads and audiences, media plann
d ning, website
e
analytics advertising effectivene
s, g ess, copy-tessting, social media, search, video, mo
m obile, cross-m
media, e-
commer rce, and a broad variety of emerging f
o forms of digital consumer behaviour. comScore services,
s
which no include th product su
ow he uites of recen acquisition Nedstat, Nexius XPlor ARSGrou and
nt ns N re, up
Certifica are used by more than 1,600 clients around the world, including global le
a, s e eaders such as
h
AOL, Ba aidu, BBC, Best Buy, Car Deutsche Bank, ESP Facebook, France Te
rat, e PN, elecom, Financial
Times, FFox, Microso MediaCor Nestle, St
oft, rp, tarcom, Terr Networks, Universal M
ra McCann, Veriz zon
Services Group, ViaMichelin and Yahoo!.
s d
For more information please visit www.coms
e n, score.com or e-mail Mike Shaw at
r e
mshaw@@comscore.c com .
ABOUT TOMORRO FOCUS
OW
TOMOR RROW FOCU AG is on of Germa
US ne any's leading publicly tra
g aded interne groups. Th group
et he
operates in three areas: trans
s sactions, addvertising an technologies. The t
nd transactions division
comprise HolidayCheck, a hote review and travel book
es el d king portal an ElitePartn
nd ner, a premiu dating
um
site.
The adv vertising division includes TOMORR ROW FOCUS Media, one of the prin
S e ncipal Germa online
an
marketin businesse Alongside group-own
ng es. ned websites such as FOCUS Onlin Finanzen
s ne, n100 and
jameda, the business markets partner site such as CHIP Online FAZ.NET, GuteFrage
es C e, , e.net and
meinesta adt.de. TOM MORROW FOCUS Med ia is the se
F econd bigges Ad Netwo in Germ
st ork many and
reaches more than 6 60% of the German inter
G rnet populati (internet facts 2010-I II). Since December
ion D
2009 the advertising division has also includ ADJUG Ltd, which operates two online mark
e g ded o o ketplaces
for last-m
minute adver rtising space in the UK an Germany
e nd y.
In the t technologies division, TO OMORROW FOCUS Technologies GmbH and CELLULAR GmbH
W d R
provide an extensive range of fix and mob ile internet services.
e xed
For more information please visit www.tomo
e n, orrow-focus.c
com or e-mail Karin Roths
stock at
k.rothsto
ock@tomorroow-focus.de .
PAGE 12

13. H
How Online Advertising Works
r
PAGE 13

14. H
How Online Advertising Works
r
PAGE 14