Jonathan Lochhaas, XM Radio, and Raymond Velez, Razorfish
Jonathan Lochhaas, director of of Online Marketing Applications for XM Satellite Radio, and Raymond Velez, vice president and National Technology Lead for Avenue A|Razorfish
Transcript: Jonathan Lochhaas, XM Radio, and Raymond Velez, Razorfish
Anecdotally it feels as though we recreating more and more content for things that I'm not sure we would have created video content as opposed to regular text or a richer type of Internet content. So it feels like we re-doing more of that, so it feels like there's a trend towards that. But to say there are a lot fewer agencies creating video for clients is my guess than people creating video. Then it's Hollywood and Bollywood in the world culture building video.
As you move to TV or internet TV, you have different engagement models. So it's less about someone watching till the end of the commercial because in many cases you have to watch till the end of the commercial. Your controls go dead and you have to see the whole commercial to go on. I think it's more the interactive model that follows that because it's no longer a passive experience. So a basic example of that is what AOL does right now. You see a 15 second commercial come on during the episode that you're watching, and after that's done, there's a little banner that comes up that's relevant to that. Now that's a very simple model, but it kind of shows that not only can you have this impression, but you can also measure click through, and depending on your interaction model, you can actually look at conversion. Did I get this customer? So the power of Net 2.0 is really that we can get a lot more accurate metrics out of this, that it's possible to get real conversion rates. We can see how far a person went down the purchase path. So, I think to answer the question about engagement models, how far we're gonna go, again, it's the Wild West right now. We don 't know what it's going to be like. We know that we have much richer data, much deeper data and a much more detailed interaction model and we can look into an engagement model. I think that in a year, we re all going to be looking back and saying look at all these brilliant ideas that came out of this because it really it is so rich, and we've never had this before.
How often do we make it relevant enough to keep people engaged? So the big difference between TV and digital video is now I know exactly who a person is whether they've logged in or I'm looking at an anonymous cookie data. So there is a way to make things more relevant, and that relevancy should drive engagement. Maybe instead of measuring engagement, we need to figure out a way to measure relevancy. If I'm watching a show and there's a crazy advertisement that makes no sense to me, why do I have to watch that? We don't necessarily have to do that anymore. We can always show relevant information so people will want to stay engaged because it has some meaning to them somehow.
Well, and you see things like the marketing campaign that followed the "Charlie's Angels" movie where they had that sort of hard cased backpack sales went through the roof because people were familiar with it. Well how much more powerful is that type of an engagement when it's not just I get out of the theater and three weeks later I'm in the mall to see it, I can now have an advertisement right in front of me that says, wow, that's a really cool backpack. I'd like to go buy that. So the models for scaling this are already there, it's just the immediacy increases with the Web, as has always been the case.