<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for SomeNametoPost</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/SomeNametoPost/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/SomeNametoPost/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 17:27:45 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: How Advertising Works, and Why It Won&amp;#8217;t For Facebook</title><link>http://mattmaroon.com/?p=365#comment-440121</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, I don't believe Im contradicting myself.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1. I didn't say ALL google ads were "wasted".&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2. I have been suggesting "wasted" from a relative perspective not an independant perspective. ie. Is your one dollar better spent targeting a specific demographic or better spent on a generic search engine? If you believe the first then the latter is a "wasted" dollar, relatively, not completely and indpendantly. I say this because I think google uses a brute force model and many adveristing dollars are thus wasted (relatively). I do beleive this has been expressed in my earlier posts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;3. If you go back and read, you'll notice my comments are also relative to "The future of advertising is in social network sites"....not based upon todays advertising earned dollars.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SomeNametoPost</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 17:27:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How Advertising Works, and Why It Won&amp;#8217;t For Facebook</title><link>http://mattmaroon.com/?p=365#comment-439760</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I did say "half of the google ads are wasted" - I did not say all.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Simply put. Facebook is not taking "ad"vantage (terrible Joke I know) of it's inherent ability. When they do, I believe they will become successfull. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SomeNametoPost</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 16:33:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How Advertising Works, and Why It Won&amp;#8217;t For Facebook</title><link>http://mattmaroon.com/?p=365#comment-438427</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Agreed! &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SomeNametoPost</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 13:06:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How Advertising Works, and Why It Won&amp;#8217;t For Facebook</title><link>http://mattmaroon.com/?p=365#comment-438311</link><description>&lt;p&gt;lol.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"The majority of sponsored links returned are from regional dealerships and online brokerages. And more intriguingly Toyota advertises its competing Corolla to lure away potential customers!"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Who cares? It's still wasted relative to finding new "buyers".&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"The second error is in assuming that because I am seeking information on a product that I am ready to buy that product."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I didn't ASSuME anything here. I never claimed the searches mean a person is intending to buy. I suggested (relative to new audiences) it's wasted.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, the idea that people don't like being forced to see ads not specific to their wants needs .... welcome to reality..... ever been to a movie in the theatre? I see more ads then movie now. Do I feel violated - YES. Does anyone care if I feel violated? NO. Will it continue? YES.... why ? because it works.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Dude, you have good opinions, but that's all they are. And you know what they say about opinions right...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Anyway - time will tell. Until then keep blogging - it's always good to have a theory.&lt;br&gt;:)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SomeNametoPost</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 12:52:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How Advertising Works, and Why It Won&amp;#8217;t For Facebook</title><link>http://mattmaroon.com/?p=365#comment-437377</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I so disagree with you. You've left out 2 very important factors: weight (the value of each of you factors which are very opinionated) and emergence (the ability to see the trend).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The future of advertising is in social network sites. Everyone has been trained to be very specific in google searches, thus the advertising dollars poured into google are having less and less of an impact (ROI) everyday. Take for example the search "new car" in google. This kind of a search returns many car maker ads (Nissan , Ford, everyone) which is great. Instead do a search on "Ford". NOPE...Only Ford. People dont search on "new cars" anymore they start with something like "Ford" then try another type after...because people, over the years have been training to be specific in order to narrow the list of results. If someone looking for "Ford" gets a Ford ad - what the VALUE in that? They are advertising to someone that is already looking for them. Instead FaceBook allows to you more accurately target, via trial and error, specific groups of people who are not already looking for them.  FaceBook is new and growing and will begin having more and more of an impact. Only 1 year have I been on FaceBook and I see new adds specific to the groups I subscribe to and in my RSS feeds front and centre.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sorry, but I don't subscribe to any of your logic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'll leave you with this:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"I know half the money I spend on advertising is wasted. Now, if I only knew which half".&lt;br&gt;-John Wanamaker (1838 - 1922)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;At least Facebook ads more CLEARLY indicates which ads work and which ones are wasted. Half of the google ads are wasted, and more so everyday.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SomeNametoPost</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 10:49:37 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>