<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
> <channel><title>David Pratt &#187; popunders</title> <atom:link href="http://daipratt.co.uk/tag/popunders/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://daipratt.co.uk</link> <description>Concerned about Website Construction &#38; SEO</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 19:14:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <language>en</language> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>Are you sure you want to put that pop-under on your site?</title><link>http://daipratt.co.uk/popunders/</link> <comments>http://daipratt.co.uk/popunders/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:43:38 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>David Pratt</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category> <category><![CDATA[analytics]]></category> <category><![CDATA[marketing]]></category> <category><![CDATA[popunders]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wordpress/?p=212</guid> <description><![CDATA[A bit of analysis that looks at the negative consequences of putting a pop-under on a website, in terms of impressions, repeat visits, visits per impression, and revenue.]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you work on a site that is funded by advertising, then you can guarantee that every once in a while someone will have the great idea to put a pop-under advertisement on it &#8211; there are sales targets to meet don&#8217;t you know! Us folk who actually use the web know this is a bad idea as it only serves to irritate the user and detract them from what they&#8217;re doing.</p><p>I had always suspected that pop-unders would have a negative effect on the metrics of a website, but I struggled to find any hard evidence that backed this up. The vast majority of negative words about popups and pop-unders tended to be Nielson esque usability pieces or very subjective &#8220;I think&#8221; rants, and thus not great for building a convincing case against them.</p><p>Some months ago at one of my previous employers, I decided to run a test in agreement with the business, that aimed to truly understand the effect of pop-unders on site metrics, and in turn, the bottom line.  With that agreement I teamed up with the resident web analyst and performed this little experiment.</p><p>The first thing we did was segment our user base into four groups:</p><ul><li>A &#8211; No popunder served</li><li>B &#8211; 1 popunder every day</li><li>C &#8211; 1 popunder every 3 days</li><li>D &#8211; 1 popunder every 7 days</li></ul><p>We then got the ad agency to generate the javascript code for each of the 3 pop-under serving frequencies.  Equipped with this code we then had to segment our users into 4 groups. We did this by targeting the last digit of an incremental six digit number that is our logged in users member ID, and then put them in a group that would be served the targeted advert code:</p><table
border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="data"><thead><tr><th>Last Digit</th><th>Group</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr
class="on"><td>0, 1 or 2</td><td>B &#8211; 1 pop-under a day</td></tr><tr
class="off"><td>3 or 4</td><td>C &#8211; 1 pop-under every 3 days</td></tr><tr
class="on"><td>5, 6 or 7</td><td>D &#8211; 1 pop-under every 7 days</td></tr><tr
class="off"><td>8 or 9</td><td>A &#8211; No pop-under</td></tr></tbody></table><p>We then put the code live, and waited.  We had planned to leave the code live for one month, but after about 8 days we thought we&#8217;d take a quick look at the results to see how they were progressing.  At just over a week into the experiment it became apparent that we already had enough information to build a convincing argument against pop-unders.</p><p>The below table looks at customer behaviour and the associated revenue (I&#8217;ve twiddled the real figures, but kept the ratios) we got from our pop-under trial.  It shows how much revenue was generated from logged in members based upon both pop-unders and ad space.</p><table
border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="data"><thead><tr><th>segment</th><th>uniques</th><th>visits</th><th>impressions</th><th>repeat visits</th><th>visits per impression</th><th>pop under revenue</th><th>ad revenue</th><th>total</th></tr></thead><tr
class="on"><td>C &#8211; 1 every 3 days</td><td>7188</td><td>23165</td><td>486323</td><td>3.22</td><td>20.99</td><td>£0.05</td><td>£1.62</td><td>1.67</td></tr><tr
class="off"><td>no pop-under</td><td>6102</td><td>20365</td><td>434502</td><td>3.34</td><td>21.34</td><td>-</td><td>£1.71</td><td>1.71</td></tr><tr
class="on"><td>1 a day</td><td>7833</td><td>21228</td><td>407515</td><td>2.71</td><td>19.20</td><td>£0.11</td><td>1.25</td><td>1.36</td></tr><tr
class="off"><td>1 every 7 days</td><td>3770</td><td>12959</td><td>288144</td><td>3.44</td><td>22.24</td><td>£0.02</td><td>£1.83</td><td>1.85</td></tr></table><p>We can see that members who are served one pop-under per day repeat visit 0.6 times fewer than the control group and see 2 pages fewer per visit. Aggregating this out to a revenue figure (assumptions below), means that so far in the trial, those members who have seen one pop-under a day drive 40p per unique less in revenue than the control group. Therefore in order to make pop-unders viable for the business, they would need to pay circa £50CPM for a 1 a day serving frequency.</p><p>The group that was served 1 pop-under every 3 days also delivered slightly reduced revenue (-4p), but the 1 a week segment outperformed the control group.  Had the trial not been canned after little over a week, it would have been interesting to see how these two groups would have performed over a longer period.  I did try and encourage the business to see the experiment through, but suddenly they weren&#8217;t interested in pop-unders anymore&#8230;</p><p>Assumptions:-<br
/> £10CPM for pop-unders<br
/> 5 ads per impression, 60% sell through, £8CPM ad space</p><p><i>Note: I&#8217;ve amended the CPM rates above to protect their true value, but have maintained the ratios between the figures.</i></p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://daipratt.co.uk/popunders/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> </channel> </rss>
