Microsoft and AOL are both rumored to be looking at AppNexus, a New York City real-time bid (RTB) advertising startup, for a possible acquisition.

RTB — in which advertisers pay for ad impressions to particular consumers based on tracking data at the moment a new web page is loaded — is growing incredibly quickly right now.

As RTB appears set to take over a large portion of the display market over the next few years, major advertising players are building, acquiring, or partnering their way into the market. Most recently, Google paid a reported $70 million for Invite Media, a demand-side platform that helps advertisers trade in the RTB market.

AppNexus is run by a couple guys who sold Right Media to Yahoo, Brian O’Kelley and Mike Nolet, as well as ex-Googler Michael Rubenstein. Souces from the company dimiss all this gossip as just that – “rumors.”

Read More: BusinessInsider

Is Ad Blocking the Right Approach?

A couple of months ago I read an article by Tom Hespos called “Is our ad delivery infrastructure overtaxed?“ Besides doing a good job highlighting the growing issue of complexity and latency issues in our ad delivery infrastructure, it reminded me of a debate that we’ve had here at Adometry: is ad blocking the right approach?

A number of companies have sprung up to block ads that would appear next to objectionable content. From a brand protection point of view, we understand the appeal of ad blockers. If you could ensure that you could stop your brand appearing next to inappropriate content 100% of the time, why wouldn’t you adopt one of these services? But when you look more deeply at the reality of what these services deliver and the potential unwanted side effects, the value proposition becomes less clear.

Additional Latency

Ad blockers work by inserting themselves in the ad delivery chain.  Ad blockers need to make a decision whether to allow or reject an ad on a particular page without delaying unduly the delivery of the page.  Most of the time, they do this by matching a URL in their cache. For a new URL, they schedule the page for examination in an “offline” queue.

How much extra latency is acceptable? While opinion varies, 100-150 milliseconds would be an upper limit, and most publishers would prefer to see something in the 40-50 milliseconds range or less.

How much latency do ad blocking vendors introduce into the ad delivery path using today’s technology? Our measurement of one of the leading ad blocking vendors indicates that they add an average of almost 500 milliseconds to the ad call.  Perhaps we measured them during a bad month; I’m not claiming we have enough data to be accurate about someone else’s technology. I am saying that if you’re thinking of adopting ad-blocking technology, you should measure for yourself the delay to the ad call.

Read More: iMediaConnection

ShareThis Puts Value on Shared Content

ShareThis plans to release two analytics tools that allow advertisers and marketers to determine the value of content being shared across Web sites. Through both, Social Reach and Audience Index, brands have an opportunity to understand the value of social traffic.

Social Reach measures the true value of shared media across the Web by looking at inbound social traffic and outbound sharing, valuing the responder of a share as much as the sharer. The analysis aims to provide more data than buttons on Facebook, Twitter and Tweetmeme buttons that measure outbound sharing.

Audience Index measures and segments a publisher’s audience by influence, so it identifies who has shared, responded and viewed content from their site. It indexes the information by category and matches it against other sites across the Web.

Some early data shows that social traffic engages consumers more than search traffic, according to ShareThis CEO Tim Schigel. “It measures the social reach and allows publishers to measure it by article,” he says. “They also can index their reach from the articles on their site against the rest of the network.”

Read More: MediaPost

Online ad network Specific Media has been hit with a lawsuit for allegedly violating Web users’ privacy by using Flash cookies for tracking purposes.

In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, six Web users allege that Specific Media failed to provide adequate notice about its online data collection techniques, including Flash cookies. The lawsuit also alleges that Specific Media used Flash cookies — which are stored in a separate location from HTML cookies — to recreate HTML cookies that users had deleted so it could “obtain personal identifying information, monitor users, and to sell users’ data.”

The company’s “privacy documents require college-level reading skills for comprehension and include substantial legalese, ambiguous and obfuscated language designed to confuse, disenfranchise, and mislead the users,” the lawsuit asserts.

In addition, the use of Flash cookies to recreate deleted HTML cookies “unfairly wrests control from users,” the lawsuit alleges.

Read More: MediaPost

Adap.tv Launches Brand Impact Offering for its Online Video Advertising Marketplace

Adap.tv, creators of the industry’s first online video advertising marketplace (atm) and the onesource video ad management (ato) platform, today announced Brand Impact, a powerful suite of tools that makes it easy for brands to increase the effectiveness of their online video advertising in the marketplace.

“Our customers are telling us they want brand safety, advanced targeting, increased measurability and verification for their online video ad campaigns. Only adap.tv’s Brand Impact incorporates all of their needs into a single offering, so they can have confidence in their video ad spend,” said Toby Gabriner, President of adap.tv. “Through partnerships with industry leaders such as Affine Systems and Vizu, as well as built-in tools, we provide brands with the necessary technologies to make online video advertising easy, targeted and impactful.”

Adap.tv’s Brand Impact provides five key benefits for brands that want to create powerful online video advertising programs:

Prevention – Through a partnership with Affine Systems, Brand Impact offers access to innovative new video targeting technology. Affine’s first-of-its-kind computer vision engine fully analyzes in-stream video content frame-by-frame, and provides ratings based on obscenity, production quality and violence. As brands expect more transparency and protection for their online video advertising, Affine’s data provides them with the protection they need to prevent their campaigns from running alongside harmful content and ensure their brand is safe.

Performance – Brand Impact will leverage Vizu’s Ad Catalyst solution to enable real-time measurement and optimization of brand advertising campaigns. With Ad Catalyst, advertisers using the adap.tv marketplace can move beyond basic clickthrough rates and apply a more relevant metric, Brand Lift, to measure the effectiveness of their campaigns. Advertisers can also use real-time data on the performance of creative, targeting, and frequency to optimize in-campaign, for maximum Brand Lift and ROI for their online video advertising.

Precision – The adap.tv marketplace includes the industry’s most advanced data targeting and audience verification tools as part of its Brand Impact offering. Brands can leverage multiple targeting providers including eXelate, Lotame and TARGUSinfo across campaigns to reach specific audiences.

Proof – The adap.tv marketplace has a built-in URL verification system that automatically confirms a campaign only runs on the sites that have been selected. Brands have full visibility into the video inventory their ads are running against and the audience they are reaching.

Premium Inventory – With a roster of more than 1,400 of comScore’s top properties, adap.tv ensures access to premium quality inventory, giving brands a powerful environment to showcase their ads.

Read More: PRNewswire

The Rise of the Demand-Side Platform

During the past few months, this column has briefly explored the history of digital ad serving. This month, we’ll continue that journey as we look at recent ad serving developments that are creating significant changes throughout the industry.

Digital advertising, unlike more traditional mass media marketing, doesn’t rely on group exposure models for its success. In reality, online advertising is less about reaching the greatest number of eyeballs and more about reaching the right eyeballs. This means that standard “blind” ad serving models (where ads are being served to any open ad slots on any available pages within the ad network) are being replaced by “smart” ad networks that look for the best recipients for an ad’s message, regardless of where in the network they visit.

Not only does this approach mean that consumers receive more relevant ads, but it also means that advertisers get better results and higher conversion rates for their campaign because they’re reaching a higher percentage of consumers who may take future action in line with the advertiser’s needs.

But there’s also a third winner in this scenario in the form of publishers who are able to better monetize the impressions they serve on behalf of the advertisers. Historically, most websites needed to divide their available inventory into a tiered value model to identify which pages were most popular (attracted the greatest number of eyeballs) and which were less popular. As a result, ads that appeared on the popular pages of a site cost more per impression than those on the less popular pages.

Because advertisers are able to rely on more behaviorally-driven ad models today, which page an ad appears on is becoming less and less significant. Instead, second or third tier online inventory can now be sold at a premium price, not because of where or when the ad runs, but because of who is seeing it when it does. This allows publishers to increase the value of all of their site impressions without having to weigh in on a page popularity contest first.

Most ad networks today utilize some level of audience targeting which allows publishers to better identify site visitor characteristics and behaviors that can be used to help define possible future interests and actions. Through the use of cookies, each user’s browser is tagged and when that consumer revisits a site or ad network, that history is used to direct ads that are more in line with the personal needs and interests of the consumer.

Read More: ClickZ

MediaMath is an important behind-the-scenes player for advertisers at a time when advertising networks, exchanges and platforms are changing the way advertising is bought and consumed. The New York-based demand-side digital media platform monitors activity on ad exchanges, where marketers bid to place ads on publishers’ Web sites, and helps them quickly buy the space and the audience they need. The system is helping turn advertising from a job for creative “Mad Men” to a numbers-based “real profession,” says MediaMath Chief Executive Joe Zawadzki.

Forbes:MediaMath allows marketers to directly buy, manage and optimize media. Tell us more.

Fifteen million impressions a day across exchanges, across different media. [We] simplify what could be a very complicated process into a series of pretty straight-forward stats, in terms of how to point all of the technology at the market’s problems.

What is the opportunity for publishers who want to sell ad inventory?

Ultimately, the more demand in an auction-based system, the higher the price. And for non-auction based systems, it’s bringing incremental advertising dollars that they’re not getting from direct sales. It’s like optimization is not zero sum. There has always been this tension between advertiser and publisher. People think that in the negotiation that someone wins and someone loses and, for the advertiser to get better performance, they need to beat up on the publisher. The reality is that, with optimization–because not everyone is looking for the same thing and because every advertiser has their own demand curve–they look for different brands, different audiences. If you do a good job with optimization, both the advertiser will see better performance and the publisher will see higher prices. It’s not an “or,” it’s an “and.”

Read More: Forbes.com

Do You Want To Succeed at Social Media or Social Media Marketing?

Do you want to succeed at social media or social media marketing? There is a huge difference. It’s the difference between using social media tools and adopting social media philosophy. The difference between sparking posts about your marketing and posts about your product or service. The difference between marketers who focus externally on how the brand is broadcast versus internally on how the brand is realized.

So do you want to succeed at social media or social media marketing? The answer is the former, but many marketers focus on the latter. I’d like to make this difference more real by sharing two examples — the first in the entertainment industry and the second my own experiences in a mall this weekend.

“Snakes on a Plane” is the entertainment industry’s greatest pre-release social media success story to date. The Guardian called it, “Perhaps the most Internet-hyped film of all time.” Fans produced their own T-shirts, posters, trailers, novelty songs and parodies. Producers organized a contest to select a fan’s music for use in the movie. The filmmakers added shooting days in order to implement changes suggested by fans on the Internet (including Samuel Jackson’s famous and unprintable line about snakes.)

But what were these people fans of? Not the product, apparently. As EW put said about the movie: “SOAP came in below even the most ridiculously cynical predictions.” Read More: MediaPost

The Fundamentals of Real-Time Bidding

When it comes to online advertising, there’s a common misconception that real-time bidding (RTB) is a whole new ball game, requiring a separate media strategy and an entirely new set of campaign goals. While it’s true that RTB is a different buying model for marketers to understand, the promise of digital display advertising remains “right message, right customer.” What RTB adds to the equation is “right price and right time.” Thanks to RTB and auction marketplaces, digital display can now be purchased in ways similar to search, and it dramatically improves a marketer’s ability to reach specific audiences at scale. It’s easy to think this might just be relevant for direct response campaigns, but in fact RTB delivers tremendous advantages for brand and branded response campaigns as well. Let’s look at how RTB enables all advertisers to more efficiently and effectively achieve four common campaign objectives.

1. Find custom audiences at scale
The fundamental concept of RTB is it enables marketers to target audiences directly, instead of using content as a proxy for audience. In auction markets, marketers bid (or not) on individual ad impressions based on the demographic and behavioral profile of a consumer, in contrast to traditional content-based buys where inventory is purchased to hopefully reach a targeted audience.

The beauty of RTB is that marketers target audiences based on their own custom definitions of which consumers are appropriate for a campaign. A classic strategy is to use remarketing data that tracks when consumers have visited the advertiser’s website. But with RTB, marketers can now take it to the next level and leverage their full customer relationship management (CRM) database for targeting. These data represent the advertiser’s full view of its customers (registration data, purchase history, loyalty tier, etc.). By using a CRM-capable demand-side platform (DSP), an advertiser can execute powerful cross-sell, up-sell, and retention campaigns.

However, these strategies, while extremely effective, tend to have limited reach. To increase scale, advertisers can use look-alike modeling to expand the size of the targetable audience. Look-alike modeling finds new consumers that closely resemble the demographic and psychographic attributes of an advertiser’s existing audience. How does this work? Imagine a dart board where the original remarketing audience is the red bull’s-eye in the center. Look-alike segments are the concentric circles that extend out from the center, with each circle increasing the scale of audience available at decreasing levels of similarity.

Read More: iMediaConnection

Investment analysts, agency media buyers, and executives speaking here this week all agree on one thing: The resurgence of online display ads is real, and will proceed apace for the next several years. But they disagreed about nearly everything else. For instance: What’s the future of CPM pricing? To what extent will media agencies be disintermediated in coming years? And just how important is Google in this space?

On a Connected Marketing Week panel featuring investment analysts, all four participants said they were bullish on display – predicting overall demand and pricing will rise. However the specific outcomes they described were very distinct.

Doug Anmuth of Barclays Capital said discussions with advertisers have convinced him large consumer goods sellers will make it rain this year and next.

Researchers and agencies anticipated such an influx of brand ad budgets way back in 2007, but that was before the bottom fell out of the economy. Now Anmuth believes the time is ripe again. “At CPG companies, [we're seeing] reinvestment in their brands,” he said.

But not all will benefit. For instance, it’s unclear whether the rise of exchange-traded display ads on Yahoo’s Right Media and Google’s DoubleClick Ad Exchange will suit large brands. Two of four analysts lauded Google’s strategy of automating display ads, while the other two offered weak or qualified support.

One of those was Robert Coolbrith, an analyst with ThinkEquity. He said, “We’re positive on Google’s display ad strategy, assuming that automation of display will serve the interest of brand advertisers. The jury’s still out on that.”

Read More: ClickZ

Apple Shuts Down Quattro Wireless To Focus On iAd

Starting in September, Apple will focus its mobile advertising efforts entirely on the iAd, which runs ads in applications on the iPhone and iPod. As a result of that decision, the company is shutting down the Quattro Wireless mobile ad network it acquired in January for $275 million.

In a statement posted on the former Quattro home page, Apple said it will no longer accept new campaigns for the ad network and will wind down existing campaigns across different devices and platforms. “As of September 30, we will support ads exclusively for the iAd Network,” read the notice.

That Apple has eschewed running a horizontal ad network to concentrate solely on ramping up the iAd platform launched in April isn’t terribly surprising. With the company’s high ambitions for the new interactive format and commanding position in mobile apps, it’s become clear Apple is betting everything on the iAd to succeed in mobile advertising.

And after enticing a roster of blue-chip brands to sign on as charter iAd advertisers at least $1 apiece, Apple likely needs to turn all its Quattro resources toward preparing and running campaigns for its new batch of clients. A recent Wall Street Journal report indicated that the service has been hampered by campaign delays, with at least one announced partner, Chanel, shelving its iAd effort.

Read More: MediaPost

RIM Reportedly Shopping For Mobile Ad Network For BlackBerry

Since Google (NSDQ: GOOG) bought AdMob and Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) bought Quattro, RIM (NSDQ: RIMM) must be shopping for a mobile ad network, right? That’s what’s happening, according to people familiar with the matter, reports the WSJ.

The unnamed sources said the BlackBerry-device maker has been in talks with Millennial Media, an independent mobile ad network based in Baltimore, but that the talks have stalled over disagreements regarding the value of the deal. Millennial is reportedly asking for $400 to $500 million based on the recent prices that AdMob and Quattro were able to score ($750 million and an estimated $270 million, respectively). Both companies declined to comment, WSJ says.

Of course, there are other free agents in the space that RIM could investigate buying, including JumpTap and Greystripe, which have been very vocal about how much their networks are growing in lieu of the recent purchases by Google and Apple, which have successfully drawn attention and more advertising dollars to mobile.

RIM’s user base can be looked at as a valuable demographic for advertisers, given that a majority of its install base are business users. However, those users can be already targeted today by using existing mobile ad networks, so presumably, RIM would be able to bring something additional to the table if it owned its own network. Likewise, RIM would be able to skim some of the profits off for itself, which both Apple and Google are doing through its ad networks.

Read More: MocoNews.com

Today, during ClickZ’s Connected Marketing Week in San Francisco which brought together name-your-digital-pleasure marketers to discuss their respective marketing channel, ClickZ and the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB) also co-sponsored an Ad Networks & Exchanges event.

Editor’s note: It would seem the name of this type of IAB event may need to evolve. Demand-side platforms don’t want to be called ad networks. And, ad networks – to a certain degree – want to be known as demand-side platforms. Looking forward to the new name!

Just prior to the day-long event, the IAB released news (see it) that 16 IAB member ad network and exchange companies had become “the first to commit to comprehensive self-certification against the IAB ‘Networks & Exchanges Quality Assurance Guidelines,’ [which aims to] increase buyer control over the placement and context of advertising on ad networks and exchanges.”

In the third panel of the day, San Francisco-area media agencies provided their take on the fast-moving ad ecosystem and ad verification technologies, in particular.

Moderated by ValueClick Media’s Matthew Boyd, panelists included associate media director Kim Small of Universal McCann, senior media manager Pablito Padua of Signal to Noise (formerly Agency.com), associate media director Lindsay Wong of Razorfish and vp, digital strategy director Chris Unno of PHD.

Noting the new guidelines and their adoption by 16 member companies, panel members agreed they were heartened to see the step forward in adopting the brand safety measures. But Signal to Noise’s Padua added that he was disappointed that there weren’t additional networks on the initial list.

Read More: AdExchanger

Excess Ad Inventory Pushing Value-Added Services

The movement into value-added services by companies throughout the online advertising space continues to get more interesting. First we saw Google provide free tools and services to support online ad sales. Now search engine marketing companies have begun to provide free tools and platforms to small-and-medium size businesses in hopes of eventually locking them in to subscription services for life. Take that one step further, to find demand side platforms (DSP) building networks of tech offerings on top of real-time bidding platforms.

Xa.net built its platform as an integration hub to bring in data from BlueKai, eXelate and TargusInfo, as well as the media from ad exchanges and publishers. Add to that creative services and it gives advertisers a way to pull in targeting data, purchase ads, and design creative pieces.

The xa.net built technology that allows companies to access inventory from ad networks and exchanges through a real-time bidding system will also offer value-added services that assist companies with copywriting and creating ads. The company’s CEO, Rob Leathern, tells me xa.net began to build the platform earlier this year and will sign on five companies to augments its services. Think of it this way, Leathern wants xa.net to provide the underlying technology that connects complementary services to make everything work together. That includes ad creation for social media platforms, too.

One of those companies will become BoostCTR, a network of copywriters for text ads that will help xa.net clients improve the quality of copy written for Facebook ads. Others include 4Delit, a self-service system that lets small advertisers create Flash and rich media ads; Interpolls, which creates rich-media formats and widgets; OneScreen; and OggiFinogi.

Read More: MediaPost

Google TV plan is causing jitters in Hollywood

Google revolutionized the way people access information. Now it wants to transform how people get entertainment.

The search giant is touting an ambitious new technology, called Google TV, that would marry the Internet with traditional television, enabling viewers to watch TV shows and movies unshackled from the broadcast networks or cable channels on which they air. Users would need to buy a TV or set-top box with Google software that could connect to the Internet, along with a keyboard to type commands. Users could also use their iPhone or Android phone to operate Google TV.

The prospect of Google getting into television frightens many in Hollywood, who worry that Silicon Valley will upend the entertainment industry just like the Internet ravaged the music and newspaper industries.

Read More: LATimes.com

Hearst-owned iCrossing has become the latest search agency to try and boost its display ad chops by partnering with a demand-side platform.

Scottsdale, AZ-based iCrossing will work with DataXu to support real-time ad optimization and bidding on ad exchanges such as Yahoo’s Right Media and Google’s DoubleClick Ad Exchange.

The move follows a slate of developments in which search agencies have made advances in the display arena. Recently, four search firms – Efficient Frontier, SearchIgnite, Kenshoo, and Marin Software – joined a Right Media pilot program involving real-time bid display ads. Back in April, SEM firm Efficient Frontier launched a DSP of its own, fusing real-time bidding functionality with search campaign management.

While not purely a search agency, iCrossing’s roots are in the search arena. Dax Hamman, the agency’s VP of display media, said in a statement that data integration is key to the company’s clients’ exchange ambitions.

“We wanted a partner…that could provide the technical framework in which we can test the effectiveness of multiple data sources for our clients,” he said.

iCrossing was not the only search firm to announce new moves into display this morning. Marin Software, a search management platform company that manages $1 billion in marketing spend annually, today released applications for managing Facebook Advertising. The new features allow clients to manage algorithmic bidding, segmentation, and ad rotation on Facebook, alongside their search campaigns on Google, Bing, and Yahoo.

Read More: ClickZ

ShortTail, TidalTV Ink Video Ad Deal

ShortTail Media, a company that helps publishers deliver video ads to text-based portions of their Web sites, has signed a deal with Web video network and technology firm TidalTV.

As part of the pact, publishers in TidalTV’s network, including 30 newspaper sites owned by McClatchy, have begun selling advertisers ShortTail’s signature D30 ad unit — a video interstitial that appears as users click between Web pages.

ShortTail touts the D30 as a way for sites to better monetize text content, which still makes up the majority of publishers’ content outside of the YouTubes and Hulus of the world. The company already works with sites such as EW.com and The Huffington Post and has run campaigns for brands like A&E, Sonic, Jim Beam and General Mills. (See also: “Web Ads Get More Intrusive.”)

That monetization concept appealed to McClatchy, which is testing the D30 on the sites for newspapers such as The Miami Herald, Sacramento Bee and Kansas City Star. “We’ve traditionally had our own video and video from the Associated Press, but that requires users to say, ‘I’m going to watch video now,’” said Chris Hendricks, vp, interactive media at McClatchy. “We’ve had very limited [video] inventory because of that. This puts video front and center on our site, and it helps us compete from a volume perspective.” McClatchy’s sites reach about 35 million unique users, per Hendricks.

Read More: AdWeek

When marketers buy television spots, they can turn on the tube and watch them run. Magazines and newspapers? Marketers can flip to their ads. But when it comes to online inventory, the questions still linger: Are my ads truly running where and when I want them to? Am I wasting impressions and ad dollars serving ads in front of the wrong audience, or are they subject to impression fraud? Are they running next to content that might be offensive to my audience or on the same page as one of my major competitors? Most of us may have chuckled over humorous examples of the wrong ad in the wrong place, but it isn’t that funny if it’s happened to you.

Most advertisers are already sold on the value of good online marketing and understand how leveraging the digital world for their end goals is an important part of their marketing mix. So why are we seeing consumer media time online rise to almost 40 percent but online budgets still only represent a portion of that ratio?

When asked why the big dollars aren’t yet flowing like they could into the channel, most decision makers seem to have an issue with trust — whether it be in brand safety concerns, unproven measurement, etc. Ultimately, the currency of choice is trust, and for some marketers, especially ones rooted in deep, traditional advertising familiarity, the online world is still a bit of a mystery. In the same vein, can you imagine if you went to buy a thousand shares of Apple and instead were given a thousand shares of a worthless penny stock? Would you continue to patronize a restaurant where you weren’t guaranteed to get the meal you ordered? Even hardcore digital advocates admit that there are still questions — and a few bugs left to exterminate –within virtual inventory.

Read More: iMediaConnection

Pushing Boundaries: Exploring the Evolving World of Display Media 

Digital media agency, FRWD, hosted digital event Pushing Boundaries: Exploring the Evolving World of Display Media yesterday at the Fine Line Music Café in Minneapolis. Industry leading publishers, demand side platforms, data aggregators, verification and survey tool providers gathered to help each other prepare for, and profit from, the fast-changing world of online advertising.  MediaMath, Simpli.fi, BlueKai, DataXu, Lucid Media, ADSDAQ Exchange, [x+1], and Rocket Fuel; among others exchanged ideas on the direction of the industry during 4 panels and 2 keynote presentations.

The transfer of data integration into ad exchanges and DSPs coupled with technology and real-time bidding (RTB) capabilities are increasing at a rapid rate, almost as rapidly as the industry is changing. Joe Zawadzki of MediaMath predicted that the industry transformation from “Mad Men to Math Men” will occur by 2012 at which point “Don Draper will be replaced by your high school Dungeon Master.” 

Panel speakers throughout the afternoon explained the details of successful ad exchanges and DSPs, specifically the capabilities of combining data and audience research targeting with the need to assure brand protection, transparency, and the unique market dynamics of RTB.  

Read More: FRWDCO.com

Google and the Search for the Future

To some, Google has been looking a bit sallow lately. The stock is down. Where once everything seemed to go the company’s way, along came Apple’s iPhone, launching a new wave of Web growth on a platform that largely bypassed the browser and Google’s search box. The “app” revolution was going to spell an end to Google’s dominance of Web advertising.

But that’s all so six-months-ago. When a group of Journal editors sat down with Eric Schmidt on a recent Friday, Google’s CEO sounded nothing like a man whose company was facing a midlife crisis, let alone intimations of mortality.

For one thing, just a couple days earlier, Google had publicly estimated that 200,000 Android smartphones were being activated daily by cell carriers on behalf of customers. That’s a doubling in just three months. Since the beginning of the year, Android phones have been outselling iPhones by an increasing clip and seem destined soon to outstrip Apple in global market share.

True, Apple sells its phones for luscious margins, while Google gives away Android to handset makers for free. But not to worry, says Mr. Schmidt: “You get a billion people doing something, there’s lots of ways to make money. Absolutely, trust me. We’ll get lots of money for it.”

“In general in technology,” he says, “if you own a platform that’s valuable, you can monetize it.” Example: Google is obliged to share with Apple search revenue generated by iPhone users. On Android, Google gets to keep 100%. That difference alone, says Mr. Schmidt, is more than enough to foot the bill for Android’s continued development.

And coming soon is Chrome OS, which Google hopes will do in tablets and netbooks what Android is doing in smartphones, i.e., give Google a commanding share of the future and leave, in this case, Microsoft in the dust.

Can it all be so easy? Google’s stock price has fallen nearly $150 since the beginning of the year. Financial pundits have started to ask skeptical questions, wondering why it doesn’t give more of its ample cash back to shareholders in the form of buybacks and dividends. Some suspect that all that temptation merely encourages Mr. Schmidt, along with founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page—the triumvirate running the company—to splurge on gimmicky ideas that never pay off. Fortune magazine recently called Google a “cash cow” and suggested more attention be paid to milking it rather than running off in search of the next big thing.

But to hear Mr. Schmidt tell it, the real challenge is one not yet on most investors’ minds: how to preserve Google’s franchise in Web advertising, the source of almost all its profits, when “search” is outmoded.

The day is coming when the Google search box—and the activity known as Googling—no longer will be at the center of our online lives. Then what? “We’re trying to figure out what the future of search is,” Mr. Schmidt acknowledges. “I mean that in a positive way. We’re still happy to be in search, believe me. But one idea is that more and more searches are done on your behalf without you needing to type.”

“I actually think most people don’t want Google to answer their questions,” he elaborates. “They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next.”

Let’s say you’re walking down the street. Because of the info Google has collected about you, “we know roughly who you are, roughly what you care about, roughly who your friends are.” Google also knows, to within a foot, where you are. Mr. Schmidt leaves it to a listener to imagine the possibilities: If you need milk and there’s a place nearby to get milk, Google will remind you to get milk. It will tell you a store ahead has a collection of horse-racing posters, that a 19th-century murder you’ve been reading about took place on the next block.

Says Mr. Schmidt, a generation of powerful handheld devices is just around the corner that will be adept at surprising you with information that you didn’t know you wanted to know. “The thing that makes newspapers so fundamentally fascinating—that serendipity—can be calculated now. We can actually produce it electronically,” Mr. Schmidt says.

Mr. Schmidt obviously has an eye to his audience, which this day consists of folks with an abiding devotion to the newspaper business. He speaks in sorrowful tones about the “economic disaster that is the American newspaper.” He assures us that in the coming deluge trusted “brands” will be more important than ever. Just as quickly, though, he adds that whether the winners will be new brands or existing brands remains to be seen. On one thing, however, Google is willing to bet: “The only way the problem [of insufficient revenue for news gathering] is going to be solved is by increasing monetization, and the only way I know of to increase monetization is through targeted ads. That’s our business.”

Mr. Schmidt is a believer in targeted advertising because, simply, he’s a believer in targeted everything: “The power of individual targeting—the technology will be so good it will be very hard for people to watch or consume something that has not in some sense been tailored for them.”

That’s a bit scary when you think about it. But for investors and executives the big question, of course, is which companies will control these opportunities. Google may see itself as friend and helper to the media business, but it also clearly sees itself in control of the targeting information. Says Mr. Schmidt: “As you go from the search box [to the next phase of Google], you really want to go from syntax to semantics, from what you typed to what you meant. And that’s basically the role of [Artificial Intelligence]. I think we will be the world leader in that for a long time.”

Between here and there, though, the company faces ever-growing legal, political and regulatory obstacles. The net neutrality debate, which Google has led, has taken a sudden turn that has many of its former allies in the “public interest” sector shouting “treason.”

What was most striking about the set of net neut “principles” Google produced this week with former antagonist Verizon was that they didn’t apply to wireless. “The issues of wireless versus wireline gets very messy,” Mr. Schmidt told one news site. “And that’s really an FCC issue, not a Google issue.”

Wait. Isn’t the future of the Internet wireless these days? Isn’t wireless the very basis of the new partnership between Google and Verizon, built on promoting Google’s Android software? But Google has now broken ranks with its allies and dared to speak about the sheer impracticality of net neutrality on mobile networks where demand is likely to outstrip capacity for the foreseeable future.

If that weren’t about to become a sticky political wicket for the company, it also faces growing antitrust, privacy and patent scrutiny, fanned by a growing phalanx of Beltway opponents, the latest being Larry Ellison and Oracle. “There’s a set of people who are intrinsic oppositionists to everything Google does,” Mr. Schmidt acknowledges resignedly. “The first opponent will be Microsoft.”

Mr. Schmidt is familiar with the game—as chief technology officer of Sun Microsystems in the 1990s, he was a chief fomenter of the antitrust assault on Bill Gates & Co. Now that the tables are turned, he says, Google will persevere and prevail by doing what he says Microsoft failed to do—make sure its every move is “good for consumers” and “fair” to competitors.

Uh huh. Google takes a similarly generous view of its own motives on the politically vexed issue of privacy. Mr. Schmidt says regulation is unnecessary because Google faces such strong incentives to treat its users right, since they will walk away the minute Google does anything with their personal information they find “creepy.”

Really? Some might be skeptical that a user with, say, a thousand photos on Picasa would find it so easy to walk away. Or a guy with 10 years of emails on Gmail. Or a small business owner who has come to rely on Google Docs as an alternative to Microsoft Office. Isn’t stickiness—even slightly extortionate stickiness—what these Google services aim for?

Mr. Schmidt is surely right, though, that the questions go far beyond Google. “I don’t believe society understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded by everyone all the time,” he says. He predicts, apparently seriously, that every young person one day will be entitled automatically to change his or her name on reaching adulthood in order to disown youthful hijinks stored on their friends’ social media sites.

“I mean we really have to think about these things as a society,” he adds. “I’m not even talking about the really terrible stuff, terrorism and access to evil things,” he says.

Not that Google is a doubter of the value of social media. Mr. Schmidt awards Facebook his highest accolade, calling it a “company of consequence.” And though “there is a lot of hot air, a lot of venture money” in the sector right now, he predicts that one or two more “companies of consequence” will be born among the horde of new players just coming to life now.

A skeptic might wonder whether, despite present glory, Google itself might yet prove a flash in the pan. The company has enormous technological confidence. Mr. Schmidt describes how YouTube, its video-serving site, almost “took down” the company in its early days, thanks to the swelling outflow of video dispatched from its servers to users around the globe. Salvation was the “proxy cache”—lots of local servers around the world holding the most popular videos. “The technology that Google invented allows us to put those things very close to you,” says Mr. Schmidt. “It was a tremendous technological achievement.”

But with YouTube, as with lots of Google projects, there remains the question of how to make money. Google captured the search wave and shows every sign of positioning itself successfully for the mobile wave. As for the waves after that, your guess may be as good as Mr. Schmidt’s.

Read More: WSJ.com (entire article here)

AOL (NYSE: AOL) CEO Tim Armstrong knew he would have to do a lot of investor soothing given that it posted another tough earnings report for Q2. He described the mission before him as very simple: making a sick company a healthy one. Invoking Warren Buffett’s “snowball” metaphor for the growth of his portfolio depending on finding a wet snowball and a steep hill to roll it down. “We’ve got a tightly packed snowball” at AOL, Armstrong said. He also described a “platform war” currently going on in Silicon Valley and how “content is the ammunition” and AOL will be a central supplier of that firepower. In explaining the dismal ad prospects, despite the recovery, Armstrong said advertisers continue to lag consumers in adopting online media.  Video is going to be a focus for AOL and Armstrong noted that there will be some branded entertainment partnerships announced shortly. StudioNow, which it bought last winter, grew 25 percent in terms of video output from the last quarter. “You will see a new home page that is targeted heavily around video this quarter,” Armstrong said.  On the local front, AOL’s hyperlocal play Patch added 39 new towns for a total of 83 localities in its network.  “Nobody likes to show up to these calls and report down numbers,” but Armstrong wanted investors to known that he has his own money tied up in AOL as well and asked for continued patience as he attempts to turn it around.  Meanwhile, Q3’s results is looking “choppy.” In terms of products he is happy about, Armstrong again focused on the homepage—which attracts about 15 million uniques—and Patch and Mapquest.

Read More: PaidContent.org

Google CEO Schmidt: “People Aren’t Ready for the Technology Revolution”

Eric Schmidt spoke at the Techonomy conference in Lake Tahoe today and dropped some serious rhetorical bombs. “There was 5 exabytes of information created between the dawn of civilization through 2003,” Schmidt said, “but that much information is now created every 2 days, and the pace is increasing…People aren’t ready for the technology revolution that’s going to happen to them.”   The Techonomy conference is a gathering of people from around the globe seeking to use technology to solve the world’s big problems. Schmidt spoke there today and said that people need to get ready for major technology disruption, fast.  The bulk of what’s contributing to this explosion of data, Schmidt says, is user generated content. From that content, far more prediction than we’ve seen today is possible and will be a factor in the future.  “If I look at enough of your messaging and your location, and use Artificial Intelligence,” Schmidt said, “we can predict where you are going to go.”   “Show us 14 photos of yourself and we can identify who you are. You think you don’t have 14 photos of yourself on the internet? You’ve got Facebook photos! People will find it’s very useful to have devices that remember what you want to do, because you forgot…But society isn’t ready for questions that will be raised as result of user-generated content.”

Read More: ReadWriteWeb.com

Demand Media Extends Content Model To Other Publishers, Hearst And Gannett First To Sign Up

Demand Media on Thursday debuted a new service for publishers to pad their online offerings with the work of independent freelancers. Two of the first properties to employ Content Channels, so-called, include Hearst Corp.’s SFGate.com and Chron.com.  “Hearst is the second major publisher to select our product for their sites,” said Steve Semelsberger, SVP and general manager of the Business Solutions Group for Demand Media. (The first major publisher was Gannett’s USA Today, which recently employed Demand to power its “TravelTips” section.) Semelsberger said Demand Media’s studio team worked closely with the editorial teams of both SFGate.com and Chron.com to make sure the Content Channels met their editorial standards.  In the case of the Houston Chronicle’s Chron.com, the team worked with Demand Media to create a “Small Business Resource Center” to complement its existing business news coverage by incorporating thousands of business-related articles and videos. Content Channels also went live this week on San Francisco Chronicle’s SFGate.com for its “Home Guides” section.

Read More: MediaPost

IAB Report Slams Most Online Research Methods

Watch out, research firms! The Interactive Advertising Bureau has embarked on a broad initiative to improve online brand effectiveness research, and its initial findings aren’t pretty.  What’s wrong with most research that attempts to measure ad effectiveness? Small respondent size and low response rates for starters, according to an initial report from the IAB.  Above all else, the validity of such research is threatened “by the extremely low response rates achieved in most IAE studies,” according to Paul Lavrakas, Ph.D., the report’s author, and former chief research methodologist for the Nielsen Company.  Average research is also “threatened by the near-exclusive use of quasi-experimental research designs rather than classic experimental designs,” in the words of Lavrakas, author of “Telephone Survey Methods: Sampling, Selection, and Supervision.”  Worse still, industry research is often compromised by “a lack of valid empirical evidence that the statistical weighting adjustments … adequately correct for the biasing effects,” Lavrakas attests.  “In instances where the sample size is at the lower end of this range [less than 800 participants] and the clients want subsample analyses to be conducted … these subsamples may not have enough members in them to provide precise analyses,” Lavrakas concludes. “Thus, subsample analyses based on small sized subsamples [fewer than 100 participants in the subsample] will have relative large sampling errors.”

Read More: MediaPost

AdMeld, a New York City based ad inventory optimizer, just closed on a $15 million round of venture funding, in the latest sign that the real-time bidding (RTB) market for display advertising is on fire.  Last month, Google paid a reported $70 million for demand-side platform Invite Media. And just a few weeks ago, brand safety startup AdSafe, which will increasingly work with RTB platforms, raised $7.5 million.  The rise of RTB is the biggest story of 2010 in online advertising, and has been written about extensively in ad industry publications. But people outside of advertising don’t seem to know anything about it.

Read More: BusinessInsider

A Peek Inside the M&A Playbooks of Technology’s Top Acquirers

Last night a group of M&A gurus from the corporate development teams at top tech acquirers Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Cisco, Facebook and Twitter gathered to share insights into their business with a group of startups at a fancy-pants Los Altos Hills, Calif. mansion. Though Facebook and Google might have been the most notable active acquirers lately, everyone on the panel said they are out shopping. They each have a bit of a different style, and a bit of a different target startup. Below are the most notable bits from each participant:

Google‘s Amin Zoufonoun said that he looks at three types of acquisitions: a proven product and team, an uncertain big bet, or market and tech leadership (like YouTube and DoubleClick). He said recent acquisitions by Google and other companies like Apple point to the fact that mobile is not a core part of the DNA of many tech giants. As for advice, he warned startups that they always underestimate how long it takes to close an acquisition; for Google, deals usually take three to four months. As for areas he’s interested in, Zoufonoun said he thinks music is overhyped (an interesting comment given Google is reportedly looking to make a play in this space), and mobile user interfaces are underhyped.

Cisco‘s Derek Idemoto talked up the value of post-acquisition integration. His company has been incredibly acquisitive, with 140 deals in the last 20-odd years. Idemoto bragged that 75 percent of acquired employees are still at Cisco after four years. He said he thinks video is underhyped, and that he’s particularly interested in data. “The most, and most relevant data might win,” he explained.

Read More: Gigaom.com

Why Agencies Must Lead The Technology Charge

Countless articles have been written in recent years putting agencies in the hot seat to adapt their business models or die. Why? Never-ending budget cuts and the digitization of the marketing landscape have produced two key trends currently threatening the livelihood of the traditional agency:

• Media has become digital, multi-channel, multi-platform, and decentralized. These elements are forcing media publishers to be more creative in how inventory is packaged and sold (e.g., bundling offers cross channels from print, online, to mobile). Furthermore, media companies are tired of losing revenue to agencies for the production of creative assets and are thus building and buying their own capabilities in house.
• Innovations in technologies, from brand monitoring, audience targeting, and media planning and buying technologies, to social media and mobile content solutions, drive when and how brands connect with consumers. Many of these technologies are being developed outside of the agency ecosystem.

Read More: iMediaConnection

The following is an excerpted interview with Ramsey McGrory, Yahoo! VP and Head of Right Media Exchange.  McGrory discusses recently announced plans for Yahoo!’s display advertising exchange – Right Media Exchange.  Topics covered include:

The results of the Demand-Side Platform (DSP) Pilot Program…
A new Search Engine Marketing pilot on Right Media Exchange…
Demand Media, a publisher for RTB participants on Right Media Exchange…
On Right Media Open, an event produced this week by Yahoo! for its Right Media partners…

On the results of the Demand-Side Platform (DSP) Pilot Program…

RM: The specifics on DSPs are actually pretty good. We expected to see improvements in targeting. We expected to see, conversely, that would mean higher bidding, which is valuable to the publishers. And so I think we generally got what we bargained for. Which is the targeting efficiency, the control of frequency, the control of cost. The DSPs are, by and large, moving directionally on executing on that vision. That’s a good thing.

Read More: AdExchanger

The Career-Relevant Timeframe

I’m attending the Right Media Open in Chicago and, no surprise, change is in the air. Although there is a general consensus on where the industry is headed, I am seeing a healthy debate around the timeline for that change.  While discussing the importance of indirect, bid-based sales to publishers, Dave Zinnman from Yahoo pumped on the brakes, saying that if you believe exchange-based inventory will become dominant in a “career-relevant timeframe”, you need to “step back from the punch bowl.” For me, “career-relevant timeframe” is the most important phrase I’ve heard today.  No matter what your business, its important to have a realistic understanding of how fast your market is changing. Just today, VMM founder Darren Herman retweeted his 2008 post comparing the rate of innovation with the rate of adoption, and reminding entrepreneurs to build for today’s market. That’s the relevant timeframe for a venture backed startup between rounds.  Here in Chicago, the question of the day is: what is the relevant timeframe for advertising-related companies evaluating the momentous shift toward automation?  Up until now, I think media decisionmakers have been very confident in their ability to influence the rate and direction of change. At the 2009 24/7 Real Media Summit, I was struck by GroupM CEO Irwin Gotlieb’s remark that he felt it was, in some part, his responsibility to manage change in this new media landscape on behalf of various stakeholders. Consolidated media buying firms exist for the sake of exerting this type of influence and the comment made me think a lot about how and when the industry would change.

 Read More: GregHills.com

RockYou Strikes Virtual Currency Deal With Facebook

RockYou has entered into a five-year agreement to make Facebook Credits the exclusive payment option in its social games and applications on the social network. The deal, unveiled Thursday, is a boon for Facebook, as RockYou is one of the largest developers on the site, with about 34.6 million monthly active users and 2.7 million daily active users, according to Inside Network’s AppData.  The move helps ensure that Facebook’s virtual currency will gain wider distribution across the site. Until recently, Facebook Credits, which cost 10 cents each and allow users to buy virtual goods in games and apps, had only been available in a limited number of apps for testing.  But Facebook has lately been trying to build the user base for Credits through deals with significant developers, who get a 70% cut of revenue from sales suing the virtual currency. Some developers, principally game maker Zynga, have resisted offering Credits because of the 30% cut Facebook takes.  In a five-year deal announced in May, however, Zynga broadly pledged to expand the use of Credits in its games, which include wildly popular titles like “FarmVille” and “Mafia Wars.” Separately, smaller developers including CrowdStar and Lolapps have also signed exclusive five-year deals to use Facebook Credits exclusively.

Read More: MediaPost

iPad As A Business Tool? Probably Not Yet

AT&T’s activation of 3.2 million iPhones in the second quarter got the attention of the tech media Thursday, highlighting the Apple device’s continued importance to the company’s wireless business.  But during its earnings conference call, AT&T also shed some light on that hot-selling Apple product, the iPad. The carrier said it activated 400,000 to 500,000 iPad 3Gs in the quarter, with usage about as expected — higher than a typical iPhone user, but less than someone using a laptop. Apple said last week that 3 million of the Apple tablets had been sold since its April 3 launch.  Tim Cook, Apple’s chief operating officer, said during the company’s conference call this week that it is selling iPads and iPhone 4s as fast as it can make them. And apparently the iPad doesn’t appeal only to consumers. AT&T’s Chief Financial Officer Rick Lindner said Thursday the company has been surprised by the level of interest among business users.  When the iPhone was first launched, he noted that businesses, and especially chief information officers, were reluctant to adopt the phone as a business tool. “Over time that’s changed dramatically,” he said. But “right from the beginning with the iPad, we’ve had a number of business customers express interest.” Lindner also suggested some companies might even use iPads to replace laptops.

Read More: MediaPost