TechCrunch has posted a list of why Google’s new PPC video ads will not work. Most of it revolves around the fact that there is a higher cost of entry for video ads and that most advertisers would not be interested in them because of the lack of tracking of ROI compared to text ads. I hear what he is saying in some ways, but I don’t completely agree. There are many cases where a video is worth 1000 text ads, especially when trying to deliver and brand a commercial product.

1. Images Can Be Unobtrusive: The image has the option to contain text ads and clickable areas. I’ve seen current uses of this with Google’s image ads, where an advertiser will target a site they want to be on and make what appears to be a google ad, only they are the only advertiser on it. The problem with Google Image Ads is that they have been sold on a CPM basis, which goes away from the model. But the point is, how the image looks is up the advertiser and they will find many ways to get someone to click.

2. Text Ad Blindness: We all love our little text ads, but lets face it, the love will only last so long. Being in the search space I tend to ignore the ads and rarely click on them. The ads may receive a good click through rating now, but over time the clickthrough rate is going to go down and Google is probably preparing for this.

3. A Picture is Worth 1000 Words (And A Video Is Worth A Million): Text and text ads can only go so far. Limited space to sell the message and value proposition. Allowing pictures and videos opens up the innovations and years of marketing experience that have developed with video. If I was a flower shop looking to make a big move for mothers day, I would much rather have a video extolling the virtues of my service and brand and bid on keywords like mothers day, mothers day presents, etc then just a text ad. Or imagine a company selling a hot new weight loss product or exercise machine. Are they more likely to leave an impression on their expensive exercise machine through a text ad or a video extolling their product?

4. Geo-Targeting for Branding: Google’s Ad Targeting by location has been proven effective for many advertisers, including the company I work for. I imagine this could play out well with local advertisers who want more branding for their physical store and do not necessarily have a large web presence or online order. The local shoe shop might have a video telling you to come to Bennie’s Shoes, where you can get the personalized attention and service you need. (Plug: I’ve been buying dress shoes from Bennie’s Shoes in Atlanta for a long time now. You see, I have large feet and finding a comfortable shoe to wear is a difficult endeavor. And its not a product I can truly order on the net)

Or imagine a local yoga studio that wants to target all local yoga aficianados in their area. A video ad might lead more people to pick up the phone or come by and check out their classes. Or imagine vacations. Its one thing to read text about a cabin vacation, its another thing to see a video of the amazing views you could have while relaxing in a hot tub. Which ad do you think makes you more likely to rent a cabin at that location?

Video ads opens up a range of products that don’t sell well on the web, especially for products which are an experience. I am sure there are many kinks that will have to be worked out in the system, but this offer could turn into a much larger play for Google as it gets better at targeting user intent and matching it with relevant ads. Especially given it offers the trackable performance aspect of knowing someone has seen your ad and not the vague rates of TV. You get to target based upon intent and frame of mind (keywords) as well as knowing your offer was appealing enough for someone to watch a video. There have been studies I’ve seen that show the impact video can have upon the overall conversion rate of a product and most indications are a video can sell the product far better then any brochure on a website. 

Michael @ SEOG