Comparison between Hardcoded Adverts and Ad Server served Adverts
| Hardcoded Adverts | Ad server served Adverts |
| Creative units are directly embedded on the web pages, thereby limiting the volume of advertiser ads on a page, so monetization is limited | Ad call tag are embedded on the web pages, Since ads are called through Ad tags all the scheduled ads would be delivered, thereby accelerating the revenue |
| Optimization of the campaign cannot be done so paving way to poor campaign performance | Manual/Auto optimization is done, so best performing unit given more priority, so advertisers gets maximum out of their investments |
| Targeting at geo-level would be complex as a separate IP pool should be maintained | Ad server maintains and updates their IP pool regularly so efficient geo-targeting is possible |
| Advanced targeting like Demographic, browser, operating system, ISP and behavioral targeting cannot be done | Core level targeting is possible to bring out better ROI to the advertisers from the inventory used |
| Lack of Compatibility with rich media ad types like expanding banners, over the page ads, interstitials and streams | Ad server technologies would integrate well with rich media technologies |
| Only basic level reporting is possible | Ad servers would provide customizable reports, where in we can run the report to analyze various metrics like campaign delivery for a specific time, location, etc |
| Difficult to implement 3rd party tracking system | Easy to implement |
| More manual intervention is required thus providing room for err | Almost everything is automated so room for err is negligible |
| Tedious to organize the campaign of advertisers | Simple to organize advertiser’s campaign |
| Manual billing is done for the campaigns | Billing report can be automatically done based on campaigns |
No comments:
Post a Comment