Enquiro recently wrapped up primary research, comissioned by Google, that shows business to business (B2B) ads ”relevant to their context” can be 30-40% more effective than those that aren’t.
For example, one of the pages shows why, “With Contextually Relevant B2B Ads, you are 28% more likely your Brand will make the cut and be shortlisted.”
Now take today’s post where we’re ruminating again about what works and what doesn’t in B2B marketing communications again.
Only today you encounter this pitch:
I do recommend Sutter Health, and this is a useful site, and you may well be in the site’s target audience, but… what is the pitch doing here? Verdict: not so relevant.
“Contextually non-relevant ads may improve immediate ad recall, but only big brands can possibly benefit as offline brand perception and awareness are carried over…”
Enquiro’s results will be particularly useful for organizations already segmenting their publications, site sections, and other communications into narrowly defined groups.
TMCnet, for example, has added microsite upon microsite to target each hot button topic its audience cares about. From a search standpoint, there are clearly upsides to this approach. From an advertising standpoint, there are clearly upsides to this approach. From a human standpoint, have they taken it too far?
Then there are not-for-profit “good guys” who can make a stronger case than ever using Enquiro’s independent research.
National Public Radio has long been able to show prospective underwriters that their content gets and holds the attention of the business decision makers demographic better than commercial counterparts do. Now add Exhibit E (for ‘Enquiro’) showing an Abbott or a Genentech why they might consider credits during Science Friday as potentially more valuable than those even PM drive time.