After a 2-week trial run of Google’s Adsense Link Units, we have removed them from SuperMotors.net because we received 0 clicks. While there are probably other areas these link units could excel in, we are really trying to avoid crowding the site with advertisements in an effort to provide an acceptable user experience.
In my quest to improve general usability in everyday life, I’ve been looking at things I use every day with a more critical eye to see how major manufacturers have either hit the nail on the head, or completely missed the nail altogether.
My latest gripes is Oreo cookie packaging.
That’s right, I’m “all growed up” but I still eat Oreos — “double stuf, to be exact. I hate their packaging, it frustrates me every time. Thankfully Oreos are so good that I brush aside this inconvenience. This evening however, I opened the kitchen pantry and found Chips Ahoy! cookies. What a nice change from Oreos. I proceded to rip open the bag and consume. Upon trying to close it, I ran into the same design/usability flaw that Oreo cookies have – the packaging is frustrating to use. I got all wound up, complained to my wife about package design, she rolled her eyes, and I proceeded to take pictures of the poor design, convinced that I’d point out all bad things about it on this blog (I later realized that Chips Ahoy! has an improved package design, I just didn’t see the label — read on for details).
Here’s my dilemma:
The design is great from a packaging standpoint in that it keeps the cookies fresh while on the shelf. However, when a consumer takes it home, how do they keep the cookies fresh after they’ve opened the package? Well, throw it in a ziploc bag of course. No re-seal capability on the Oreos package. Plus, it’s really hard to shove the plastic tray back into the packaging, too (this is the most annoying part, for me).
But wait, there IS a better way!
Well, I discovered that Chips Ahoy! has actually improved their packaging ten-fold, I just didn’t notice the label. They have a new package design that allows you to conveniently open from the top and re-seal it for freshness. What a concept!
Now, they just need to do a better job of making it obvious that you open the package from the top. Their current design makes it look more like a promotion than a design improvement. The tab is really small and you don’t see it. Since we’re all used to opening these packages on the side, a simple note on each end of the package would eliminate all pain points! 
So, kudos to Chips Ahoy! Oreos on the other hand, needs an update to packaging. Just make it easier to shove the cookies back into the packaging as a first step, I can deal with putting them in a ziploc baggy. Or, kill 2 birds with 1 stone and handle both usability/design faults at the same time.
How does Oreo cookie packaging apply to website usability and design?
Sites are designed by engineers with business rules to satisfy, just like packaging is designed by a packaging engineer with shelf-life dates to satisfy. It must meet certain technical standards in order to be released to consumers. However, technical standards do not take into consideration how consumers will actually interact with the product, and sometimes the best intentions with designs become your largest hurdle. Odds are that your site probably has competition on the Internet. Unlike Oreo cookies (once you bring them home, you’re stuck with them until you eat them all), your website can easily be passed up for a competitor site if a consumer finds any pain points with it.
Do your due diligence and test your site with your target audience, and the average consumer who is not web savvy. It will open up your eyes to how everyday people interact with your creation. Don’t take it personally if they don’t “get” how to navigate your site, what a particular button or link is supposed to do, etc. — it’s up to you to interpret these results and make it easier for them. At the end of the day, they make your site successful. Don’t fall victim to Oreo cookie packaging because it meets standards for shelf life.
MarketingVOX ran a blurb today on a new company called Quantcast. Quantcast is described as follows:
Quantcast is the world’s first open internet ratings service. Advertisers can find reports on the audiences of a half million web sites here. Publishers can ensure their sites are represented accurately by tagging them for direct measurement. The service is free to everyone.
This service is what Google Analytics (light-weight, free web analytics) is to Omniture SiteCatalyst (heavy-duty web analytics). It functions on a similar methodology of partnering with ISPs for aggregate data and crossing it with panel data to provide a higher-level overview of your target audience such as:
This is similar to the data that Hitwise provides, but the very tip of the iceberg and best of all, free. Where it’s extremely valuable is you can analyze the stats of other sites (partners, competitors, potential sponsors, etc.). Hitwise, through their contractual structure, will typically limit your reach within the data to just the pre-defined categories that sites are lumped into. Hitwise also provides a much deeper dive into the data. Quantcast is a superb service for small-to-medium sized businesses.
Sitegraphics & Common Audience (I love these!)
What is also provides is a snapshot of the sites that index well against your audience (the “Sitegraphics” feature). Additionally, it also provides a list of sites that your audience also visits. Check out the snapshot of SuperMotors.net here. Unfortunately, we changed domain names in July of ‘06, so there’s only 5 months of data (their stats go through November 2006 thus far), so the data isn’t 100% accurate. I have however added their tracking code to SuperMotors.net in an effort to paint a more accurate picture of our visitors.
What value does this provide?
As a site owner, this is a very powerful tool, particularly if you sell your own advertising inventory. On SuperMotors, while we run Tribal Fusion and Google AdSense ads, we also have our own ad serving system and subsequently sell inventory in it. We do not have a dedicated sales force, so we rely heavily on ad networks for revenue. That said, selling our own inventory offers the greatest ROI.
In looking at the “Common Audience” chart:
We have data that supports which sites our visitors also frequent — thus we have data to bring to potential sponsors to help sell ad inventory
Here we see where our visitors are also going. I know of a lot of these sites and personally visit them quite often. You can see a trend of Ford and Bronco-related sites, primarily because our userbase indexes heavily towards those makes and models of automobiles. Those sites aside, we also see retailer sites such as Summit Racing, 4 Wheel Parts, Edelbrock, Bronco Graveyard, James Duff, and BC Broncos. Fortunately for us, Bronco Graveyard is already a sponsor on SuperMotors.net (where we sold directly out of our inventory). We now have data that can help us craft a story to approach these other retailers and manufacturers. This shows that our visitors also visit their sites. This has nothing to do with referring links, it simply tells us over time that these sites are also visited by our members.
But, if they’re already visiting these retail/manufacturer sites, why would they want to advertise on SuperMotors.net? They already are getting the traffic.
Sure, this argument could be made. However, one of the driver’s behind choosing where to advertise is qualifying the sites you advertise on. What better way than to advertise on sites that you know is already a match for some of your consumers. Leverage this demographical data and expand your reach to this network that is already proving it has qualified consumers.
As a sponsor or someone who spends ad dollars, this tool is great to identify sites on which you would consider advertising on.
On the flip-side of this coin, this also means we could pursue partnership opportunities with the non-retail sites who have visitors that use our services. Perhaps even we would advertise on these sites to further promote our services. We are much better off advertising where we already have advocates than trying from ground zero. The same holds true for retailers who are looking to advertise online. Examine the sites where your users are currently visiting and tap into the visitor bases of those sites.
Moral of the story: Use data to support your advertising pitches
Ad networks frequently approach advertisers and pitch them on demographics, ages, incomes, education, and all of the metrics that align with an advertiser’s target market. If you sell your own advertising on your site like we do, use this tool to identify potential sponsors and leverage the data in your sales pitch. It’s a much more compelling if visitor data shows that users who visit Yoursite.com also visit TheSponsorYouWant.com. It’s hard for a potential sponsor to tell you, “no” because it’s hard to argue against data. This levels the playing field for you if you’re a smaller company — get them hooked with the data and talk about the sponsorship package you can put together for them.
I came across an interesting post which I commented on over at Read/Write Web, discussing the recent Forrester Research
results of RIA (Rich Internet Applications) vs. HTML. While I think the result of the research is nothing shocking (RIA provides a better user experience than HTML), the bigger issue I would like more insight on is ajax vs. Adobe Flex.
Apparently, this has already been discussed on several sites/blogs (google search “ajax vs. flex”). There are inherent pros and cons to each platform, and I think the debate could go on forever on which is “better.” Sort of like J2EE vs. PHP for web application development…or better yet, Mac vs. Windows, or Ford vs. Chevy. Two types of technology that can really get to the same end result (more or less). Obviously, depending on the end result you need, one technology may be better than another. In the case of cars, if you need to do any real work, then you need a Ford ( sorry, I’m a “Ford” guy).
I digress. The issue I would like to initially evaluate is not really the technical implementation discussion but rather the usability and user experience discussion.
Ajax User Experience vs. Adobe Flex User Experience
Do consumers really care that an application is done using Flex vs. Ajax? Does one technology fair well for certain demographics, industries/markets, or services better than another?
Take Glidden Paint for example. Here is their RIA utilizing Adobe Flex:
Painting is a very interactive experience, and the color-picking process should arguably be, too. In the Glidden application, you navigate down to color families which they’ve so kindly organized for you, and you drag and drop color swatches onto the areas of the photo so you can see how it looks. Very effective. Does it help sell more paint? Probably. Could the same application be done utilizing ajax? Probably, minus drag-and-drop features.
Let’s say it was done in ajax, to the best of the most-talented developer’s capabilities, designed to look nearly identical where it could:
Knowing what I know now, flex is definitely the way to go for the Glidden environment. Why? The subtle touches that flex offers:
These all contribute to making it a very usable, inspirational, and, well, fun application to use! This is an important consideration that needs to also be made when choosing the technology — how will your customers benefit from one technology vs. another?
OK, so when is Ajax better than Flex?
In many places. Google maps is one. The ability to grab the map and move it with your mouse is a significant usability benefit of Google Maps over competitor mapping systems. Not to mention that there really are no page loads. Google benefits from a very “plain Jane” UI throughout all of its applications it offers for free. Ajax is a clear winner for them because it provides extreme flexibility, runs entirely on open source software, and well, their target audience wants their product to just work. Light-weight portability is also critical for Google as they branch out into mobile phones, syndicating services, licensing search engine appliances — dealing with the inherent licensing fees of Flex and the portability to all of the different mediums they play in would be rather difficult. When your target market is the entire world, it’s best to K.I.S.S.
I already have an ajax-based web application. Should I port it over to flex?
This is a really interesting question that I do not have the answer to. We will face this same dilemma for our ajax-based project. We’ve already spent 12 months on the project, it’s nearly finished — does it make technical sense to port the client-facing side of the application over to flex? Does it make business sense? Will it create a happier customer? Will it generate more revenue? Will it be more or less of an ongoing burden as it pertains to maintenance? What about portability to other mediums besides the web (mobile phones, kiosks, etc.)?
I will continue to comment on our progress on our ajax application (I will talk more about it when we actually launch it — so for now, I have to be vague). We will most certainly do a technical and business analysis of converting from ajax to flex to see if we will see a return on investment. The last thing we want to do is to do something just for the sake of doing it. Converting to flex essentially means halting new development of the existing ajax application — which also will have an affect on current revenue streams and customer satisfaction. Instead of pumping time and resources into improving what we have already, we’re essentially starting the client-side from scratch. Anyway, we’ll weigh the pros and cons and I’ll post more details as we cross that bridge.
Moral of the story: 3 components to choosing the right RIA technology
In the meantime, we’ll chew on research like Forrester’s RIA vs. HTML — but this is fairly common sense. RIA’s inherently provide an improved user experience, so they are a home run with consumers. I’ll eagerly await more data on which RIA technology drives higher satisfaction and ROI.
We are testing Google AdSense “Link Units” on SuperMotors. We see a lot of sites using the Google AdSense link units to generate advertising revenue. They are a relatively small footprint and can provide very relevant content when functioning correctly. We are still inside the 48-hour ramp-up period which Google describes as:
Once the code is live on your site, relevant ads should appear within 48 hours.
This is where we have implemented them (horizontally, just below the 728×90 leaderboard banner ad) based on locations we’ve seen on other automotive-related sites:
I personally have never once clicked on these types of links simply because it produces a list of sponsored links. Seems like extra work for me and I’d rather click on relevant ads that are already displayed on the site. This may also be attributed to my behavior on sites in that I realize these are sponsored links and perhaps tend to avoid this style of link. Based on usability studies and general observations of consumers using websites, I think the more often than not, they are under the impression that the text-based links are for pages within the current site they are visiting.
Will report back as to whether or not revenues increase substantially with the addition of these link units.
Blog by Eric Long
