Advertising Frequency vs. Relevance

Everyone knows the “rule of 7” when it comes to advertising. It takes someone 5-7 views of an ad to be driven to action.

This may (have been) true, but I wonder if it is still as important as it once was.

Sure, if you see something enough times, it may stick in your head…but if it’s not relevant, what difference does that make? I think that frequency is being eclipsed by relevance and content.

In an age where people are utilizing technologies to skip as many advertisements as possible, is it still realistic to simply churn out more versions of a bad ad and expect results? Doesn’t that just result in people just skipping MORE bad ads? Which leads advertisers to churn out more to try to get people’s attention.

I’m not “anti-advertising.” I think it is and will always be a necessary tool to reach new potential customers. For all the talk of engagement these days, we need to remember that people must first be aware in order to engage.

I just don’t think that the answer is more ads. Or ads more often. It all comes back to the Purple Cow concept. If your offering is compelling enough, people will come.

Technorati Tags: , ,
Advertising Frequency vs. Relevance

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s