Neuster released its “Q1 2014 Media Intelligence Report.” I’ve written up the main findings at Marketing Land. The report is also embedded below.
Essentially the report argues that social sites offer the greatest audience reach and cost efficiency vs. other channels (search wasn’t a part of the analysis). The data come from billions of ad impressions, including video and mobile, across seven verticals.
The verticals are CPG, Education, Entertainment, Health, Media, Retail, and Telco. Each is broken out for drill-down treatment. For some reason, however, Media is not.
Neustar says that, along with other parameters (demographics, life events, interests, and financial attributes), location provided a “performance lift” in some but not all of these verticals. Performance means a number of things in the report; however it’s never specifically defined beyond broad metrics: impressions, clicks and actions.
Of the seven, the verticals where location had an impact or delivered a meaningful performance improvement were: CPG, Entertainment and Retail. It’s not clear in the report whether location targeting was simply not effective in these other verticals or whether it wasn’t used equally across verticals. In these three contexts it appears to have “worked” however.
Location can unlock demographics but it appears that location in this context only means geotargeting. It’s also not clear what degree of geotargeting or location precision was utilized in these campaigns.
Health, Education and probably Telco are also likely to convert offline. So it’s interesting to me that location wasn’t a factor in those categories. What are your thoughts on these findings? Any theories on why location wasn’t a factor in all these verticals?