The availability of internet marketing tools has made it possible for companies to collate vast amounts of information about how campaigns are performing, which kinds of people are clicking, and how potential customers behave once they arrive on a website.
In fact, sometimes the number of metrics available can feel a little overwhelming, to the point that it is easy to miss trends that are obviously important or overlook issues with a particular approach to digital marketing.
Even if you manage to get a handle on the salient details amongst a sea of data, it is still necessary to look at digital ad spend through one or two metrics that lend meaning to the figures.
Communicating with London AdWords consultant companies can be immensely helpful for smaller companies that lack the in-house expertise to tackle such issues. But now a new approach is being introduced by the Financial Times in an attempt to squeeze even more analytical power from a given campaign.
When looking at the reasons behind this metric being formulated, it may seem strange that CPH (cost per hour) has not been implemented by others in the past. Because by utilizing time to assess the value of an online ad, a lot more can be predicted about subsequent consumer behavior.
In short, ads that appear for a minimum of five seconds onscreen are capable of generating greater engagement with visitors and resulting in better levels of brand recall than any piece of marketing content that is viewed for less than this benchmark time period.
It is all about assessing the attention which is being given to an ad, with the FT arguing that if marketers choose to optimize their campaigns based on the CPH metric they will be better placed to boost brand recognition as well as CTRs and conversions in the long run.
As with any online marketing metric and the strategies deployed to maximize its potential, there are some companies that will be better positioned to benefit from CPH than others. And it certainly seems like a more brand-oriented means of measuring the impact of ad spend than anything else, which means translating it into tangible figures for direct conversions may be difficult.
If, on the other hand, a site is more interested in making people take immediate action on an ad, rather than simply absorbing the ethos of the brand and familiarizing themselves with its products and services, then CPH may not be the best solution available.
Paying for screen time rather than clicks may seem like a new idea for the digital market, but in another way, it is a lot like the more traditional method of TV advertising where the length of a slot determines how much an ad costs to run. So it will be interesting to see whether the digital ad spends shifts as a result of this FT scheme, or if the market remains unconvinced.