Yankee Group Blog

Blog Home

Analyst Pages

Categories

Search:

Blog Alert:

Enter your e-mail address to receive notifications when there are new posts.

Archives

Yankee Group RSS Feed

Some funnels are good, and others are bad. For example, funnel cakes fall into the “good” category, but funnel clouds are considered by many to fill the obverse role.

In the world of marketing, there is the often-mentioned “marketing funnel” which shows the range of marketing activities from awareness all the way down to (purchase) intent. The proverbial “line” of above- and below-the-line fame lies somewhere about two thirds of the way down the funnel, and it speaks volumes to the types of marketing objectives that exist in the world of advertising.

Put simply, brand advertising dollars are invested at the top of the funnel where they drive brand and product awareness. Further down the funnel, performance marketing budgets reach closer to purchase intent. As this happens, it becomes easier to measure campaign effectiveness in terms of click-through rates and intent to purchase.

A few days ago, I was talking about targeting with someone who quickly repeated the current industry assertion that online marketers will want to deliver an automobile advertisement to someone who’s in the market for a new car. This is true, but the true question isn’t whether targeting can deliver such an advertisement — it’s how much will marketers be willing to spend to reach buyers in this stage of the process. Dollars per funnel inch…or something like that.

Because not every advertising dollar will get spent at the bottom of the funnel. And even as hundreds of companies hope to make it big by bringing scads of targeted digital inventory onto the market, we have to ask this fundamental question — what is the proper ratio of dollars spent at the bottom of the funnel in comparison to dollars spent at the top? 1:2? 1:3? 1:5?

It’s an open question, but I have to wonder whether anyone is thinking about the size of the market for below-the-line, performance-based, digital advertising targeted at consumers at the “intent” stage of the marketing funnel.

Sorry to be such a reductionist, but this is the epistemology that keeps coming to mind. Digital advertising can be disruptive, but it won’t likely change the core fact that no marketer will want to wait until someone is looking for a new car to introduce them to their brand. Imagine trying to sell a Lexus over a Toyota when that time comes. If you can’t explain the brand at the top of the funnel, then how will you succeed by focusing all your resources at the bottom?

You won’t. And that’s why — as a marketer — I’d prefer to make a calculated investment across the funnel, not just concentrated at one spot on the bottom.

Leave a Reply