A common currency of attention neil_1.pdf · In this study, viewability in desktop and mobile...

A common currency of attention

Comparing the ‘visibility adjusted contact’ consistently across OOH, digital display and mobile advertising

Neil Eddleston, JCDecaux

David Bassett, Lumen Research

The challenge of viewability

Of non-viewable digital advertising:

“It's like having billboard ads

underwater, it's a complete and

utter waste of our money. I believe

we should get what we pay for”

Keith Weed, CMO, Unilever

Going beyond viewability to calculate viewing

Could be seen:

Viewable

Was seen:

Viewed

What is a ‘viewable’ impression?

Minimum requirements:

• Be facing in the direction of the traffic flow being

measured

• Have both edges of poster visible

• Can never have more than 10% obstruction and this

must be “transitory”, e.g. a lamppost passing over the

face as you drive past it.

• Will only receive audience at night (be viewable) if the

poster has dedicated illumination


Display: 50% of pixels displayed on screen

for 1 second+

Video ads: 50% of pixels displayed on screen for 2

second+

OOHDigital display and Mobile

What is a ‘viewed impression’?


At least 1 fixation* hit on the advertising

* Minimum fixation duration of 100ms

Digital display, Mobile and OOH

OOH industry has been estimating ‘viewed impressions’

for many years

Visibility Adjusted Contact (VAC)

Total footfall of ‘viewable’ panels adjusted by a

‘realistic likelihood to view’ based on eye tracking

studies

Challenge

What happens when we apply the Visibility

Adjusted Contact (VAC) methodology to mobile

and desktop advertising?

Lumen operate a passive eye-tracking panel for desktop in the UK

Laptop mounted eye-

tracking device

766 households (c.250-300 active per month)

400,000 minutes

natural browsing

150,000+ ads tracked

in natural browsing

Live since January 2016

Data collection

•Natural browsing

•Controlled tests

The AM4DOOH project measured attention to digital OOH

• Virtual 3d environment with Tobii

Eye tracking device

• 464 respondents in UK, France,

Sweden and Switzerland

• 36 Brands

• 12253 contacts

Lumen partnered with JCDecaux to understand mobile

Tobii eye-tracking glasses

150 respondents in the UK

50 hours of data

11 sites

57 brands

2682 ad impressions

Standard formats

DMPU

300 x 600

Billboard

970 x 250

Leaderboard

728 x 90

Skyscraper

160x600MPU

300 x 250300x600320 x 50 300x250320x100 2m 12m

The reality of attention to advertising

Viewable impressions

Viewed impressions

Viewing time

In this study, viewability in desktop and mobile samples matches global

benchmarks; OOH digital viewability is calculated with an equation

59%

69% 70%

64%

55%

970x250 300x600 160x600 300x250 728x90

28%

42%

64%

44%

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50

% Viewable% Viewable% Viewable% Viewable

MobileMobileMobileMobile DesktopDesktopDesktopDesktop OOHOOHOOHOOH

IAS viewability H1 2017

benchmark

43.9%

IAS viewability H1 2017

benchmark

61.0% min (�� + �� − 2

�� , 100%)

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

25%

35%

63%

80%

55%

72%

2 12 2 12 2 12

Drive Roadside pedestrian Internal

Paper

Digital

The realistic likelihood to view mobile ads differs by format type

78% 77%

60%

20%

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50

MobileMobileMobileMobile

% of % of % of % of viewableviewableviewableviewable

impressions impressions impressions impressions to be viewedto be viewedto be viewedto be viewed

Almost all mobile formats out perform desktop formats

37%

19%

13%

18%20%

970x250 300x600 160x600 300x250 728x90

78% 77%

60%

20%

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50

MobileMobileMobileMobile DesktopDesktopDesktopDesktop



Realistic likelihood to see OOH panels is strong

37%

19%

13%

18%20%

970x250 300x600 160x600 300x250 728x90

78% 77%

60%

20%

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50

MobileMobileMobileMobile DesktopDesktopDesktopDesktop OOHOOHOOHOOH

48%

58%

64%

73%76%

79%

57%

64%

75%

72% 70%74%

2 12 2 12 2 12


Paper

Digital



Combining viewability and realistic likelihood to view statistics

highlights significant differences in Visibility Adjusted Contact (VAC)

22%

13%

9%12% 11%

970x250 300x600 160x600 300x250 728x90

22%

32%

38%

9%

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50


VACVACVACVAC

% likelihood % likelihood % likelihood % likelihood of of of of total total total total


OOHOOHOOHOOH

48%

58%

64%

73%76%

79%

14%

22%

48%

57%

39%

53%

2 12 2 12 2 12


Paper

Digital

Viewing time with advertising is remarkably consistent across media

1.71.6

1.9

1.1 1.2

970x250 300x600 160x600 300x250 728x90

1.71.7

1.0

0.6

300x600 300x250 320x100 320x50


Viewing time Viewing time Viewing time Viewing time (s)(s)(s)(s)

OOHOOHOOHOOH

0.9

1.3

1.1

3.3

1.7

2.0

1.1

1.6

1.4

2.3

1.6

1.4

2 12 2 12 2 12


Paper

Digital

Implications for advertisers

Digital media can

learn from OOH to

calculate the reality of

attention to advertising

Digital creative can

learn from OOH on

communicating in a

short time slot

Thanks!

Neil Eddleston, JC Decaux: [email protected]

David Bassett, Lumen Research: [email protected]

A common currency of attention neil_1.pdf · In this study, viewability in desktop and mobile...

Documents

Transcript of A common currency of attention neil_1.pdf · In this study, viewability in desktop and mobile...