Google’s PPA has launched a litany of articles ranging from an acknowledgement that this is just one more arrow in their quiver, to “Oh no, they are going to put affiliate networks out of business,” and even “PPC is going away.”
For me, it is just another arrow. Unlike PPC, where there were a few so-so players (with many more not so good ones), and they could dominate just by being very good, the PPA world has competition that is quite competent; just as radio sales, t.v. sales and newspapers. But, this announcement brought to mind the broader guessing game: What’s Google up to?
When the company launched into radio, I though it was far a field. Ditto for t.v.; newspapers, not so much, but still out there. My main contention was and still is that agencies won’t simply step aside as Google develops direct relationships with advertisers, or forces blind buys to media. Advertisers themselves are not necessarily interested in disintermediation either. Well, my perspective was skewed by the nature of my interaction at Google, with the sales and agency relationship groups. While still valid (I believe), I don’t know that it is the relevant perspective.
Google is fundamentally a technology company. The sales side has benefited greatly from the door-opening-great-product, relevancy based PPC Search. They have always said their goal was to make the advertising buying process more efficient. But it was always communicated as something over which Google will have control in the relationship. Media placement decided by Google and the goal of developing direct to advertiser relationships have given me pause. Efficiency is important, relationship control is paramount.
Well, most of the transactions are going to take place with or without Google (SMEs are a different and very viable prospect). But, Google can make them better. By interjecting themselves at all levels, Google can learn what makes the process inefficient at every stage of the marketing communications chain (brand / product awareness down to acquisition), and then offer up the tools to improve it. They become the conduit through which all processes are connected and managed.
Ultimately, I do not see Google owning the advertiser / agency – to– media relationship. But, they may just build the tools on which the agency – media relationship depends. They become the Intel inside the ‘machine.’ Agencies can claim a level of proficiency and acumen as they sell their use of the “Google Media Engine” as part of the tactical implementation of their unique agency strategy skills.
When we sell our skills as agencies, we focus on the strategic abilities we have. Uncovering the unseen, identifying opportunities and ultimately growing our client’s business along side them as no other agency can. Too often though, we get stuck on our media buying prowess. It boils down to efficiency – how much do we get for each dollar spent.
The truth is, any good agency, and there are a lot of them, can, or has access to efficient media buying. It is the minimum price for entry. Nonetheless, we spend a fair amount of time convincing prospects we do this better than anyone. It is a commodity. The real value is in identifying the strategic value of a media and being able to integrate it into the overall objectives.
If Google’s tools can abate this question somewhat and allow us to focus on our truly unique strategic abilities, then they will add a lot to the equation. If, however, they simply try to interject themselves between advertiser / agency and media, I don’t believe it will work out for anyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment