Are the websites relying on display ads doomed to fail? Only 0,1% of banners get clicks. Most people downright ignore banners altogether. Compare this with search-related ads’ 35x higher click rate and it becomes obvious why so many online media are resorting to gigantic panorama banners and other desperate measures in order to increase their click rates.

BUT: Measuring the click rate is wrong!

comScore’s Gian Fulgoni wrote an interesting post on display ad’s efficiency. He refers to comScore’s research that followed the purchase process all the way to the actual offline in-store buying. The most interesting points are:

1. There was 16% lift in sales among people who were exposed to display ads only. Even if the click rate was only 0,1%. Display ads support search ads very well.
2. There are only a limited number of people searching for a product. Display ads reach much wider audience. Thus the total dollar sales gained from display ads may be much larger than from search ads. According to comScore: the sales volume lift index for search ads is 100 and for display ads 198. Interesting and totally unexpected.

Another comScore research done in Europe reveals that Internet users exposed to a banner campaign are 94% more likely to conduct a trademark search on the advertiser’s brand.

comScore’s numbers sound reliable. Display ads seem to be much more efficient than I thought. Combine this with personalization and targeting (as in TripSay) and you’ll get a money-making machine like TripAdvisor. ;)