Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: mondeo on October 09, 2013, 03:29:06 am
-
Hi,
I fully understand the need for ad's to help finance the site. However those that are animated and particularly the phase 1 ad is so distracting on the left hand side that I just want to scroll down and therefore not read that content (and the ad).
I think its because its on the left hand side (rather than at the top) and significantly larger.
Appreciate the animation is intended to attract attention but this particular design is far too obvious!
As a general comment I do find the ad's in US published content (Outdoor Photographer) much more invasive than UK content.
-
+1 the phase one type of ad is very distracting. At the moment not keen on the new layout (safari on macbook retina) just looks confused and rather fussy.
-
+ 1 more
-
All your ad are belong to us
(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/adImages/P1_LL_Oct13_SW1.gif)
-
In all seriousness though it's an OK design, nothing great. I'm all for ads, I run them myself - but that's one I would have rejected, I'm picky about animations allowed on my sites, you HAVE to consider the users feelings and NOT annoy them. There's a line and don't be afraid to say to the advertiser - nope sorry, too obnoxious, tone it down.
-
Have to say, I am also not a fan of the left hand larger adds. Very distracting to the point of being annoying.
Most likley I will now direct link the Forum and the 'whats new' page, rather than that home page.
-
Amen. I have complained about the blinking ads (not "ad's") before to no effect. The site needs ad revenue, understood, but do they have to wring every last cent out? Have some respect for your appreciative visitors! Anyway, who would buy a hugely expensive system like Phase 1 based on a blinking ad? At some level it is offensive to us, the visitors, to think we will click on something because it is blinking.
-
Just some info on our ads. First, we talked to Phase One and we will hopefully tomorrow have static ads for their ad spot. While the idea of animated ads is good and fun it does seem to disturb some readers. We will install new ads when they are received. As far as the size goes, our ad spots are now adhering to standard internet size ads. This makes it easier for vendors to place ads with us based on standardized sizing.
Kevin
-
Good to hear you are listening :-)
-
Kevin, thanks for the response
David
-
In all seriousness though it's an OK design, nothing great. I'm all for ads, I run them myself - but that's one I would have rejected, I'm picky about animations allowed on my sites, you HAVE to consider the users feelings and NOT annoy them. There's a line and don't be afraid to say to the advertiser - nope sorry, too obnoxious, tone it down.
So how come you have ads that move, change colour and are otherwise distracting then?
-
Just some info on our ads. First, we talked to Phase One and we will hopefully tomorrow have static ads for their ad spot. While the idea of animated ads is good and fun it does seem to disturb some readers. We will install new ads when they are received. As far as the size goes, our ad spots are now adhering to standard internet size ads. This makes it easier for vendors to place ads with us based on standardized sizing.
As far as the left hand placement goes you said this in another thread Kevin....
In regards to ads on the left or right. We opted for ads on the left because that was where they were on the old site. The old look we had a left column with menu selections and ads. So, we thought rather than shake things up too much we would use the left side as we had done for a very long time.
That's a really bad reason for doing something. If you alter things things to a way that is more functional/nicer to use you will get less hassle not more. Sticking with the old way simply because that it's the old way is not good. Though this probably explains why the site has not progressed as the internet has changed, moved on and improved all these years.
Now I have no problem with advertising being used as a means of revenue raising, but what advertisers repeatedly seem to fail to understand is that intrusive advertising is a complete turn off and not a sales aid. For example in the UK advert breaks on TV are not allowed to increase the volume compared to the programme, yet it is something that is very definitely done by some channels. Self defeating though as I've noticed that people simply hit mute because ads are now too loud and unpleasant.
Reading an article in say a US mountain bike magazine is really painful at times as you get a single page article scattered thorough several pages of ads. Now do advertisers really think we'll suddenly stop reading an interesting article to look at a dull advert [which they invariably are in those cases]. UK [cycling] mags do not do this thankfully and are much nicer to read as a result and because the ads are usually for products we are already interested in, we can look at them at out leisure and without irritation. Annoying web ads mean people use adblock, not more sales.
As for the ads on LL, I now find them annoying and placed poorly from a design perspective. On the right would be much better.
-
So how come you have ads that move, change colour and are otherwise distracting then?
I said I'm picky about them, not I don't allow them. I have never received a single complaint about any ads in 5+ years and there have been hundreds of them rotating in. When I see google ads I don't like I block them immediately. When an advertiser tries to use an obnoxious one I reject it. That has only happened a couple times though most of them know better.
-
And to those complaining about the placement, they have it right. Studies plainly show that ads on the left are more effective than the right. I had mine on the right for the first couple years and redesigned to move them on the left. No changes to what was shown, just where. Revenue instantly jumped up double digit percentages from increased click-through. Google provides very easy to digest studies and data regarding ad size, placement and human interaction. They aren't doing anything wrong as far as that goes whatsoever.
-
I said I'm picky about them, not I don't allow them. I have never received a single complaint about any ads in 5+ years and there have been hundreds of them rotating in. When I see google ads I don't like I block them immediately. When an advertiser tries to use an obnoxious one I reject it. That has only happened a couple times though most of them know better.
What Google ads you see depends on the viewer. I find them extremely pointless as they usually advertise the product I've just bought or made a specific search for so no need to advertise product/service to me.
Why would anyone complain to you about ads? If things like ads annoy people they simply move on.
-
What Google ads you see depends on the viewer. I find them extremely pointless as they usually advertise the product I've just bought or made a specific search for so no need to advertise product/service to me.
Why would anyone complain to you about ads? If things like ads annoy people they simply move on.
That's only partially true. While some of the google ads are displayed based on your individual matching, I still approve every ad that can be shown. Many though have nothing to do with the viewer, they are shown simply on the bidding process. I have complete control over what ads can be shown on my sites, even from google.
Obviously there is a great benefit to them and they work very well overall. Why would people complain to a site about an ad? Didn't you read this very thread??
-
That's only partially true. While some of the google ads are displayed based on your individual matching, I still approve every ad that can be shown. Many though have nothing to do with the viewer, they are shown simply on the bidding process. I have complete control over what ads can be shown on my sites, even from google.
Really, so how come I saw an ad for flying a Tiger Moth in the Peak District. Something I was looking at the day before. Did you know I was going to visit site and pre-approve it. ;)
Obviously there is a great benefit to them and they work very well overall. Why would people complain to a site about an ad? Didn't you read this very thread??
No, I said why would anyone complain to you about an ad. And I'm well aware that this is a thread about ad complaining, but this is a forum full of pixel peepers, so it is only to be expected.
-
Really, so how come I saw an ad for flying a Tiger Moth in the Peak District. Something I was looking at the day before. Did you know I was going to visit site and pre-approve it. ;)
No, I said why would anyone complain to you about an ad. And I'm well aware that this is a thread about ad complaining, but this is a forum full of pixel peepers, so it is only to be expected.
1 - because I have those ads enabled. If I choose to, I can disable them at any time. I see in the backend what was shown. I can also choose to yes, pre-approve any ad that wants to be shown. Because that obviously would cut down on effectiveness, I run the approval post and it so far has not been an issue.
2 - they would presumably complain to me for the same reason people here are complaining to lula. It's where the ads are being run - obviously.
-
---
-
Luckily for us that run them, you are in the vast minority. They work, and work very well.
-
Well seeing as it is so very easy to accidentally click on ads particularly if you use a trackpad or they are designed to deliberately catch you out, click through rate may not always be that relevant. However apposite ads such as for cigars on a cigar review site or bikes on a bike review site are certainly going to get deliberate click throughs as they are the people who want to buy that product, so they make perfect sense.
The Google ads that advertise what you have already bought or searched out or even simply glanced once by mistake a month ago however are simply irritating. And Adsense ads can be very inappropriate at times too with a car ad appearing on an anti car blog say. Ads do make Google a fortune though.
So do the ads make decent money for your cigar site then, as that's where they should work very well.
-
Indeed Internet ads work. Companies like Epson and Phase wouldn't advertise here if they didn't. There is a direct financial correlation. Do you imagine that the people who run corporations are that stupid?
Michael
-
I'm certainly not saying there isn't money to be made by running ads or that I am against it on LuLa. I'd simply run an ad blocker if it was an that much of an issue.
But I do doubt their usefulness at times, Google ads with or maybe because of all their tracking seem to consistently advertise the wrong products to me.
Phase One would be daft not to advertise on LuLa as this is where a lot of people who are interested in Phase One hang out. Deciding whether their ads on here make the difference between buying a camera or not is the tricky part.
-
Do you imagine that the people who run corporations are that stupid?
Hmm, let me think... Yes, I actually do think they are stupid. Here is a link from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_business_failures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_business_failures) with a long list of business failures.
-
Hmm, let me think... Yes, I actually do think they are stupid. Here is a link from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_business_failures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_business_failures) with a long list of business failures.
Good point. My experience of people in boardrooms [of multinationals] is that they seem more like children squabbling in the schoolyard at times, than smart grown ups.