View Full Version : CPX - New Advertising Standard

12-08-2001, 05:47 PM

This is the introduction to a new Internet advertising standard that I have been working on for the last couple of days. It's supposed to bring the power of branding and exclusivity over to the Internet. CPX stands for "Cost Per Experience". You can check out the specs at...


I believe the IAB was trying to lay out something like this, but hasn't made any formal announcements.

Tell me what you think about CPX, and send in your suggestions so that I improve this first draft.

Ralph :)

12-08-2001, 06:35 PM
I think its a good start. For one, the 'drive-by' type of advertising we've been seeing is probably one reason CPM advertising is so ineffective. So many advertisers and networks insist on only showing an ad once to a user. I don't know how you can even try to brand off that.

In my mind there are 7 important steps to 'brand' something:

Interruption, Recognition, Repitition, Communication, Targeting, Relation, Action

This list is by no means authoratative or exhaustive, but lets look at a few of them..

Interruption - You compare online advertising to TV advertising. One of the reasons TV advertising works is that it interrrupts . Online advertising rarely does. Interruption need not always be a popup, annoying ad, or one of those epilipsy-inducing banners. Interruption can be putting an ad in the middle of content, or many other things. But if you confine advertising to a banner in the same place on your site, you aren't going to do much interrupting.

B]Targeting[/B] - Should be a no-brainer, but it doesn't always seem that way. I often listen to MTV Radio via the Internet, and lately all the ads I get are for MTV Girl, which is targeted at 14 year old girls, which is not even close to a 20 year old male! Its quite embarrasing when I am blasting Nelly one minute, and then someone walks by and hears "MTV Girl.com, where you can be a GIRL", and even more importantly, its not good advertising.

Recognition - A user must see and recognize an ad for it to be effective. This means ties into interruption - you want the user to at least see your message.

Repitition - I think your 'CPX' fixes this problem. Too many advertisers use the drive-by solution -- lets show them one ad and hope they buy something from us. When you have multiple ads, and even better, multiple ads in multiple forms/spots, you get that repitition needed to make your potential customer familiar with you.

The rest of the steps probably rest more on the advertiser than on the network or publisher.

Anyway, I think its a great idea and a good start to hopefully make advertising more effective. I'll quit ranting now :)

12-08-2001, 07:19 PM
it's a very good idea.

Though hasn't this already been done on NyTimes.com?

12-09-2001, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by PaulT
it's a very good idea.

Though hasn't this already been done on NyTimes.com?
Yup. They call them 'Surround Sessions', but they're exactly the same as the CPX defined by Ralph.

12-09-2001, 06:36 AM
This is a very good idea. I never heard of the drive by trend but I guess you are right.

Bad things happen when all ends (pubs and advs) try to make easy money, or save money. I really think that could brink results to the advertisers. Only think bad is that many big off-line companies do not advertise on small-medium sites. They have their reasons (fraud, low-quality), you can't blame them.

12-09-2001, 04:54 PM
I like the idea. The point about some big companies not wanting to advertise on the little sites has always existed. I think it'd be great if any size company could go to a network such as FastClick (or even DoubleClick) and purchase 1000 unique CPX sessions. The power of the network is that they could deliver those a lot faster than any single site.

12-09-2001, 09:20 PM

Thanks for all of your replies! :)

Now, my plan is to keep polishing this up. Then, I want to set up an ad network that is based on CPX. So keep sending in suggestions, etc. Email: ralph_chochlac@altavista.com

It's time for webmasters to make money again!


12-17-2001, 08:55 PM
Just out of curiousity, here's the recent Fastclick release focusing on CPM-CUME. It's a new ad format that is focusing on reach with unique users. Not a surround session, but a way of impacting individuals.


I think ad networks will have a difficult time adopting the surround session, specifically because each site attracts a different demographic. The chances that an individual person will go to multiple Fastclick sites, for example, is slim.

12-17-2001, 09:07 PM
Cume's a very interesting concept when brought online - and great when used in regards to popunders.

One question, though, does the CUME/frequency capping technology allow advertisers to specify exactly how many times they'd like a user to be exposed to a particular campaign/creative, rather than simply place a one view/unique/month limit upon the campaign?

As a side note, Premium Network (founded by member Voltaire), also announced this week that they will be introducing a CPU (cost per user) pricing model associated with their online ad representation.

12-18-2001, 02:46 PM
Advertisers will be allowed to specify the frequency of their ad campaign. That is, a user can be exposed to their ad as infrequently as the advertiser desires up to 28 days. We typically recommend a seven day unique cap as that is four times a month. It seems to do well for the majority of our advertisers.