Twitter Ad Results Better Than Google and Facebook's? (13:38)

Posted on by Abby Johnson | 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Last month, WebProNews brought you a story on an advertising campaign that Clix Marketing’s David Szetela was beta testing in Twitter. Since Twitter announced that it would be releasing a self-service ad platform this year, some people assumed his beta test was the new platform because it did have a few self-serve features.

Twitter spoke out and said that this was not their self-service ad platform. Instead, they said it was part of their Promoted Tweets offering. In spite of the confusion over what the platform was or wasn’t, Szetela began seeing some fascinating results in his campaign.

One of the most significant findings from the campaign was the fact that the results on Twitter were better than both Google and Facebook‘s results. In addition, Szetela found Twitter to be a better investment for his clients. For instance, in an effort to promote Guy Kawasaki‘s new book Enchantment, Szetela spent $1,000 on Twitter and a combined $4,000 on both Google and Facebook. However, Twitter received more pre-orders for the book than Google or Facebook received.

In part, Szetela credits these results to the newness of Twitter advertising and the lack of competition at this point. He believes that Guy Kawasaki’s Twitter “celebrity” status played a role as well.  Also, he believes the platform is unique since the ad appears as a tweet and less like an advertisement.

“It’s really a unique platform, in that it’s very conversational by nature… I think that distinguishes it from Google and from Facebook and adds an element of personality and persuasiveness that you don’t get when you’re advertising on a third person platform,” said Szetela.

Although advertising on Twitter is still in its very early stages, he went on to say that it is very important that advertisers understand that Twitter is for display ads and not search ads. He adds that display ads have a much softer offer than search ads have, which allow them to convert better.

In terms of when Twitter might release its full self-service ad model, Szetela thinks the company is being cautious and working to improve its capacity issues first.

Posted in: Advertising and Marketing, David Szetela, Twitter
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , .
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
Get The Newsletter!

10 Responses to Twitter Ad Results Better Than Google and Facebook's?

  1. INFOCPNSBUMN says:

    yes i am agree Twitter Ad Results Better Than Google and Facebook how about pricing.. which one is cheaper..

  2. Macoway Ads says:

    If you are looking for affordable advertising try Macoway Ads -> might be a start in online targeted ads.

  3. Nothing better than try it first but surely it will make a deeply differe4nce with the others (Google and Facebook). However maybe the customers tend to experiment this way and the results maybe it will be better than the othe4r competitors but what happens in the long term?

  4. Vince Damico says:

    This was a very interesting interview. It makes sense and I like the fact that it can be used as a cost effective way to advertise on the Net. Do you think it will work on non-tangible items such as Real Estate advertising?

  5. tatil says:

    In part, Szetela credits these results to the newness of Twitter advertising and the lack of competition at this point. He believes that Guy Kawasaki’s Twitter “celebrity” status played a role as well. Also, he believes the platform is unique since the ad appears as a tweet and less like an advertisement.

  6. Pingback: Twitter’s ad system deconstructed – charging $120,000 per day for promoted tweets

  7. Pingback: Inside Twitter's ads: $120,000 per day for Promoted Trends - Twitter

  8. Pingback: Inside Twitter’s ads: $120,000 per day for Promoted Trends | TechDiem.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>