Quantcast

Ad Nauseam: Are Facebook Ads Really Worth It?

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:


Ad Nauseam: Are Facebook Ads Really Worth It?
[ Social Media]

In theory, advertising on Facebook allows marketers to reach one of the largest populations of potential buyers possible. Short of throwing up a banner ad on the moon, it’s unlikely that you’re going to find an outlet with more upside – the network is approaching 1 billion users.

In theory.

But of course, unlike a Super Bowl ad or the like, not everyone in the target population is going to see any given Facebook advertisement. Whether it be a Sponsored Story in a user’s news feed or a more traditional ad on the side of the page, they are all competing with each other for attention at all times.

Is Facebook the best place to advertise? The worst? Somewhere in between? What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages to a paid Facebook campaign? Let us know in the comments.

Are people seeing the ads? Are they getting lost amidst the busy Facebook homepage? Do users even notice them anymore? Are Sponsored Stories more effective that traditional ads? All of these questions are simply part of a larger question that marketers have been asking themselves recently.

Is advertising on Facebook worth it?

General Motors makes a move

Although it’s an advertiser’s job to ask the “is it worth it?” question regarding any medium that they consider throwing cash into, the spotlight seemed to turn directly on Facebook after a very public breakup between the social network and a giant American automaker.

Back in May (right before the IPO), General Motors yanked all of their paid advertising from Facebook. According to the reports, GM was unconvinced of the effectiveness of advertising on the site. GM’s Marketing Chief Joel Ewanick said that the company was “definitely reassessing our advertising on Facebook, although the content is effective and important.”

Short and sweet version: Facebook ads don’t really work, but we gotta maintain a brand page.

This decision resonated among the social media/advertising community (and in the halls at Menlo Park, I assume). A few days later, the blow of this giant pullout was lessened a bit when we learned that GM was also planning on ditching its Super Bowl ad campaign in 2013. Maybe the Facebook exodus wasn’t personal after all – maybe it was simply part of a bigger strategy. We have to concede, however, that the timing of it all, days before the IPO, reeks just a bit.

Earlier this month, we heard that GM may be returning to the Facebook ad game, as executives at both companies have had talks. Even so, GM dropping its Facebook ad strategy just days before the IPO solidified the uneasiness and trepidation surrounding the culture of Facebook advertising.

Advertiser confidence on shaky ground

The folks over at GM aren’t the only advertisers that have doubted the efficacy of Facebook ads. Some recent reports from brand marketers and agency executives have painted a less-than-rosy picture concerning confidence that Facebook is a worthwhile platform to spend a good chunk of ad dollars.

33across’ Advertiser and Agency Study looked at over 2000 of these professionals and came up with a pretty interesting stat: 71% said that they were focusing 80% of their attention on other advertising mediums not named Facebook. Just four months ago, only 58% of ad men were mostly staying away from Facebook.

Not only that, but only 7% said that they were putting the majority of their ad dollars into Facebook. A whopping 0% said that 80% of their efforts come in the form of Facebook ads. Back in March, that number was small, but present at 4%.

In all, post-IPO, more than five times the number of respondents said that they were planning on decreasing their Facebook ad spending.

Another study of marketer/agency exec attitudes came to this conclusion: Facebook is vital, but Facebook ads may not be.

You see, although 86% said that Facebook is currently a part of their paid advertising strategy, 88% said that they would consider forgoing all of the paid stuff and just sticking with “implementing Facebook content.” If you’ve heard that before, just look a few lines up a what GM said. Basically, they’re both saying that having a presence on Facebook is important, but they can own, operate, and promote content through their brand pages for free.

The same group of people was asked their opinion of how useful Facebook is a “driving purchase intent.” Only 12.2% said that it is “very useful.” 19% said they didn’t know. 13.4% said it’s not useful at all and 55.5% said that it’s “somewhat” useful. What’s our takeaway here?

One word. “Meh.”

Facebook’s post-IPO ad blitz

Right before the IPO, marketing software provider WordStream released a report card comparing Facebook and Google in the ad game. Long story short, Google won. In their mind, Facebook failed at their ad targeting options and ad formats.

“So far, Facebook’s advertising platform hasn’t kept pace with the explosive growth of its social network, and it remains to be seen if CEO Mark Zuckerberg even wants to focus on advertising as a source of revenue,” said WordStream’s Larry Kim. “In his 2,500+ word letter to shareholders…he mentioned advertising just once.”

Of course, Zuck and the team has to focus on advertising. Since going public, monetization is probably the only thing that’s been on his mind.

That’s because it’s the main concern of anyone looking to the future of the company. And monetization in general isn’t the real concern – it’s actually mobile monetization that has been a hot topic surrounding Facebook both before and after the IPO.

“We do not currently directly generate any meaningful revenue from the use of Facebook mobile products, and our ability to do so successfully is unproven… and if we are unable to successfully implement monetization strategies for our mobile users, or if we incur excessive expenses in this effort, our financial performance and ability to grow revenue would be negatively affected”

Those words came straight from Facebook in their IPO filings. Zuckerberg himself has since echoed those claims. And in an effort to “generate meaningful revenue,” Facebook is in the process of making quite a few changes to their advertising options – which is good news for advertisers.

In one of the most important tweaks to their ad platform, Facebook now allows advertisers to purchase mobile-only Sponsored Stories. Before, you couldn’t choose exactly where the Sponsored Story you paid for would show up. But now, mobile-only targeting is one of five different ad options that Facebook offers.

We also know that a new ad platform, Facebook Exchange, is on the way. It’s basically a real-time ad bidding service that allows advertisers to target Facebook users based on previous activities. Here’s how I explained it before:

The premise of Facebook Exchange is pretty simple: When you visit a site (other than Facebook) and spend some time looking at a product, but don’t make the final purchase – that third-party site will be able to follow you to Facebook and target you there with a highly specialized ad.

For example, let’s say that I spent a good while checking out a new watch on a third-party retailer’s site (that has enlisted a demand-side platform) – let’s go with Swatch. Although I didn’t actually end up buying the watch, I was on the site long enough for them to determine that I was very interested in it – so they hit me with a cookie.

If the advertiser (in this case Swatch) wanted to pursue me beyond the walls of its site, the demand-side platform would contact Facebook and use an anonymous User ID to show intent to target me. Now, the next time I log in the Facebook, that cookie alerts everyone to my presence and the advertiser is allowed to make a real-time bid to show a pre-rendered ad to me.

And if everything goes according to plan, I’ll see a perfectly targeted ad for that blue Swatch watch I was eyeing earlier that day – or even earlier that week.

We’ve also heard reports that Facebook will soon be targeting mobile ads based on app usage. This means that if you play a lot of Zynga’s game Word with Friends, you may see an ad for another Zynga game like Scramble with Friends. As a user, you wouldn’t even have to have “liked” Zynga to see this ad. That’s because Facebook knows you’re playing Words with Friends because it forces you to log in through Facebook connect.

And it’s not only mobile ads that have been seeing some changes (or proposed changes). Recently, Facebook has been experimenting with showing more traditional right-side ads on pages as well as switching out the ads when users linger on a page.

Of course, all the ads, ads, ads could be having a negative effect on user engagement. In the latest American Customer Satisfaction Index, Facebook did just drop nearly 8% since 2011.

Some good signs for Facebook ads

If advertisers are going to retain/regain faith in Facebook ads, they probably need to see results. A recent report from TBG Digital suggests that Facebook ads are engaging – much more so than a competing service like Twitter.

TBG’s report looked at click-through rates of Facebook ads – both mobile and desktop – and compared them to Twitter ads in the user feed. They found that Facebook ads on desktop has a CTR of .588%, and mobile ads nearly doubled that at a rate of 1.14%. By comparison, Twitter ads had a CTR of .266%. That means, on average Facebook ads (mobile and desktop) are around three times as effective as Twitter ads.

Facebook’s higher CTR was attributed to the effectiveness of Sponsored Stories in the news feed, which feel more organic and less like a traditional ads. TBG also found that right-side traditional ads are becoming more and more ignored.

Data from a few Facebook Ads API partners echoes the good news about Facebook ads – when it comes to mobile. One parter found that Facebook mobile ads had a CTR that quadrupled the combined CTR of all other types of ad placements. Another source went even higher, reporting a 25x efficacy for mobile ads over other traditional ads.

A small legal problem going forward

Now that we’ve seen just how effective mobile ads in the form of Sponsored Stories can be, it’s time to tell you that Facebook is soon going to have to let you opt out of being featured as a Sponsored Story.

This comes as a result of a lawsuit filed by five plaintiffs in California. They claimed that Facebook had violated the law by using their likeness in advertisements (Sponsored Stories) without their consent, compensation, or the ability to opt out.

Facebook settled the suit with a $10 million cy-pres payment, which will go to charity. But they also agreed to amend their Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and implement an opt-out mechanism for Sponsored Stories. The opt-out mechanism will allow for user to exempt any past activities from begin featured as Sponsored Stories, although it won’t prevent them from seeing Sponsored Stories in their own news feeds.

From the settlement:

Facebook will create an easily accessible mechanism that enables users to view the subset of their interactions and other content that have been displayed in Sponsored Stories. Facebook will further engineer settings to enable users, upon viewing the interactions and other content that have been used in Sponsored Stories, to control which of these interactions and other content are edible to appear in additional Sponsored Stories.

This may not be a killer, but it definitely impacts Facebook’s ability to get advertisers enthusiastic about ads, as well as advertisers confidence in the ads’ efficacy.

Facebook is making plenty of moves to boost ad revenues by making it more attractive to brands. Do you think that Facebook advertising is worth it? If you’ve participated in an ad campaign on the site, what were the results? If you’re a Facebook user, what kind of marketing are you most likely to interact with? Let us know in the comments.

Ad Nauseam: Are Facebook Ads Really Worth It?
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://secretd.net james

    out of all 400 friends of mine no ONE person has ever clicked on an ad

    what does that tell ya, the price of the stock should have been based on success of advertisers ad campaigns…not how much the initial spending from advertisers where…you can sell ANYTHING one time….in ten years people will be like “what was facebook?”

  • http://whoisyourlawyer.com Robert Scott Lawrence

    Ads are the only real way to increase Facebook “likes” for pages (unless you go viral), but there’s no evidence that increasing your Facebook authority actually results in increased sales. Most of the Facebook ads are trivial — e.g., “Come LIKE us!!” — and don’t result in such things as running out to buy a new car. Why would GM keep throwing $10MM at FB just to be “liked” by random strangers?

    I’d rather just pay to have FB get rid of all ads, but apparently that won’t happen — because FB promised they would be “free” forever. Whatever “free” means in that context is, of course, questionable.

  • http://www.internetauctionscompany.com Steve Fliegman

    I use all the major search engines with PPC advertising. “What do I think”? FaceBook has the worst return for your investment by far. (I can back my mouth up)

  • http://www.welcome2france.com sophie

    I will never put an add in Facebook, as I do not think that serious people will look there,

    Sophie

  • http://www.rushprnews.com Ane

    Hello, Facebook Ads have proven themselves useless to our business. Expensive too.

    • John

      Same with my web site Ane . . . I have done very well with Pinterest though. I have actually posted photos of products and had questions asked right there on their site that have lead to sales. If they allow children on FB it will be even worse.

    • http://www.parpools.com RonP

      ditto to above comments. at a CPC of $4.00 or thereabouts, it’s way too expensive without the accompanying sales. I dropped my ads today.

  • http://www.planfindesemana.es Jesus

    Hi there,

    I just finished a Facebook campaign to get more “likes” so I could get more readers for my articles.

    The first part went good: I doubled the “likes”, however I only increase around 15% my web traffic, which means that new fans never clicked on the links to my web.

    I think people prefer to read the sharing and news on Facebook and are relactant to click on the outbound link. Also double number of “likes” does not assure to get double traffic from the social network.

    Well, this is my experience. Still get most of the traffic form organic search.

    Jesus

  • http://sites.google.com/site/justsayingmypiece/ Charlie

    Y’know, this question has puzzled me for some time, actually…because Facebook, as most of us know, began as an outlet for friends, family, perhaps business associates, college connections, and the like. But it wasn’t initially tailored for the real world of advertising, I don’t think. Not to say it’s not a real opportunity for advertisers, because I think it is…rather, I think FB is still ‘evolving’ in that aspect of their platform.

    I’m no expert, so I can’t really speak very well to how FB (and others) actually operate with regard to advertising. But I’m a FB member (yep, one of that “almost-a-billion”) so I see what they deliver to ME, anyway…and I know they ‘tailor’ ads to individual user habits and “likes” and other bits of information they can gather about us…anywhere we go (sites), anything we do (games, shopping), what we buy, what we search for, what we read about…you name it, right?

    So…the opportunity for FB is simply off the scale, actually; because if they tailor every user’s FB experience, that means advertisers are very likely to reach very potential paying customers, y’know? Think of the dynamics of how that can ultimately target exactly what advertisers don’t mind paying good money for, and I think we can see how FB can (and probably will) become an even greater ‘cash-cow’. After all, a billion (almost) members (captive audience?) + a billion ‘tailored-ad-strategies’ + hundreds of FB sub-platforms (games, music, videos, much more) = a billion unique opportunities for revenue. Guess that’s not too shabby, if I got it right. I’m just sayin’…

    • http://sites.google.com/site/justsayingmypiece/ Charlie

      I should also explain that I’ve also noticed FB’s recent advertising ramp-up. Can’t say I particularly “like” it, but I have a feeling it might be here to stay. So, if I wish to continue using FB for all I like it for now, I guess it’s up to me to “suck it up”, right? I think most members will probably do the same, unless FB gets really crazy about it all, y’know? I’m just sayin’…

  • Joons

    Total waste of time for us. We maintain an FB page but there is zero return on any paid advertising so we don’t do it.
    Google works for us and we’re looking at Bing as well.

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      Do you receive fan engagement from the page? Since it’s free to operate, anything you generate from it is probably worth it.

  • http://www.designbyniall.com/ Niall

    Don’t think I’ve ever clicked on a Facebook ad in my life, nor has my wife for that matter. Google AD clicks? Plenty…

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      I guess it has a lot to do with the fact that you’re actively searching for things on Google. Facebook is testing targeted ads in their search bar, however.

      • http://www.designbyniall.com Niall

        Actually no, I don’t really click on the Google’s site, I normally click them on blogs or sites that are using Google ADs. :-)

  • http://www.captaincyberzone.com Cap’n Cyberzone

    Eventually all the online ads will become to the mind’s eye like background noise to the mind’s ear … filtered-out.

  • http://ferrycrossings.org.uk Miles

    With Facebook Ads, the devil is in the detail. See this about Zappo’s FB ads:

    Facebook offers plenty of options for targetting that few (if any) other online ad provider can.

  • http://Mabuzi.com kevin

    Intent! If I Google I am search for something but FB is a social engagement tool and shopping is not necessary the first thing you think of when logging on.

    We do need to competition to the current monopoly on search.

  • http://www.dirtyweekendshop.com.au Rowan

    We have spent thousands on FB advertising and got very little business from it, we have spent thousands on Adwords and it makes a massive difference to our business. In our experience FB is great for branding, awareness and communication, but not for sales. Adwords rocks when it comes to sales.

    • John

      Just don’t use Adwords express unless you want to be bent over without even a kiss. Adwords yes works GREAT express SUCKS and is a total click rippoff

  • Carol

    In the near past, I advertised my business with FB. No likes, no nothing… Not happy!

    Carol

  • Watching the Wheels

    Weell, seeing how I deleted myself from facebook even before I finished the joinibg process, none of the ads will receive anything from me.

    What I don’t understand, WHY do large companies attempt to get me to find them on Facebook? Wouldn’t it be more efficient to invite me to go directly to YOUR site?

    There ar those who are completely creeped out by Facebook. I don’t follow a company on Twitter, eithr.

    IF a company can’t tell me what they need to tell me within their own site, there’s a problem. I don’t do convoluted.

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      Brands put a lot of stock into their Facebook pages because it allows them to generate “likes,” plus it is a social forum so they have the ability to communicate with fans in a real-time direct way that a website can’t really provide.

  • Greg

    FB ads are offensive attempts to guess what I want based on lurking at me. FB gives the option to decline such offers but they keep coming anyway. I DO NOT go to FB to spend a dime, and I visit less frequently because the blatant selling will never stop.

  • http://www.melbourneweddingvideographer.com/ Wedding Videography Melbourne

    I think people look at Facebook ads in the wrong way. FB ads shouldn’t be compared to adwords where you get a measurable return on investment, but should be considered a branding exercise with a view to ongoing marketing.
    I’ve been using FB ads for 3 years now and have had great results for very little investment. I use the ads to steer viewers to my FB page where I encourage them to like the page and then update them regularly on my business progress.
    It’s a long term investment in strong ties to your potential clients.
    It can work, you just have to do it right.

  • John

    I will have NOTHING to do with facebook in any way,shape or form and I damn sure wouldn’t waste a nickle on advertizing there. It’s a bunch of kids for the most part and they are not there looking to buy or trying to search for anything beyond more friends to be the highest in friends.

    I had a Facebook account for about a year and deleted it.

  • http://youthful-appeal.com Art

    I keep F/B for my friends and family. Facebook is a farce at best, and after reading you only get as much traffic as you pay for its even more of a farce. I don’t even notice peoples ads, or careless.

  • http://www.sbcglobal.net dc doych

    Nice post, you might like this quick Facebook analysis from three related but different perspectives.

  • Jon

    No!

    For me the problem is two fold.

    1. In contrast to Google advertising there is no context – I only advertise on Google when the user is searching for certain terms.

    2. Facebook is trivial – yes its a social phenomenon but it also represents our least directed state of mind – we all change mentality from hour to hour – sometimes we doodle on a sketch pad in a meandering frame of mind – sometimes we are sharp and attentive – the latter state of mind is characteristic of the Google searcher and the former is characteristic of the facebook user.

    I dont particularly like Google – I hate big corporations, Google is too powerful and I hope it gets serious competition soon to divide up the cake – HOWEVER I do find it works for advertising a hell of a lot better than facebook.

    Perhaps facebook is good if you have a product aimed at teenagers but thats about it.

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      Regarding your first point – Facebook is currently testing “Sponsored Results” in the Facebook search bar that allows advertisers to target ads based on searches for specific pages. Would that type of ad interest you more?

  • http://thatisascam.com PeterG

    I tried a facebook ad once on a different site of mine and had a bazillion “shows” or “reveals” NO clickies.

    For all those “placements” one would think … haha … google would notice this activity and somehow this would help your website ranking.

    So if google doesn’t care, or should I say, google doesn’t want to add credibility to a traffic competing site and facebook only wants your money without results, for the average small business ADS on facebook are only good for awareness, which is branding and that is a space big boys play in. Surprised Coke and Pepsi aren’t that active on facebook, cause they are everywhere.

  • http://www.website-consultancy.com/ Website Consultancy

    Similar to all ad portals, for some businesses it works for others it doesn’t. A few years back many website owners shied away from AdWords, they don’t now. I believe Facebook are just going to have to sort out how they overcome the total social aspect of their pages.

  • http://simple-elegant-websites.com Alec Ward

    i have said this before but the article warrants a repeat;

    I asked my daughter how many times she clicks on facebook ads to which she replied “what ads”

  • Peter

    Comparing the best advertising methods is two bald men fighting over a comb.
    The truth is that while people were information poor, adverts planted things in their consciousness.
    Now that less biased sources of information are a click away, the ad may spark a thought, but it rarely leads to a sale for that company.

    This is more so on Facebook, where people are already looking for advice and information from their peers.

    Advertising on Facebook can spark a debate. It can initiate a conversation which influences not just one person but quite a few.

    But most advertisers simply transplant ads made for other media. Then they wonder why they don’t work.

  • http://www.holidaytocyprus.com/ Avraam Zenonos

    Advertising on FB is just waste of time. Likes are for childen looking for somthing new. I have deleted my face book account today.

  • Richard Robinson

    It`s a waste time as far i am concerned i block all adds .

  • http://www.seo-systeme.fr/referencement/roi.html JN

    As it was said before I think advertising on Facebook is worth it only for some businesses.

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      Which types of businesses do you think could benefit most from Facebook advertising?

  • http://www.mobiquest.co.uk Mobile Websites

    It doesn’t take much for users to suffer from ad blindness on Facebook

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/josh-wolford Josh Wolford

      True. It’s like the Matrix – I don’t even see the ads anymore…. :-)

  • http://canlookup.com Rex Mundi

    I have a personal Facebook page and one for each of my two businesses. I tried Facebook ads but found them to be a waste of money. There were clicks generated, but they must have been mostly from people curious as to what the ad was because the conversion ratio was the worst I ever experienced.

    I dropped the campaign after a month because the money spent should have generated many times over the number of sales it did. I have never bothered to try again and feel vindicated now that GM and other big players have dropped their campaigns too.

    Personally, I think Facebook is simply the wrong media for web marketers. True, Facebook has a huge user base, but too many of them are irrelevant as a potential online market. I see a ROI only when I pay to have ads placed on blogs and websites targeting the demographic groups I seek because of their quality content.

  • http://faceitpages.com/blog/ Misty Lackie

    You have to know how to leverage them. If you run ads for the sole purpose of increasing your likes and hoping your likes (fans) turn into sales, they are not as effective. If you run very targeted ads and point them to good call-to-action Facebook landing tabs, they can be very effective.

  • http://finewinerackstore.com William Wise

    Cost way too much for little result or no result in sales.

  • Daniel Rico

    You need to focus when you run a campaign in Facebook and know for sure what do you want to get from facebook ads, what kind of user do you need?, do you have a local business? or, do you need to share, teach, . When you decide what do you need from facebook ads, (I always use this tool to get likes, not for redirect traffic) the real work it is in your timeline, with good content and share atractive things.

    Facebook in my opinion is a FREE space when you want to “spread the word” within your “users” or “customers”. It is like an email marketing tool, yes, an email tool.

    Another thought….
    Just think this… When you login to your email inbox account, the first thing you do is searching for an email in specific, and you need to read the name of the sender first. Talking about Facebook, when you login into your account you do the same, searching for a friend’s comment or so, but the huge advantage is that you do not need to “open” the post of anyone, they are already opened and you must take acction presenting to the people GOOD content, in my opinion again always post an image.

    Well, at the end, facebook ads only works if you know what you want.

  • http://thebeautybeat.com/ Dee

    I have tried FB ads on several occasions. the results are always the same, plenty of shows & less than 1% click rate. I also tried one ad to get FB likes. This cost about $1.25 per like.

    On several occasions I have caught FB ‘unpausing’ my paused ads wasting my advertising dollars on a targeted campaign. When confronted, they always have the same excuse, they claim their TOS states that ” we agree to run ads from the start of the campaign” … so why implement a pause button ? … and the ads WERE paused. This happened on every occasion that I have run an ad, so it is NOT my imagination or caused by user err as FB would have liked me to think. This practice is inexcusable.

    After the last one, I sent them a blaring letter & advised I would not be running further ads with them. The results & the experience are not worth the cost.

  • http://www.tipsinablog.com Danny

    I here far more about the social/ community aspects of FaceBook, and not all that much regarding it’s Ad program.

    Mostly that FaceBook should be used to lead potential customers to your site, once you’ve build a strong rapport(trust) with that individual….

    Probably depends more on the area of business being engaged in, as to how effective FaceBook Ads would be…

  • Monica White

    Well, we have recently tried Facebook advertising and to tell you the truth we expected much more results and effects. It was even confusing when we discovered that the number of clicks shown in Facebook reports is twice more than the number of visitors (who came from Facebook) shown in the Google Analytics report. Besides, the support team doesn’t seem to be very friendly because we just didn’t receive any answer to the questions we asked, though we have send at least 3 letters. So, our experience wasn’t very pleasant, in fact. We have even released in this article: Our Ambiguous Experience In Advertising On Facebook.

  • http://online-backup.stocklii.com Stocklii Storage

    I Think that there are really some kind of company which according to the products they want to promote are very accurate to Facebook users. However many others are quite unsuitable with Facebook users inquiries. Infact when you are doing advertising you first need to know what kind of customer you want to reach in advertising campaigns; In an words it’s not useful to advertise what only old people use in young social network !

  • http://fabirco.org Beton

    I believe it does

  • http://www.digitalmarketing.co.nz Kevin Trye

    No surprises here. Research we did a year back on CTR (clickthrough rates) for Google and Facebook showed a ‘good’ CTR for Adwords as typically 10 times better for the same money, as the same Ads run on Facebook, even though Facebook could talk about their ability to profile and target specific groups or genders.

    The bottom line is that when most people go to Facebook, they’re there to converse with friends. It’s basically a fancy community forum. Like turning up at someones party or social event, the last thing people want is to be sold to and have ads pushed in their face.

    Google Adwords on the other hand is quite different. It’s generally used to help people find out stuff and the any advertising is not deemed as intrusive, in fact can often give them what they want. Facebook ads can work well in specific niche markets, but for general business use, are largely a waste of time and money, unless the costs are a fraction of what Google charge.

  • http://www.camwilkes.com/ Cam

    I’ve just finished reading a book called “Killer Facebook Ads” by Marty Weintraub – he’s the CEO for aimclear (they manage some pretty high profile facebook ads accounts including MarthaStewart.com, Siemens and Second Life to name a few). It is an excellent resource for beginners through to the seasoned pro when it comes to Facebook Ads. I have a reviewed it here for anyone interested:
    http://www.camwilkes.com/killer-facebook-ads/

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom