Also, the active Google Answers Researchers regrouped at Uclue.com where they provide a similar paid Q&A/research service to that which was offered by GA.

For the “Increase in sales” agency compensation model – see new model agency “Anomaly” http://www.anomaly.com/home.php

Segmentation, as currently used by most ad agencies, has trended away from a useful mathematical tool for reaching your target audience. It’s now more of a sales tactic used by agencies to sell (and “brand”) their work for the client.

Overall the thing I liked best about this post was your thought: “Statistics related to inputs are useless.” Very true. But they’re safe! If your success is tied to statistics related to inputs, your success if practically guaranteed.

It all goes back to the risk equation in advertising. Marketing services companies by nature are very risk averse. Most still bill by the hour and force their clients to take on most of the risk when it comes to the dollars invested in the advertising. They also want their success metrics to be tied to variables that are controllable (e.g. GRPs) rather than variables that are uncertain (e.g. sales). Unlike almost every other industry where risk is managed and shared – in advertising it all trickles back down to the advertiser. I’m percolating thoughts on this one…

I agree with the S curve theory. A big question that rarely finds a good answer is how to invest incremental funds (e.g. if you’re already spending $10MM on a television campaign – is it worth spending $1MM additional?).

In concept I think most people would agree with the S curve, the problem though is knowing exactly where on the curve you stand.

On the subject of variables and, as you point out, there can be quite a few – i think one of the biggest issues is how we quantify presence on each media channel. Universally the units that are used are “GRPs” or Gross Rating Points which are the product of “Reach” and “Frequency” against your target audience. For advertising measurement to really progress we really need a new unit of measurement. The system of GRPs worked great when the only media options were TV, Print, and Radio – but in today’s world, with such a fragmented media landscape, there really needs to be a more fitting measure. Maybe something like “Persuasion units?” Interested to hear what you think about this – i don’t doubt you could come up with something good.

Andrew

The George books are “Progress and Poverty” — see http://www.wealthandwant.com/George_P&P.html for some background material and links to online version (I’d recommend the recent Drake abridgment as a starting point) — and “Social Problems” (see http://www.wealthandwant.com/#book, and consider starting with “The Increasing Importance of Social Questions” and “Political Dangers,” then exploring the rest).

The Mason Gaffney book I recommend for you is “The Corruption of Economics,” whose opening chapter is at http://www.wealthandwant.com/docs/Gaffney_Intro_TCOE.html. Your thesis mentions neoclassical economics, but doesn’t specify how it differs from classical economics. (I’d argue that the neoclassical economists are missing some important truths, and that educations in economics which skip merrily over classical economics are sadly lacking. But what professor or instructor is likely to teach something he wasn’t taught in college or graduate school?) See also http://www.henrygeorge.org/pdfs/decons.pdf which looks at a couple of pages from an NCE text from a classical economics POV.

George was an autodidact — a printer who read quite widely and ultimately traveled the world giving lectures. I would not be surprised if you’d not heard of him; 120 years ago, he, Twain and Edison were the three best known public figures. Today, few know about his ideas. In July, there is a 4-day meeting in Albany, NY, of the organizations who promote his ideas; you’d be very welcome to participate if you found his ideas of interest. See http://www.cgocouncil.org/conf10.htm.

You might find Henry George’s ideas satisfying from the point of view of reconciling things which aren’t otherwise reconciled in what we read.