Jump to content

"Scale and Loyalty are more important online than offline..." (Gavin Baker)


Liberty
 Share

Recommended Posts

As I was reading through this I was reminded about another thing I read recently.

 

Burry posted this on Twitter the other day.

 

https://thecorrespondent.com/100/the-new-dot-com-bubble-is-here-its-called-online-advertising

 

Have you guys ever actually ever purchased anything from an online ad? Google ad? facebook or youtube? I have adblocker on because they're super annoying.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking for shorter man's shorts a couple years ago.  I do squats and my quads are the only things that naturally look good on me.  Plus, it's not "gay" to wear 7 inch inseams anymore.  The 90s were awful.  Anyway, Instagram's algorithms figured this out and was showing me quite a bit of Chubbies and Birdog's shorts.  I was genuinely entertained in a fun way.  I winded up buying some bear bottoms for 1/2 price.  I guess what I am saying is that the algorithms work.  Alternatively, I have become a lot more well verses on various Michelin star restaurants that I had no idea about in the past.  I am not eating there yet, but do wish to one day with my wife.  So these restaurants are playing the long game.  Lately, I've been targeted restaurant ads from California etc.  I feel bad because those restaurants pay for those ads, but I am not flying to Cali for a neighborhood restaurant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Trust the journalists to produce sensationalist non-sequitur headline.

 

Instead of writing a headline "Online advertising effects are difficult (impossible?) to measure" or "Online advertising may be ineffective" or let's go with sensationalist, but with a grain of truth: "Online advertising is worthless", they choose "The new dot com bubble is here: it’s called online advertising".

 

The fact that online advertising effects are difficult (impossible?) to measure and that (some) online advertising might be ineffective does not mean that there is a "new dot com bubble". It's like learning that Superbowl ad effects are difficult (impossible?) to measure and that (some) Superbowl ads might be ineffective and writing a headline "New Superbowl bubble!".

 

It's ironic that the journalists are doing the same thing that they accuse their subjects of doing: drawing baseless conclusions from insufficient data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...