Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Advertising (1)
- App Tracking Transparency Framework (1)
- Apple (1)
- Audience Segments (1)
- Cumulative abnormal return (1)
- Display advertising (1)
- Event study (1)
- Facebook (1)
- Financial structure (1)
- Firm value (1)
Institute
Most event studies rely on cumulative abnormal returns, measured as percentage changes in stock prices, as their dependent variable. Stock price reflects the value of the operating business plus non-operating assets minus debt. Yet, many events, in particular in marketing, only influence the value of the operating business, but not non-operating assets and debt. For these cases, the authors argue that the cumulative abnormal return on the operating business, defined as the ratio between the cumulative abnormal return on stock price and the firm-specific leverage effect, is a more appropriate dependent variable. Ignoring the differences in firm-specific leverage effects inflates the impact of observations pertaining to firms with large debt and deflates those pertaining to firms with large non-operating assets. Observations of firms with high debt receive several times the weight attributed to firms with low debt. A simulation study and the reanalysis of three previously published marketing event studies shows that ignoring the firm-specific leverage effects influences an event study's results in unpredictable ways.
This research examines the impact of online display advertising and paid search advertising relative to offline advertising on firm performance and firm value. Using proprietary data on annualized advertising expenditures for 1651 firms spanning seven years, we document that both display advertising and paid search advertising exhibit positive effects on firm performance (measured by sales) and firm value (measured by Tobin's q). Paid search advertising has a more positive effect on sales than offline advertising, consistent with paid search being closest to the actual purchase decision and having enhanced targeting abilities. Display advertising exhibits a relatively more positive effect on Tobin's q than offline advertising, consistent with its long-term effects. The findings suggest heterogeneous economic benefits across different types of advertising, with direct implications for managers in analyzing advertising effectiveness and external stakeholders in assessing firm performance.
Even as online advertising continues to grow, a central question remains: Who to target? Yet, advertisers know little about how to select from the hundreds of audience segments for targeting (and combinations thereof) for a profitable online advertising campaign. Utilizing insights from a field experiment on Facebook (Study 1), we develop a model that helps advertisers solve the cold-start problem of selecting audience segments for targeting. Our model enables advertisers to calculate the break-even performance of an audience segment to make a targeted ad campaign at least as profitable as an untargeted one. Advertisers can use this novel model to decide whether to test specific audience segments in their campaigns (e.g., in randomized controlled trials). We apply our model to data from the Spotify ad platform to study the profitability of different audience segments (Study 2). Approximately half of those audience segments require the click-through rate to double compared to an untargeted campaign, which is unrealistically high for most ad campaigns. Our model also shows that narrow segments require a lift that is likely not attainable, specifically when the data quality of these segments is poor. We confirm this theoretical finding in an empirical study (Study 3): A decrease in data quality due to Apple’s introduction of the App Tracking Transparency (ATT) framework more negatively affects the click-through rate of narrow (versus broad) audience segments.
In recent years, European regulators have debated restricting the time an online tracker can track a user to protect consumer privacy better. Despite the significance of these debates, there has been a noticeable absence of any comprehensive cost-benefit analysis. This article fills this gap on the cost side by suggesting an approach to estimate the economic consequences of lifetime restrictions on cookies for publishers. The empirical study on cookies of 54,127 users who received ∼128 million ad impressions over ∼2.5 years yields an average cookie lifetime of 279 days, with an average value of €2.52 per cookie. Only ∼13 % of all cookies increase their daily value over time, but their average value is about four times larger than the average value of all cookies. Restricting cookies’ lifetime to one year (two years) could potentially decrease their lifetime value by ∼25 % (∼19 %), which represents a potential decrease in the value of all cookies of ∼9 % (∼5%). Most cookies, however, would not be affected by lifetime restrictions of 12 or 24 months as 72 % (85 %) of the users delete their cookies within 12 (24) months. In light of the €10.60 billion cookie-based display ad revenue in Europe, such restrictions would endanger €904 million (€576 million) annually, equivalent to €2.08 (€1.33) per EU internet user. The article discusses these results' marketing strategy challenges and opportunities for advertisers and publishers.