I was looking over this infographic on Google's Revenue from Search/Display Advertising and was surprised to see such a high Click-through-rate for Search.

To me, this means that advertisers are still using Search as Direct-Response media only, shortchanging not just Google but more importantly, themselves. Using Search to address the entire Customer Journey - and accepting slightly lower CTR for more Awareness Phase media, in exchange for a larger volume of Impressions (Reach), not to mention overall sales, would make much better business sense for most brands.

On the other side, I see a disconnect between Display and the Creative used. A CTR that low means  the messaging is too direct-response focused while the venue is geared more towards Branding.

In both instances the medium is being under-leveraged. Take a look below-- What do you think?

A white paper from Networked Insights reports that organizations are overspending by 30-80% on marketing initiatives, compared to the value they are getting in return.

I might be more inclined to believe such a statement if I felt confident they were measuring that returned value properly. But the truth is, that very few businesses understand the total true value of their online marketing efforts, so who's to say they are over or underspending.

In my experience, most companies are UNDERspending, especially on early phase online media, where the opportunity to increase customer reach and create brand really occurs.

This paper spends most of the time talking about social media and extracting as much as possible from the channel - using the channel to become more "efficient" by leveraging customer "conversations".  Again, I take exception with the emphasis on efficiency here. It's not that I want budgets to increase without regard for profitability - I just want the focus of marketing, especially online, to shift from thinking about efficiency to thinking about how online can grow the business.

Instead of asking how we can rifle-target a subset of potential customers, why don't we ask "How can you reach and convert an optimal amount of customer - to increase your profit volume?" That's the question I've always asked, and I use a proven test-and-scale methodology to achieve that profitable reach for clients. That means we know how much we should be spending on each type of customer, and we test and refine that spend across select markets before we deploy on a wider scale. Presto! Growth + Efficiencies.

Because I don't have anything against being efficient, I just don't think we should sacrifice sustainable growth to achieve it.

Here's the thing: If you're not Apple or Gap or another big brand, chances are you are not automatically top-of-mind when the consumer gets around to needing or wanting a product (or service) you offer. So they'll go looking – generally online.

They'll type in things like "Modern Crib Bedding" or "Washer Dryer sale".
 
And they'll be confronted with approximately a bajillion different options – and since you're competing in the space, you'll be one of the little voices vying for attention.

But what if they recognized you already? What if, earlier that month, you showed up when they typed in "Moving Supplies" with your offer of top-of-the-line washer/dryers?

That is called reaping the benefit of Awareness media. But, oddly enough, the only brands I see that do this consistently well are those same brands that don't really need to (as much). Those brands like Apple who put up mysterious billboards (introducing the iPod) or Target, who used to buy search keywords like "dirt".

So what gives?

I think it's because companies don't know how to handle online media that's not direct-response. That's not directly trackable.  They're afraid to allocate dollars to media they can't justify on a micro-level.

Which is a shame because in the long run they're losing a lot more than they've saving.