IDEA #15 - Ads on Websites Replaced
By Steve Poland • February 12, 2007
This idea would really shake a few things up. Users would install a plugin to their web browser (which can be a tricky proposition — needs to be real value to user in order to do that). The plugin would spot any advertising on a webpage and cover it up with new ads from a different ad network.
Example Scenario:
 Webpage typically seen by readers. |
-> |  Users with our plugin won’t see that ad. That ad is covered up… |
-> |  And replaced by an ad from our own network. So the user with our plugin installed, sees this ad instead of the ad seen by non-plugin users |
 |
||||
Thus, I am imagining that Google AdSense text ads or graphical banner ads would be covered up — and replaced with ads from a network that the user may find more beneficial to them somehow.
I think the best idea is that we pay the user $5 per month to utilize our plugin and view our advertising — or the price we pay them depends on how much web browsing they do. Imagine the possibilities for advertisers — you could pay this ad network I’m proposing here, to have your advertisement appear on CNN.com or MySpace.com (to our plugin users). The user would still be seeing advertising and still would be clicking, but just wouldn’t be seeing the same ads as non-plugin users.
Or maybe… the different ads are personalized and/or recommended by peers, such as I have suggested in my previous idea. Maybe it’s a completely free (or barter, or paid) ad network in which you post ads that run and the more you click on other ads, the more your ads will appear in the network. Maybe it’s an ad network that gives you a kick-back for ads you click (doesn’t seem practical from an advertiser position).
The websites that are being viewed and whose ads are being covered up — wouldn’t have any say in what’s going on, since the browser itself would be covering the ads up (and/or manipulating the code that loads in the webpage, so that the ads are definitely covered up; the exception being all-Flash websites such as Heavy.com that have advertising integrated within).
What do you think these ads could be that would make a user interested in using this plugin / new ad network? Or what other method could we get users to download this plugin? Is there something else that could display over the advertisements on websites?
Comments
7 Responses to “IDEA #15 - Ads on Websites Replaced”
Got something to say?
Lately, the model has been to take everything from desktop based to web based. Pushing the users to adopt a plugin would not be an easy task. More importantly, if UserA uses your plugin to show ads from your network, then UserB could be using some other plugin to mask all the ads
A tough business model to sustain.
I’m still not sure why users would download the plugin, but imagine replacing search boxes. So instead of:
...
The plugin would realize it’s a search box, and replace the form action to:
...
Now, AdSense ads are shown, but you’re still searching the site you were on.
Of course, Google won’t do this (too “gray”) but an AdSense publisher may come up with the plugin to use their site and display the search results, plus ads.
For the user, the plugin must do one (or both) of two things: improve relevancy (http://ilovebacon.com/051705/c.shtml- oops!) or share revenue. I can’t think of any other reason why users would install it.
You are so right, the difficult part is to get user download the plugin and actually collaborate with the ad network.
I would suggest using Multilevel Marketing Method.
This lead me to think that there must be a way that a browser plugin could detect adsense html tags, and other types of ad schemes, and actually not even show them on the page, maybe just replace it with a blank box or seomthing. Somehow I think my brain has started to ignore these anyway, much like banner ad’s from the 90’s…
I think the Gator network did this. Of course, the main issue with Gator was that it did it in most cases against the wishes of the end user.
The publishers of course wouldn’t like this as it would detract from their revenue, so the business could theoretically be strangled by its own success…if everyone started using it, that revenue stream would dry up for publishers who would then start generating revenue in some other way, either via micropayments or more ‘in your face’ ads that couldn’t be blocked.
Of course, using adblock on Firefox is far easier - see no ads at all (cept those flash ones…)
...