Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Selling Mobile Ads - Facebook Does it Better Than Publishers

2015 - 05 - 15

With Facebook’s Instant Articles, Publishers May Find 70 Cents Is Better Than a Dollar

Publishers are still digesting the details of Facebook’s new “Instant Articles” initiative, which in the first 24 hours has set off reactions ranging from panic to confusion to envy across the online news landscape.

There are many questions for media executives to consider about the program, which allows whole articles and videos to be published to the social media site’s mobile app. One major consideration is whether Facebook can help publishers generate revenue from their mobile audiences more successfully than they can themselves.

The answer? Quite possibly, because Facebook has figured out what other online ad sellers haven’t: how to effectively target and track mobile ads.

As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, participating publishers will keep 100% of the revenue generated from advertising placed alongside Instant Articles, provided they sell and serve the ads themselves. They get a 70% cut if Facebook sells the ads through its Audience Network product.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/05/14/with-facebooks-instant-articles-publishers-may-find-70-cents-is-better-than-a-dollar/

所以,報社透過FB所銷售的廣告拿回70%的分潤之總合,會遠勝過自己在FB的”Instant Articles”裡所賣的廣告營收(雖然自售的廣告收入100%歸報社自己)。

儘管不假思索也知道是這樣,但這篇WSJ的文章提供了進一步說明。

簡單歸納起來原因有二:

(1) 原本的吃飯領域:”Facebook will collect around 33% of all mobile display ad spending in the U.S. this year.”

(2) 原生的吃飯傢伙:藉著”Like 按讚”,使用者的喜好FB當然比報社懂;另外,FB的跨裝置廣告效果追蹤分析,自然遠比cookies更有效

Recommended article 

Is Amazon a Tough Competitor for Google's Search / Ad?

When you have a specific product in mind, do you go on Amazon or Google? 當你有特定領域的需求(比方說,要上網買東西)時,是先上Amazon找、還是去Google? 電子商務調研公司BloomReach近期在線上訪問了2000位網購者。結果顯示:在尋找一項商品時,有超過55%會直接前往Amazon,比去年成長了11%。消費者也不再偏好搜尋引擎來尋找商品,從去年的34%直落到今年的28%。Google在這點上,持續敗給Amazon,而且看來差距還愈來愈大。這部分的廣告收入,亦然。 9 in 10 consumers will check Amazon even if they find a product they want on another retailer’s site…

Trucks v.s Drones

Let’s see if this article from Insider makes any sense? 我們來看看Insider這篇文章到底合不合理? 無人機送貨純為噱頭?成本為快遞一萬倍 送貨成本計算:(能源成本 + 操作人員成本 + 載具費用攤提) 這個基本公式,不論用卡車或是無人機,都一體適用。從Amazon日漸廣佈的fulfillment center送貨到客戶那兒,Prime二天、Prime Now二小時、再進到將來Prime Air以半小時為目標;其同時、同路線的出貨數量都趨於靈活之小量,大型貨車根本使不上力。用無人機,會比起用卡車的單趟人力貴,我都高度懷疑了,還一萬倍? 送貨的能源成本:卡車 vs. 無人機 每英哩,卡車是 $0.5 而無人機只要 $0.02。所以,混用卡車和無人機來完成送貨到府,就能大幅降低亞馬遜必須支出的運費 the fuel cost of running a diesel-powered truck…

Procomp (Part 1)

The Enron Scandal was revealed in 2001 and the world started to pay more attention on corporate governance. Not long after that, Procomp Scandal was allover the news in Taiwan, it destroy a public-traded company and…