Comparison between Hardcoded Adverts and Ad Server served Adverts
|
Hardcoded Adverts |
Ad server served Adverts
|
|
Creative units are directly embedded on the web pages, thereby limiting the volume of advertiser ads on a page, so monetization is limited |
Ad call tag are embedded on the web pages, Since ads are called through Ad tags all the scheduled ads would be delivered, thereby accelerating the revenue |
|
Optimization of the campaign cannot be done so paving way to poor campaign performance |
Manual/Auto optimization is done, so best performing unit given more priority, so advertisers gets maximum out of their investments |
|
Targeting at geo-level would be complex as a separate IP pool should be maintained |
Ad server maintains and updates their IP pool regularly so efficient geo-targeting is possible |
|
Advanced targeting like Demographic, browser, operating system, ISP and behavioral targeting cannot be done |
Core level targeting is possible to bring out better ROI to the advertisers from the inventory used |
|
Lack of Compatibility with rich media ad types like expanding banners, over the page ads, interstitials and streams |
Ad server technologies would integrate well with rich media technologies |
|
Only basic level reporting is possible |
Ad servers would provide customizable reports, where in we can run the report to analyze various metrics like campaign delivery for a specific time, location, etc |
|
Difficult to implement 3rd party tracking system |
Easy to implement |
|
More manual intervention is required thus providing room for err |
Almost everything is automated so room for err is negligible |
|
Tedious to organize the campaign of advertisers |
Simple to organize advertiser’s campaign |
|
Manual billing is done for the campaigns |
Billing report can be automatically done based on campaigns |