I think cost of influence is a more important metric for judging how serious advertisers are than the overall size of a market.
Take television, for example:
"during the 2007-08 season, Grey's Anatomy was able to charge $419,000 per advertisement"
Independently, I found the viewing figures were 17-18 million per episode for that season. So about $24.65 "CPM". And that was one of the best mainstream, regular ad returns on TV (CSI had a higher audience and far lower charges per ad). That's half of what I know even minor podcasts are making..
On the flip side, a TV show tends to have many ads packed in whereas a podcasts runs with a few at most but in terms of CPM, they seem to trump most TV.
fascinating. I wasn't aware of the ad rates for podcasts. Are they for american audiences or overall audiences?
Because I would see Australian ads if I watches Grey's Anatomy or CSI -- but I hear the generic ads when I listen to TWIT.
My point was more that TV/etc is a fundamentally less trackable audience. (agreeing with your point that some advertisers don't require tackable ads).
Take television, for example:
"during the 2007-08 season, Grey's Anatomy was able to charge $419,000 per advertisement"
Independently, I found the viewing figures were 17-18 million per episode for that season. So about $24.65 "CPM". And that was one of the best mainstream, regular ad returns on TV (CSI had a higher audience and far lower charges per ad). That's half of what I know even minor podcasts are making..
On the flip side, a TV show tends to have many ads packed in whereas a podcasts runs with a few at most but in terms of CPM, they seem to trump most TV.