Vice team launches youth-focused online ad network Populace

Um, given that we’re in the Populace network, I can tell you on good authority that Remi is a dude.

What has this video got to do with the story? The ‘Sales Manager’ talking about her shoe collection. Thrilling…..no really

Indeed, Remi is a top bloke.

Remi’s a girl.

I took her out last week. She loves her yum cha.

(Call me, Remi)

x

Congrats, Remi. One of the few great men.

love the concept but wonder what the source is on that user figure … doesn’t seem to be verified/referenced.

SJOwen is to Reeboks what Bob Katter is to suit + cowboy hat combo.

500K uniques

Is that really worth announcing?

Remi is the name of my 8 year old daughter.

Remi from Vice and I did have words about this by email a while ago – good name for both genders it seems.

Populace is also a good name and a strong idea. Seems they have attracted solid early support and I look forward to watching their progress.

Depends on the audience, This Is Old Skool.

500,000 hard-t0 reach uniques. Yes please.

And Really – good question. The number will only have credibility once it’s audited.

@occasional media buyer

Hard to reach? really?

There are lots of publishers and networks or hybrid publisher/networks in the youth space offering the same service

Great to see commenters questioning credibility of home-cooked figures that aren’t audited! (it wasn’t me, I promise).

500k (if real) is a strong figure, considering if a network is much larger you could argue that it stops targeting trendsetters and starts branching into the mainstream .. or broader niches.

Quick analysis of other networks would suggest reach of 100-500k is typical for sub-niche networks, 1-2M for niche networks …

un-substantiated sub sites aggregated under one unsubstantiated umbrella. Sounds elusive indeed.

These sites may not be audited, but there is no denying their cultural popularity for youth audiences overseas, which inherently means there would be youth audience locally in Australian finding & using these sites.

Australians, in particular the 13-35yo demo, crave content about fashion, trends, music and lifestyle from our UK & American Friends.

I am actually a supporter of auditing, however if Populace or other youth networks can deliver a good media deal, deliver your campaign and get results. Then its ultimately down to that particular agency/client to decide what works & fits for them, regardless of what the audited traffic figures.

A questions for Alex from the ABA, is there a way international websites can be audited for AU traffic numbers?

The least the sites can do is go on Nielsen MI. The audit process may be difficult for a big network without monster rev. expectations

The excuse for most of these yoof sites is that they’re such a “great fit” they don’t need to be measured by an external … problem then is how can you trust the numbers?

no one is disputing the fit of the sites … it’s moreso the accuracy of the number claims. site side numbers generally don’t exclude bots, non human traffic etc etc so the figure is always inflated.

To audit, or not to audit? Any figures that are used to evaluate or promote websites for display advertising should be audited. Being audited is a prerequisite to trade in any other media and the same standard now applies in the online marketplace.

Of course, there are certain media-transactions (like performance buys) where having an audited figure is not as critical, but if a publisher is using figures for any promotional or competitve comparisons, then it needs to be audited to ensure there is a level playing field and to protect media-buyers from wasted buys. If no one was audited than it’s every man for himself, using their unverified home-cooked figures to report they are all #1 in reaching their target audience.

Relying on unaudited figures just leads to confusion and uncertainty – this recent comment thread is a case in point: http://bit.ly/bqCPau

Yes, international sites can be audited for AU traffic numbers. The most common and elegant solution is to geo-target the tracking tag to AU-users only. The same ABA audit rules apply – no publisher-generated traffic can be counted.

Dear Sara Jane Owen

I am terrified of female media sales reps.

You know what they can be like: so sleek, so glossy, so urgent, so hungry, so calculated, so polished, so buoyant; so much hard work. It’s terrifying. You know the type. You worked at OMD, you know exactly what I’m talking about. They’re scary.

Do these people have successful relationships? I’d like that ‘audited’. Are there numbers on this?

I think the only women that scare trannies are media women.

But you are fab. I love you.

You will be amazing in this job – put one of those glossy media women in your role and it would never work. You know why. You are perfect for this.

Using your ‘Freestyle Forever’ video thing for the Mumbrella PR thing was genius. It says ‘we understand this stuff’.

Anyone who ‘gets’ the ‘market’ will know this is important. ‘Alex’ doesn’t. Ignore Alex. Alex doesn’t know anything.

You rock, you are my new favorite media person. And you love shoes – I love shoes, do you need a PA?. I’m at the ‘Taxi’ on Friday and Nevermind on Saturday. I can bring references.

X

Lavinia

I think this idea has merit but I’d also question the numbers behind the claims. A quick peruse of the website showed huge disparities in their claimed numbers. The homepage states boldy “500,000 unique visitors” but on this page http://populacemedia.com.au/advertisers/ it lists each site and it’s traffic. Problem is the combined total is 324,000 and that’s with duplication. Which is it I wonder?

If you are going to throw out un-verified numbers at least get the story straight on your own website.

Thanks for your feedback Alex.

@Hipsters don’t Audit I agree, there are some contradictions out there. Some of the other “cool” publishers who push very hard on the audit bandwagon ( fair enough too). But what is the perspective from people if said “cool” publishers are claiming total traffic figures that are purely aimed at grabbing ad $$$, yet their domestic traffic numbers have actually decreased by up to 25%

Is there any point in making the “larger” claim, since we are buying and selling AU eyeballs? and what is the ABA doing about such claims when its irrelevant to the market.

The point of auditing is having transparent domestic figures. Why are said “cool” publishers allowed to make claims especially if they are the ones pushing for better auditing across the board?

Some of these publishers even represent 3rd party international sites. In some cases i have noticed that even though these “cool” publishers are massive audit supporters, Do they roll this out for all the 3rd party sites they represent. Seems like a contradiction??

Do they even have MI on those 3rd party international sites, hmmm i don’t think so.

@To Audit, or not to Audit?

The ABA by default only reports AU traffic figures except in cases where the website is clearly intending to sell only international eyeballs to advertisers. E.g. (Pipelines International is for international workers in that industry, not just AU). I hope that answers your question in regards to how irrelevant traffic is removed from the ABA reported figures. Not sure where the ‘larger claims’ are being made … ?

Some international sites can’t be easily audited due to difficulty deploying tags but it shouldnt be a show-stopper. No reason any Intnl site vying for AU advertising dollars shouldn’t be providing audited figures. Who are you referring to … ?