Here’s the Kicker…

“We expect all our businesses to have a positive impact on our top and bottom lines. Profitability is very important to us or we wouldn’t be in this business.” – Jeff Bezos

Profitability through Bezos’ lens embraces accounting terms like “matching principle”: matching unit level revenue to unit level cost.

Every metric attempting to measure advertising response uses flawed, siloed, last click measurement (versus full journey attribution).

The CMO is like a football coach.

The coach deploys resources with different formations, different packages, and different tactics. But if we measured points scored by position, the position scoring the most points = the kicker.

The kicker is always the last player to touch the ball before every field goal, and every extra point. using every statistic the kicker scores the most points. Consequently mathematicians just looking at points (ignorant of the real game) would say: fill the team with kickers.

But, anyone who knows the game of football, knows that in order to move chains down field, you need more than just a kicker. It’s a journey.
Scoring touchdowns, extra points, and field goals, is a journey.

If you’re measuring media investments (with a vision of becoming the most profitable marketer), you can’t do it this year using last click measurement. You have to use full funnel attribution.

The 2019 Attribution Vendor Scorecard compares 15 attribution vendors across 15 customizable criteria.

The “Matching Principle”

Every CEO and CFO understands the “matching principle” also referred to as activity base costing. Unit level revenue matched to unit level cost.

Between digital fraud, lack of online display viewability, and last click measurement: reporting falls short of accounting standards which inadvertently allocates revenue credit to the lower funnel and the last marketing expense versus a full, activity-based costing view.

Nielsen’s former Chairman & CEO John Dimling joined C3 Metrics six years ago, saying he was a champion of Nielsen and Arbitron’s ambitious but ill-fated ‘Project Apollo’ to create a single-source measurement system. Project Apollo failed to succeed with old technology, but C3 Metrics’ attribution platform proves to be the answer.

The most common error in marketing accountability is over-counting. When adding up revenue from siloed tracking systems, the industry over-counts revenue by approximately 4x. Each marketing channel and vendor tries to claim 100% of revenue credit versus an activity-based method. Nothing matches.

“It’s the only industry that over-counts revenue by 4x, and the CFO has no idea it’s going on,” said C3 Metrics Co-Founder and COO Jeff Greenfield.

Now take display: when 97% of all data to be analyzed = programmatic display impressions

and 51% of those programmatic display impressions are not viewable

(97% x 51%) = 49%

49% of marketing’s campaign data is wrong before you begin.

Would Mike Jurecki request data to report numbers, and request that data to be 49% wrong?

That’s just digital viewability.

For TV, C3 translates TV impact through time-stamped geo-based lift in its BOS score (brand search to a website, organic navigation, and SEO search) within seconds of a TV ad airing, plus cross-device matching (validated by NYSE: ADS at 90%) plus a slew of cross-channel false positive controls and algorithms.

CEO of Terra’s Kitchen Michael McDevitt brought C3 Metrics in while CFO and CEO of Medifast (NYSE: MED). “When we began with C3 Metrics, for every ad dollar spent, we got back $2.59 in revenue. With their unique auditing system, we grew that to $3.50 per ad dollar spent while doubling marketing expenditure. I nicknamed C3 Metrics ‘the cash register’ because the platform generated cash for us every quarter. In my days at Blackstone, we dreamed of marketing technology like this.”

C3 Metrics also resolves the most emotional question in TV: which spots work and which don’t. C3 measures user-level performance of TV creative in its attribution data cloud down to the penny.

CMO + C3 Metrics =15%+ more marketing profitability

Attribution Scorecard

The 2019 Attribution Vendor Scorecard compares 15 attribution vendors across 15 customizable criteria.

Criteria include:  fraud removal, user-level data, viewability, TV, and cost.