I think maybe a re-read is in order. They’re claiming the new format outperforms the (presumably) old format by 28%, not that the CTR is 28%.
Comment on Reddit introduces a new ad format that looks similar to posts made by users | TechCrunch
wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
There’s absolutely no fucking way CTR for those is 28%.
I do not believe that.
Posts don’t even have a CTR that high, that would mean the average user goes no further than 4 ads before clicking one.
Now I wish I bought some stock so I could get in on a shareholder lawsuit about them cooking the books on this shit.
dave@feddit.uk 6 months ago
numberfour002@lemmy.world 6 months ago
What’s more likely, someone at reddit fucked up an analysis, or these ads are 14x better than Google or 31x better than FB?
What’s most likely is that you misread or misinterpreted what was stated. It says the new format outperforms other types of ads by 28%, not that they get 28% CTR.
wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Yes… It was me… I read it wrong
Identity3000@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I replied to you you elsewhere in this thread, but they never claimed to be getting 28% CTR. They only claimed that this format performs 28% better than alternatives.
If a different ad format was getting 1% CTR, then a 28% improvement is still only a total 1.28% CTR.
wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Thanks, I’ve updated both comments.
Ihnivid@feddit.de 6 months ago
I mean, generally I’m all for shitting on reddit, but there’s also a third option: Reader’s not understanding what 28% better than other ad types means.
wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
Yep, I misread it and have updated my comment
Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
Improved by 28%, not at 28%.
That would be some awful idiocracy type of future and we’re not there… yet.
elvith@feddit.de 6 months ago
…but it’s got electrolytes!