Jim

Thanks for reading the document. There was indeed a mistake in the labelling.

Attached is the slightly revised version.

Don

From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Jim DeLaHunt
Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2018 8:10 PM
To: ua-discuss@icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Results: Pilot LinkedIn Campaign

Don:
On 2018-11-08 14:55, Don Hollander wrote:
>
> As discussed during the UASG Meeting in Barcelona, please find this report on our Pilot LinkedIN campaign.

This is interesting. Thank you for sharing it.

I'm having a hard time understanding two parts of the report.

"In terms of messaging Ad #3, which positioned UA as a ‘bug fix’ that can drive revenue for organizations, was our strongest performer."
Ad #3 appears to be the strongest performer (highest click-through rate, lowest cost per click, most ad clicks, most impressions), but it is described as the message, "Learn how Universal Acceptance, the idea that all domains are treated equally, is a business opportunity for IT leaders." Meanwhile, the ad with the message, 'IT leaders might be surprised to learn how a routine "bug fix" can help generate significant revenue for their organization.', is described as Ad #2, with lower performance by the given metrics.

Am I misreading? Are the ads mis-labelled?

But it's great that we are doing quantitative research on how to get our message out!

Best regards,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada

--

    --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com     http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/)

      multilingual websites consultant

      355-1027 Davie St, Vancouver BC V6E 4L2, Canada

         Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953