A+ Web Audit Template (extracts)

2011 - 2013

1

Background §  Audited figures pag. §  Audit Issues pag.

In Brief §  Management Summary pag. §  KPI’s pag. §  SWOT pag. §  Recommendation pag. §  Overall FY Audit Performance pag.

Details §  Audit Key Charts

§  Cost/Quality Map pag §  Campaigns: Results vs Obljectives pag §  Channel Efficiency pag §  Sales House Efficiency pag.

§  Display §  Delivery: sales house performance, underdelivery focus pag. §  Cost: Investment breakdown, Negotiation in brief, pag

Performance by sales house, Technology cost §  Quality: Prime Site, Affinity, Reach Overlap pag.

§  Search §  Engine analys, click performance by campaign, efficiency pag

overview, account structure, keyword relevance matching & strategy check, deeplinking, misspelling, negative match pag

Key Contents

§  Methodology and Glossary at the end of the full report.

Missing or Recommended data

What Availability Details

Placement details

partially available

§  Available only in xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx §  For future data collection, please refer to Display

template.

Delivery partially available

§  Delivery details available only at global sales house level. §  Data is needed for individual placement/format.

Performance partially available

§  Click tracking available only for 1hy, only at global sales house level.

§  Rich media features tracking not available. §  Conversion data not available. §  Data is needed for individual placement/format and

individual post-click activity.

Exclusive reach

not available

§  Exclusive reach per individual campaign provides an indication of each site’s ability to access a unique audience not reached by other sites on the plan.

§  Data is collectable from adserver.

Search partially available

§  Campaign details not available §  For future data collection,

please refer to search data-collection template.

3

4

Management Summary

In Brief §  Consistent room for improvement

Reco §  Delivery to be checked monthly §  Key Metrics to be set up and monitored

Cost §  Impression CPM less competitive than marketplace by X%* §  Technology cost in line with norm

(*) based on ROS assumption

Delivery §  Global underdelivery: -X% §  Strong underdelivery recorded on individual saleshouse

(aaaaaaaa -77%, bbbbbbbb-23%, cccccccccc-12%)

Quality §  Presence in prime sites better than market average by X%. §  OK Site selection target

(although demographic targeting not applied). §  Two sales houses efficiency performing poorly

Guidelines for the agency

§  Reporting to be precise, updated and complete in order to steadily improve results ( from delivery to overall target reach. Cost/performance to be provided for placement, site, sales house etc.)

§  Quality (such as…….) to be improved

5

- - - Media + + +

Cost

Delivery

Prime Sites

Position

Affinity

Reach

Più competitivo del mercato Meno competitivo del mercato

KPIs (Rough Estimate)

6

-7%

§  Cost: Tecnology average x%, in line with the market.

§  Delivery x..

§  Prime sites: x% of ad impressions available in top 20 sites, with x% of total spend.

§  Affinity and Coverage: esteem, analytical data not available

-18%

+6%

+1%

+34%

+2%

7

Strengths: Tech costs

§ Technology costs in line with market (Competitive adserving costs on rich media : xxx of spend)

§ Frequency well controlled in extrabudget campaign

Weaknesses: Cost & Delivery

§ Cost under the norm by xx%

§  Overall under-deliveries by xxxx% § Xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx

sales houses not efficient

Opportunities

§  Search performs better than display. investment may be increased since

consistently supported by several media

§ Consistent, Updated monitoring may improve overall company performance

§  Working on the web in order to face audience migration from print media

Threats

§  .................. § ................

SWOT

Area Action Importance Feasibility

Negotiation Overall negotiation under the norm: Review rates on sites/sales houses (such as x, y with excessive cpm rates.

1 High

Display planning

Identify exclusive reach and audience duplication with adserver. 2 High

Plan using demo-targeting sites, when available, to reduce wastage. 3 Medium

Apply frequency caps on strong impact creatives/formats for all pianification 2 Medium

Display delivery

Strictly monitor delivery at site & placemen level 1 High

Verify refunds owed on individual campaign basis. 2 Challenging

Search Consider investing a higher portion of the online media budget into Paid Search and Performance channels

2 Medium

Overall Management

Arrange monthly reporting in order to optimize budget allocation across brands

2 Challenging

Recommendations

8

§  Importance and feasibily based on: . company objective . specific performance.

Posizione dell’Azienda nei diversi Audit

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Low Quality Competitive Cost

High Quality Not competitive cost

High Quality Competitive Cost

Low Quality Not competitive cost

Costi Non competitivi

Costi competitivi

Qualità Bassa Qualità Alta

Servizio Agenzia

TV

10

+ QUALITY

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Cost / Quality Map

- QUALITY

COST competitve

COST NOT competitve

2012 2011

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

-40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Low Quality Competitive Cost

High Quality Not competitive cost

High Quality Competitive Cost

Low Quality Not competitive cost

+ QUALITY - QUALITY

COST competitve

COST NOT competitve

2012 2011

Campaigns: Results vs Objectives

Legenda: Vs Objectives results in line performance indicators (weights below 20%) not in line performance indicators (weights above 20%) not in line

cost/quality trade-off not in line

Negotiat. Delivery Coverage Affinity c/q** variables

Campaign A x% y% k% n% d% c% a%

strategic weights 60% 40% 30% 30% 40% 0%

Campaign B x% y% k% n% d% c% a% coverage

strategic weights 35% 65% 15% 20% 20% 20%

Campaign C x% y% k% n% d% c% a%

strategic weights 80% 20% 40% 40% 20% 20%

Campaign D x% y% k% n% d% c% a% negotiat

strategic weights 25% 75% 20% 5% 17% 23%

Campaign E x% y% k% n% d% c% a%

strategic weights 50% 50% 30% 20% 20% 20%

Campaign F x% y% k% n% d% c% a% delivery

strategic weights 60% 40% 55% 5% 20% 20%

Campaign G x% y% k% n% d% c% a%

strategic weights 30% 70% 15% 15% 20% 20%

COMPANY % % % % % % %

strategic weights % % % % % %

CAMPAIGN Cost KPI QualityStatusCost Quality

q  Trade-off cost/quality : xxxxxxx

q  Variables: xxxxxxxxxxx

x

y z

€ -

€ 0.50

€ 1.00

€ 1.50

€ 2.00

€ 2.50

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Display Search Others

click Cost per click

13

13 13

Channel Efficiency

ddddd  

cccccc  

aaaaa  

hhhhhh  

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii  

bbbb  

ffffff   eeeee  

gggggg  

Cost per click

Low CostPer Mille High CostPer Click

Note §  Efficiency analysis

on HY1 2011

§  Data source: agenzia

§  CPM including gratuits based on delivered volumes.

§  CPC based on net net spend

Low CostPer Mille Low CostPer Click

High CostPer Mille High CostPer Click

High CostPer Mille Low CostPer Click

Sales House Efficiency

15

Attached

q  Guidelines deem under-delivery of more than 10% of planned inventory to be significant – we therefore recommend seeking compensation for the difference.

q  Refunds are calculated selecting placements/sites exceeding 10% under-delivery; for these placements/sites we sum up net net value for under-delivered inventory.

q  More info on Slideshare, see: Under-delivery and media refunds

Under-deliveries value

16

Accurate Approach

§  Considering individual campaign placements with under delivery >10% in terms of impressions: FY evidence: xxxxxxxx value owed to the company

Medium Approach

§  Considering individual sites per individual campaign with under delivery >10% in terms of impressions: FY evidence: € xxxxxxxx value owed the company

Light Approach

§  Considering individual sites over all period with under delivery >10% in terms of impressions: FY evidence: € xxxxxx value owed to the company

q  Prime Sites are prime choice sites q  The definitiion is based on the Christies Diagram top quadrant,

where sites with high affinity and high number of visitors are positioned. Affinity varies according to business categories.

q  The Prime Site KPI provides fast and clear indication of most appealing sites for the market.

Prime Sites

17

Prime Site: The Cristies Diagram

18