In all the different areas of performance marketing, such as SEM, RTB and Remarketing, things change so quickly that writing off a strategy or tool for good – or, indeed, singing the praises of a tool or strategy – will eventually be based on dated information.

Take an example like the GDN (Google Display Network – where you deliver banners and/or text ads on participating websites). Many advertisers may have tried it six months or a year ago (or more) and found it hard to use or simply not efficient enough for their needs. They’ve shelved it and written it off as a waste of money.

However, in recent months, we have seen a raft of new developments on GDN both in management and reporting. In the last 6 months the GDN has added:

• Universal App Campaigns
• Estimated Total Conversions
• Improved design options for Full-Screen In-App Ads
• Simplified campaign creation wizard for a better structure and messaging
• Audience insights reporting
• 100% viewability was introduced – charges now only occur when the ad is shown on screen on a page it delivers
• Better Dynamic Remarketing ad adaptability
• Customer Match was launched so you can use the email addresses of your customers/visitors to target them in ways not possible before.
• Interactive In-App ad formats were brought in late last year

This is just one corner of PPC and its development since July last year and you can see many major changes, which could fundamentally alter the performance of your GDN marketing efforts.

If you had written off GDN as a money pit or too impenetrable or hard to control, maybe another go round is in order now?

What it all means

PPC is, at its core, a testing occupation (I don’t mean challenging in this instance, although that does apply!) in that you cannot assume an outcome without ever trying something out. In the case of having tried it and getting a negative outcome, if a significant set of material changes are made to the infrastructure on which the original test was built, it’s sensible to go back to the well and have another taste test.

Ultimately, it boils down to not leaving money (revenue) on the table unnecessarily just because you were burned in the past. Competing advertisers are likely to give it a try and you’ll be left looking flat-footed if they do well with it and take market share.

So, although, this is a tech-based industry, looking back and revisiting an “old” ad approach could pay off if you are careful. Do you have a story that follows this narrative in your own experience? Let us know in the comments.