Digital Marketing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
2. the Advertising-Supported Internet 21 2.1 Internet Advertising Segments 2.2 the Value of the Advertising-Supported Internet 3
Economic Value of the Advertising- Supported Internet Ecosystem June 10, 2009 Authored by Hamilton Consultants, Inc. With Dr. John Deighton, Harvard Business School, and Dr. John Quelch, Harvard Business School HAMILTON CONSULTANTS Cambridge, Massachusetts Executive Summary 1. Background 8 1.1 Purpose of the study 1.2 The Internet today 1.3 Structure of the Internet 2. The Advertising-Supported Internet 21 2.1 Internet advertising segments 2.2 The value of the advertising-supported Internet 3. Internet Companies and Employment by Internet Segment 26 3.1 Overview of Internet companies 3.2 Summary of employment 3.3 Internet service providers (ISPs) and transport 3.4 Hardware providers 3.5 Information technology consulting and solutions companies 3.6 Software companies 3.7 Web hosting and content management companies 3.8 Search engines/portals 3.9 Content sites: news, entertainment, research, information services. 3.10 Software as a service (SaaS) 3.11 Advertising agencies and ad support services 3.12 Ad networks 3.13 E-mail marketing and support 3.14 Enterprise-based Internet marketing, advertising and web design 3.15 E-commerce: e-tailing, e-brokerage, e-travel, and others 3.16 B2B e-commerce 4. Companies and Employment by Geography 50 4.1 Company headquarters and total employees by geography 4.2 Census data for Internet employees by geography 4.3 Additional company location data by geography 5. Benefits of the Ad-Supported Internet Ecosystem 54 5.1 Overview of types of benefits 5.2 Providing universal access to unlimited information 5.3 Creating employment 5.4 Providing one of the pillars of economic strength during the 2008-2009 recession 5.5 Fostering further innovation 5.6 Increasing economic productivity 5.7 Making a significant contribution to the U.S. -
PFSWEB Annual Report 2021
PFSWEB Annual Report 2021 Form 10-K (NASDAQ:PFSW) Published: April 30th, 2021 PDF generated by stocklight.com UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 _________________________________________ Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) _________________________________________ ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission file number 000-28275 _________________________________________ PFSWEB, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) _________________________________________ Delaware 75-2837058 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification Number) 505 Millennium Drive, Allen, Texas 75013 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code 972-881-2900 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, $.001 par value PFSW Nasdaq Capital Market Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None _________________________________________ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Y es ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. -
An Antitrust Analysis of Google's Proposed Acquisition of Doubleclick
JOINT CENTER AEI-BROOKINGS JOINT CENTER FOR REGULATORY STUDIES An Antitrust Analysis of Google’s Proposed Acquisition of DoubleClick Robert W. Hahn and Hal J. Singer Related Publication 07-24 September 2007 An Antitrust Analysis of Google’s Proposed Acquisition of DoubleClick Robert W. Hahn† Hal J. Singer†† By serving as a key revenue source for online content providers, online advertising has been instrumental in the development of innovative websites. Continued innovation among content providers, however, depends critically on the competitive provision of online advertising. Suppliers of online advertising provide three primary inputs—(1) advertiser tools, (2) intermediation services, and (3) publisher tools. Certain suppliers such as Google provide a platform that combines the inputs into one integrated service. In this paper, we focus on the overlapping products sold to advertisers by Google and DoubleClick—namely, the supply of advertiser tools. Because the supply of advertiser tools is highly concentrated, Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick raises important questions for antitrust authorities. Proponents of this acquisition argue that Google and DoubleClick do not compete—that is, buyers of search-based or contextual-based advertising (the two advertising channels in which Google participates) do not perceive graphic-based advertising (the advertising channel in which DoubleClick participates) to be substitutes. Thus, they conclude that the proposed acquisition would not lead to higher prices. In this paper, we examine economic evidence and legal precedent to help identify the relevant antitrust product market for Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick. According to the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice Horizontal Merger Guidelines, product markets are defined by the response of buyers to relative changes in prices. -
Ethics Resource Center (2013) a Scary Headline
If I Were Trying to Get and Keep an Ethical Culture . Prof. Marianne Jennings Emeritus W.P.Carey School of Business Arizona State University Jennings Where we are SOME SCARY SLIDES 2 Ethical Lapses . Davis-Besse . Google (3 times) . Bear Stearns . Adelphia (FENOC) . GroupOn . Berkshire Hathaway . Deloitte Touche . ADM . Hallmark Westland . Biovail . Delphi . AIG (three times) . HealthSouth . BNY . Deutsche Bank . Allergan . Body Shop . Diamond Nuts . Helig-Myers . American Apparel . Boeing . Downey Savings & . Herbalife . American Express . BP (three times) Loan . HP . Apple (twice) . Bristol-Myers . Duke Energy Squibb . HSCB . Apollo Group . DuPont . Calpers . ImClone . Arthur Andersen . Edward Jones . Cardinal Health . IndyMac . AstraZeneca . Eli Lilly . Cendant . Ernst & Young . Johnson & Johnson . AT & T . Chase . Facebook . Autonomy . Kmart . Chesapeake Energy . Fannie Mae (twice) . Avon . KPMG (twice) . Chiquita . Fidelity Investments . Bally Total Fitness . Chrysler . Krispy Kreme . Galleon Hedge Fund . Bank of America . Cintas . Lehman Brothers . General Electric . Barclays . Citigroup . Lennar Corp. GlaxoSmithKline (2) . Bayer . Columbia HCA . Lucent . BCBS . Computer . Global Crossing Associates . Madoff Investment . BCCI . Global Research Securities . Countrywide . BDO Seidman Financial . GM . Marsh & McLennan . CSFB . Goldman Sachs (2X) . McNeil (Tylenol) . CVS Ethical Lapses . Medtronic . Qwest . Mellon Bank . Razorfish . Tyco International . Mercer . RBS . UBS . Merck . Reebok . UnitedHealth Group . Refco . Merrill Lynch . Universities and . MF Global . Royal Ahold sports . Royal Shell . Microstrategy . UPS . Milberg Weiss . SAC Capital . Wachovia . Moody’s . Saks Fifth Avenue . Morgan Stanley . Sallie Mae . WaMu . Navistar International . Samsung . Wells Fargo . New Century Financial . Satyam (India) . World Bank . Shaw Group . New Orleans Saints . WorldCom . Nortel . Siemens . Xerox . Novartis . Société General . Options scandals (200 . Standard & Poor’s . Zynga companies) . Stanford Investments . Oracle . Student loan lenders . -
Google/ Doubleclick REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1)
EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.4731 – Google/ DoubleClick Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8(1) Date: 11-03-2008 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 11/03/2008 C(2008) 927 final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 11/03/2008 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.4731 – Google/ DoubleClick) (Only the English text is authentic) Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................4 2 THE PARTIES...........................................................................................................5 3 THE CONCENTRATION.........................................................................................6 4 COMMUNITY DIMENSION ...................................................................................6 5 MARKET DESCRIPTION......................................................................................6 6 RELEVANT MARKETS.........................................................................................17 6.1. Relevant product markets ............................................................................17 6.1.1. Provision of online advertising space.............................................17 6.1.2. Intermediation in -
Are Cookies Monsters? by Stephen Turbek
Are Cookies Monsters? by Stephen Turbek RAZORFISH REPORTS a publication of the razorfish science department | 23 october2000 | report 037 Internet cookies are a simple, beautiful Cookies Are Generally Safe The most common use of these is to system for letting people interact with The beautiful aspect of the cookie store a user ID. This allows the Web Web sites in a more intelligent fashion. system is that a Web site can only have site to recognize you again when you They are also mistakenly blamed for access to what it knew already - it can return, and is used to reference the per- spying on people, breaching security, not touch another site’s cookies. Each sonal information that is stored securely C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. and giving away personal information. cookie has a domain address associ- on the Web site’s server. ated with it – a cookie set by coke.com What Are Cookies? can never be accessed by pepsi.com, They can also save information about A “cookie” is a bit of text in a file on but the site diet.coke.com server has your preferences, often simple things the hard drive of a desktop computer. the same domain name and can share for example, your zip code to give you Each cookie can be saved into the file it. personalized news reports. or “set” when the browser loads a page on a Web site. The cookies are sent to Cookies are small text Shopping sites can also store a visitor’s the Web site whenever another file is files used to store shopping cart information in a cookie, loaded. -
Participate in Creating Their Own Content Through Message Boards and Online Chat Areas
Media Selling, 4th Edition Chapter 20 – The Internet By Vincent Thompson and Paul Talbot As an advertising medium, the Internet is complex and measured differently from traditional media. Also, online advertising buys are often difficult to execute and to implement. So why are marketers switching billions of dollars to the Internet? Because the Internet is one of the most disruptive innovations of our time and represents the most fertile environment ever for marketer-consumer interaction. Disruptive technologies transform societies – the way people live, think, and conduct business – and the Internet has been as disruptive and transformative as movable type, the telegraph, airplanes, and the computer have. The History of the Internet Most historians agree that the birth of the Internet occurred in 1969 when computer scientists from the government and universities linked large mainframe computers together with the objectives of sharing data and distributing information over a network. This groundbreaking work came from a desire to ensure the safety of government data during natural disasters or war and to allow university researchers the ability to share information. Prior to this project, networks were set up like phone systems with information traveling through vulnerable centralized hubs. With the invention of the distributed network, information could be simply routed along any of the networks’ many connections until it found its way to its final destination. Aiding in this concept was the use of packets. Packets allow small chunks of digital data to be sent into the network independently and then reassembled at their final destinations. Once the initial computers at UCLA and Stanford Universities were connected in 1969, other Universities followed suit and with each addition the network gained more power and provided more value to its users.i Over the next five years scientists developed cornerstone technologies such as e-mail, the ability to access the network remotely, and the ability to host multiple chat sessions. -
Digital Fact Pack, Is Full of Fascinating Numbers
DIGITAL MARKETING & MEDIA FACT PACK IN ASSOCIATION WITH Published April 23, 2007 © Copyright 2007 Crain Communications Inc. Digital Marketing & Media | Advertising Age | 3 30+ billion ads per month - 200+ million unique users - 7,000+ premium web sites Your audience is on our network DIGITAL MARKETING AND MEDIA DATA ON THE DIGITAL WORLD LET’SFACEIT. It’s becoming critical to stay atop the digital media and marketing space, but the pace of technological change is making it increasingly difficult. That’s why we’ve again pulled together the important data and trends to serve as a guide to marketing in this space. This, our second annual Digital Fact Pack, is full of fascinating numbers. Some highlights: Big players continue to dominate online advertising, thanks to both their audience scale and their ability to re-aggregate smaller, disparate audiences. The top 10 online properties took in 99% of 2006 gross online ad revenue. Net online ad revenue is a slightly less stilt- ed story, but continues to illustrate that when it comes to online ad revenue, the Long Tail of the web has a big, fat head (Page 11). 48.3% of Americans will be hooked up to a broadband connection this year and $243.1 billion will be spent in U.S. online retail sales. After breaking onto the scene a few years ago, social networking is flourishing. MySpace and Facebook continue to defy gravity, growing 72.5% and 59.2% (Feb. ‘07 versus Feb. ‘06), You need a network that can keep respectively, and, depending on what surveys you use, advertisers are set to spend between up with your audience online. -
“Privacy Roundtables – Comment, Project No. P095416.” Cookie Wars, Real-Time Ta
“Privacy Roundtables – Comment, Project No. P095416.” Cookie Wars, Real-Time Targeting, and Proprietary Self Learning Algorithms: Why the FTC Must Act Swiftly to Protect Consumer Privacy Comments of the Center for Digital Democracy and U.S. PIRG 4 November 2009 On behalf of the Center for Digital Democracy and U.S.PIRG, we want to express our appreciation for this new initiative on the part of the commission to ensure that consumer privacy and related safeguards are a fundamental part of the online experience. The new administration has brought new leadership to the FTC, especially in its chairman, director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, and senior privacy staff. Time is of the essence, however, as the commission has lagged far behind all of the latest developments in the interactive marketing arena, particularly in the important area of online data collection. In its past complaints on behavioral advertising and related data collection/consumer profiling and targeting issues in 2006, 2007, and 2009, as well as in its opposition to the Google/DoubleClick merger, CDD and U.S. PIRG have provided the commission with a detailed analysis of what the online ad industry has termed the “marketing and media ecosystem.”1 For example, we urged the FTC early on to investigate and address the online ad exchange marketplace on both consumer privacy and consolidation grounds. Today, consumers online face the rapid growth and ever-increasing sophistication of the various techniques advertisers employ for 1 Center for Digital Democracy and U.S. PIRG. Complaint and ReQuest for InQuiry and Injunctive Relief Concerning Unfair and Deceptive Online Marketing Practices. -
Reynolds Opportunity Fund
REYNOLDS FUNDS Dear Fellow Shareholders: November 3, 1999 We app re c i a te your continued confidence in the Reynolds Funds and would like to welcome our many new share- holders. The Reynolds Blue Chip Growth Fund was ranked #1 among Growth and Income Funds by Lipper Inc. for the five years ended September 30, 1999. The Web Site for the Reynolds Funds is www.reynoldsfunds.com. We are pleased to introduce a new investment option, the Reynolds Fund. This Fund is No-Load and is now available for investment. I am the portfolio manager of this Fund in addition to continuing to manage the four other No-Load Reynolds Funds. The Reynolds Fund is a general stock fund and is intended to be a core i nvestment holding. The Fund may own common stocks of all types and sizes and will mainly invest in common stocks of U. S. headquart e red companies. While the Fund will ge n e ra l ly invest in “grow t h companies”, it may also invest in “value stocks”. The Reynolds Blue Chip Growth and Op p o r tunity Funds had strong app re c i a tion for the twelve months ended September 30, 1999: October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999 +48.6% +60.0% Reynolds Reynolds Blue Chip Opportunity Growth Fund Fund The Blue Chip and Opportunity Funds also The Blue Chip and Opportunity Funds also had strong appreciation for the three years ended had strong ap p re c i ation for the five ye a rs ended September 30, 1999: September 30, 1999: Average Annual Total Returns Average Annual Total Returns October 1, 1996 through September 30, 1999 October 1, 1994 through September 30, 1999 +35.5% +30.8% +31.8% +28.2% Reynolds Reynolds Reynolds Reynolds Blue Chip Opportunity Blue Chip Opportunity Growth Fund Fund Growth Fund Fund – 1 – The Blue Chip Fund has received many awards for its recent performance including: (1) America Online – Featured on Sage Online - September 8, 1999. -
Name Search & Selection Checklist
November 11, 2016 VELOCITY LAW, LLC BUSINESS LAW FIRM 5449 BENDING OAKS PLACE DOWNERS GROVE, ILLINOIS 60515-4456 [email protected] 630-963-0439 x 22 www.velocitylaw.com © Nancy Fallon-Houle, Attorney, 1998-2016 Name Search & Selection Checklist (To Pick Your Business Name, Tag Line or Product Name) I. Name Selection Process - How to Pick a Great Name (For Business Name, Product Name, d/b/a, or Tag Line) A. Pick a “Suggestive”, “Fanciful” or “Arbitrary” Name. “Suggestive”, “Fanciful” or “Arbitrary” names are best choice for available names and trademark-able names; Don’t pick “descriptive" names, as they are generally not trademarkable. Create a brand from a uniquely applied key word or words, rather than trying to describe what you do in your business name. Or add a "branding" word to the descriptive words; or a word that is suggestive of what the company does or the result of its service or product, or an allusion to, the service or product. 1. “Suggestive” word or combination of words. Alludes to or suggests the industry, product, service, positive result of the service or product, but that is not directly Descriptive. Or uses a term of art from the industry, a part or tool used in your industry; or uses innuendo or double meaning. “Federal Express”, “Think or Swim” (Options Trading Firm), LiquidPoint (Options Trading Firm), Spokes Bike Shop (bike shop); “Full Stack” (Tech Employment Search Firm covering the “full stack of back-end and front-end coders/designers”), “Great Wall” (Chinese Restaurant) or “MarchFirst” (web design and management Consulting; Rootstock Wine Bar (bar); Second Wind (used exercise equipment); Oasis Irrigation (Lawn sprinkler systems); “Triple Toe Skate Shop”, CleanCycle (laundrymat) “Soap Opera” (laundrymat) “Forget Me Not” (Florist), Slide Rule (Engineering); NetRoadShow (online securities broker-dealer firm), TripleNet (real estate investment) 2. -
2019 UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION DOCUMENT -Financial Report
2019 UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION DOCUMENT 2019 Annual fi nancial report CONTENTS MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR 6 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL OF THE SUPERVISORY BOARD 02 STATEMENTS 2019 YEAR 183 MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR OF THE MANAGEMENT BOARD 04 6.1 Consolidated income statement 184 OUTLOOK 07 6.2 Consolidated statement of BUSINESS MODEL 08 comprehensive income 185 VALUE CREATION 0 9 6.3 Consolidated balance sheet 186 ORGANIZATION 10 6.4 Consolidated statement of cash fl ows 187 TALENT 11 6.5 Consolidated statement of changes KEY FIGURES 12 in equity 188 STAKEHOLDERS AND CORPORATE 14 6.6 Notes to the consolidated fi nancial SOCIAL RESPONSABILITY 15 statements 190 HISTORY 16 6.7 Statutory auditors’ report on the GOVERNANCE 17 GLOSSARY AND DEFINITIONS 18 consolidated fi nancial statements 250 7 2019 ANNUAL FINANCIAL 1 PRESENTATION OF THE GROUP 21 STATEMENTS 257 1.1 Group h istory 22 7.1 Income statement 258 1.2 Organization chart 26 7.2 Balance sheet at December 31 259 1.3 Activities and strategy 27 7.3 Statement of cash fl ow 261 1.4 Investments 34 7.4 Notes to the fi nancial statements 1.5 Major contracts 37 of Publicis Groupe SA 262 1.6 Research and development 37 7.5 Results of Publicis Groupe SA over RISKS AND RISK MANAGEMENT 39 the past fi ve years 280 2 7.6 Statutory auditors’ report on 2.1 Main risk factors 40 the fi nancial statements 281 2.2 Internal control and risk management procedure 44 8 COMPANY INFORMATION 2.3 Insurance and coverage of risks 46 AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE 285 GOVERNANCE AND COMPENSATION 47 8.1 Information about the Company 286 3 8.2 Ownership