Oh the silliness of counting ad value when you can count real value instead.
I thought we'd put the AVE debate to rest. A unanimous vote of the IPR has rejected its use, practice and concept. Yet the pestilence raises its head again.
First, this blog post, which suggests using AVEs to assess a very expensive publicity stunt. The silliness of this exercise is that for non-profits, the really useful measures are so easy: Count the donations. Why bother with calculating ad values when you can count up what you really want to know?
And then there's this post by Jason Falls. It makes me crazy to see the words "ad" and "equivalency" in the same sentence. I will always prefer measuring real value – i.e. the true benefit you are bringing to the bottom line of your organization. But, I suppose one could argue that search ranking is "real value," so his ideas are worth considering. I think he may be on to something.
Don't get me wrong. My good friend Jason Falls has done so much great good for the cause of measurement over the years that I could never award him Menace of the Month. It's AVEs that are the Menace. --KDP
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many… Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders... But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” 
Comments