On Wednesday morning last week, a few more people than usual were probably interested in picking up the morning paper.  However, the New York Times was nowhere to be found at many new stands here in Manhattan.   The new parallel online economy was making itself felt - papers were bought in bulk throughout the city long before rush hour, and now that historic front page can be yours, suitable for framing - Buy It Now for only $99.99.

Similarly, a CNN story this morning aired regarding the online sale of Obama inauguration tickets ,  which are intended to be distributed free of charge through members of the incoming congress (currently, VIP tickets are going for the low five figures).

These two end-runs around the intended distribution mechanism put me in mind of the situation my wife faced earlier this summer when attempting to surprise me with birthday tickets to the much in-demand iMax showing of The Dark Knight during the first week of its release (I know: best. wife. ever.)  It turns out she had been trying to buy them for days via AOL’s Moviefone service , but strangely the tickets (released in maximum lots of 5) were constantly sold out: regardless of how often (or when) she checked, there were just never any tickets available - for that particular movie, the AOL site was essentially broken.  She then checked craigslist and found out where all those tickets went: a thriving business in (drastically marked-up) iMax Batman tickets.  ‘Entrepreneurs’ were grabbing all tickets within seconds of release and were reselling them on craigslist for 3 to 4 times the original price - depending on your point of view, either a complete hijacking of the system by a unnecessary additional layer of middleman, or a shining example of capitalism at its finest.

To someone who’s just paid $80 for two tickets to a movie, it seems more the former - although of course, with the power and convenience of the internet comes the occasional disruptive gaming of the system - so chances are, this kind of thing will be with us for a while.

I still like my internet.

There it was. Noticeably forlorn between marketing for Dr. Zizmor skin treatments, ConEdison, and the Apex Technical School, a singular display ad for web darling cnet.com - of all places on New York’s subway, the C train from 186th street to Euclid Ave.

What struck me was the seeming lack of context. I have not seen any other c|net ads anywhere since. Not on the subway or outside.

So what’s the genesis of this oddly-placed ad?

Maybe it was CBS’ recent “digital” c|net acquisition that auto-triggered the new parent’s media agency to spend traditional “analog” ad money on what’s essentially a web-only property.

The big picture: To this day, long held dynamics between brand marketers, agencies, and media outlets continue to dictate where budget flows, and how much.

To that end, despite the significant increase in online ad sales (folk, these Lehman Bros. stats clearly are pre market melt down), brand marketers and their media agencies still are much more comfortable buying traditional marketing spots.

This is where the big budgets go, and with that, buyers’ year-end bonuses.

Hence my assumption: Once c|net became “analog”-owned - swoops - “analog” ad money was automatically allocated for, of all places, what seems to have been a single subway car in New York.

To me anyway, it seems as unusual a choice as somewhat misplaced - as I doubt the subway ad in  question will meaningfully spike “click-thru” for cnet.com.

Not to mention the rather “bland” poster design.

But hey.  Another morning on the subway in New York.

UPDATE

With my recent c|net display ad find, I have started paying more attention to seemingly misplaced ad buying decisions inside hybrid analog / digital media companies.

This one’s with McGraw-Hill’s Business Week magazine and their Technology & You podcast series of which I am a long-held fan.

Tuns out, what started with Intel and Audi branded audio pre-rolls, I am now greeted by, of all things, a pitch for Clinique skin products for men.

How did Steve Wildstrom’s decidedly (great) geeky discussion over the ins and outs of tech topics from Android phones and flash memory, to WiFi vs. WiMAX grab the attention of an ad buyer tasked to sell facial creams?

I want to assume that somehow this checked out as a targeted ad buy; that somehow this all made sense as part of a greater marketing mix.

In the meantime, this day and age, I wonder whether beauty cream products sold during a technology podcast are as smart as giving me diaper ads during The Simpsons or The King of Queens.

I am just not the desired target group.

This day and age, there are better, more targeted technologies to connect me with the right ad.

Why not try it?

Business Week recently ran a telling article about the state of the German dailies industry.

The magazine argues - despite dropping ad sales overall - “special interest”-focused print media seems to do reasonably well in an otherwise hotly competitive marketplace for news.

Compared to many of its ailing US peers, popular dailies such as Berlin-based Bild apparently knew to focus on exclusive content, and embrace (rather than fight) innovation early enough to succeed. 

What’s more, Bild and other dailies managed to benefit from German readers’ somewhat slower flight to online media alternatives. Turns out, in an increasingly crowded field of German dailies publishers, readers seem to find solice in established print media brands they have known for years.

Still, competition remains tough; with increasing pressure not just from semi-professional and user-generated news sites, blogs, and online video, but also from at least 600 branded online editorials trying to compete for diminishing audiences and a shrinking ad revenue pie.

In the US a similar “doom-and-gloom” scenario persists, but the “pain” of market share loss felt by state-side newspapers seem more urgent compared to their German peers.

Seeking a solution to the mess, the Newspaper Association of America recently published its own state-of-the-industry stats, and, along with that, recommended 8 steps towards dealing with its own challenges of dropping circulation and ad sales.

Meanwhile, over in Germany, Bild intuitively took some of these recommendation to heart, yet went beyond its US peers’ 8-step plan.

Among other things, it partnered with Germany’s #1 consumer online portal, Deutsche Telekom-owned t-online.de, and later, started selling pre-paid mobile phone services at newsstands, right where its dailies sell.  (The service affords customers unlimited online access as long as they are reading bild.de online).

While the former provided instant traffic boost to its first branded online site, the latter helped to make up for revenue losses from ad sales moving to the Web. 

Of course, Bild is infamous for its daily coverage of sex and crime. Unlike in the US, nudity not a problem to the extend shown (think topless models on the cover looking for a date), maybe its the oldest trick in the book that does the trick for Bild.

I doubt this would be an option for Bild’s US newspaper publishing peers.

UPDATE:

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Today, the New York Times reported about BusinessWeek’s planned launch of BusinessExchange.

The Wiki-meets-social networking sites seeks to amalgamate professional and user-generated news into a new and (hopefully) successful online news experience.

Clearly this is BusinessWeek’s own attempt to fight off lagging ad sales from ongoing audience fragmentation and ubiquitous “anytime, anywhere” content competition.