That one include digital videos, which they say includes cable and spot TV (I assume based on the article that this mean streaming sites and sport commentators?). Thus We are now trailing far far away from ads on a website which is the primary purpose of ad-block. TV and by extension video is basically never PPC or PPI based for their advertisement model.

For better statistics, lets pick advertising companies that only offer banner and text ads (like ad-word), or which has clear way to separate them. We also want the number of sites that use each type of model and not the total revenue for the ad company. I am not the least surprised that video streaming, sport channels, and news papers has a much larger revenue source for ad companies than say all other type of websites combined. Feel free to point to statistics that proves this wrong.

When they say video, they mean sites like YouTube etc -- spot TV is so negligible as to be pretty much a non-factor. As you can see from the 2012 report (http://www.iab.net/media/file/IAB_Internet_Advertising_Reven...) video is < 5% of overall spend and is not rolled up with display. The number you should be looking at is Banners + Rich Media, which is what most publishers use.

Ty, that report was an interesting read. Rich media and Digital Video was way smaller than I would had thought, and email way bigger than I ever feared.

Sad that they didn't include a Revenues by pricing model for each of search and banner specific market. The second thing I would have very much liked to see which markets sold the space.