Amazon recently closed a deal with demand-site platform Triggit which will allow the e-commerce giant to expand its existing retargeting efforts and take advantage of the growing display market. (www.paidcontent.org, David Kaplan, 6/29/2011) Research analysts have noted Amazon’s current efforts to expand its display ad business and to even provide services to third-party sites. According to Macquerie Research analyst Ben Schachter, Amazon intends to use Triggit’s RTB system to match pools of profiles from Amazon’s consumer data with available ad impressions. From there, “Amazon will then bid on inventory and re-sell it as part of a targeted ad buy to third-party advertisers.” Schachter estimates the gains for Amazon from display to be non-GAAP EBIT margins in the 20-25 percent range” compared to its current 5-6 percent margins.
Two issues that arise from this retargeting system are those of privacy and of user interference. After Amazon acquired the online shoes retailer Zappos two years, as a result of retargeting efforts, customers complained about receiving the same ads repeatedly. For example, when consumers visited and browsed items on a website, if they made no purchase, they would continue to see ads from the same website; the purpose of this technology was hopefully to convince these users to return to the website they visited and purchase the items they browsed. After a series of complaints, Zappos adjusted the system to stop repeated ads.
Amazon is obviously in a great position to make display advertising a lucrative business, but it must be careful not to let retargeting efforts ruin the user experience and drive away customers who are annoyed by repeated ads.
Sunday, July 03, 2011
Facebook Launching Something "Awesome"
Facebook recently announced that it is doing something "awesome" and that it will announce what it is on July 6h. However, rumors have already begun to float around as to what this awesome invention is. Many speculate that Facebook is planning to include Video chat through their social network. The plan to do this is through a partnership with Skype. According to TechCrunch,
The product has been built on Skype and will include a desktop component. It’s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has Skype already installed
on the computer, or if additional software will need to be downloaded even if user already uses Skype. But it’s clear that there’s very deep integration between the, products and from the user’s perspective, the product will be an in browser experience.
This to me seems like it has huge marketing potential. I feel that it could potentially change the way marketers have been interacting with consumers. Customer service representatiives can now have face to face converations with consumers. By giving the customer a human experience, they are more likely to appreciate the brand and not feel like they are speaking to a nameless telephone operator.Online sales might pick up through a face to face sales pitch. It will be interesting to see what is their actual game plan on July 6th but if the rumors are true, I think Facebook might have a winner on their hands.
The product has been built on Skype and will include a desktop component. It’s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has Skype already installed
on the computer, or if additional software will need to be downloaded even if user already uses Skype. But it’s clear that there’s very deep integration between the, products and from the user’s perspective, the product will be an in browser experience.
This to me seems like it has huge marketing potential. I feel that it could potentially change the way marketers have been interacting with consumers. Customer service representatiives can now have face to face converations with consumers. By giving the customer a human experience, they are more likely to appreciate the brand and not feel like they are speaking to a nameless telephone operator.Online sales might pick up through a face to face sales pitch. It will be interesting to see what is their actual game plan on July 6th but if the rumors are true, I think Facebook might have a winner on their hands.
Advertising in online gaming
I've been following news about Zynga's valuation closely and I couldn't help but wonder why there isn't much advertising in the more hardcore online gaming. I'm not much of a gamer myself, but I haven't seen advertisements embedded in most of the games I've seen.
Imagine playing a soccer tournament on a hot summer day, and after hours of button pressing and player maneuvering, you beat your online community to the cup with a banner on the side promoting an ice cold beer.
It sounds logical to me. Target segment can be easily matched from the game genre and so there definitely is some potential for ad revenues. So why hasn't sony (playstation network) ,microsoft ( xbox live) or nintendo (not sure if there is an online component to that) leveraged their networks to cash in some advertising revenues?
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Too much Google!!
The internet opens up opportunities in many areas and Google seems to stretch itself to have a presence in every space there can possibly be. A little longer than a decade ago we were all using AltaVista, Excite, Lycos and a bunch of other search engines most of them discontinued by now, Google was just one more. Those days are gone, the power of network externalities kicked in and positioned Google in exponential growth, by 2006 Merriam Webster and Oxford dictionaries included “Google” as a verb in the English language. Now every other month we hear of a new Google product “Google + whatever the latest trend is” It seems we are experiencing the googlelization of the web, Google is becoming the conglomerate of the digital world!
Today Google offers more than 40 products in 8 categories. In my attempt to become a savvy digital marketer I tried to get acquainted with most of them. I grouped the products in three categories:
1. Product Extensions: all those products that are naturally born from a search engine. That is, specialized search products that help you find what you are really looking for (e.g. images, videos, news, products, places, blogs, discussions, recipes, patents). A second level of product extension includes products that use all the data gathered by a search engine like Google trends (search trends) and iGoogle (customize your own homepage).
This is the realm of a search engine, but I guess their need for innovation led them to design products in totally new areas.
2. Products in whatever area you can think of: all those products that I have no idea why they are with Google. It reminds me of the industrial conglomerates that tried to get into every industry they thought might have some synergies with their existing business. Those are products like photo editing Picnik and Picasa (yes two), Google Maps, Google Earth, Google Translate, Knol, Google Reader, Blogger, and Google sites, among many others.
Some of these products have failed and are being discontinued like Google Buzz, Google Wave, Google health (trying to pioneer the digitalization and centralization of medical records), and Google PowerMeter (trying to ride the green wave too).
To keep up with any trend they did not start, Google designs products trying to improve on the category leaders.
3. Google “me too” products: from a user’s perspective it seems Google’s first “me too” product was Gmail, following the then leader hotmail (followed by a whole suit of functionality products like Google docs, calendar, Google talk, Google groups). Other “me too” products include Google Checkout following Paypal, Google Offers following Groupon, Google Finance following Yahoo Finance, Orkut in an attempt to get into social networks, and most recently Google+ following Facebook.
It is too soon to tell what will be the fate of Google’s newest product. So far, some bloggers like it and some say it is very similar to Facebook. The news also generated comment from the investment community. A. Hartung from Forbes thinks it is not a good idea to engage in battle with Facebook that is already too far to reach, and that it would have been a better idea to stick to Google Health and Google PowerMeter
http://blogs.forbes.com/adamhartung/2011/06/30/why-google-plus-is-a-big-minus-for-investors/
For us, the users, competition is always good news. Google just announced Google Takeout, which allows you to take all your data with you when you leave a Google product, this is definitely a plus amidst worries of privacy around Facebook.
Today Google offers more than 40 products in 8 categories. In my attempt to become a savvy digital marketer I tried to get acquainted with most of them. I grouped the products in three categories:
1. Product Extensions: all those products that are naturally born from a search engine. That is, specialized search products that help you find what you are really looking for (e.g. images, videos, news, products, places, blogs, discussions, recipes, patents). A second level of product extension includes products that use all the data gathered by a search engine like Google trends (search trends) and iGoogle (customize your own homepage).
This is the realm of a search engine, but I guess their need for innovation led them to design products in totally new areas.
2. Products in whatever area you can think of: all those products that I have no idea why they are with Google. It reminds me of the industrial conglomerates that tried to get into every industry they thought might have some synergies with their existing business. Those are products like photo editing Picnik and Picasa (yes two), Google Maps, Google Earth, Google Translate, Knol, Google Reader, Blogger, and Google sites, among many others.
Some of these products have failed and are being discontinued like Google Buzz, Google Wave, Google health (trying to pioneer the digitalization and centralization of medical records), and Google PowerMeter (trying to ride the green wave too).
To keep up with any trend they did not start, Google designs products trying to improve on the category leaders.
3. Google “me too” products: from a user’s perspective it seems Google’s first “me too” product was Gmail, following the then leader hotmail (followed by a whole suit of functionality products like Google docs, calendar, Google talk, Google groups). Other “me too” products include Google Checkout following Paypal, Google Offers following Groupon, Google Finance following Yahoo Finance, Orkut in an attempt to get into social networks, and most recently Google+ following Facebook.
It is too soon to tell what will be the fate of Google’s newest product. So far, some bloggers like it and some say it is very similar to Facebook. The news also generated comment from the investment community. A. Hartung from Forbes thinks it is not a good idea to engage in battle with Facebook that is already too far to reach, and that it would have been a better idea to stick to Google Health and Google PowerMeter
http://blogs.forbes.com/adamhartung/2011/06/30/why-google-plus-is-a-big-minus-for-investors/
For us, the users, competition is always good news. Google just announced Google Takeout, which allows you to take all your data with you when you leave a Google product, this is definitely a plus amidst worries of privacy around Facebook.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Here comes another social network: The Google plus
Google has been working on developing great solutions to engage the masses by offering free solutions to become smarter in today's internet addicted age. While social media is in boom, Google was working since last year to consolidate all their solutions like Gmail, talk, buzz, etc. into one social network that they named it as Google+.
It has been a while Google is trying to come up with a next generation of social network tool however it has not worked for them. There is a hope that by launching this new gadget that has not only features from Facebook but also introducing many other cool features like user maps, video chat, Huddle, Sparks and Circles.
For a complete article visit Google official Blog
This article is also published on my personal blog at Digital Strategist.
It has been a while Google is trying to come up with a next generation of social network tool however it has not worked for them. There is a hope that by launching this new gadget that has not only features from Facebook but also introducing many other cool features like user maps, video chat, Huddle, Sparks and Circles.
For a complete article visit Google official Blog
This article is also published on my personal blog at Digital Strategist.
Saving Banner Ads for Later
Ever see and ad and want to save it for later? Then a new company founded by a guy from About.com called AdKeeper is just for you. It allows users to click on the icon in the ad to store it for later. The company hopes that in the future every ad will have a little Adkeeper button which you could click to save. It's free for comapnies now, but the intent is to have them eventually pay to be included. The idea is that people are annoyed by ads now, but if given the chance to view it at their own pace it will increase the response rate. It comes at an interesting time, when other tools such as AdBlock Plus exist which is designed to eliminate unwanted ads. I definitely think this unique approach has the chance to capture some of the market lost to over advertising on the internet.
Here is the full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/business/media/28adco.html?_r=1&ref=technology
Here is the full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/business/media/28adco.html?_r=1&ref=technology
Ad Miles - USA Today Article: American Express and Facebook are teaming up on a rewards program. By Karen Bleier, AFP/Getty Images
It's one thing to get free airline miles or hotel stays for credit card points, but here's an industry first: free Facebook ads.
Today, American Express and Facebook will roll out a program that allows the credit card giant's Membership Rewards customers to redeem points for ads on the social-media giant's site. The program is primarily targeted at small-business owners via American Express OPEN, but it's also open to millions of other AmEx card holders, says Ed Gilligan, vice chairman at American Express.
"When we ask small-business owners to name their biggest challenge, the answer is always finding new customers," Gilligan says.
The ads-for-points concept could rock both the credit card and social-media worlds. It's the first time a major company has linked social-media advertising with currency for customer rewards. But social-media and small-business consultants warn that it's not for everyone.
"It a boon for Facebook," says Janet Fouts, a social-media coach. "But you can't just throw your money at this and hope it works. You have to have an advertising strategy."
The move also is a win for AmEx, says small-business consultant Hamilton Wallace, because it gives folks an additional reason to use the brand. But, he says, "You have to first ask yourself: Does Facebook advertising make sense for my company?"
While Facebook ads are great for getting folks familiar with your brand, Fouts and Wallace say they're sometimes not as good at getting customers to actually buy a product.
But the power of Facebook is huge. It has more than 750 million members worldwide and is the world's largest social-media platform.
"The number of small businesses advertising on Facebook is growing exponentially every day," says David Fischer, vice president of advertising and global operations at Facebook. And Facebook ads let businesses target the right audience and leverage word-of-mouth advertising via recommendations of friends.
How to earn points — and freebie Facebook ads? Simply by buying stuff with AmEx cards. Each $6,750 spent can be redeemed for $50 worth of Facebook advertising.
"We're simply going to where the customers are," Gilligan says. "That's Facebook."
Today, American Express and Facebook will roll out a program that allows the credit card giant's Membership Rewards customers to redeem points for ads on the social-media giant's site. The program is primarily targeted at small-business owners via American Express OPEN, but it's also open to millions of other AmEx card holders, says Ed Gilligan, vice chairman at American Express.
"When we ask small-business owners to name their biggest challenge, the answer is always finding new customers," Gilligan says.
The ads-for-points concept could rock both the credit card and social-media worlds. It's the first time a major company has linked social-media advertising with currency for customer rewards. But social-media and small-business consultants warn that it's not for everyone.
"It a boon for Facebook," says Janet Fouts, a social-media coach. "But you can't just throw your money at this and hope it works. You have to have an advertising strategy."
The move also is a win for AmEx, says small-business consultant Hamilton Wallace, because it gives folks an additional reason to use the brand. But, he says, "You have to first ask yourself: Does Facebook advertising make sense for my company?"
While Facebook ads are great for getting folks familiar with your brand, Fouts and Wallace say they're sometimes not as good at getting customers to actually buy a product.
But the power of Facebook is huge. It has more than 750 million members worldwide and is the world's largest social-media platform.
"The number of small businesses advertising on Facebook is growing exponentially every day," says David Fischer, vice president of advertising and global operations at Facebook. And Facebook ads let businesses target the right audience and leverage word-of-mouth advertising via recommendations of friends.
How to earn points — and freebie Facebook ads? Simply by buying stuff with AmEx cards. Each $6,750 spent can be redeemed for $50 worth of Facebook advertising.
"We're simply going to where the customers are," Gilligan says. "That's Facebook."
Monday, June 27, 2011
This funny viral Facebook page was created a couple of days ago in Brazil, has over 150,000 "Likes" (157,000 by the time I finished writing this... and counting...) It has lots of targeted advertising (at least with my user) and apparently already got sponsored on the side from AB-Inbevs "Brahma" beer, very popular in Brazil. (Photo at the end)
The story is that this soon to be father wants to name his child "Jaspion" after the 2 decade old action figure. His wife, not surprisingly, was not enthused. He then suggested to ask their friends on Facebook, to which she answered : "not even if ONE MILLION PEOPLE agree". There it was, she laid her own path to misery. They made the bet, and baby Jaspion is on his way to be famous...
Should be interesting to follow how the ad space in this page gets utilized over the next few days as it seems it won't be long before they hit 1,000,000 likes.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/1-Milh%C3%A3o-CURTIR-e-minha-mulher-aceita-o-nome-do-bebe-de-JASPION/221903794498237
Ps.:The beer advertising is not user-targeted, but directly a link to the official beer website and photo.
Ps2.: It is not clear if this is a Hoax marketing campaign, but regardless of that, it has great value and marketing potential.
Cheers!
The story is that this soon to be father wants to name his child "Jaspion" after the 2 decade old action figure. His wife, not surprisingly, was not enthused. He then suggested to ask their friends on Facebook, to which she answered : "not even if ONE MILLION PEOPLE agree". There it was, she laid her own path to misery. They made the bet, and baby Jaspion is on his way to be famous...
Should be interesting to follow how the ad space in this page gets utilized over the next few days as it seems it won't be long before they hit 1,000,000 likes.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/1-Milh%C3%A3o-CURTIR-e-minha-mulher-aceita-o-nome-do-bebe-de-JASPION/221903794498237
Ps.:The beer advertising is not user-targeted, but directly a link to the official beer website and photo.
Ps2.: It is not clear if this is a Hoax marketing campaign, but regardless of that, it has great value and marketing potential.
Cheers!
Kiva - Crowdsourcing
Crowdsourcing is taking on interesting new forms - last week's guest speaker talked about Kiva, a non-profit website which allows you to make a small loan of $25 to be used by entrepreneurs around the world. I found this website to be fascinating. It is truly harnessing the power of digital media to mobilize mass volumes of funds through multiple donors. Moreover, with a philanthropic appeal and a low $ hurdle, it has facilitated loans of ~$220 million in 5 years with repayment rates of 99%, higher than most micro-finance institutions.
I strongly believe this model could be replicated to raise funds for real investment projects in which several investors want to participate. The appeal would be a small enough investment that not raise eyebrows, coupled with superlative returns. But the greatest challenge would undoubtedly be execution. I am certain there will be numerous opportunities in this website format. Wait and watch, or better, participate.
I strongly believe this model could be replicated to raise funds for real investment projects in which several investors want to participate. The appeal would be a small enough investment that not raise eyebrows, coupled with superlative returns. But the greatest challenge would undoubtedly be execution. I am certain there will be numerous opportunities in this website format. Wait and watch, or better, participate.
eReaders vs. tablets marketing
Some new report published today by Pew Internet & American Life Project seems to point that adoption rate for eReaders has just surpassed adoption of tablets, and is probably going to increase more and more as the price for eReaders goes down and the products start offering also basic internet service.
Some numbers? One adult out of 8.3 in the US owns an eReader (doubled compared to 6 months before), while tablets are owned by one adult out of 12.5 (only 3percentage points increase in past 6 months).
Targets are similar: adults, Hispanic adults, college graduates and householders with + $75k income, men more likely than women.
What are the implications? It will be essential for marketers to design and segment their campaigns specifically for eReaders, differentiating them from tablets' ones. eReaders are less complicated to use and internet access is cheaper; moreover, their are more focused on books and therefore offer easier targeting. Specific campaigns will therefore become a must for companies.
Content anti-farming
"Rick Fox's mustache googled the Red Sox pornography murders while Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt fought tears and ate tattoos over aborted babies in Barçelona with Neymar and Mickey Mantle. Meanwhile, Lady Gaga and Elvis were found with Princess Diana growing marijuana to a diet of Doritos."
This is what a post on a content farm looks like. Meaningless sentences of highly searched keywords strung together to lure searchers onto a webpage which would then try to bring in some ad revenue.
In class we learned about Search Engine Optimization and how incorporating highly searched keywords and other tweaks, we can significantly improve our Google search rankings. This of course led to a whole business of content farming on the internet. Last week, Google released Panda 2.2, the internet monitor for content farms which serves as a filter in the ranking algorithm to weed out the nonsense from the internet. Incorporation of this change though has had both good effects and bad, with rankings of many legit websites been claimed to have decreased after this update. This NYT article on Google's efforts to clean up the content farm mess provides good insight. Facebook's Ban Bot has caused some similar problems in the recent past and is now being compared to the Panda 2.2 update. More details here
YouTube is one of the most successful brands on the Internet. But did you know it's still bleeding money?
When Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion in 2006, everyone was well-aware that the company was unprofitable. In fact, some had speculated that the reason YouTube originally sold out was because they couldn't raise the massive amounts of capital required to power the servers and pay for its bandwidth bill. But many people simply assumed, given the product's continued success and the gradual acceptance of video advertising that it would eventually become profitable.
Not so. Though more recent numbers are scarce, a few years ago Credit Suisse issued a YouTube profitability analysis that was summarized and appended by Benjamin Wayne, the CEO of Fliqz. Among the more jarring notes:
and
It will be interesting to watch this shake out...
When Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion in 2006, everyone was well-aware that the company was unprofitable. In fact, some had speculated that the reason YouTube originally sold out was because they couldn't raise the massive amounts of capital required to power the servers and pay for its bandwidth bill. But many people simply assumed, given the product's continued success and the gradual acceptance of video advertising that it would eventually become profitable.
Not so. Though more recent numbers are scarce, a few years ago Credit Suisse issued a YouTube profitability analysis that was summarized and appended by Benjamin Wayne, the CEO of Fliqz. Among the more jarring notes:
YouTube will manage to rake in about $240 million in ad revenue in 2009, against operating costs of roughly $711 million, leading to a shortfall of just over $470 million.
and
Assuming YouTube delivers the 75 billion streams that Credit Suisse projects for 2009, and assuming YouTube manages to slot an ad for every stream (which is practically speaking, impossible, given the nature of much of their content), YouTube would have to achieve a $9.48 CPM for every video impression shown. Presumably, the videos YouTube is already monetizing represent the best content available, with diminishing returns as they reach deeper and deeper into a repository rife with copyright violation, the indecent, the uninteresting, and the unwatchable. Hulu claims to be charging a $30 CPM, of which roughly 70% goes to the copyright holder. Averages for other proprietary content hover around the $10 CPM mark.
It will be interesting to watch this shake out...
Social Media – Enhancing or Distracting in Live Performances
A new play in St. Louis, currently untitled, will be produced in December 2012 that integrates social media into the live performance on stage. The author of the play, Romeo, commented, “To me, one of the most interesting things about the rise of social media...is the way it has turned the communication of information from a one-way into a multi-way conversation. It struck me as interesting that most theater is still a one-way conversation, and I started thinking about ways to get the audience actively involved in commenting on or even shaping the direction of a piece of theater in real time, as it was going on."
I’m sure this will not be the only play or performance piece produced with this intention, especially by Dec. 2012, but it is an interesting step that the arts are taking in order to break some of the natural divide between audience and performer.
So, I initially thought this sounded great, progressive, and sort of thought – finally, the arts are trying to get up to speed with technology, but after talking this over with the 60-year-old development director at my old internship, she brought up some good points. Why does social media have to make its way into live performance? What is wrong with turning off our devices and “social media brain” and escaping into the world of theatre or dance or music? She was very adamant that ‘that is the point of many performances– to bring us into a different world, for us to find quiet space, to reflect on the scene, movement, or expression. Art takes time.’ I found her point very interesting and I started to swing the other way, getting defensive about allowing this in the theatre until I ran into the Dean of Fine Arts at Boston University. He loves bringing in his ipad to the symphony. He’s a trained musician and gets so much joy out of reading the score of music while hearing the symphony play. Now here’s a point where technology is enhancing an audience member’s experience.
Recently, Julie Taymor, original writer of “Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark,” gave the artist perspective on social media and the arts, claiming that it’s very hard to create work when you are under a microscope and “it’s very scary if people are going to move towards having audiences tell you how to make a show.”
So what do we do? Do we allow devices into the theatre and provide wi-fi to all and for those who wish not to be connected, they can still choose not to? Do we section off theatres so that the first third is for the quiet and contemplative, the second third for devices, and the last third for the people who want to duck in and out or have a drink or chat with someone instead of paying full attention? I’m really curious how all this could either bring the performing arts a new audience or how it could deter theatre lovers from attending? Also, are the arts really ahead or catching up – Dec. 2012, c’mon! Are the arts trying to make something fit into their art form that really doesn’t belong or could this just be a new art in itself?
I’d be very curious to hear anyone else’s opinion on this, especially those not from an arts background.
Social Networks and Word of Mouth (WoM) – a perfect marriage
Some history
A network is defined as a set of nodes and links. In the late 18th century Euler invented the field of network theory. For the following century and a half it remained in the realm of the abstract in mathematics departments. In the second half of the 20th century social scientist started studying social connectivity. Milgram’s famous six-degrees-of-separation experiment revealed how highly interconnected humans are. You can reach anyone else in the world following on average six links. Nevertheless, this average hides the fact that some people are “social hubs” and can link to anyone else in as few as 3 links and others are highly disconnected and need more than 100 links to reach anyone far away from their cluster. In the 90’s scientists started looking at digital networks. First they turned into the world wide web which is a highly tractable network where websites are the nodes and their links are the network’s links (a fact that Google uses in its search algorithm). More recently scientist turned their attention to digital social networks where people are the nodes and the friend connections are the links, Facebook being the largest social network today. In parallel, scientists have also studied the evolution of epidemics and spread of contagious diseases.
The connection to WoM
All this lines of research coupled with the internet revolution give rise to the opportunity to start studying Word of Mouth marketing in social networks. Network theory plus epidemics theory applied to WoM can provide huge insights on how messages (promotions, brands, product reviews, etc) spread in a social network (in the same way a contagious disease spreads). The first thing researches need is a map of the network (Facebook has it). Second, they need a way to track messages to analyze the “contagion effect”. Finally, researchers should follow the “touched” users to understand how they act on the message (e.g. do they talk about the product?, do they visit the brand’s website?, do they buy the product?) With this information marketers could leverage WoM much more effectively. In fact, current WoM services are based on artificial buzz generation (e.g. hired agents dropping messages) and sign-in communities that participate in WoM initiatives (e.g. SheSpeaks). The problem with the former is that the buzz is artificial and does not resemble the organic spread of messages. The problem with the latter is that it more a pool of people willing to participate in marketing activities and in that sense are more like a digital focus group instead of a real incubator of worth of mouth.
The opportunity
Given that the tools exist (network theory, social interaction theory, epidemics theory, and complex systems theory) and the current services for WoM do not capitalize on the full potential, there is an opportunity to study WoM on social networks like facebook and start offering a better service. For example, if you know which users are the “social hubs” for different products/services, so companies can know where to drop the message and what message to drop where.
A network is defined as a set of nodes and links. In the late 18th century Euler invented the field of network theory. For the following century and a half it remained in the realm of the abstract in mathematics departments. In the second half of the 20th century social scientist started studying social connectivity. Milgram’s famous six-degrees-of-separation experiment revealed how highly interconnected humans are. You can reach anyone else in the world following on average six links. Nevertheless, this average hides the fact that some people are “social hubs” and can link to anyone else in as few as 3 links and others are highly disconnected and need more than 100 links to reach anyone far away from their cluster. In the 90’s scientists started looking at digital networks. First they turned into the world wide web which is a highly tractable network where websites are the nodes and their links are the network’s links (a fact that Google uses in its search algorithm). More recently scientist turned their attention to digital social networks where people are the nodes and the friend connections are the links, Facebook being the largest social network today. In parallel, scientists have also studied the evolution of epidemics and spread of contagious diseases.
The connection to WoM
All this lines of research coupled with the internet revolution give rise to the opportunity to start studying Word of Mouth marketing in social networks. Network theory plus epidemics theory applied to WoM can provide huge insights on how messages (promotions, brands, product reviews, etc) spread in a social network (in the same way a contagious disease spreads). The first thing researches need is a map of the network (Facebook has it). Second, they need a way to track messages to analyze the “contagion effect”. Finally, researchers should follow the “touched” users to understand how they act on the message (e.g. do they talk about the product?, do they visit the brand’s website?, do they buy the product?) With this information marketers could leverage WoM much more effectively. In fact, current WoM services are based on artificial buzz generation (e.g. hired agents dropping messages) and sign-in communities that participate in WoM initiatives (e.g. SheSpeaks). The problem with the former is that the buzz is artificial and does not resemble the organic spread of messages. The problem with the latter is that it more a pool of people willing to participate in marketing activities and in that sense are more like a digital focus group instead of a real incubator of worth of mouth.
The opportunity
Given that the tools exist (network theory, social interaction theory, epidemics theory, and complex systems theory) and the current services for WoM do not capitalize on the full potential, there is an opportunity to study WoM on social networks like facebook and start offering a better service. For example, if you know which users are the “social hubs” for different products/services, so companies can know where to drop the message and what message to drop where.
Google for one?
Will there be a customized google for every person on the planet? The guest lecturer from Econsultancy posited that we were less than ten years away from a google who knows who you are, what you believe, what your friends think, what your friends would recommend to you, where you live, where you are, how you search, and what you are looking for. Could it be that google may grow to have a more robust understanding of the different elements and influences that comprise all people to the point that it may understand us better than the people who ought to know us best--more than your mom, your partner or your best friend?
Living life in a stream of data and social discovery allows for an increasingly interconnected world in one sense. It is a world where you know exactly where your friends and loved ones are and what exactly they are thinking at that very moment. The power of this information can produce compellingly accurate results in your searches from the mundane to the extraordinary.
Our ability to stay connected to our online community has increased and will continue to do so. I worry that our ability to connect in person will not keep pace.
Impolite Ads on Big-Name Sites
I dig sports and I dig politics, so I spend a lot of time on ESPN.com and the HuffingtonPost. And, as an ex-ad sales rep, I like to think that I've got a higher tolerance for commercials than the average user. Combine those two and you'd think I'd be pretty amenable to ads on both of these sites.
But I'm not...they've done screwed up and annoyed me because of impolite ad serving. Have you ever logged on to ESPN.com, only to have an ad start blaring at full volume? Or try to read an article on budget negotiations on HuffPo, but have to wait for a full screen takeover? Yeah, it's aggravating. And, to draw on a concept we discussed in class last Monday, such placement isn't "polite." I've gotten to the point where I mute the volume and consciously block out the areas where ads typically appear on this site. I often even open up another tab and wait a minute before checking ESPN or HuffPo just to be sure that I avoid any ads.
I can't imagine I'm the only one who's been turned off to ad placement on these sites and I wonder if these and other publishers lose out on engagement and click-throughs because of such practices. These may be big name sites, but that doesn't mean they can't use a refresher on some basics.
But I'm not...they've done screwed up and annoyed me because of impolite ad serving. Have you ever logged on to ESPN.com, only to have an ad start blaring at full volume? Or try to read an article on budget negotiations on HuffPo, but have to wait for a full screen takeover? Yeah, it's aggravating. And, to draw on a concept we discussed in class last Monday, such placement isn't "polite." I've gotten to the point where I mute the volume and consciously block out the areas where ads typically appear on this site. I often even open up another tab and wait a minute before checking ESPN or HuffPo just to be sure that I avoid any ads.
I can't imagine I'm the only one who's been turned off to ad placement on these sites and I wonder if these and other publishers lose out on engagement and click-throughs because of such practices. These may be big name sites, but that doesn't mean they can't use a refresher on some basics.
Consumer Rules... not efficiency... not information...
In this digital era where with the widespread of the internet and the connectivity among databases many platforms emerge in order to provide solutions for current consumer needs... and who is better to forecast or estimate this needs that the King of the information Itself... Google... Google developed and acquired successfully many business to complement its existing business model and to provide better service/ tools for its loyal consumers... Such is the case of broad services such as G Chat, Gmail, Gnews, Gimages, Google finance among many others and the specific ones... google analytics, adplanners, search optimization tools etc... But this time the news hit around for missing the consumer need and developing a Platform that consumers don't really need it or information that consumers don't want to search. Google Health was launched 3 years ago allowing users to track their health related information, prescription, history allowing them to plan ahead saving costs and adding efficiency... Google just announced this week that they are shutting down the service by January 2013 due to consumer lack of adoption to the service... So, even the biggest owner of consumer information still missed in developing a product? Coming from a marketing background it is very important to identify that yes, consumer research and data are key to successful product development, but also its to spend a day in the life of the consumer... With all the insecurity lately around the web who wants to have a file with all your history of diseases and prescriptions? What if those get stolen and everybody can know about them? Just remember how confidential information got spread out in the web with wikileaks... imagine your personal disease/ problems been spread out in the web and anybody can just google you and know your medical history? Is there a real need for this product? Or is it maybe a security concern and maybe the web is not so secure yet? It will be interesting to see now with the big success of Clouds if people upload their medical information to an external database...
The web is till evolving and more information is becoming available for all... but been in a consumers show for a day should save us a lot of research in product development.
Don't Call Us- We'll Tweet You
A recent blog posting on Adage.com calls out the fact that only 3 Fortune 50 companies have a phone number listed on their homepage. This despite the fact that 82% of Americans report they've stopped doing business with companies with poor customer service. Yet 44% of Fortune 50 companies have social media links on their homepage. With the constant influx of new technology and the buzz around social media, marketers tend to forget that often what customers most want to be able to do is just pick up the phone and talk to an actual person. While it's great that all of these companies are embracing social media, this should only be a complement to, and not a replacement for traditional customer service, in which you actually hear a person's voice. Thoughts? Do you think that contacts through social media will one day replace the phone?
Save H&H Bagels
H&H Bagels, the Manhattan store made famous by the Seinfeld tv show, is closing. The bulletin board near the laundry room of my building has a flier soliciting support, and a number to call to join a petition, but no social media info or internet links for sign ups. I began to wonder if this campaign would be improved with the benefit of technology.
A quick search brings up news stories detailing the saga of the store's owner, and various reviews from the past. It turns out the owner has had some legal problems, and that the store doesn't provide much customer service, being more of a bakery than a cafe/restaurant.
Perhaps if my search had uncovered a Facebook page or Twitter feed from H&H in the first few results, there would have been a chance to put some spin on the owner's reputation, as well as created a mechanism for me to be enlisted as a supporter. Had I followed a Twitter feed or liked a Facebook fan page, they could have contacted me directly, or quoted me speaking about the bagels to my followers.
If a marketing strategy is defined by four p's, place, people, promotion and product (or something like that), H&H would still have a challenge even if its promotion were more together online.
H&H Bagels is across the street from Zabar's, who make better bagels at a lower price, as well as supplying better customer service. A large population could be reached online that doesn't know about Zabar's, however, around the country.
H&H's internet strategy should be facilitated by its physical locations, and the reverse is true too. If they had a big mail order business, it wouldn't matter what corner they were on.
A quick search brings up news stories detailing the saga of the store's owner, and various reviews from the past. It turns out the owner has had some legal problems, and that the store doesn't provide much customer service, being more of a bakery than a cafe/restaurant.
Perhaps if my search had uncovered a Facebook page or Twitter feed from H&H in the first few results, there would have been a chance to put some spin on the owner's reputation, as well as created a mechanism for me to be enlisted as a supporter. Had I followed a Twitter feed or liked a Facebook fan page, they could have contacted me directly, or quoted me speaking about the bagels to my followers.
If a marketing strategy is defined by four p's, place, people, promotion and product (or something like that), H&H would still have a challenge even if its promotion were more together online.
H&H Bagels is across the street from Zabar's, who make better bagels at a lower price, as well as supplying better customer service. A large population could be reached online that doesn't know about Zabar's, however, around the country.
H&H's internet strategy should be facilitated by its physical locations, and the reverse is true too. If they had a big mail order business, it wouldn't matter what corner they were on.
Is content really king?
Very few content websites have managed to be profitable. Even Facebook (the reigning king) does not boast big profitability. Linkedin, Youtube, Twitter and others are still in the red. Most of the web-based businesses that have managed to become real-life giants in the business world (like Amazon, eBay, google, etc) have managed to offer the consumers with a solution for something other than just content. Amazon and eBay obviously changed the way commerce is done. One might think, what about Google, google captures a massive long tail of advertizers from one end and a humungeous number of consumers on the other end because it offers the one thing everyone HAS to use when surfing the seas of the web, search. Content only websites like Digg and blogs or even twitter have yet to find a sustainable formula to generate revenue from the huge traffic they are enjoying. This does not seem to be happening soon though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)