Alert Blog Reviews » street

Can Snail Mail Be Part of Social Media?

admin — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:49:38 +0000

The online space is certainly trying hard to cut the apron strings associated with traditional media techniques and practices. It can be hard though, to completely separate from something that may still have value. Think about how nice it was (or still is) to go back “home” and get that meal that you just can’t make on your own. While you never want to be back there 24 / 7 again there are certain things that are part of our past that will always have great value and we get to take the best of those things with us. The same concept may apply to the Internet marketing world as well. As much as we try to break away and create our own identity separate from the traditional world of content generation, advertising, PR and every other piece of the overall marketing mosaic, there may be some things that will always have a place. One of them might even be snail mail. An article in the Wall Street Journal talks about how there may be certain aspects of snail mail that carry importance even in the rush to digitize everything in our business lives. While not right for every business, part of the relationship building that we talk of as the most important aspect of the social web can be cemented with a good old fashioned handwritten note. For instance: Looking to cut costs amid the recession, Alicia Settle initially thought it would be a good idea to eliminate her company’s annual direct mailing. Spending about $20,000 on the personally signed letters, which offered customers a discount on early orders, seemed indulgent for Per Annum Inc., which sells city diaries, albums, and planners in the struggling corporate gift market. But after swapping snail mail for email last year, Ms. Settle saw a 25% drop in early orders compared with the same period the previous year. “We realized we had made a huge mistake,” says Ms. Settle, president of the New York firm. This is one of the dangers of taking established businesses and preaching that since online is the wave of the future that you need to go there. Damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead into the future! Sure businesses do need to evolve but to what extent is completely dependent on what kind of business it is, what their existing customers are used to and how new customers can be attracted to the offerings. As a result, you don’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater so there may be room to get rid of some traditional marketing that is certainly unproductive in the new world order while keeping others. These “old school” activities like handwritten thank you notes and other techniques now are part of the whole social marketing fabric that can serve to benefit the new and the old customers. They are actually part of social media. The idea is to send something that’s more appealing than “junk” mail and potentially more noticeable than an email message, says Eric Anderson, a professor of marketing at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management. That allows business owners “to offer a personal touch the larger firms may not be able to have,” he says. Prof. Anderson says other business owners are trying to figure out how to integrate Web marketing—such as email campaigns, banner ads and social-networking sites—with direct mail. “The introduction of new media has forced [business owners] to go back and revisit the whole playbook on what’s the best way to communicate with customers,” Mr. Anderson says. Ms. Settle, for instance, plans to use e-marketing to complement the hand-signed direct-mail piece, not replace it. So how do you incorporate the best of the old and the new in your business? Have you made a “pendulum swing” adjustment and taken away too much of what was once effective? Did you then find that part of the old way of doing things could still serve you well? Where is the happy medium and what might it look like moving forward?

Go here to see the original:
Can Snail Mail Be Part of Social Media?

Survey: Online Shopping Satisfies; Bigger is Better

cgseo — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:57:40 +0000

ForeSee Results has issued the results of its annual E-Retailer Satisfaction Index—a survey of 10,000 shoppers at the top 40 retailers—and the results are good—if you’re a big e-tailer. If not, well—let’s just say you’re pulling down the average. As the Wall Street Journal reports , the 40 largest online retailers averaged a satisfaction score of 79 on a scale of 100, up five points from the 2007 and 2008 steady results. But for their sample of over 100 large and small e-tailers, overall satisfaction was down to 73, off from 75 in 2008 and 77 in 2007. MediaPost adds an important finding, too: ForeSee’s research also finds that shoppers who are highly satisfied are 65% more likely to purchase online, 44% more likely to purchase offline, 70% more likely to recommend, and 49% more likely to return than a dissatisfied shopper. While satisfaction drives purchases, a leading indicator of satisfaction wasn’t competitive pricing or free shipping—but the website’s ease of use. ForeSee CEO Larry Freed noted that most of the top 40 also work hard to integrate their online experience with that of their offline brick-and-mortar. Only six of the top 40 are not associated with an offline retailer—with Amazon, the long-time satisfaction leader, one of those notable exceptions. (Amazon leads the satisfaction survey with its score of 87.) Web-only stores, Freed says, succeed when they make sure to include information such a product reviews and continually invest in their user experience, including the look and feel of the site. Naturally, the satisfaction index shows a strong positive correlation with sales. According to comScore reports, the top 25 retailers saw a 13% increase in holiday spending YOY, while small and medium companies saw a 10% decline. The overall holiday spending was up 4% over last year. What do you think? Were you more satisfied with online shopping this year? Do you use smaller retailers or do you tend to stay in the top 40? Photo credit: Joel Telling

Originally posted here:
Survey: Online Shopping Satisfies; Bigger is Better

Google Analytics Adds Annotation Feature

admin — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:51:27 +0000

Google Analytics is one of the most robust offerings by the search giant and it manages to fly under the radar a little bit. It has almost become ubiquitous for a large number of companies that are not prospects for other analytics packages like Omniture, Coremetrics, Webtrends etc. Many will even run it concurrently with these other players that have one distinct and major difference compared to Google’s offering: they cost money. Now, many people rail against the amount of data that Google has at its disposal as a result of their analytics offering ( formerly Urchin ). That’s fine and is great fodder for the Google conspiracy theory set, which is a pretty active community. On the street level though it is hard (read: impossible) to find a more robust offering that is free (another bone of contention for Google haters so go ahead and let’er rip). Well, Google is not resting on its laurels as it has announced a new feature that allows for users of the program to include annotations on reports. Search Engine Land tells us Following October’s release of Google Analytics new features, Google has just released another set of very cool new features. Among them is “Annotations,” a tremendously useful new feature both to analysts as well as executives, who are usually not up to date on granular details about website activity. The annotations feature basically allows users to make comments on graphs regarding events that happened on specific days. Here is an example of what can be done with the annotation feature: The idea here is that there can be real collaboration between those who put together campaigns and those who see the analytics without that important data. There is nothing more dangerous than an upper level executive that sees a spike or a dip on a graph but has no idea that there may have been very good business reasons for why that type of traffic or conversion or whatever pattern exists. A simple note that outlines a “cause and effect” for the data consumer can save a lot of time and trouble. Daniel Waisberg of Search Engine Land points out some great scenarios where this could be useful The PPC team can announce major changes to their campaigns. The SEO team can annotate changes to the website so that results can be tracked over time. The PR team can update dates of events, enabling the tracking of offline activities into Google Analytics more easily. The media buying team can provide updates of major banner campaigns. As per usual Google does a pretty good job on its blog showing how this feature is implemented as well a other additions to the analytics tool. Here’s to a 2010 full of real communication and good cheer!

Read the original post:
Google Analytics Adds Annotation Feature

Madison Avenue See Slight Uptick in Ad Spend for 2010

admin — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:14:39 +0000

While it is important to try to see what lies ahead in the advertising industry it is also important to watch exactly who is reading the tea leaves. On Tuesday some of the heavy hitter from the agency world predicted slight increases in spending on advertising in 2010 and did not see returns to 2007 levels until as late as 2012 (an election year, hmmmmm). The New York Times reports on the meeting that these predictions were unveiled. The predictions were made during a panel event at the second day of the 37th Global Media and Communications Conference, sponsored by UBS. The conference, in Midtown Manhattan, typically assembles executives from media agencies to offer forecasts for ad spending in the year — and years — ahead. In ascending order, the forecasts for 2010 compared with 2009 call for an increase of 0.8 percent, from the GroupM unit of WPP; 0.9 percent, from the ZenithOptimedia division of the Publicis Groupe; and 5.9 percent, from the Magna unit of Mediabrands, a division of the Interpublic Group of Companies. (A forecast from UBS, offered during the panel discussion, was for an increase of 3.9 percent.) Not exactly robust growth but at least there may be a halt put on the skid that advertising spending in traditional mediums has seen. Wait, did I just say traditional? Yes, I did and what was said by these ‘experts’ as it relates to the other side of advertising, you know that Internet marketing and social media piece we talk about from time to time? Adam Smith said GroupM was encountering difficulty in measuring the ad spending in new outlets like Facebook, which could eventually affect the accuracy of the forecasts. “We may adjust for it next year,” Mr. Smith said, to acknowledge the increasing role such media are playing. May adjust for it? Could affect the accuracy of the forecasts? So in other words, this kind of ‘advertising’ is almost viewed as a nuisance or afterthought to these traditional agencies, I suppose. They don’t even appear to fully recognize the online space. Nothing was said specifically about search marketing or any other online advertising either. Do you find it curious that the advertising ‘industry’ seems to still be disconnected from where advertising is moving? What are your thoughts about traditional agencies from Madison Avenue to Main Street that still clump online under the interactive tab on their site and say they perform these functions but then don’t even consider them in the grand scheme of advertising?

Follow this link:
Madison Avenue See Slight Uptick in Ad Spend for 2010

Small Business Marketing Efforts Point to E-Mail and Social Media in 2010

admin — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:12:23 +0000

Often we forget the little guy, the SMB, in our discussions of the comings and goings of the Internet marketing industry. Sure there are times like this when a report surfaces talking about their issues and concerns but, for the most part, we like to talk about big brands and how they do the Internet marketing thing well or not so well. Of course, when you consider that 95% of the businesses in the US are considered an SMB of some shape or size it should make one think a little more about the impact this market segment has in the overall scheme of things. Unfortunately, ‘too big to fail’ bailouts don’t await the little guy. Instead the SMB needs to make due with what they have and be as smart about how they spend their marketing dollars as possible. The Center for Media Research has released a study by Vertical Response that shows just where many of these ‘Main Street’ players are going with their online dollars. The big winners: e-mail and social media. With only 3.8% of small business folks NOT planning on using e-mail marketing and with social media carrying the perception of being free (which they so rudely discover it is far from free) this should make some in the banner and search crowd a little wary. I suppose the question is just what does increased use of social media mean? Will there be money put toward it or will it just be that the effort by the SMB social media practitioner (usually also referred to as the business owner) is increased. We’ll see. This quote from helps to frame something that most know already but have had a hard time changing. Janine Popick, VerticalResponse CEO and founder, says “… small businesses continue to allocate portions of their budget to… email and social media, despite the downturn in the economic climate… (but) marketers (still) need to help small businesses to see the value of integrating search engine marketing… into their campaigns.” Honestly, I am a little confused by some of the findings here because in the next breath we see the following: According to the study, the most important tool for small businesses to succeed in 2010 is search engine marketing, while email marketing, public relations and social media cited as crucial for success. 23.8% of all small businesses reported that search engine marketing was the tool most needed for their business to succeed in 2010. So which is it? Do they or don’t they use or want to use search marketing? Or is the better question can they or can’t they? Maybe the way that these findings seem a bit muddy is just a reflection of the struggles that many businesses have with the shift from traditional marketing to the online space. In 2010 it looks like the rubber is really hitting the road as the Internet marketing industry matures while many may end up just being left behind. Your thoughts?

More here:
Small Business Marketing Efforts Point to E-Mail and Social Media in 2010

Bing Revamps Maps—Now with Twitter!

admin — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:57:24 +0000

Isn’t everything better with Twitter? All right, let’s admit it: we had to see at least part of this coming. Microsoft Live search had maps with bird’s eye view and even the equivalent of Street View in some places, and we all had to know that eventually that product would get rolled over to the Bing brand, too. Well, now that’s happening: but Bing wants to take it to the next level. And, of course, the best, most obvious way to take maps to the next level is to add Twitter. Everything is cooler with teh social, right? Now in beta , Bing Maps uses the same Silverlight technology that Microsoft Live Maps did, including directions, street-level views and even museum tours—but now with Twitter’s geolocation API, they have a “mash in” to add Tweets (so not only can you see the mummies, you can also read 19 Tweets saying how boring they are). Other “maps apps” include traffic, what’s nearby, hyperlocal content, 3D images from Photosynth, webcams, roadside attractions, restaurants, public artwork and . . . graffiti (really?). The street level views (called Streetside) are obviously not as complete as Google Maps’. Bing (No coverage outside the continental US; the blue dude is just the cursor): Google (just in the US; they’re in more than a dozen other countries, too): What do you think? Will Twitter and museum tours be enough to get a leg up on MapQuest and Google Maps?

Go here to read the rest:
Bing Revamps Maps—Now with Twitter!

Why a Deal With News Corp Would Make Bing the Trader Joe’s of Search

cgseo — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:14:57 +0000

A confession. Sometimes I use Bing.com. Stop looking at me that way. I said I “use” Bing.com. I didn’t say I enjoy it! In fact, I “use” Bing.com when I’m shopping online and want to get the best price. Bing has a pretty cool shopping engine and I can get up to 10% cashback with its cashback program . See? I use Bing.com. The problem is, that use does not result in me using the search engine for any other task. And that is the issue I see with rumors that Bing is willing to pay News Corp and other news organizations to provide their content exclusively to the Microsoft search engine. The FT reports : Microsoft has had discussions with News Corp over a plan that would involve the media company being paid to “de-index” its news websites from Google, setting the scene for a search engine battle that could offer a ray of light to the newspaper industry. OK, so let’s say this deal comes together–which I really doubt–but let’s say it does. What will happen? I, and many others, will know that in order to read an article on the Wall Street Journal, we have to go to Bing.com and not Google. We conduct our search, read the article, then decide to keep Bing as our default search engine …go right back to using Google! While Bing does need to get some exclusives like this, I just don’t see them being enough to fully switch the masses away from Google. If I know that my favorite bread is only available at Trader Joe’s, I’ll occasionally buy my bread there. The rest of the grocery shopping will be done at Harris Teeter…technically by my wife, but you get the idea. What do you think? Will deals like this convince you to switch to Bing? Forget you–you’re smart–will it convince the average search user to switch? Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Continue reading here:
Why a Deal With News Corp Would Make Bing the Trader Joe’s of Search

Woman Loses Benefits, In Part, Due to Facebook

cgseo — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:00:04 +0000

So I had to open my big mouth on my previous post today and say that Facebook is keeping its nose clean with regard to news as of late. I guess it still is despite this particular incident that happened to a woman living in our neighbor to the north, Canada. You remember Canada. The place where Facebook had to adhere to their privacy policies for threat of shutting them down ? Well, I wonder how that privacy deal is working out because it looks like companies working on Canadian soil may need a lesson in privacy. The CBC reports A Quebec woman on long-term sick leave is fighting to have her benefits reinstated after her employer’s insurance company cut them, she says, because of photos posted on Facebook. Nathalie Blanchard, 29, has been on leave from her job at IBM in Bromont, Que., for the last year and a half after she was diagnosed with major depression. The Eastern Townships woman was receiving monthly sick-leave benefits from Manulife, her insurance company, but the payments dried up this fall. When Blanchard called Manulife, the company said that “I’m available to work, because of Facebook,” she told CBC News this week. Now before you get your knickers in a twist, I am not defending this woman. Honestly, I don’t really care if she is trying to get over on a company or not. I have too many other things to worry about. What does make me wonder is how the insurance company accessed her Facebook account if they were not allowed by Ms. Blanchard? My guess would be that someone at IBM who is her ‘friend’ on Facebook turned over some data but I am not a private investigator and any speculation as to how this happens stops here. What doesn’t stop here is where are lines going to be drawn moving forward. Of course, if you are ignorant (or even stupid) enough to put damning evidence on Facebook then that’s nothing that anyone can control. What will be considered actual evidence as retrieved through social media? The story says She said her insurance agent described several pictures Blanchard posted on the popular social networking site, including ones showing her having a good time at a Chippendales bar show, at her birthday party and on a sun holiday — evidence that she is no longer depressed, Manulife said. Huh? What if she was just trying to get undepressed (is that even a word?) and and part of the process was to share her ‘happiness’ with others? Where will a line be drawn on this kind of stuff? In the US it’ll like land in the 9th Circuit because if it’s weird that’s where it goes. Anyway, what’s your take on this one? Should the insurance company be ale to use Facebook as evidence if they were not directly connected to her account? Is finding out information in Facebook any different though than investigators digging to find evidence any way they can? Or will these kind of stories just always be part of the social media world we live in and we just need to make sure to keep our side of the street clean? Fire off before you head out for the weekend. We’d like to hear from you.

Here is the original post:
Woman Loses Benefits, In Part, Due to Facebook

Digg CEO: Content as Advertising

cgseo — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:30:46 +0000

In a headline from yesterday, the Wall Street Journal tells us that Digg CEO Jay Adelson has one less thing to worry about: “ Profitability Is Not A Problem Anymore .” In an interview with Fox Business Network, Adelson addressed the issue of monetizing social sites—but I’m not so sure I’d say profitability isn’t a problem anymore. Adelson says that last year was the big year for pressure to monetize social sites—”to monetize fast and to get to profitability quick. This year, not as much. We’re back focused on growth.” (That’s all well and good for them—they are “monetizing well.”) And growth is good—but haven’t we learned anything yet? Having a lot of users isn’t a business model. Relying on angel investors for the next 20 years is not a business model. (Then again, I guess focusing on growth means you don’t think about the “next 20 years” just the “next 20 users.”) Advertising, however, is a business model—and one that seems to be working for Digg, despite the economic downturn. Despite his insistence that they have no need to worry about monetization anymore, Adelson does focus on Digg’s advertising efforts—and recommends their model to newspapers (typos corrected) (because I’m like that). Right now what we do is we go to these advertisers and try to convince them to create content as advertising . Instead of the standard billboard or whatever you read on the Internet, we’re going to create ads – and we do create ads – that are literally content, so if you click on it you read an interesting story or article, and you put branding next to it. And we get literally get 100 times the clickthrough rate of what a typical ad would get, so that’s good for advertisers. Now if I can take that same concept and syndicate it and put it on a newspaper site and help them monetize it the same way, I can help them solve their problems. But advertising isn’t a panacea, even for Digg—while Adelson says that “We’re making money which is the most important thing” (not growth? Hm.), he also notes, “ I feel like we’re going to get to profitability ” (but he’s not losing sleep over it). What do you think? Could the content as advertising model work for newspapers or other social sites (*cough*cough*YouTube)? How would you feel if you clicked on content only to discover it was (partially) advertising?

Read this article:
Digg CEO: Content as Advertising

Online Ads Attached to Video Working Well

cgseo — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:41:52 +0000

This is one of those subjects that I can say that my personal experience actually mirrors what the rest of the market is apparently seeing. Oftentimes that’s not the case since I can be somewhat of a contrarian in my views and habits. Apparently much of initial push back against ads attached to video, in particular pre-roll, is starting to give way to some level of acceptance. While I am still not thrilled with it, I do tolerate it much more these days especially when an advertiser actually gets that 10-15 seconds is not nearly as annoying as 30 seconds. The NY Times reports that news sites are finding more and more success with their online video offerings as ways to increase ad revenue. The impact is even being felt beyond the delivery of news. Beyond news sites, video is now the fastest-growing segment of the Internet advertising market. Digital video amounted to $477 million in revenue in the first half of 2009, up 38 percent from the same time period in 2008, according to the Interactive Advertising Bureau. I have wondered over time as to just how much video ‘regular’ people ingest and if there is room for growth. I am certainly not a ‘power consumer’ of video but I am finding myself watching more online offerings. I still avoid the ‘stupid human tricks’ side of the online video experience. In fact, any ads attached to that kind of offering will fall flat with someone like myself but I am just one point of view. What’s interesting is that the online news experience is starting to look more and more like one medium it is supposedly challenging: television. News Web sites are starting to look a lot less like newspapers and a lot more like television. CNN.com and ESPN.com are featuring video much more prominently on their home pages, often prompting visitors to press play before they begin to read. Even The Wall Street Journal has moved its video player front and center with a twice-a-day live newscast on WSJ.com. The shift is likely a natural progression since there seems to be more news than ever. Of course, we have the same number of events that are newsworthy it’s just that the ability to now see more is exponentially increased. “Every watershed event leaves video more popular than before,” said Charles W. Tillinghast, the president of MSNBC.com, a joint venture between NBC Universal and Microsoft. So as the consumer becomes more accepting and the advertisers actually pay attention to what consumers will tolerate the combination of the two is starting to become a real player in the online advertising space. One drawback will be the cost to produce this content will keep competition down but the big guys actually like that idea. “It actually works really well,” said Brian Quinn, the vice president and general manager of digital ad sales for The Journal’s digital network. A 15-second pre-roll “followed by two to five minutes of high-quality content is a fair-value exchange,” Mr. Quinn said. Analysts say they expect the flow of online advertising dollars to video to continue. The research firm eMarketer projects 35 to 45 percent growth for the segment for each of the next five years, topping out at $5.2 billion in 2014. (Even then, it would hardly rival search advertising, which is projected to be a $16 billion business.) So as this option for marketers grows there will be the usual growing pains. Among those is people starting to confuse an event with actual news and then rushing to produce more noise and junk so an ad can be slapped on it. At that point, it will be up to the consumer to “Just say no!” so the healthy balance between news and commerce can be reached as quickly and painlessly as possible. How do you feel about ads attached to any video you would like to watch? Is it more acceptable depending upon the venue? Do you make exceptions abot your reactions to ads depending on what you are trying to find?