Archive for the ‘Internet Marketing – eCommerce –’ Category

Family Jewels: Blue Nile invests and expands during downturn

February 25, 2010

Blue Nile — self-proclaimed “man’s best friend” — has taken it up a notch …

* * * * *

Business Week: How Four Rookie CEOs Handled the Great Recession – DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER, February 18, 2010

Diane M. Irvine had no time to celebrate getting the chief executive job at online jewelry retailer Blue Nile. Hours after her appointment in February 2008 she had to tell investors that sales from the previous holiday season had been worse than expected—and the credit crunch would probably mean a dreadful next year.

Blue Nile was selling luxury goods in what was probably the worst economy in 75 years,  Adding to the challenge of waning consumer demand were diamond prices, which remained at boom-year levels.

Irvine had to come up with a plan, and fast.

She surprised many by using the recession as an excuse to go on the offensive and gain market share. 

Blue Nile had an edge on brick-and-mortar jewelry brands like Tiffany’s and Zales in a downturn because it required little overhead and virtually no inventory.

Competitors would struggle and close stores; Blue Nile would invest and expand.  

Irvine doubled down on technology that would help bring in new customers. Blue Nile’s site underwent a year-long revamp, adding new tools to help buyers search for diamonds by budget, shape, and quality.

The new CEO also pushed into overseas markets, tweaking the Web site to accept 23 different forms of currency.

Credit was a barrier to many potential sales. So the Seattle company joined up with Bill Me Later (the company eBay would later acquire) to offer customers no-interest financing for six months on large purchases.

Irvine’s offensive is beginning to pay off. Fourth-quarter revenues increased, by 20%.

Meanwhile, three of the top traditional jewelry retailers have filed for bankruptcy, and competitor Zale appears poised for a major restructuring.

Full article:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_09/b4168032766715.htm?campaign_id=magazine_related

Intel finds sometimes a click is more than just a click

February 24, 2010

Takeaway: Online marketers have long struggled to decipher meaning behind browsers’ online behaviors. Intel has now abandoned traditional web metrics, such as total number of impressions or cost per click, and has adopted a point system whereby activities that are aligned with deep engagement are valued higher than more passive activities.

Intel’s point system has allowed the company to gear its site toward the needs of highly involved users and more precisely measure its returns on its online investments.

With this in mind, marketers should assess if a metric makeover would help them to better focus their efforts and increase online profitability

* * * * *
Excerpt from AdvertisingAge, “Inside Intel’s Effectiveness System for Web Marketing” by Beth Snyder Bulik, January 25, 2010.

A click is just click, and most sophisticated online marketers have realized that click counts are really poor indications of whether their online marketing programs are working.

But if you can start to understand the value behind certain online behaviors, you move much closer to making sense of the efficacy of your spending. That’s why Intel has launched an internally developed program it calls the Value Point System to measure marketing effectiveness online.

The system assigns a pre-determined number of points for every action consumers do online with Intel. Watching a certain online video may garner 40 points, while a site visit is worth only two points. As the online visitor moves about the site, they accumulate points, which Intel uses to evaluate its marketing.

This kind of information is especially important to Intel, because as an ingredient brand that doesn’t sell products directly to consumers, it doesn’t have databases of loyal customers, sales data or even casual shoppers’ e-mail addresses to use for marketing. “It’s really critical that we’re getting maximum impact out of our investment, and measuring what matters is a really important part of that,” said Intel’s director of marketing strategies and campaigns. 

Intel has been a marketing pioneer before, launching the first and arguably most successful ingredient-branding program with “Intel Inside” advertising and marketing partnerships, aggressively adopting in-game advertising and, at one point two years ago, dropping TV advertising altogether. While not every marketing gambit has worked — Intel is back on TV, for instance, having discovered that a mix of online and offline media is necessary to achieve different goals — that doesn’t stop it from pushing the edge.

Ad Age: Why did you decide to institute the Value Point System?

Intel: The opportunity that online represents for us is to be able to really take a look at numbers and data to help evaluate the value we’re getting. What we realized early on was that traditional methods really fell short of our expectations and weren’t as meaningful a method as we were looking for.

A good example of how I describe it is by using the analogy of sending out invitations to a party. Advertisers evaluate whether their party is successful by how many people accept the invitation and knock on their front door. But that really isn’t giving you a meaningful level of information and knowledge around whether that truly was a good party.

What you want to know is, did they knock on the door and did they come inside? What did they do once they came inside? Did they mingle? Did they talk to other people? Did they laugh? Or did they stand in the corner with their arms folded?

Understanding different levels of interaction and engagement helps you evaluate your online activity.

Ad Age: What process did you use before this?

Intel: We looked at the way I think every advertiser out there does: total number of impressions, costs per click, click-through rates. Those are all standard and they’re not bad, but they’re only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the level of information we need to truly measure effectiveness.

In the past, for example, when we would evaluate online activity in China vs. another country, it was always skewed in China’s favor just because of the sheer numbers and the huge population. But when you then start using the same Value Point System and measure the activity, you’re creating a nice even scale, so it becomes an apples-to-apples comparison, where before it wasn’t possible.

Ad Age: Has it yielded any cost savings?

Intel: When you look at a 35% or higher percentage of our media spend going into online, if we can acquire even 10% additional savings through the use of better metrics and information, that’s sizeable for us. It helps us drive down rates, it helps us optimize the value of each dollar spent, and just like any other company we’re under a lot of pressure with our marketing investment to get as much as possible out of it.

* * * * *
Full Article:
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=141711

* * * * *

Cruisin’ the Net for luxury & fashion … the marketing power of the Web

November 18, 2009

TakeAway:  This is another big victory for online retailers.  Anyone in fashion who does not take them seriously should think again.

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ, “From the Runway to Your Laptop,” By Christina Binkley, October 1, 2009

At the D&G runway show in Milan last week, the CEOs of Saks, Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman were relegated to second-row and third-row seats. In front of them, sitting primly in the first row, was the CEO of online retailer Yoox.com.

The moment—coming as the super-sexy women’s styles for next spring pranced down Milan’s runways—marked a shake-up in an ultra-hierarchical world. The privileged treatment of a digital-media figure showed that luxury fashion is ready to introduce styles to the public in new ways … 

Front rows are reserved for those most important to a brand’s success … In past years, Yoox CEO sometimes borrowed tickets to shows from other guests. But in the past year, Yoox has expanded its business of creating online stores for luxury brands such as D&G … and for Jil Sander … and this season, Yoox CEO has been invited to too many shows …

The warm welcome extends to bloggers. While the New York shows have been inviting some bloggers for a few seasons now, many of Europe’s luxury houses have been slower to allow bloggers into the shows. But two days after the D&G event … four surprised bloggers found themselves seated in coveted spots near the queen of fashion …

Luxury brands have long been leery of the pedestrian Internet, a place where consumers coldly compare prices while forgoing attentive service … But online luxury sites like Net-a-Porter.com proved that many women would do just that. Now, Yoox … is running online stores for brands including Bally, Valentino, Pucci, and Marni …

This season, Twitter and Facebook are littered with fashion brands—including Louis Vuitton and Burberry—testing how social-media sites might benefit them … A number of brands have tried streaming their shows live on the Internet …

Designers feel that the Internet offers the possibility of talking directly to customers …

Edit by TJS

* * * * *

Full Article
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574445222739373290.html#mod=todays_us_personal_journal

* * * * *

Market segmentation is so yesterday … today, it’s self-selected “tribes”

November 13, 2009

TakeAway:  The power of the Web is undeniable.  It gives companies access to consumers in ways never thought possible.  Companies enjoy the luxury of leveraging online consumer groups for product development feedback, buzz generation, etc. 

Now, companies are flipping their segmentation strategies upside down and using consumer data gathered from the Web to build their segmentation strategies.  And, these companies are realizing cost and accuracy benefits.

* * * * *

Excerpted from Strategy & Business, “The Promise of “Self Segmentation”,” By Nick Wreden, October 5, 2009

… Today, a community-based approach to segmentation — which is both less expensive and more effective than the traditional methodologies based on customer relationship management (CRM) systems — is becoming possible …

Self-segmentation provides a foundation for leveraging customer experience and input … The rise in social networks and online communities, combined with the new era of the Web-empowered consumer … consumers are increasingly segmenting themselves into communities, based on common characteristics, passions, interests, or needs. Such “self-segmentation” is likely to be much more accurate and reflective of consumers’ attributes …

Companies can now bind themselves to consumer communities of interest or “tribes,” … such self-selected communities not only reflect consumers’ true interests but also involve their connection to others with the same passions. This opens the door to fostering brand ambassadors, enabling customer collaboration, and facilitating word-of-mouth cross-fertilization …

Since relevant communities represent self-selected groups who share one or more interests, marketers can substantially reduce the costs, time, and toil required to identify, and segment, qualified prospects … and the communities provide a better guide to potential purchasing behavior …

Interactions within communities represent an ideal listening post, enabling marketers to glean direct insights without the filter of market research …

Engaged participants can provide product development guidance and identify shortcomings in service or other areas to help a company improve its brand …

Companies can utilize three approaches to leverage self-segmented communities — engaging with social networks, tracking online communication behavior, and mass customization …

Segmentation is vital as mass marketing slips into irrelevancy, with information overload causing consumers to block out many corporate communications … But CRM-based market segmentation can be expensive, complex, one-dimensional, and static. It fails to accommodate the multidimensional nature of consumers … It leads to top-down initiatives that view potential customers as targets to be blitzed with campaigns, ambushed with messages, and subjected to guerrilla marketing.

In this new era of branding, companies must focus on ethnic, cultural, religious, sports, or other segments, not markets. This pivot could be achieved through CRM systems, but self-segmented communities of interest provide a more effective alternative. Such communities can provide fast, low-cost market research, generate ideas and feedback about new offerings, help improve corporate and customer-to-customer service, strengthen relationships, provide an early warning system about problems, and promote favorable word-of-mouth. It all starts with finding communities united by a passion or an interest, and talking with them, not at them.

Edit by TJS

* * * * *

Full Article
http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00004?pg=all

* * * * *

Ignoring its product problems, GM attempts to boost sales via distribution increases

October 22, 2009

TakeAways: (1) When you give buyers a chance to bid low on your product, they will.  (2) If your  product sucks, they’ll bid low … real low.

Welcome to the era of Government Motors.

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ, “GM, eBay End Online Sales Effort” By Geoffrey Fowler, Scott Morrison, and Sharon Terlep, September 30, 2009

General Motors is ending a seven-week experiment to sell new cars in California with eBay as many dealers report the online marketplace didn’t help sell more vehicles and led shoppers to offer low-ball prices … but the program did generate customer interest … and customer leads …

The program launched … as part of an effort to make car shopping more convenient …

The experience illustrates why car retailing, which involves peculiarities such as franchised dealers with exclusive territories and the tradition of haggling in person, makes an odd fit for the Web, where consumers expect to comparison shop for the lowest price …

The promotion didn’t allow customers to bid against each other, like they do in typical eBay auctions. Rather, they could click “Buy It Now” to purchase a car at a preset price, or send an offer to a dealer … the ridiculously low offers forced staff to sift through bids that were highly unlikely to result in sales …

Maybe GM and eBay should have done more to set appropriate expectations among shoppers, many of whom had no idea where to start their price negotiations.

Edit by TJS

* * * * *

Full Article
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125423429407549391.html#mod=todays_us_marketplace

* * * * *

The “Wal-Mart of the web” … Amazon’s KSFs.

October 7, 2009

KSF= Key Success Factors

* * * * *

From BrandChannel, Nimble Amazon Thrives In Recession, September 22, 2009

Having conquered the online book market, reports the New York Times, “Amazon is set to cross a significant threshold” to become the Wal-Mart of the web.

By the end of 2009, Amazon’s worldwide sales of general merchandise will exceed the books, music and movies Amazon is known for.

“Amazon’s expansion strategy has allowed it, almost alone among retailers, to thrive during the recession, even while its own media business has stagnated*”

While Amazon’s marketing has helped transition customers into seeing it as more than a bookstore, back-end innovation is the real engine of the company’s successful expansion.

In Amazon’s huge merchandise warehouses, “every product, shelving unit, forklift, roller cart and employee badge … has a bar code.” The company has an “almost magical business model in terms of inventory management”

Amazon builds engagement with purchase recommendations, wish lists, customer reviews and free shipping.

According to Interbrand — a brand consultancy , the company’s success shows “why you are best off not owning a retail footprint in a recession“: its flexibility lifted it past struggling and fallen competitors like Borders and Circuit City.

Full article:
http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2009/09/22/Nimble-Amazon-Thrives-In-Recession.aspx

* * * * *

Get out your wallet … states move to tax internet sales

July 8, 2009

Ken’s Take: I hate taxes.  Not because I’m not willing to pay my fair share, but because so much of tax revenue is wasted or applied to  questionable political missions. 

That said, if there have to be taxes, I’m a fan of user taxes (think toll bridges) and consumption taxes (think sales taxes).

So, it never made sense to me that internet sales should be sales tax free, except for sites that have a local physical presence (think Best Buy or Barnes & Noble). Of course, I take advantage of the rules and buy stuff over the internet.   But, why should states forego this revenue and why should retailers with a local physical presence be put at a disadvantage.  It just doesn’t make sense.

I expect many states to pit internet sales in the sales tax bullseye.

* * * * *

WSJ, Amazon Cuts North Carolina Affiliates to Avoid Tax,
June 27, 2009

North Carolina is in the process of passing a law that would force companies to collect the tax if they have in-state online-marketing affiliates — people who get a sales commission from links on their Web sites. To avoid getting caught by the law,

Amazon is dropping the affiliates. Amazon.com Inc. said it has ended business relationships with marketing affiliates in North Carolina to avoid collecting sales tax in the state. 

But the decision highlights mounting tensions between online retailers and cash-strapped states across the country. Other states are considering similar laws that would use affiliates as a way to force companies to collect a sales tax for online purchases. 

Consumers are technically supposed to pay a so-called use tax for online purchases on their own, but most don’t. Many e-commerce sites rely on the price advantage they have over traditional retailers because they don’t have to collect taxes. , and forcing them to collect the tax upfront could take away some of that advantage.

Full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124603593605261787.html#mod=testMod

* * * * *

Dusting Facebook pages for “friendprints” …

June 18, 2009

Ken’s Take:  As I continue to learn about Facebook and other social networking sites, three things strike me: (1) they are great places to share pictures (2) some people don’t have enough to do (note: at least I can claim that I’m doing “research” for marketing strategy classes) (3) people post some pretty indiscriminate stuff – some of which can / will come back to haunt them. 

I’m most  intrigued by the increased use of “behavioral profiling”  and “friendprinting” .

Behavioral profiling mines posted nuggets for ‘triggers’ and ‘patterns’. 

For example, all of the free email sites sift through a person’s emails looking for key words that might signal a propensity towards a particular category of products.  A guy who constantly shares sports tidbits with friends may coincidentally (?) start seeing a lot of pop-ups for odds & scores sites.

Friendprints are analytical inferences drawn from a person’s posted friends and associations. 

For example, if friends are profiled as being grads of good colleges, then it’s a reasonable inference that the person travels with a good crowd.  So what?  Well, ‘good crowds’ may spend more on certain things and may be more credit worthy.  It’s not proof, but provides clues.

What if — for privacy — a person ‘hides’ their friends list.  Well, a logical inference is that they’re hiding something.  A red flag for credit raters, prospective employers. and friends & family. Hmmmm.

And, as more friends lists get hidden, the marketing value of social networking sites diminishes.  Double hmmmm.

Below are highlights from the article on the general topic of privacy in social networking that got me thinking.

* * * * *

From Knowledge@Wharton, “Leaving ‘Friendprints’: How Online Social Networks Are Redefining Privacy and Personal Security”, June 10, 2009

People [say] privacy [is] important to them, yet they engage in behaviors that indicate a remarkable lack of concern.

Privacy thresholds vary by individual and  those boundaries are being tested by social networking.

The information people post, when combined with new technologies for gathering and compiling data, can create a fingerprint (or “friendprints” -like pattern of behavior … that can be decoded for both legitimate and illegitimate purposes..

Third-party applications (e.g. think credit scoring systems)can take data outside of the friendly confines of a social networking site and combine it with data from other sources (e.g. inter-site linking) to piece together enough information to “define” a person.

For example, just a person’s name and birth date — routinely found on a Facebook profile — can be a useful starting point for an identity thief.

The line between professional networking on a site such as LinkedIn, and social networking on sites such as Facebook, has become very thin.  Many Facebook users might create a more casual persona for themselves on that site than they would on LinkedIn, where they would include nothing but professional information. But both sites can be seen by potential employers and clients

And what about the person you don’t really know who wants to be your friend because you have some friends in common?  That new friend may just be mining your social circle for information. As networks grow and more friends of friends (and their friends) are accepted by users, it’s unclear who can be trusted.

“Though it is not difficult to sign up under an alias, it is extraordinarily difficult to change one’s friends and family.”

Full article:
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2262

Your cellphone will keep you connected … with companies trying to sell you something.

June 2, 2009

Summary: The jargon is “mobile marketing” — marketers placing ads, coupons, reminders, and links in and around your cellphone apps.  It’s the next wave of innovative marketing and will spread quickly.  Why? Because it seems to work.

* * * * *

Excerpted from Business Week, “Pandora: Unleashing Mobile Phone Ads: Kraft, Nike, and others are getting results advertising on Pandora’s mobile music service. Is cell-phone marketing finally taking off?” By Tom Lowry, May 21, 2009

It’s just a matter of time until mobile marketing will take off in the U.S.  … for two reasons: Web-surfing smartphones are selling briskly even in a downturn, and applications for those gadgets … are proliferating.

People are spending a lot more time playing games, watching TV, and shopping on their phones. That’s what marketers call engagement, a fancy way of saying people are paying attention. Companies, of course, prize that, so they’re looking for mobile applications that are a good fit for their brands.

Which brings us to Pandora, a nine-year-old, free online service that lets users design “radio stations” based on their musical preferences. Since Pandora launched a mobile edition two years ago, it has signed up 6 million people…That has prompted the likes of Best Buy, Dockers, Target, and Nike to buy ads on Pandora and experiment with what remains a cheap advertising medium

“Marketers, especially consumer brands, have to take mobile seriously now. You have to be where your customer works, lives, and plays.”

Pandora has become a test bed because people who use the service tend to spend a lot of time playing around with it. They are constantly creating stations, rating songs, and scrolling through playlists to find artists they don’t know … on average subscribers use the mobile service about 90 minutes a day (though there are no independent numbers).

Advertisers are trying out Pandora in myriad ways. Sometimes it’s as a direct marketing tool. Domino’s, for example, puts up ads that urge people to call in for a pizza directly from their phones.

Other companies are using coupons. Docker’s offered a 20% discount if visitors went to the brand’s site and entered a promotional code .

Some companies prompt users to watch movie clips where their products are featured prominently.

If one thing has surprised advertisers, it’s how avidly consumers are responding. Target says 27% more people clicked on its ad for the release of Christina Aguilera’s greatest hits CD last fall than on any other mobile Web campaign. The ad urged users to visit a site where they could get a free Aguilera ringtone and buy the album…

Sonos, which sells home music systems, just wrapped up a campaign on Pandora. DeAnna Wassom, Sonos’ senior marketing director, says she has never seen better customer response in her 20 years in the business. The ads asked people to click through to a promotional video. Typically, only 1% to 2% of people click on ads overall. But nearly 5% clicked in this case…and almost 40% of those clicking watched the entire video. During the campaign, nearly twice as many people asked to be put on Sonos’ e-mail list as those signing up on the company’s regular site.

Most brands have no clue how to market on mobile devices. Many try to do too much, including making sites so technologically flashy that they crash phones. The key is to keep it simplebuild special mobile sites, because regular ones don’t translate well to supersmall screens.

Edit by TJS

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_22/b4133052597112.htm

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

 

AOL down to 6.3 million dial-up subscribers … (none of whom are loyal readers of the Homa Files)

May 29, 2009

Ken’s Take: AOL was sitting on a golden goose … one that still generates about $1.5 billion in annual subscription revenue.

AOL.com and related properties claim over 100 million unique visitors each month  —   that’s about 1 of every 3 US citizens.

Was a great business … still is a good business … but slipping away.

* * * * *

Excerpted from Standard.net, ” AOL reboot? “, May 24, 2009

The dial-up Internet service was AOL’s backbone. At its peak, in 2002, AOL had 26.7 million dial-up subscribers. Even as recently as 2006, dial-up was a $5.78 billion business for AOL.

But consumers have flocked to speedier offerings. Last year AOL’s Internet access revenue was down to $1.93 billion, and now AOL counts just 6.3 million dial-up subscribers.

AOL’s various online properties averaged 106 million unique U.S. visitors each month during the first quarter. That ranked AOL fourth; Google, Yahoo and Microsoft Corp. were first, second and third.

But AOL was the only member of this Web top four to see a year-over-year drop in traffic in the first three months of the year. It had averaged 110 million visitors in the first quarter of 2008.

And while AOL’s operating income totaled $150 million in the first quarter, that was a 47 percent fall from the year-ago quarter.

Full article:
http://www.standard.net/live/business/174069

* * * * *
Want more from the Homa Files?
     Click link =>
  The Homa Files Blog

Web Marketers Face Privacy Challenge in Europe

May 13, 2009

Excerpted from New York Times, “Use of Web Tracking Tool Raises Privacy Issue in Britain”, by Kevin J. O’Brien, April 15, 2009

* * * * *

The European Commission threatened Britain with sanctions for allowing an Internet service provider to use a new advertising technology to track the Web movements of customers.

The case could become a test for the limits of ads that aim at online behavior. Supporters of the practice say it has the potential to transform advertising by allowing marketers to show Internet users only ads that are considered relevant to them, based on their surfing habits.

But the technique has come under scrutiny because of concern that personal privacy could be violated as companies seek more specific data on individual users. 

Many companies involved in Internet advertising, including Google and other social networking services, use behavioral targeting. But because this new technology, “Phorm”, receives actual Web-use records from service providers, it says its technology is more accurate.

An Internet association that has led the protest against Phorm in Britain, Open Rights Group in London, said the government had ignored European law to accommodate businesses interested in developing lucrative Internet advertising models.

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/business/global/15privacy.html?_r=2&ref=business&pagewanted=print

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *

Twitter Loses Touch … Fritters Away SUbscribers

May 7, 2009

Excerpted from Ad Age, “Why Twitter’s Reach Is Limited” By Abbey Klaassen, April 28, 2009

* * * * *

Over the past few weeks we’ve seen countless stories about the “Oprah effect” on Twitter — TechCrunch suggested more than one million people signed up and many a blog linked to Hitwise data that suggested the talk-show doyenne’s endorsement of the service led to a 43% spike in Twitter traffic.

While those numbers are important, the breathless reports have not accounted for what people do after they sign up for a Twitter account. Creating a Twitter account doesn’t equal becoming an uber-user, or even a casual user, of the micro-blogging site. Nielsen Online data suggest more than 60% of people who sign up for Twitter abandon the service.

David Martin, VP-primary research at Nielsen Online, posted the data on the company’s blog, noting that Twitter’s retention rate — the percentage of a given month’s audience that comes back the following month — hovers around 40%. So that means only 40% of the people who visited Twitter last month will come back this month. However, that number is slightly higher than the 30% retention rate Twitter saw before Oprah Winfrey’s endorsement

One problem, Mr. Martin noted, is that it’s very hard to grow reach when that much of your audience fails to return month after month. He plotted the reach and retention rates of the major websites Nielsen follows and came up with an audience curve that suggests that at Twitter’s current retention rate, it will only reach about 10% of online consumers …

“Twitter has really big hype — it’s the hype that much bigger sites like MySpace or Facebook had when they were coming up … But it’s just not going to live up to that hype in the long run, audience-wise, if it can’t get retention up.”

He also looked at MySpace and Facebook’s retention in their first few years, when their reach looked more like Twitter’s current reach. Even then, the two larger social networks had steadily growing retention rates of more than 40%, which moved closer to 60% as time went on. Twitter’s retention rates, on the other hand, have fluctuated without passing 40%.

Twitter’s user interface can be confusing to people who aren’t familiar with the service, from the hard-to-follow conversation threads to the codes for direct messaging, “retweeting” and “hashtags.” … On the flip side, said Mr. Martin, to “keep people engaged there has to be interesting content. And Oprah, to a large number of Americans, is interesting content. If people continue to stay engaged and are compelled to stay on the site, there’s no reason that engagement shouldn’t go up. But it’s yet to be seen.”

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=136318

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Making Money in Magazines: Is It Time for a New Pricing Model?

May 6, 2009

Excerpted from New York Times, “In Switch, Magazines Think About Raising Prices”, by Stephanie Clifford, April 13, 2009

* * * * *

Most big magazines’ subscriptions cost on average little more than a dollar an issue. But now, as they consider the decline in advertising and the success of magazines that have increased prices recently, some publishers are wondering whether they can raise their prices without losing subscribers.

“We’re realizing that the product is undervalued,” said the chief marketing officer of Hearst Magazines, which raised cover prices on more than half of its magazines last year and plans to raise subscription prices this year.

Publishers have long set low subscription prices and have even lost money doing so, assuming that the real money came from ads. Subscription revenue was gravy.

It is a “model where magazines essentially try to gain as many subscribers as they can and allow advertising to pay the bills.”

* * * * *

“Think about the cost of a movie ticket. Think about the cost of your subscription for cable television. Think about the cost of going to a sporting event,” Mr. Clinton, the Hearst marketing chief, said. Those industries, he said, “have kept pace in passing on more of the cost to the consumer, and the consumer’s willing to pay for it.”

The Economist is leading the charge on expensive subscriptions, and its success is one reason publishers are rethinking their approaches. It is a news magazine with an extraordinarily high cover price — raised to $6.99 late last year — and subscription price, about $100 a year on average.

Even though The Economist is relatively expensive, its circulation has increased sharply in the last four years. Subscriptions are up 60 percent since 2004, and newsstand sales have risen 50 percent, according to the audit bureau.

“We get more money out of our readers than advertisers, and that’s a very different model,” said senior vice president for marketing in the Americas at the Economist Group. “We’ll never discount the kind of content we have.”

* * * * *

The Economist’s readers, it could be argued, are professionals who can afford price increases. But one of the most popular and expensive mass magazines, People, has also been raising its prices without losing readers.

The subscription price for People has risen about 5 percent, to $104 a year, in the last four years. The cover price has risen 21 percent, to an average of $4.09 . In that time, People’s subscription and newsstand sales have both increased slightly.

“Our strategy right now is to maintain a premium price on both sides of the equation,” said the president and group publisher of Time Inc.’s (People’s) style and entertainment group.

* * * * *

Interestingly, whether consumers pay $5 or $50 for a subscription does not affect their perception of the magazine, according to a study conducted four years ago by the media consultant Rebecca McPheters.

Given those findings, the price a consumer pays should not matter to advertisers, since it does not affect the reader’s attitude toward the magazine–“the fact is, the pricing comes as a result of what the consumer is willing to pay.”

Given the economy, it may not be “a propitious moment to launch this,” said Victor S. Navasky, chairman of The Columbia Journalism Review, but “to the extent that the publication is aimed at a segment of the population that can afford it, why not?”

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/business/media/13circ.html?ref=media&pagewanted=print

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *

Is the honeymoon over for FREE user-generated content?

May 4, 2009

Excerpted from Slate, “Do You Think Bandwidth Grows on Trees” by Farhad Manjoo, April 14, 2009

* * * * *

The darlings of the the Internet…websites built on user-generated content, might seem like an extension of the “Long Tail” concept (all you need are a website and users, right?), but this article points out that these ventures aren’t as profitable as you may think.  The large amount of storage and bandwidth needed for content means that companies need to find a way to cover this high storage and distribution cost if they plan to make a profit (or at least break-even).   Since services are typically free, they rely on advertising to cover these costs, but it doesn’t seem like that is enough.

* * * * *

Everyone knows that print newspapers are our generation’s horse-and-buggy; in the most wired cities, they’ve been pummeled by competition from the Web. But it might surprise you to learn that one of the largest and most-celebrated new-media ventures is burning through cash at a rate that makes newspapers look like wise investments. It’s called YouTube: According a recent report by analysts at the financial-services company Credit Suisse, Google will lose $470 million on the video-sharing site this year alone. To put it another way, the Boston Globe, which is on track to lose $85 million in 2009, is five times more profitable—or, rather, less unprofitable—than YouTube. All so you can watch this helium-voiced oddball whenever you want.

YouTube’s troubles are surprisingly similar to those faced by newspapers. Just like your local daily, the company is struggling to sell enough in advertising to cover the enormous costs of storing and distributing its content. Newspapers have to pay to publish and deliver dead trees; YouTube has to pay for a gargantuan Internet connection to send videos to your computer and the millions of others who are demanding the most recent Dramatic Chipmunk mash-up. Google doesn’t break out YouTube’s profits and losses on its earnings statements, and of course it’s possible that Credit Suisse’s estimates are off. But if the analysts are at all close, YouTube, which Google bought in 2006, is in big trouble.

There’s a simple reason for this: Advertisers don’t like paying very much to support homemade photos and videos. As a result, the economics of user-generated sites are even more crushing than those of the newspaper business. At least newspapers see a proportional relationship between circulation and revenues—when the paper publishes great stories, it attracts more readers, and, in time, more advertisers. At YouTube, the relationship can be backward: The videos that get the most clicks—and are thus most expensive for YouTube to carry—trend toward the sort of lewd or random flavor that doesn’t sit well with advertisers. 

…YouTube sells ads on fewer than 10 percent of its videos. Credit Suisse estimates that 375 million people around the world will play about 75 billion YouTube videos this year. To serve up all these streams, the company has to pay for a broadband connection capable of hurtling data at the equivalent of 30 million megabits-per-second—about 6 million times as fast as your home Internet connection. All this bandwidth costs Google $360 million a year, the analysts estimate. Then there’s the cost of the videos themselves: Even though many of the site’s most popular content is uploaded for free from users, Credit Suisse says YouTube spends about $250 million a year to acquire licenses to broadcast professionally produced videos. Add in all other expenses, and the cost of running YouTube for one year exceeds $700 million. But the company makes only a fraction of that back in advertising—about $240 million in revenues for 2009, according to the report.

YouTube isn’t alone in Poor House 2.0. Yahoo bought the popular photo-sharing site Flickr in 2005, and though the service might be marginally profitable, it certainly hasn’t added appreciably to Yahoo’s bottom line. (Yahoo similarly doesn’t break out Flickr’s financials.) Facebook provides an even better example. The social network is running up a huge tab to store and serve up all the photos, videos, and other junk you stuff into your profile. Last year, TechCrunch reported that Facebook spends $1 million a month on electricity, $500,000 a month on bandwidth, and up to $2 million per week on new servers to keep up with its users’ insatiable photo-uploading needs. (Members post nearly a billion photos every month.) But Facebook gets relatively little in return for storing all your memories. Ad rates on its network are terribly low, the company doesn’t make a profit, and it hasn’t shed any light on how it will make good on investments that valued the company at $15 billion.

For all the frenzy surrounding citizen-produced media, the content that seems to do best online is the same stuff that did well offline—content produced by professionals. My colleague Jack Shafer recently listed the many services that people are willing to pay for online. They include music from iTunes, game videos from MLB.TV, reviews from Consumer Reports, and articles from the Wall Street Journal—and nothing made on some dude’s cell phone. Or look at Hulu, the video site that shows TV shows and movies. It attracts far less traffic than YouTube does (and thus pays far less for bandwidth). But because advertisers are willing to pay much more to be featured on its videos, Hulu is on track to match YouTube’s revenues and with much lower overhead.

YouTube has been trying to catch up to Hulu in the non-user-generated video business. It has signed content-licensing deals with several Hollywood studios and recording companies in the hopes that it can attract an audience—and advertisers—for the kind of quality programming we now run to Hulu for. But as Benjamin Wayne points out, those deals won’t solve YouTube’s fundamental problem; even if it does begin to make respectable profits from, say, showing old feature films, it’ll still have to keep paying huge infrastructure costs to host the world’s home videos. It’s possible that over the next few years, Google’s engineers could find a way to reduce dramatically the costs of hosting such a service. (They’re capable of amazing things.) But that proposition is iffy. As Wayne argues, there’s a very real possibility that YouTube as we know it is doomed. The company may have to institute restrictions to keep its bandwidth in check, or it could unveil any number of pay-per-use schemes (as some other video sites have done). Then the video free-for-all that we’ve grown to love will come to an end.

That would be unfortunate. Time wasn’t wrong: YouTube and its fellow user-contributed sites really did change the world. Too bad nobody could find a way to pay for it.

Edit by NRV
Full article
:http://www.slate.com/id/2216162/pagenum/all/#p2

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => The Homa Files Blog

Nintendo Striking Back at iTunes … It’s No Game !

May 1, 2009

Excerpted from Washington Post, “Nintendo, Biting Back at iTunes”, by Mike Musgrove, April 5, 2009

* * * * *

Open up the latest portable game gadget from Nintendo, the DSi, and you’ll be able to log onto a new online store carrying a small catalogue of software titles. If you see one that grabs your interest, you can buy and download it to your device on the spot, with prices starting at $2.

This type of purchase probably doesn’t seem exotic any more, thanks largely to Apple. Apple’s App Store, which offers software for its iPhone and iPod Touch, has had 800 million downloads since it opened last summer. Now, other mobile gadgets like Nintendo’s DSi are quickly creating their own retail outlets on the Web.

* * * * *

Some see Apple’s online software store as having hit close to home for Nintendo, which has long dominated the mobile gaming market. The most popular category in Apple’s software store, after all, is entertainment-related software.

DSiWare is “basically a direct response to iTunes . . . Apple definitely came up and bit these guys on the rear end, and this is Nintendo striking back.”

In terms of downloadable content, Apple’s store offers almost 7,000 games. Nintendo’s DSi store launches today with five titles, not including a free Web browser that DSi users can download to their device.

Nintendo says the company has adopted a different strategy than the competition. Just about anybody who pays a fee and passes an inspection by Apple reviewers can sell his software on the iTunes store, but that’s not how Nintendo has approached this market. The roster of titles Nintendo approves for sale on the DSi store will be “more like the content you’ll find at a film festival”, as opposed to its competitors’ catalogues, which are “more akin to YouTube.”

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/04/AR2009040400098_pf.html 

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *

Getting Readers to Pay for Online News: A New Business Model for a Battered Industry

April 29, 2009

Ken’s Take: Didn’t AOL live (and die) by trying to charge folks for largely undifferentiated content?  Didn’t work for them, and won’t work for these guys.

* * * * *

Excerpted from New York Times, “They Pay for Cable, Music and Extra Bags. How About News?”, by Richard Perez-Pena and Tim Arango, April 8, 2009

Just a year ago, most media companies believed the formula for Internet success was to offer free content, build an audience and rake in advertising dollars. Now, with the recession battering advertising online, in print and on television, media executives are contemplating a tougher trick: making the consumer pay.

Publishers like Hearst Newspapers, The New York Times and Time Inc.are drawing up plans for possible Internet fees.

“People reading news for free on the Web, that’s got to change,” Rupert Murdoch said last week at a cable industry conference in Washington.

Only a few publishers have tried such a transition, with mixed results. The Los Angeles Times and The New York Times each tried charging for access to some content online, then dropped the requirement because it cost them audience and advertising revenue.

But from networks selling downloads of TV shows, to music companies trying to curb file-sharing, to struggling newspapers and magazines, the make-or-break question is this: How do you get consumers to pay for something they have grown used to getting free?

* * * * *

Some industries have pulled it off. Coca-Cola took tap water, filtered it and called it Dasani, and makes millions of dollars a year. People who used to ask why anyone would pay for television now subscribe to cable and TiVo. Airlines charge for luggage, meals, even pillows. And some music fans who have downloaded pirated songs are also patrons of iTunes.

All of these success stories offered the consumer something extra, even if it was just convenience.

* * * * *

“With newspapers and magazines, there have to be features you can’t get anywhere else, and maybe part of what you would pay for is the privilege of helping the business survive, but that is more of a difficult sell.”

By adding free features like e-mail alerts, blogs, discussion forums and video, news organizations are trying to persuade readers that they provide something more valuable than the aggregators and blogs that attract news readers online.

“You have to expect that at first, most of your customers won’t go along,” said a professor at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. “You have to train people — the academic word is ‘educate’ — to expect to pay, and unfortunately for media companies, they’ve trained people to expect the opposite.”

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/business/media/08pay.html?ref=media&pagewanted=print

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *

Google clicks for General Mills …

February 3, 2009

Excerpted from Brandweek, “General Mills: Google Ads Click for Nature Valley” By Elaine Wong, Dec 18, 2008

* * * * *

As marketers question the effectiveness of display ads and their ROI value, General Mills is telling a different story. The packaged goods giant revealed the results of a partnership with Google’s Content Network and YouTube, where consumers were exposed to display ads for a Nature Valley contest … The ads resulted in a 525% sales lift and delivered more than 830 million impressions for the Nature Valley brand…

It was the largest in scale for General Mills as far as online efforts go. General Mills didn’t disclose the cost of the effort … I t spent $2.8 million in Internet display advertising during the period when the contest ran…

The company used Google’s ad technology, including display, YouTube in-video, text and search ads, to reach out to consumers. As a result, the brand saw a 1,050% lift in related search behavior and a 1,000 percent increase in Web site visitation among consumers who were exposed to the ads…

“The key takeaway is, when we gave folks who care about Nature Valley an easy and fun way to talk about and share their experiences about the brand, they jumped into it with both feet”…the campaign’s success lies in its ability to tap into “the affinities and passions of consumers,” who, in this case, were avid nature enthusiasts. “Obviously, they didn’t just build a granola bar web site. Instead, they leveraged the passions and interests that most aligned with consumers likely to interact with their brand”…

General Mills said more digital campaigns are in the works following this success…

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

Full Article: 
http://www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/news-and-features/digital/e3i213af1e960abb3d865852c02173d4c5e?imw=Y

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Opposites Do Attract: Google and P&G Partner for Innovation

January 29, 2009

Excerpted from WSJ, ” A New Odd Couple: Google, P&G Swap Workers to Spur Innovation” By Ellen Byron, November 19, 2008

* * * * *

At P&G the culture is so rigid, employees jokingly call themselves “Proctoids.”

In contrast, Google staffers are urged to wander the halls on scooters and brainstorm on public whiteboards.

Now, this odd couple thinks they have something to gain from one another — so they’ve started swapping employees … staffers have spent weeks dipping into each other’s training programs and sitting in on meetings … Closer ties are crucial to both sides.

P&G, the biggest advertising spender in the world, is waking up to the reality that the next generation of buyers now spends more time online than watching TV. Google craves a bigger slice of P&G’s $8.7 billion annual ad pie as its own revenue growth slows.

The struggle by these two heavyweights to formulate successful strategies highlights how tough it is for myriad other companies, from newspapers to auto makers, to profit from Americans’ rush online

P&G has a long history as a marketing innovator … But amid the shift to online media, P&G has stayed mostly on the sidelines so far … Tide is P&G’s single biggest brand in North America … It was also one of the first products to advertise on live television … Still, despite the shift among younger consumers toward online media, it is clear P&G’s marketing approach still prioritizes TV…

A big hurdle for Google is that many big ad agencies … still don’t make online strategies a priority. “The worst answer you can hear from an agency is, ‘Don’t worry, we have a group to handle interactive’ … Interactive isn’t a group, it’s everybody’s job”…

Consumer-products companies have been among the slowest to adopt online marketing because the traditional forms of marketing … are still reasonably effective

A recurring suspicion: It works only for products that people buy online…”Everyone has a mindset that it has to be transactional … But, Online campaigns,  can powerfully influence brand awareness among consumers.”

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

While the corporate cultures of Google and P&G couldn’t be more dissimilar, the partnership is a merger of two of the best and promises interesting results.  It appears that P&G has been satisfied with and encouraged by the success of the first online campaigns to come out of the partnership.  If this relationship continues P&G is nearly guaranteed to increase its online spending and Google will be there to reap a portion of the benefits. 

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122705787917439625-lMyQjAxMDI4MjE3OTAxNTk3Wj.html

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Do birds of a feather buy the same things ?

January 27, 2009

Excerpted from Ad Age, “Can Social Networks Predict What You’ll Buy?” by Abbey Klaassen, November 17, 2008

* * * * *

Those stalking the social-networking field are betting that birds of a feather don’t just flock together — they buy together too.

There’s emerging evidence that mapping the online relationships among consumers…can be just as valuable as traditional targeting and segmentation in predicting how people will respond to marketing messages…

“It may well be that direct communication between people is a better indicator of deep similarity than any demographic or geographic attributes”…

In one way, the concept is almost the opposite of collaborative filtering. Instead of associating unconnected consumers through their similar preferences and behaviors, it associates consumers who are already connected and share values and beliefs, a concept called homophily

Several firms are hoping social-connection mapping will create a more valuable ad experience in social networks…

SocialMedia.com has developed a relationship-targeting technology called FriendRank using data from social-network applications…to construct a sense of where consumers’ strongest online relationships lie … It serves ads within social-network environments and incorporates the explicit associations between two people into its creative. A typical ad might have a call to action or question that is then sent to 10 of their friends. Should they interact with it, it will be sent to their networks, and so on and so on.

“Our thesis all along has been: Ads have to become social themselves…They can’t just be traditional web ads on top of social networks.”

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

The influence of social networks on purchase decisions could provide significant insights to marketers and advertisers.  However, it is unclear how credible these start-up technologies are in their ability to predict the influence of relationships on purchases. A specific barrier that exists is in the tendency for social network users to “Friend” or “Link in” with many people with whom they rarely communicate, and thus are unlikely to influence or be influenced by.  Among the many firms that are analyzing this social network to purchase relationship, FriendRank seems to be on the right track of first understanding where consumers strongest relationships lie. 

* * * * * 

Full Article:
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=132582

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Domino’s beams pizza to consumers … well, almost.

January 21, 2009

Excerpted from Marketing Daily “Domino’s Lets TiVo Users Order Pizza Via TV”  by Nina M. Lentini, November 17, 2008 

* * * * *

Why get up? Now, couch potatoes who subscribe to TiVo can order a Domino’s Pizza through the service…

Say you’re watching “Monday Night Football” and an ad for Domino’s Pizza shows up. Right there, as you view the ad and hear your tummy growl, you can click through, order the pizza and have it at your home in about a half hour…  

Domino’s is targeting TiVo subscribers as well as potential subscribers…This includes a special tag in its TV ads that TiVo servers can recognize, thereby allowing the click-through during the ad’s broadcast. Also, at TiVo “central” or the service’s “home page,” where subscribers can view their shows…one of the top five options will be: Order a pizza from Domino’s…

TiVo will tout Domino’s Pizza and the fact that it can be ordered through the service in its subscriber emails and billing statements. In addition, TiVo’s sales force is touting educational and training material to push the fact of this innovation…

Edit by SAC 

* * * * *

While Domino’s has taken to TiVo, Papa John’s is luring Facebook fans with free pizza.  Papa John’s current promotion promises a free pizza to fans who join its Facebook page.  Both pizza makers have had used internet ordering for some time now, but are continually looking for ways to break through the clutter.  Papa John’s also offers text message ordering.  In the words of a Domino’s VP of Marketing from this article, “The only thing better is if we could actually beam the pizza to the consumer.”

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=94922

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Online ads … customized on the fly

January 16, 2009

Excerpted from the New York Times, “Web Marketing That Hopes to Learn What Attracts a Click”, by Stephanie Clifford, December 3, 2008

* * * * 
Online advertisers are not lacking in choices: They can display their ads in any color, on any site, with any message, to any audience, with any image.

Now, a new breed of companies is trying to tackle all of those options and determine what ad works for a specific audience. They are creating hundreds of versions of clients’ online ads, changing elements like color, type font, message, and image to see what combination draws clicks on a particular site or from a specific audience.

It is technology that could cause a shift in the advertising world. The creators and designers of ads have long believed that a clever idea or emotional resonance drives an ad’s success. But that argument may be difficult to make when analysis suggests that it is not an ad’s brilliant tagline but its pale-yellow background and sans serif font that attracts customers.

Adisn, based in Long Beach, and Tumri, based in Mountain View, are working both sides of the ad equation. On one, they are trying to figure out who is looking at a page by using a mix of behavioral targeting and content analysis. On the other side, they are assembling an ad on the fly that is meant to appeal to that person.

* * * * *

Adisn’s approach has been to build a database of related words so it can assess the content of a Web site or blog based on the words on its pages.

Adisn then buys space on Web sites, and uses its information to find an appropriate ad to show visitors to those sites. If a visitor views pages about beaches, weather and Hawaii, it might suggest that the visitor is interested in Hawaiian travel.

Based on that analysis, Adisn’s system pulls different components — actors, fonts, background images — to make an ad. For example, it might show an ad with a blue background, an image of a beach, and a text about tickets to Hawaii.

Simple Green, the cleaning brand, began working with Adisn this year to advertise a new line of products called Simple Green Naturals.

“If it’s a woman looking at a kitchen with a stainless steel refrigerator, they can show a stainless steel product.”

* * * * *

Tumri’s approach is slightly different. It creates a template for ads, including slots for the message, the color, the image and other elements.

Unlike Adisn, it does not buy ad space, but lets clients choose and buy space on sites themselves. And rather than building a contextual database, Tumri uses whatever targeting approach advertisers are already using, whether it is behavioral or contextual or demographic, and assembles an ad on the fly based on that information.

“It’s reporting back to the advertiser and agency saying, ‘Guess what? The soccer mom in Indiana likes background three, which was pink, likes image four, which was the S.U.V., and likes marketing message 12, about room, safety and comfort.”

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/business/media/03adco.html?_r=1&ref=media&pagewanted=print

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

Marketing 101 … for Web 2.0

January 12, 2009

Excerpted from WSJ, “The Secrets of Marketing in Web 2.0” By S. Parise, P. Guinan, and B. Weinberg, Dec 15, 2008

* * * * *

For marketers, Web 2.0 offers a remarkable new opportunity to engage consumers…But most companies still don’t appear to be well versed in this area. So here’s a look at the principles we arrived at — and how marketers can use them to get the best results.

Don’t just talk at consumers — work with them throughout the marketing process. A leading greeting-card company…set up an online community — a site where it can talk to consumers and the consumers can talk to each other. The company solicits opinions on aspects of card design and on ideas for gifts and their pricing. It also asks the consumers to talk about their lifestyles and even upload photos of themselves, so that it can better understand its market…the online community is much faster and cheaper than the traditional focus groups and surveys used in the past…

Give consumers a reason to participate. Consumers have to have some incentive to share their thoughts, opinions and experiences…One lure is to make sure consumers can use the online community to network among themselves on topics of their own choosing. That way the site isn’t all about the company, it’s also about them…Other companies provide more-direct incentives: cash rewards or products…Still others offer consumers peer recognition…recognition not only encourages participation, but also has the benefit of allowing both the company and the other members of the community to identify experts on various topics…

Listen to — and join — the conversation outside your site. Consumers tend to trust one another’s opinions more than a company’s marketing pitch. And there is no shortage of opinions online. The managers we interviewed accept that this content is here to stay and are aware of its potential impact — positive or negative — on consumers’ buying decisions. So they monitor relevant online conversations among consumers and, when appropriate, look for opportunities to inject themselves into a conversation or initiate a potential collaboration…

Resist the temptation to sell, sell, sell. Many marketers have been trained to bludgeon consumers with advertising — to sell, sell, sell anytime and anywhere consumers can be found. In an online community, it pays to resist that temptation. When consumers are invited to participate in online communities, they expect marketers to listen and to consider their ideas. They don’t want to feel like they’re simply a captive audience for advertising, and if they do they’re likely to abandon the community…

Don’t control, let it go. In an online community, every company needs balance between trying to steer the conversation about its products and allowing the conversation to flow freely. In general, though, managers believe that companies are better off giving consumers the opportunity to say whatever is on their minds, positive or negative…The more that consumers talk freely, the more a company can learn about how it can improve its products and its marketing.

Find a ‘marketing technopologist.’ So who should direct a company’s forays into Web 2.0 marketing?…We coined the term marketing technopologist for a person who brings together strengths in marketing, technology and social interaction…”someone with the usual M.B.A. consultant’s background, strong interest in psychology and sociology, and good social-networking skills throughout the organization.”

Embrace experimentation. One Web 2.0 strategy does not fit all…Blogs, wikis and online communities are among the tools that companies are most commonly using for marketing, but there are other ways to reach consumers…For instance, many companies have long used instant messaging on their Web sites to allow shoppers to chat with customer-service representatives…

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

While the Marketing 101 principles are sure to evolve for Web 2.0 the above mentioned principles provide a good foundation for marketers looking to take advantage ever changing world of the web.

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122884677205091919.html

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
The Homa Files Blog

Price Wars on the Web

January 8, 2009

Excerpted from the New York Times, “Web Sites Wage Holiday Price Wars,” by Claire Cain Miller and Brad Stone, November 20, 2008

* * * * *

Internet retailers, trying to navigate the first truly dreary holiday shopping season ever on the Web, are engaged in price-cutting and discounting so aggressive that it threatens their profit margins and, in some cases, their very survival.

Traditional retailers faced the same problem, of course, but the price-cutting is fiercest on the Web, where customers can easily shop for the best price with a quick search on Google or on specialized shopping engines like Shopping.com. Online, the competition is only a click away. For many Web sites, the discounts and price cuts are the only way to hold on to customers as online buying unexpectedly plummets.

The research firm comScore reported that sales growth on e-commerce sites slowed to a meager 1 percent in October compared with the previous year — the lowest rate ever for online retail and well down from the industry’s typical 20 percent gains.

* * * * *

To preserve the sanctity of their brands and some level of pricing control, some Web companies are promoting discount sites separately from their main brands. Zappos.com, a shoe retailer never runs promotions on its site. Instead, it quietly moves shoes that do not sell in six months to 6pm.com, a clearance site it acquired last year, but runs separately. 

* * * * *

Free shipping is also becoming a painful imperative for all e-commerce sites. Three-quarters of online shoppers say that they would shop elsewhere if a site did not offer free shipping. E-commerce giants like Amazon.com can easily absorb shipping costs, but small online vendors struggle. 

To exacerbate matters, a major expense for online retailers seems to be rising: the cost to advertise products on the search engine Google, the source of considerable traffic and visibility for most e-commerce sites.

Over the last year and a half, prices for text ads related to women’s fashion have quadrupled, say apparel retailers. In the popular gifts category, the price to advertise alongside results for common search queries like “gift baskets” jumped 50 percent from the 2006 holidays to 2007 and is expected to climb again this year.

Edit by DAF

* * * * *

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/technology/internet/20slashing.html?ref=technology

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *

On December 15th …

December 31, 2008

Shoppers bought more than 6.3 million items – or 72.9 items per second – from Amazon.com on December 15, its best day of the holiday season.

* * * * * 

Internet Usage

83% of those earning more than $100,000 annually say they are online every day or nearly every day.

57% of whites use the Internet every day or nearly every day
35% of African-Americans use the Internet every day or nearly every day
24% of blacks rarely or never go online.

* * * * *

Source: Rasmussen Reports
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/60_are_comfortable_using_credit_cards_online

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link =>
  The Homa Files Blog

Marketing in the World of the Web

December 1, 2008

Excerpted from WSJ, “Marketing in the World of the Web”, November 29, 2008

* * * * *
Bemes, clouds and MySpace: Welcome to the brave new world.

As the evidence mounts about the power of social networks to reconfigure individual behavior, the crucial question is: How to leverage this phenomenon into actual profits?

The second generation of Internet (“Web 2.0”) companies such as MySpace, Facebook, Linked/In and YouTube exploded upon the scene three years ago. Today, MySpace and Facebook together have more users than the entire U.S. population; and the online community concept is already becoming a powerful tool for everything from creating customer loyalty, to assistance in product design, to a sounding board for company strategy.

There isn’t a smart company today that isn’t implementing some kind of online community, wiki or blog strategy. But companies with millions of members of online communities are now asking: How do we sell them products and services?

Very few of the traditional techniques of classical marketing (call them Marketing 1.0), or even of eCommerce (Marketing 2.0) will work in the world of social networks. A very different set of tools, concepts and practices is needed. Call it Marketing 3.0. Here are five:

From loyalty to attention. Before you can win consumer loyalty, you have to capture and reward consumer attention. Smart marketers will of necessity become obsessed with customer attention in the way they once obsessed over customer loyalty. The shrewd brands will create elaborate attention-rewards programs, and incentives to break through the noise and make that critical initial connection.

From crowds to clouds. Once you get that attention — once you generate heavy traffic to your site, gather a large league of “friends” on MySpace, or spawn a dedicated following on Twitter — how do you monetize the crowd? Smart brands are turning their crowds into “clouds”: organic, self-forming and often self-governing communities of interest. In the old model, customer-service departments aimed to placate or jettison disgruntled customers. In the cloud model, the idea is to cultivate and reward them. That’s not an easy transition.

From places to spaces. Consumers are increasingly organizing themselves into new communities — not just the big generic social communities, but myriad idiosyncratic slices of narrow, passionate interest (i.e., BlackPlanet, Inpowr and MomsCafe).   These new  “meganiches,” may seem small, even strange at first. But when they’re efficiently targeted, they can be highly responsive, lucrative and loyal. With this shift toward self-organization by consumers, national advertising campaigns as we know them will increasingly become a waste of time and money for many companies. The trick for brands is to cohabit social spaces with these consumers.

From memes to bemes. In the Age of Broadcast, good advertising could occasionally manufacture memes of tremendous social impact. Think of “Where’s the Beef?” or “I can’t believe I ate the whole thing.” If you can’t recall an irresistible or effective turn of phrase of late, it’s because it is exceedingly difficult to spread a meme in today’s fragmented media environment. Marketing 3.0 is now the science of devising and managing directed business memes: call them bemes. Bemes are sent by members of social communities to each other and typically contain a reward or exclusive offer, which, when redeemed, also results in a reward coupon for the sender. This encourages members of social communities to propagate a “viral” ad.

Brute force marketing won’t work inside social networks. The best online marketing now takes place among people who know and trust each other. Want to be a sensation? Create a beme that consumers willingly accept and share with others.

From silos to simultaneity. Too many retailers today persist in believing that online shopping is merely a virtual extension of real world shopping. That is a big mistake. he physical world has become the showroom for the virtual realm. Retailers now must reimagine a world where consumers experience products in stores but ultimately buy them on the Web: Stores are for experiences, the network is for inventories.

* * * * *

All of this suggests that Marketing 3.0 is not only different from its predecessors, but actively undermines them. If your marketing program fails to adapt to this new world, it won’t just become irrelevant — it will actually work against you.

Full articel:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122792310060465901.html

Want more from the Homa Files?
     Click link =>
  The Homa Files Blog

Brooks Brothers or Big Brother?

October 10, 2008

Excerpted from Strategy & Business, “Web Sales with a Human Touch”, by Edward H. Baker, August 28, 2008

* * * * *

Many e-tailers endeavor to gather as much knowledge as possible about customer behavior and buying habits by aggregating and crunching massive amounts of data on users’ online buying habits. But those are just dry numbers and statistics. The plain truth is that even the most successful, tech-savvy retail Web sites still convert only 1 to 3 percent of visitors into buyers, largely because Web-based salesmanship is such a blunt instrument.

Suppose, however, that you could use the very technological virtues that make e-commerce so potent a sales channel, and bring in the human touch at exactly the moment it would be most effective. How much would that be worth? According to 24/7 Customer, a business process outsourcing firm based in Campbell, CA,  the human touch used in this way can increase online consumer conversion rates by 15 percent or more.

To prove this, 24/7 has developed predictive software called SalesNext that sorts online visitors into hot and cold leads and then makes personalized contact through online chat with the most promising prospects to close the deal.

* * * * *

The flow of consumers from the category of mere visitors to that of actual buyers, in any sales channel, is like liquid passing through a funnel. At a real-world retail outlet, the marketing portion of the funnel at the top is poorly targeted because companies have limited control over who visits a store. The power of the funnel lies at the bottom, where seasoned salespeople convert store visitors into buyers.

However, the top part of the typical e-commerce funnel is potentially very efficient. Advanced Web marketing techniques can target prospects entering the online retail site on the basis of prior Web behavior and other historical data and drive them to items that match their past preferences. But the bottom part of the funnel narrows to a trickle, because most Web sites’ one-size-fits-all consumer experience makes conversion of those visitors into buyers much more difficult.

However, by separating the tire kickers from the hot leads, then chatting with those leads in a way that personalizes their experience and drives them toward a transaction, Web retailers can open up the bottom of the funnel significantly.

* * * * *

Plenty of retail Web sites offer live human-to-human chat with consumers; what distinguishes 24/7 Customer’s approach is its ability to offer chat only to those who might not otherwise buy. Getting to the stage at which a visitor is invited to chat involves a series of filters de­signed to predict which individuals are most likely to buy as a result of a chat, rather than through self- service. After all, there’s no point in needlessly cannibalizing the lower-cost automated channel.

As a visitor browses the Web site, she is evalu­ated on a variety of criteria, including how she was referred to the site, whether she’s visited or bought anything there before, the time of day, the day of the week, her geographical location, and the product category. Equally important is the path a consumer takes through the Web site. If she heads immediately to the spec sheet for a particular digital camera, it’s unlikely that chatting with her will influence her buying decision. But if she appears to be wavering among three different models, a chat just might help her make up her mind.

The goal at this stage is to match likely consumers with likely product choices.

* * * * *

Once a visitor is identified as a hot lead, another filter determines whether to invite him to chat — that is, the program analyzes whether talking to him is virtually the only way to convince him to make a purchase. On one level, deciding who to invite for a chat is a simple scheduling problem: Are there enough agents available to handle the chat? Increasing the number of agents means increasing the number of invitations to chat, which in turn means approaching colder leads who are less likely to end up making a purchase. The colder the lead, the lower the potential profitability.

On a more strategic level, the software must determine the number of agents that will maximize profitability. Further statistical modeling is needed to select the right agent for each consumer, depending on such criteria as the best-performing agent for the product category that individual is looking at.

* * * * *

Now, it’s time to chat. The 24/7 chat format, of course, does not allow for all the nuances any decent salesperson picks up in a face-to-face conversation. It does, however, perform analyses of thousands of chat transcripts, through text mining and data mining, to perfect the techniques that human customer service representatives use to close the sale.

* * * * *

Adobe, the software giant, rolled out SalesNext in July 2007 with excellent results. Since then, the company has seen a 15 percent jump in conversion among consum­ers who chat, says Dawn Monet, senior manager of Adobe’s worldwide call centers. And, she notes, the satisfaction of consumers who use chat is higher than that of both consumers who shop online without chat and those who shop by phone.

Edit by DAF

* * * * *
Full article:
http://www.strategy-business.com/press/article/08313?pg=all&tid=230

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => 
The Homa Files Blog

* * * * *