I have just had four of the most energetic and enervating days that I have had for a long time. One of our clients asked me to join them for a trip to Mumbai to review the media scene there, and the opportunities for recruiting subscribers to their organisation.
Before I went I guess my understanding of India was hazy to say the least - major inputs being Slumdog Millionaire and EM Forster.
What I found was a group of bright, creative, motivated entrepreneurs. And that applied across the board from the smaller organisations right up to big corporates.
We met with a bunch of media owners, clients and agencies. What we found was a media scene of extremes. Fewer than 10 million broadband internet connections. More than 350 million mobile phones. The largest circulation newspaper at just 5 million copies, but pay TV penetration at nearly 100 million homes.
Direct marketing as a discipline is still fairly immature. It is used mostly for CRM (airline loyalty programmes, financial services cross selling). There is little direct mail for acquisition as data sets are small and of dubious quality.
But the DRTV scene is alive and flourishing. The suburban Indian housewife has discovered the delights of slow cookers, teeth whiteners and exercise equipment in the same way middle America did. And DRTV is beginning to creep into the mainstream marketers lexicon, with financial services and charities conducting campaigns that we would recognise in the UK.
It's potentially a very interesting opportunity for DM acquisition. A growing market of affluent middle class (numbers vary but think more middle class Indians than Americans in the next 10 years), very low media rates (say 10%-20% of UK rates) and a sophisticated call centre infrastructure.
I’m going back. I don’t know how yet, but I am sure India represents volume and value opportunities for our clients and ourselves.
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Friday, 15 January 2010
Improving measurability between off line and online media
We now understand more about the link between online and offline media. And we know more about the customer journey. But are we using this understanding to measure the journey a consumer takes between offline and online media?
Is it sufficient to say we know that offline media drives consumers online when we can't measure the success our offline media has in driving potential customers online?
How can we identify which of our offline media drives our search? We can monitor the search uplift in and around television adverts, as we know what time the messages are consumed by our audience so any spikes can reasonably be attributed to these spots.
It's trickier where press and out of home are concerned because when the media are consumed is harder to pin-point. And of course increased time shifting behaviour with TV (e.g. PVRs and ITV Player) makes even TV's effect on online harder to measure.
But what if we told our audience what to search for online within the creative copy?
Potentially we could use one word for tube car panels that is relevant and memorable to the campaign, one for our press adverts and a different one for TV. The copy could simply read “to find out more search…….”, or “to take advantage of this offer search……”.
There's another benefit. If the key words or search terms used are different to those your competitors are using then this could mean you to pay less per click to obtain a customer compared to the more expensive generic search terms that are used by people who have not seen an offline advert.
And you are more likely to convert your audience. Sometimes if you are not at the top of search listings you lose a potential sale to one of your competitors (which you really earned because you paid for the offline ad which drove them online in the first place!)
This problem can be alleviated by using the “search for” mechanism as none (or certainly fewer) of your competitors should appear in the search listings.
Measurable, cheaper and more effective. Media-relevant campaign search terms are a powerful tool!
Christopher Bell, Media Assistant
Is it sufficient to say we know that offline media drives consumers online when we can't measure the success our offline media has in driving potential customers online?
How can we identify which of our offline media drives our search? We can monitor the search uplift in and around television adverts, as we know what time the messages are consumed by our audience so any spikes can reasonably be attributed to these spots.
It's trickier where press and out of home are concerned because when the media are consumed is harder to pin-point. And of course increased time shifting behaviour with TV (e.g. PVRs and ITV Player) makes even TV's effect on online harder to measure.
But what if we told our audience what to search for online within the creative copy?
Potentially we could use one word for tube car panels that is relevant and memorable to the campaign, one for our press adverts and a different one for TV. The copy could simply read “to find out more search…….”, or “to take advantage of this offer search……”.
There's another benefit. If the key words or search terms used are different to those your competitors are using then this could mean you to pay less per click to obtain a customer compared to the more expensive generic search terms that are used by people who have not seen an offline advert.
And you are more likely to convert your audience. Sometimes if you are not at the top of search listings you lose a potential sale to one of your competitors (which you really earned because you paid for the offline ad which drove them online in the first place!)
This problem can be alleviated by using the “search for” mechanism as none (or certainly fewer) of your competitors should appear in the search listings.
Measurable, cheaper and more effective. Media-relevant campaign search terms are a powerful tool!
Christopher Bell, Media Assistant
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Useful local apps will build real brand engagement
There are seminal moments in the development of any new medium and I think I have just been part of one.
Check out http://uksnow.benmarsh.co.uk/ or see #uksnowmap 2.0 on Twitter.
It’s a Google map of the UK, but with tweet comments on snow fall and uploaded mobile phone photos of the snow where the users are.
Never mind weather reports and AA snap shots, this is real-time real-location weather reporting.
This is a great example of consumers congregating around a brand new but really relevant and useful application.
The first brand to harness this level of local engagement will do so well. I want it to be one of ours!
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Check out http://uksnow.benmarsh.co.uk/ or see #uksnowmap 2.0 on Twitter.
It’s a Google map of the UK, but with tweet comments on snow fall and uploaded mobile phone photos of the snow where the users are.
Never mind weather reports and AA snap shots, this is real-time real-location weather reporting.
This is a great example of consumers congregating around a brand new but really relevant and useful application.
The first brand to harness this level of local engagement will do so well. I want it to be one of ours!
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
Social media etiquette
In the last few weeks I have witnessed a couple of occasions when people who have been asked for “friendship” on social media sites have reacted aggressively.
In one instance a woman on LinkedIn asked for reassurance when someone she had tried to connect with rebuffed her approach and told her not to “misuse” the system. Unsurprisingly she received a lot of support and sympathy from other members.
And then, more recently, I read a vigorous discussion in the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) about the rights and wrongs of someone on the list asking another member for friend status on Facebook. In this case the reactions were far more mixed with as many people decrying this as an intrusion as supporting the attempt at building a network.
So who’s right? What is the etiquette here?
In LinkedIn it seems perfectly in order to ask to connect with someone who is a member of the same professional group that you are a member of. Surely that is what online networking is about.
It’s like being at a party or a business networking event: you may not know someone there but you talk to them because you have friends or colleagues in common. And if the person you approach doesn’t want to connect with you all they have to do is say “no”. There is no need to shout and scream about “misusing” the party!
But is Facebook any different? Well, I suppose Facebook is often more closely aligned to friendships in the physical world. But not always.
Increasingly Facebook is used to set up interest groups (in a similar way to Ning, I guess.) And in the case I am talking about the “victim/criminal” was using Facebook to promote a professional grouping on Ning. So it seems perfectly reasonable for him to get in touch with people asking them to “friend” him and join his new group. And again, if people don’t want to connect, all they need to do is say “no”. (I also got an invitation, which I accepted even though I have never met him.)
My conclusions?
First there are plenty of plonkers in the world and if you ever raise your head above the online parapet you should do so in the expectation that one of them may well have a pop at you. So make sure that your skin is at least reasonably thick.
And second, if you are approached by someone you don’t know, and don’t want to know, in a social networking environment, just say “no thanks” politely. To respond to a social invitation with rudeness implies that you are either bizarrely terrified of other people or massively puffed up with your own importance. Neither says much about you.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
In one instance a woman on LinkedIn asked for reassurance when someone she had tried to connect with rebuffed her approach and told her not to “misuse” the system. Unsurprisingly she received a lot of support and sympathy from other members.
And then, more recently, I read a vigorous discussion in the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) about the rights and wrongs of someone on the list asking another member for friend status on Facebook. In this case the reactions were far more mixed with as many people decrying this as an intrusion as supporting the attempt at building a network.
So who’s right? What is the etiquette here?
In LinkedIn it seems perfectly in order to ask to connect with someone who is a member of the same professional group that you are a member of. Surely that is what online networking is about.
It’s like being at a party or a business networking event: you may not know someone there but you talk to them because you have friends or colleagues in common. And if the person you approach doesn’t want to connect with you all they have to do is say “no”. There is no need to shout and scream about “misusing” the party!
But is Facebook any different? Well, I suppose Facebook is often more closely aligned to friendships in the physical world. But not always.
Increasingly Facebook is used to set up interest groups (in a similar way to Ning, I guess.) And in the case I am talking about the “victim/criminal” was using Facebook to promote a professional grouping on Ning. So it seems perfectly reasonable for him to get in touch with people asking them to “friend” him and join his new group. And again, if people don’t want to connect, all they need to do is say “no”. (I also got an invitation, which I accepted even though I have never met him.)
My conclusions?
First there are plenty of plonkers in the world and if you ever raise your head above the online parapet you should do so in the expectation that one of them may well have a pop at you. So make sure that your skin is at least reasonably thick.
And second, if you are approached by someone you don’t know, and don’t want to know, in a social networking environment, just say “no thanks” politely. To respond to a social invitation with rudeness implies that you are either bizarrely terrified of other people or massively puffed up with your own importance. Neither says much about you.
Jeremy Swinfen Green
Digital Director
Monday, 21 December 2009
Email is great: but get the message right, Eurostar!
Sitting at home, toasting my tootsies on a roaring radiator while scanning the inbox, I couldn’t believe my eyes. A jolly email from Eurostar nestled between Johnnie Boden and my sister-in-law.
The email arrived Saturday morning just after the Eurostar’s most hellish day in their 15 year history. Customers being treated worse than any banker deserves to be. Traffic chaos resembling a mass exodus caused by an impending nuclear Armageddon.
The subject matter of the email: “Give a continental gift this Christmas”. Are they off their rails?
I’m a happy customer. In fact two days previously I'd had a great day in Paris thanks mainly to Eurostar. But they’ve shown a total lack of sensitivity. Any Eurostar customer could have faced that situation and instead of recognizing this, they are selling a Christmas present to remember.
I can only think that either some overworked or hung-over marketing exec thought "I’ve been waiting months to get this away, driven the design team nuts, I don’t care, just get it out."
Or they’re just too arrogant to give a damn.
As a communication tool emails are great; but they have to be handled with care. We’ve all got a horror story to tell.
What should have happened is an email explaining what went wrong, the steps taken to rectify the situation and positioning the Christmas offer as a "thank you for understanding". I’d forgive them. After all it’s the season of goodwill.
Ian Prager, Planning Director
The email arrived Saturday morning just after the Eurostar’s most hellish day in their 15 year history. Customers being treated worse than any banker deserves to be. Traffic chaos resembling a mass exodus caused by an impending nuclear Armageddon.
The subject matter of the email: “Give a continental gift this Christmas”. Are they off their rails?
I’m a happy customer. In fact two days previously I'd had a great day in Paris thanks mainly to Eurostar. But they’ve shown a total lack of sensitivity. Any Eurostar customer could have faced that situation and instead of recognizing this, they are selling a Christmas present to remember.
I can only think that either some overworked or hung-over marketing exec thought "I’ve been waiting months to get this away, driven the design team nuts, I don’t care, just get it out."
Or they’re just too arrogant to give a damn.
As a communication tool emails are great; but they have to be handled with care. We’ve all got a horror story to tell.
What should have happened is an email explaining what went wrong, the steps taken to rectify the situation and positioning the Christmas offer as a "thank you for understanding". I’d forgive them. After all it’s the season of goodwill.
Ian Prager, Planning Director
Thursday, 10 December 2009
Bronze, silver and gold!
Funny thing change.
Many of the team this morning (including me) are floating – literally on residual alcohol and metaphorically on air.
It was the DMA awards last night: new venue at Old Billingsgate market; new format with ten new categories; and a new attitude that direct marketing is not the poor relation of advertising but rather the discipline that is at the centre of many clients' marketing globe.
I felt a real sense of pride across the room in the work that we created as an industry.
And there was local pride too. We won three awards- a bronze, a silver and a gold, and were associated (as footballers say “assists) with two more.
Huge impact on the teams involved- both client members and MC&C members. And the change again from previous years. In my youth we would have celebrated today’s win all night and thought naught of the morrow. These teams took the joy from the moment- but also used it as a resolution for next year, and the basis of a pact to win not only again, but more and better.
Most mornings I reflect on how lucky I am to do what I do, but today, even through my hangover, the realisation of that privilege is more acute than ever.
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Many of the team this morning (including me) are floating – literally on residual alcohol and metaphorically on air.
It was the DMA awards last night: new venue at Old Billingsgate market; new format with ten new categories; and a new attitude that direct marketing is not the poor relation of advertising but rather the discipline that is at the centre of many clients' marketing globe.
I felt a real sense of pride across the room in the work that we created as an industry.
And there was local pride too. We won three awards- a bronze, a silver and a gold, and were associated (as footballers say “assists) with two more.
Huge impact on the teams involved- both client members and MC&C members. And the change again from previous years. In my youth we would have celebrated today’s win all night and thought naught of the morrow. These teams took the joy from the moment- but also used it as a resolution for next year, and the basis of a pact to win not only again, but more and better.
Most mornings I reflect on how lucky I am to do what I do, but today, even through my hangover, the realisation of that privilege is more acute than ever.
Mike Colling, Managing Director
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
The future of online content revenues
I went to a Westminster eForum meeting yesterday. On the agenda was "The Future of online content" and much of the discussion revolved around business models.
Several contributors seemed to feel that advertising revenues would ride to the rescue of media owners and that other revenue models were not worth bothering with. In particular, video advertising was held up as a powerful revenue generator.
It is certainly true that you can pay over £20 cpm for some video advertising inventory. But you can also pay £2 cpm!
The reality is that the marketplace for video advertising is still forming and value is still being established. Online enables you to click through to a website from an advert - which can be considered as extra value. And online targeting and ad-serving does allow campaigns that are more sophisticated than TV, where small groups of people can be shown sequential advertising based on their previous online behaviour for instance.
But you can buy TV advertising of £3.50 cpm or less, and even prime-time TV can be bought for well under £20.
Is a pre-roll online ad worth so much more than TV? My belief is that media owners will struggle to maintain a premium for online video advertising – or will perhaps only be able to maintain it for highly targeted (including time targeted) inventory.
In addition, does a linear video ad, which by necessity has to be capable of delivering its message without audio, represent the best way of advertising online? Surely more interactive formats, where people can somehow "participate" in an ad, are likely to be more engaging.
Given that online display revenue actually declined last year in the UK, it seems unwise to rely on video advertising to rescue the online media industry. And while video advertising will no doubt have a part to play, media owners need to examine all other opportunities for generating revenues. These will include:
- Subscription - possibly along the lines of that being trialled by Johnson Press, or possibly of certain premium elements of a site - which common sense would dictate will be elements that are hard to find elsewhere and which are particularly suited to delivery in an online environment
- Data - which can be used to help advertisers understand marketplaces, deliver advertising messages that are effective and develop new products and services
- Syndication - but only where this doesn't have a major impact on subscription revenues
- E-commerce share - which can involve specially developed readers offers or simply a share of revenue from sales made by third parties
- Pay to participate revenues - which might include fees for joining communities (e.g. dating), talking to specialists (e.g. astrologers), competition entry fees, and fees to participate in online games and virtual environments
Of course, advertising will also be an important source of revenue - indeed it may remain the largest source of revenue for many media owners; but on its own it is unlikely to be enough to be enough to deliver a robust online business for most media owners.
Jeremy Swinfen Green, Digital Director
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)