The search engine wars have heated up recently with Microsoft's Bing joining the game. Make no mistake, Microsoft is trying to take Google down and is putting some major money and resources behind it, ie. the creative team that basically stole the Google "concept" of using a distinct sounding, simple name for a search engine. Can you imagine if they named it Supercalifragilisticexpealidocious? Anyways, Microsoft seems to be pleased with the early results and are calling it a success so far.
As we all know, humans are creatures of habit and the habit for most humans the past number of years has been to log onto Google when needing to find anything online. How is Bing going to change people's habits? One way would be to make their search engine different, and I know that Microsoft probably has different bots that run behind the scenes and filter results, etc., etc. But 90% of people don't really know how a search engine works, or really care to find out. They want something that that provides value to them that they can see/use. Now in their latest advertisements (which are actually pretty good) Bing makes itself seem like it is different, calling itself a decision engine and adding an airplane, shopping cart, buildings, and medical symbol next to its logo........ohhhhkay. Don't really understand the significance of those but i'll let you run with it. Here's one of the commercials
What does a decision engine get me? Let's go to Bing to check it out. Okay i'll type in Hawaii Tickets as per their commercial. Bing! Make my decision for me decision engine.......oh. The results are pretty typical of Google's. Hmmm. Thats not really following through on your promise, or maybe you just haven't explained well enough what makes your search engine a "Decision" engine. Might want to think about that, or at least explain it somewhere on your page. Just a thought.
I wonder what "Decision Engine" even means, I think i'll Google it.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Twitter Teetering??
I've written a few posts about Twitter and can personally say that I'm not a huge fan of Twitter. I have used it for my company in the past and to be honest, it did a good job at what we were using it for. But we were using it to help spread political insight leading up to a provincial election as opposed to our day-to-day marketing of health plans. Twitter certainly has its share of success stories including this one that Marketing Magazine shares with us.
That being said, I think Twitter has peaked and is heading for a steady decline. Much like Second Life and a couple of other social networking sites that were big for a while. I read a FastCompany article a few weeks ago saying that 60% of new Twitter users were not logging on again after a month on the site. That's not a good sign. Then just yesterday I read Mitch Joel's post about Twitter and one of the telling quotes from it was this:
At the bare minimum 70% of the people on Twitter won't tell you who they are, where they are located or how to connect to them. That doesn't sound very "social" at all.
On top of that, over half of those people don't follow anyone, have never tweeted and how no followers. So, what's the point? Are most of these "people" not really "people" and simply bots? Or, do the majority of people who sign up for Twitter have no idea what they're getting themselves into, what the point is or how to really use it?
This makes it extremely hard for you to use Twitter as a targeted marketing effort. With 70% of the people not sharing their information your entire list of followers could, in effect, be completely wrong for your business. Take my company for example, we focus largely on British Columbia and sometimes all of Canada. Well anyone that would follow an account of ours in the States or elsewhere on the globe would not be any value to us, nor would we really be providing value to them.
I still don't really see the sustainability of Twitter and don't expect it to have the same buzz about it in the future. However, there clearly is some value for specific companies and individuals but I wouldn't bank my entire marketing efforts on it.
As you can tell, I can relate much more to the brownhaired guy in this video
That being said, I think Twitter has peaked and is heading for a steady decline. Much like Second Life and a couple of other social networking sites that were big for a while. I read a FastCompany article a few weeks ago saying that 60% of new Twitter users were not logging on again after a month on the site. That's not a good sign. Then just yesterday I read Mitch Joel's post about Twitter and one of the telling quotes from it was this:
At the bare minimum 70% of the people on Twitter won't tell you who they are, where they are located or how to connect to them. That doesn't sound very "social" at all.
On top of that, over half of those people don't follow anyone, have never tweeted and how no followers. So, what's the point? Are most of these "people" not really "people" and simply bots? Or, do the majority of people who sign up for Twitter have no idea what they're getting themselves into, what the point is or how to really use it?
This makes it extremely hard for you to use Twitter as a targeted marketing effort. With 70% of the people not sharing their information your entire list of followers could, in effect, be completely wrong for your business. Take my company for example, we focus largely on British Columbia and sometimes all of Canada. Well anyone that would follow an account of ours in the States or elsewhere on the globe would not be any value to us, nor would we really be providing value to them.
I still don't really see the sustainability of Twitter and don't expect it to have the same buzz about it in the future. However, there clearly is some value for specific companies and individuals but I wouldn't bank my entire marketing efforts on it.
As you can tell, I can relate much more to the brownhaired guy in this video
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Pour a little beer on that wildfire
Last year I wrote a post on an event/product/brand catching on like a wildfire (you can read that post here) and recently I have noticed such an event in the Canadian marketplace. Now maybe i've only taken notice because I enjoy beer, but hey it's not a crime were not in the prohibition era so stop giving me the stink eye. Anyways, it's for the Bud Light Lime product that was introduced to the canadian marketplace a month or so ago. It has literally been a wildfire for Labatt since then (Labatt markets and sells the product in Canada). I'm not sure how well they have handled/fanned the wildfire though.
First off, the product got plenty of press before its entry because a Facebook group had been created to encourage the beer be brought to Canada, so they already had a passionate following. According to Labbatt's, they usually only release one new product per season and had already introduced Alexander Keith's White Ale to the masses. Then they did the right thing and took notice of what these hardcore customers wanted and brought Bud-Light Lime in at the same time which went against company SOP. Smart decision. Listen to your customers.
The launch has been a success i'd say (to say the least), but it may turn bad for them soon if they can't bump up production on the hugely poplar drink. Here is an image for the BC Liquor Stores website which shows real time inventory of the product.
First off, the product got plenty of press before its entry because a Facebook group had been created to encourage the beer be brought to Canada, so they already had a passionate following. According to Labbatt's, they usually only release one new product per season and had already introduced Alexander Keith's White Ale to the masses. Then they did the right thing and took notice of what these hardcore customers wanted and brought Bud-Light Lime in at the same time which went against company SOP. Smart decision. Listen to your customers.
The launch has been a success i'd say (to say the least), but it may turn bad for them soon if they can't bump up production on the hugely poplar drink. Here is an image for the BC Liquor Stores website which shows real time inventory of the product.
If you can't see the inventory numbers it shows exactly 3 cases of the product in all of British Columbia. So there are goods and bads of this obviously. Good, the product is basically sold out which means it has been received very well by the masses. Bad, the product is sold out which means your customers who would be loyal to the product can't get it anywhere.
Now maybe this will be effective in helping build up another buzz around the product and generating more excitement for when they actually get some shipments in, but I think their customers would rather whet their whistle than twiddle their thumbs. To me it shows a lack of wildfire protection planning.
When people have had enough of your antics
Yes, this is yet another post on General Motors. I can't help it, I read Jaffe Juice or watch Jaffe TV and he makes nothing but logical points about the mess that they are in and I can't help but blog about it myself.
However, this blog post is about how with the internet people now have the power to knock companies down a couple of pegs. It's an obvious statement and anyone that knows the power of social media and the internet realizes how disastrous one person with a vendetta can be to your brand. Unfortunately GM has many haters, which leads to things such as this:
This is not what GM was hoping for following their Chapter 1 television ad and the launching of the "Reinvention" website. They have also taken strides to be very prevalent throughout social media (including their head commenting on my blog), but no matter how hard you work the internet balancing the playing field. GM has spent millions and millions of dollars on their latest campaign and whoever started this website probably spent a couple of hundred. In terms of which has more impact, it may even be the GM Retardation site.
Unfortunate for GM but a humbling lesson that many marketers know.
However, this blog post is about how with the internet people now have the power to knock companies down a couple of pegs. It's an obvious statement and anyone that knows the power of social media and the internet realizes how disastrous one person with a vendetta can be to your brand. Unfortunately GM has many haters, which leads to things such as this:
This is not what GM was hoping for following their Chapter 1 television ad and the launching of the "Reinvention" website. They have also taken strides to be very prevalent throughout social media (including their head commenting on my blog), but no matter how hard you work the internet balancing the playing field. GM has spent millions and millions of dollars on their latest campaign and whoever started this website probably spent a couple of hundred. In terms of which has more impact, it may even be the GM Retardation site.
Unfortunate for GM but a humbling lesson that many marketers know.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Lack of Creativity
In an earlier post I talked about the lack of creativity of car companies.
Well, turns out they aren't the only ones who aren't creative. Lately there has been a lot of "combination" commercials, where one thing is mixing with another to create this "new" idea. Unfortunately the companies and their agencies haven't put much thought into a "new" idea for the advertising.
Car commercial exhibit A
Burger commercial exhibit B
Exhibit C: Arby's Fajita flatbread commercials which feature a mexican guitarist meeting a chef and embracing. Can't find them on Youtube because no doubt they aren't that proud of them.
Could this lack of creativity be the result of creative companies not getting as much work because more and more companies are encouraging their consumers to come up with marketing ideas? Is this leading to a brain drain from the creative area of the advertising/marketing world?In Canada, Doritos consumers were asked to name a new chip for them and come up with an ad for it. I've seen numerous requests for consumers to help work on a new packaging look for products (Pepsi, Kokanee, etc.). Is this costing us good creative? Who knows, I certainly don't have any stats to back it up.
Maybe its just companies being less willing to step out on a ledge and actually stand out from the crowd. Play it safe and hope for the best. Seems like a waste of money to me.
Well, turns out they aren't the only ones who aren't creative. Lately there has been a lot of "combination" commercials, where one thing is mixing with another to create this "new" idea. Unfortunately the companies and their agencies haven't put much thought into a "new" idea for the advertising.
Car commercial exhibit A
Burger commercial exhibit B
Exhibit C: Arby's Fajita flatbread commercials which feature a mexican guitarist meeting a chef and embracing. Can't find them on Youtube because no doubt they aren't that proud of them.
Could this lack of creativity be the result of creative companies not getting as much work because more and more companies are encouraging their consumers to come up with marketing ideas? Is this leading to a brain drain from the creative area of the advertising/marketing world?In Canada, Doritos consumers were asked to name a new chip for them and come up with an ad for it. I've seen numerous requests for consumers to help work on a new packaging look for products (Pepsi, Kokanee, etc.). Is this costing us good creative? Who knows, I certainly don't have any stats to back it up.
Maybe its just companies being less willing to step out on a ledge and actually stand out from the crowd. Play it safe and hope for the best. Seems like a waste of money to me.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
The death of print media
This topic is pretty prevalent in the news these days and is at the forefront of marketing discussions everywhere. Print media is dying and newspapers are not adapting to the new world quick enough to survive. I was watching the Daily Show with Jon Stewart the other day and as much as they create a satirical news program, they still do a good job reporting on some of the major issues in the world (albeit in a different form from traditional newscasts).
The show in question had a segment done by correspondent Jason Jones, fast forward to 4:30 of the clip, http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/full-episodes/june-10-2009/#clip180782 (canadian version, for american go to Comedy Central June 10th, part 1). He went to the New York Times and talked with employees about the newspaper situation. He summed up the entire segment with this question to the Assistant Managing Editor of the paper "Why is aged news better than real time news?" and then asks the editor to "Give me one thing in there that happened today." He then finishes the interview by asking an editor "What's black and white and red all over?" the answer being the New York Times financial statements.
As entertaining as the clip is it raises good points for both sides of the argument. Newspapers don't deliver news in a timely enough manner for the new generation, they use rss feeds, blogs, online video, etc. From the newspapers point of view, you get people on the ground where the action is happening, experts in their area, and well versed/researched in the subject they are writing about. Which often times is not the case with a blog.
So, while the battle rages on, its becoming more and more evident that not long down the road the majority of newspaper presses will be coming to a stop as more and more people get their news electronically.
The show in question had a segment done by correspondent Jason Jones, fast forward to 4:30 of the clip, http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/full-episodes/june-10-2009/#clip180782 (canadian version, for american go to Comedy Central June 10th, part 1). He went to the New York Times and talked with employees about the newspaper situation. He summed up the entire segment with this question to the Assistant Managing Editor of the paper "Why is aged news better than real time news?" and then asks the editor to "Give me one thing in there that happened today." He then finishes the interview by asking an editor "What's black and white and red all over?" the answer being the New York Times financial statements.
As entertaining as the clip is it raises good points for both sides of the argument. Newspapers don't deliver news in a timely enough manner for the new generation, they use rss feeds, blogs, online video, etc. From the newspapers point of view, you get people on the ground where the action is happening, experts in their area, and well versed/researched in the subject they are writing about. Which often times is not the case with a blog.
So, while the battle rages on, its becoming more and more evident that not long down the road the majority of newspaper presses will be coming to a stop as more and more people get their news electronically.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Google makes my life easier
Maybe thats why their stock is completely overpriced?
Last week I talked about how Google sent me this great offer that made me feel like an important part of their monstrous engine. I blogged about it. This week I had the follow up call with a competent, nice, helpful optimization strategist to further discuss their offer. Here's what she told me the offer is:
- They will come up with an optimized adwords campaign for our main line of business
- 3 different text ads and the keywords that go along with each ad
- Using a qualified adwords strategy team that will work personally to help improve the value of our adwords
- Will return the proposal with the completed campaign in 5 working days
oh, and did I forget to mention that this is all.....FREE. All my company has to do is promise to use their proposed ads for a month since they will be putting their time into it.
Yeah, as in doesn't cost my company a dime, and hopefully will help return a greater ROI with the current money we are spending on adwords.
She was basically daring me to say no. How can you possibly turn that down.
I'm getting Google's search expertice, their knowledge in adwords, and a finished marketing campaign for $0. If I didn't know they had more money than God himself, I would feel sorry for them.
But it just goes to show you how well Google knows how to play the game. I can't even imagine the number of companies that use Adwords as a main source of their marketing, so when they are offered a way to use this chunk of their marketing budget more effectively they might just be a little excited. Hmm maybe that will lead to some goodwill towards Google, a blog entry, a mention to a colleague in passing. Well played Google, i'm thoroughly impressed.
When you add that to the list of other things that Google does for me for free (Analytics, maps, etc.) it makes one wonder: Why Bing! when you can Google?
Last week I talked about how Google sent me this great offer that made me feel like an important part of their monstrous engine. I blogged about it. This week I had the follow up call with a competent, nice, helpful optimization strategist to further discuss their offer. Here's what she told me the offer is:
- They will come up with an optimized adwords campaign for our main line of business
- 3 different text ads and the keywords that go along with each ad
- Using a qualified adwords strategy team that will work personally to help improve the value of our adwords
- Will return the proposal with the completed campaign in 5 working days
oh, and did I forget to mention that this is all.....FREE. All my company has to do is promise to use their proposed ads for a month since they will be putting their time into it.
Yeah, as in doesn't cost my company a dime, and hopefully will help return a greater ROI with the current money we are spending on adwords.
She was basically daring me to say no. How can you possibly turn that down.
I'm getting Google's search expertice, their knowledge in adwords, and a finished marketing campaign for $0. If I didn't know they had more money than God himself, I would feel sorry for them.
But it just goes to show you how well Google knows how to play the game. I can't even imagine the number of companies that use Adwords as a main source of their marketing, so when they are offered a way to use this chunk of their marketing budget more effectively they might just be a little excited. Hmm maybe that will lead to some goodwill towards Google, a blog entry, a mention to a colleague in passing. Well played Google, i'm thoroughly impressed.
When you add that to the list of other things that Google does for me for free (Analytics, maps, etc.) it makes one wonder: Why Bing! when you can Google?
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
What's your motivation to buy GM.....Ever?
I am a GM owner. I bought a Chevy, partly because my Dzedo worked for them practically his whole life, and partly because I got a good deal.
Why would I ever buy a GM again? Why would anyone buy a GM?
They have one of the toughest tracks back to significance ahead of them. The people that buy their cars "bailed" them out 6 months ago, now they are bankrupt. Thats left a rather bitter taste in their mouth I'd say.
They probably have the worst vision of any car company ever, partly because they are locked in to certain things by their unions, and i'm guessing a huge part is poor management. Why have they not changed their course of action? Stop selling trucks, suvs, high gas-guzzling vehicles! Okay maybe not all of them, but start focusing on what people want now, anticipate the future. Smaller, economical, greener. Easy buzzwords and it doesn't take a genius to recognize that. So what does GM do? They flash around the Chevy Volt, an electric car that has style and looks groundbreaking. And they flash it some more, then a little more, and finally a little more. Where is the Volt???? Make it a priority to get that car on the road! Can you imagine the impact/goodwill you would get by being that first major car company to roll out an electric vehicle? Nope, they will just continue to tease and annoy their customers with it.
Everybody is getting frustrated by this GM saga and the ridiculous deal the unions have been able to manage over the years is completely absurd and coming to the forefront nowadays. Isn't it time the union members go to their leaders and say...."Uh, i'd like to keep my job why don't we roll back salaries to a reasonable level?" Never going to happen I realize.
Joseph Jaffe also made a similar post ranting about GM's timing of their new commercial (commerical can be viewed by clicking the link) and got some serious response from GMs guys pretty quickly, although the GM posters were taking it much much much to personally. Makes for good reading though. I think Christopher Barger (GMs director of Social Media) made the right decision in inviting Jaffe to join Fritz on Thursday, but at the same time he came off as an arrogant dick.
This is the kind of attitude that wanes a lot of my motivation to buy GM again, they think they are ENTITLED to us buying cars from them because they are a large employer and have been around for so long, whereas they should be working their asses off to prove to us why we should support such an obvious collasal failure. Maybe this is their starting point though.
Why would I ever buy a GM again? Why would anyone buy a GM?
They have one of the toughest tracks back to significance ahead of them. The people that buy their cars "bailed" them out 6 months ago, now they are bankrupt. Thats left a rather bitter taste in their mouth I'd say.
They probably have the worst vision of any car company ever, partly because they are locked in to certain things by their unions, and i'm guessing a huge part is poor management. Why have they not changed their course of action? Stop selling trucks, suvs, high gas-guzzling vehicles! Okay maybe not all of them, but start focusing on what people want now, anticipate the future. Smaller, economical, greener. Easy buzzwords and it doesn't take a genius to recognize that. So what does GM do? They flash around the Chevy Volt, an electric car that has style and looks groundbreaking. And they flash it some more, then a little more, and finally a little more. Where is the Volt???? Make it a priority to get that car on the road! Can you imagine the impact/goodwill you would get by being that first major car company to roll out an electric vehicle? Nope, they will just continue to tease and annoy their customers with it.
Everybody is getting frustrated by this GM saga and the ridiculous deal the unions have been able to manage over the years is completely absurd and coming to the forefront nowadays. Isn't it time the union members go to their leaders and say...."Uh, i'd like to keep my job why don't we roll back salaries to a reasonable level?" Never going to happen I realize.
Joseph Jaffe also made a similar post ranting about GM's timing of their new commercial (commerical can be viewed by clicking the link) and got some serious response from GMs guys pretty quickly, although the GM posters were taking it much much much to personally. Makes for good reading though. I think Christopher Barger (GMs director of Social Media) made the right decision in inviting Jaffe to join Fritz on Thursday, but at the same time he came off as an arrogant dick.
This is the kind of attitude that wanes a lot of my motivation to buy GM again, they think they are ENTITLED to us buying cars from them because they are a large employer and have been around for so long, whereas they should be working their asses off to prove to us why we should support such an obvious collasal failure. Maybe this is their starting point though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
