A recent Fortune Magazine article talks about the challenges companies and brands continue to face turning Facebook into a valuable marketing tool. Too many brands have jumped on the Facebook bandwagon without fully understanding what they are trying to accomplish or how it might help them connect with consumers. To quote J.M. Barrie from Peter Pan, it’s as if they believe that all they need is “faith, and trust, and pixie dust.” Simply having a presence on Facebook or even a significant number of “likes” does not mean the brand’s efforts were successful. As the article notes, “(m)ore than half of Facebook users say they seldom visit a brand’s page once they tell the rest of the world it’s a keeper, while 55% of Facebook users have “liked” a company one minute, then decided they don’t the next. “[M]ore than half the time, the company receives no direct feedback about the consumer’s desire to stop seeing their posts,” says the report. “Kind of like a long-distance relationship where your beloved forgets to tell you they’ve moved on.”" To work, a Facebook strategy must have clearly defined objectives from the outset, continuous monitoring and adjustment, and a willingness to change gears if something goes amiss. That’s the only way to really get to the second star on the right.
Amazon Kindle has finally opened up its platform to advertisers. So now, there are two versions – ads, or no ads. However, as is the case with Pandora or with any “lite” version of an app where the ad supported version is free for download, the Kindle will still cost people money. Amazon is decreasing the price for the Kindle by $25, if the consumer is okay with seeing ads on a regular basis. I’m not impressed. $25 is a nice % discount, but it is not enough. As an advertiser, I love that there is another platform for me to reach my target market, however as an avid reader who has not gone Kindle yet, this will not convert me.
Back to me as an advertiser. While I commend Amazon for opening up an additional advertising touch point and another revenue stream, in order for an advertiser to get an ad into a Kindle, there are hoops to jump through. First, there is a minimum spend. This is partly due to the “hype” of advertising in the Kindle along side the operational cost of reformatting content to fit the platform and for measurability (impressions and clicks). While this may be common place, the minimum spend is not so minimum, and in most cases is equal to the maximum spend that most advertisers are willing to shell out for one publisher overall. The other issue is lead time. In a digital ad world where creative versioning based on learnings is happening in real time, Kindle advertising requires over a month to load. Not very progressive, and a huge deterrent for DR advertisers. Excuse me, Amazon, can you please address accountability. How can you segment my ad (demo, contextual, genre)? How many people will see it? What happens after the click? Can we use 3rd party validation?
While the platform is still new, take it as you will, I do have faith that these pain points will be fixed in due time – however, I am not sold just yet.
Over the past week, Google execs and Sales representatives alike have been speaking agency to agency touting their most recent SEM development, the +1. Google is finally taking a leap into the “socialsphere” and a shot at taking share away from Facebook. Ultimately, the +1 is Google’s version of a “like” button on Facebook. If you click the +1 and are linked to your friends via the Google Profile network, then your friends will see your Search Results recommendations, or your +1′s.
By introducing this type of technology, advertisers question what impact this will have on targetability – can I now target ads on the Google Display Network to those that +1 a certain topic? How about deliver keyword to those that have a +1 threshold? Lot’s of questions.
Think of it this way- does getting a +1 on your listing drive up your organic ranking? If so, will there be a click fraud issue?
I’m curious to see how this plays out in the future, but I applaud Google’s new addition…for now.
As of today there are two cable providers offering owners of an iIPad the opportunity to watch live television programs on this expensive new toy. Time Warner offers their app as an offshoot of a cable subscription via the Internet, while Cablevision’s television content will be delivered to the iPad via a secure digital tv network through a special router.
The big question is whether either of these companies has the right to provide television programs through their existing affiliate agreements with the cable and broadcast networks. Right now, both services say they can provide these programs without additional carrying fees but not everyone agrees.
In this first iteration of iPad TV, programming must be viewed within the home which lends weight to the argument that the iPad app it basically a wireless , albeit lovely, hand-held tv set you can carry to any room in your home . Importantly, Cablevision also claims that their app meets all the technical requirements for audience measurement, making it an interesting learning opportunity for advertisers in this new environment.
That all sounds good – but there is still a lot of confusion on the carriage rules, monetization opportunities and audience measurement as they try to figure out who gets paid, and who pays, for the content. No doubt, this could get ugly in the short term, but one thing is certain. This new train has left the station , and there is no turning back. No matter what it’s called, and regardless of whose pocket gets picked in the end, “TV” content is going to be made available through each new emerging platform, because the viewer wants it that way — CHOO, CHOO.
Cyndi and Michele