Archive for September 22, 2010

September 30, 2010

Posted by Ian McKee in Blog, WordPress | Comment Here | Via Mashable

Microsoft and Automattic, the parent company of WordPress.com, announced today that the Windows Live Spaces blogging service will be phased out in favor of WordPress.com. Users of the service will have the ability to transfer their blogs via a new migration utility beginning today.

In a post on Inside Windows Live, Dharmesh Mehta, director, Windows Live product management, said:

“Over the last few weeks, we’ve spent a good bit of time talking about our approach to partnering with the web, and as part of that, how we’re deeply integrating with the leading consumer services that you find most valuable….

As we looked at customers’ blogging needs and what different companies were providing, we were particularly interested in what WordPress (WordPress).com is doing….

So rather than having Windows Live invest in a competing blogging service, we decided the best thing we could do for our customers was to give them a great blogging solution through WordPress.com.”

Automattic’s Paul Kim added on the Just Another WordPress Weblog:

“Over a six month period, beginning today, Windows Live Spaces users will have the option to move their blogs to WordPress.com. To make this possible, we’ve created a brand new importer for Windows Live Spaces to WordPress.com. New Windows Live users will also be offered a WordPress.com blog when they choose to create a new blog.”

WordPress.com currently hosts nearly 14 million blogs. If even half of the 30 million blogs on Windows Live Spaces make the transition, it’s a major client acquisition for the WordPress.com service.

September 29, 2010

Posted by Ian McKee in Blog, Word of Mouth | Comment Here | Via Knowledge@Wharton

If your hair stylist gave you $10 every time you sent one of your friends her way, you might be more tempted to tell all of your buddies what a fabulous stylist she was — or you might even try to make new friends to refer.

This clever method of customer acquisition is a form of word-of-mouth (WOM) marketing known as a referral program. While such programs have been used for decades by not-for-profit organizations like PBS, similar customer referral programs have also become increasingly popular with companies in a wide range of industries, from financial services and automobiles to newspapers and hotels. Christophe Van den Bulte, a professor of marketing at Wharton, describes customer referral programs as an effective way to attract higher quality customers. “They are an old idea that’s getting more traction these days,” he notes, “and we now have solid evidence of their financial benefits.”

According to a new study titled, “Referral Programs and Customer Value” (to be published in the January 2011 issue of the American Marketing Association’s Journal of Marketing), customer referral programs are indeed a financially attractive way for firms to acquire new customers. The study — authored by Van den Bulte, Bernd Skiera and Philipp Schmitt, a professor and doctoral student, respectively, at Goethe-University in Frankfurt, Germany — was conducted over a period of three years and followed the customer referral program of a leading German bank (which remained anonymous) that paid customers 25 euro for bringing in a new customer.

Van den Bulte says it is no coincidence that the study was conducted with colleagues based in Frankfurt, a city considered the eurozone’s financial capital, and the home not only of the European Central Bank, the Bundesbank and the Eurex, but also of the headquarters for several large banks, including Deutsche Bank, Commerzbank and KfW.

The objective of the study was two-fold, Van den Bulte states. “There’s a lot of talk about word-of-mouth-marketing, and about making money out of social connections. Our first objective was to see if customer referral programs can indeed turn social capital into economic capital. Second, we wanted to come up with a methodology to assess the effectiveness of customer referral programs that was easy to implement with data and tools available to many managers.”

Using information from a database of 10,000 customers acquired by the bank in 2006 — about half of them through the institution’s referral program and the other half through traditional marketing efforts such as direct mail and advertising — the study tackled three questions:

  • Do referred customers have higher margins than other customers?
  • Do referred customers stay longer with the firm than other customers?
  • Do referred customers have a higher customer lifetime value (CLV), the net present value of all the profits a customer generates over his or her entire association with the firm?

The answers, according to the study, are all positive.

An analysis of customer activity from January 2006 until September 2008, a total of 33 months, showed that referred customers indeed generated higher margins than other customers. This difference was quite sizable at first, but eroded over time and came down to zero after about 1,000 days.

This pattern, Van den Bulte notes, is consistent with what is known as the “better-matching mechanism”, which has been documented in studies by economic sociologists at MIT on employee referral programs. The practice involves employees getting paid for bringing in new hires and is especially popular in high-tech industries.

“As a customer, I know my bank better than non-customers do. I also know my friends better than my bank does,” Van den Bulte points out. “I have a better idea than my bank about which of my friends would be a good match for the bank, and vice versa. This is the better-matching argument: The existing customer knows both the bank and the prospect, and so has superior information to assess to what extent there is a good fit between the two. Using that information, I only refer prospects who I feel will match well with my bank.”

This “superior match” phenomenon explains why the margins documented at the beginning of the study were higher for the referred customer than for the customer acquired through traditional marketing efforts. Well-matched customers simply generate more revenue at a lower cost to the firm.

As the bank worked with the new customers, however, the two parties learned about each other from their own interactions and no longer needed to rely on having a third party in common (the customer who made the referral). The initial information advantage from superior matching eroded as the relationships between the bank and new customers developed, and so did the margin advantage. Thus, the better-matching effect also explains why the difference in margin eroded over time.

Sharing a Bond

The second key finding was about customer retention. Referred customers were about 18% more likely to stay with the bank than other customers, and that gap did not fade over time. This pattern, Van den Bulte suggests, is consistent with another mechanism documented in previous studies on employee referral programs. People tend to have a stronger attachment to an organization if their friends or acquaintances share a bond to the same establishment.

The researchers also concluded that the difference in margin combined with the difference in customer retention amounted to a disparity in long-term customer value of 16% to 25%. “That’s not only a sizable chunk of money,” Van den Bulte says, “it also amounts to a 60% ROI over six years on the 25 euro that the bank paid for every referral.”

Many practitioners, including managers of the bank who made the data available, fear that referral programs suffer from “moral hazard,” where opportunistic customers bring in “deadbeats and other unprofitable new customers just to earn a referral fee,” Van den Bulte states. However, the study shows that the benefits of a customer referral program can outweigh such negatives, making the programs pay off financially.

According to Van den Bulte, this is the first study ever published on the financial evaluation of customer referral programs. “We actually have hard financial numbers, not vague feel-good stories or abstract statistical coefficients. Our findings and methodology are something that financial managers can actually understand and apply immediately,” he says.

It helps that the techniques used to conduct the study were simple and straightforward, he adds. “You can basically [calculate the value using] Excel. You don’t need a master’s degree in statistics; a smart intern or decent marketing consultant can do it. We hope our study will actually motivate and help companies to assess how effective their referral programs are.” The margin, customer retention and customer value numbers, he notes, will vary across industries and customer segments, but the procedures used in the study can be put into practice at any company with customer profitability data.

Van den Bulte says that referral programs featuring a financial pay-out are likely to remain a B2C practice, “because paying referral fees to B2B customers’ employees could be conceived as a bribe. Pharmaceutical and medical companies sometimes get in hot water with the FDA for remunerating opinion leaders to educate fellow physicians about the benefits of new products, so I expect that paying someone money just to bring in a new B2B customer or lead will be frowned upon. Of course, the absence of financial pay-outs does not mean that customer referrals are any less important in B2B markets. Companies just have to be more creative in finding proper incentives enabling them to capitalize on their existing customers’ networks.”

Why does a study on the financial benefits of customer referral programs make sense now? The recent trend toward viral, or social, marketing is one reason, but Van den Bulte notes that there is also a general belief that the ROI on traditional marketing has been decreasing. Consequently, companies feel that something must be done to “get a bigger bang for our marketing dollars.” This in turn has put marketers under pressure to quantify the return on their expenditures. “Marketing accountability is a major trend nowadays. One of the appeals of using a customer referral program is that you know exactly how much you put into it and, as our study shows, you can also calculate how much you’re getting out of it.”

Although the study compared the financial value of customers acquired through referral programs versus traditional channels, Van den Bulte and his colleagues now plan to compare the behavior of pairs of referring and referred customers, asking such questions as, “If one stops being a customer of the bank, does the other have a higher chance of leaving as well?” and “Do high-value referrers tend to bring in high-value referrals?” The answers, Van den Bulte says, are important to identify the best customers toward which referral programs should be targeted. The team has already begun analyzing the data and hopes to have new insights ready within a year.

Via [Knowledge@Wharton]

September 28, 2010

Global – The daily deal service Groupon, which quietly started in Chicago in November 2008, is a sensation.

In less than two years, it has grown to 29 countries, 230 markets and boasts 17 million subscribers who get daily offers on everything from leg-waxing sessions and amusement parks to restaurants. It’s estimated to be on track to record $500 million in revenue this year and perhaps double that in 2011. Forbes has christened it “the fastest-growing company ever,” boasting a $1 billion valuation.

Its success can be attributed to several factors — and traditional advertising is definitely not one of them.

Groupon, in fact, whose marketing is essentially built into the product, has done all this without the machinery of Madison Avenue, either to build its brand with deal-seeking customers or to entice businesses to its marketing platform.

Groupon’s approach “reflects a bit of the transformation of markets and the way in which advertising agencies have to respond,” said Ed Cotton, director of strategy at Butler Shine Stern & Partners.

Because the marketing appeal is built into Groupon’s product, he explained, it doesn’t have much need for what Madison Avenue specializes in: the creation of brand images and strategy, and distribution of them through paid media.

Groupon, which takes a percentage of the revenue generated, boasts an advantage in the world of branding: the social aspect of its service. Each day, a Groupon editor chooses a limited-time bargain at a steep discount that’s e-mailed to subscribers.

The deal “tips” (goes into effect) only when a certain number of people buy it. This helps encourage viral pass along (the service has grown so big that its deals tip over 95 percent of the time). The offers themselves are often for social activities — eating out, renting bikes, going to a comedy club — that also entice sharing.

Aaron Cooper, SVP of marketing at Groupon, saod there’s no need to hire traditional marketers: the firm believes it knows how to market itself better than agencies.

“When you deeply understand your customer and product, you’re going to be better, there’s no doubt. There’s no way that can be communicated by weekly phone calls. You just miss too much,” said Cooper, who arrived at the company two-and-a-half months ago following five years in online marketing at Orbitz.

But unlike the wave of internet juggernauts built on discovery and communication, like Google and Facebook, Groupon has not shied away from advertising, and its ads are ubiquitous on Google’s ad network. According to Nielsen, Groupon served over 600 million U.S. display ad impressions in August. (The company won’t reveal its online ad spending.)

Cooper, who calls Google “a huge partner,” said they are not relying only on ad networks and self-service ad platforms. It has also inked deals with sites like IAC-owned Evite, which shows a Groupon deal when users respond to an invitation. And it courts national deals, such as a Gap promotion in August that saw 440,000 coupons redeemed and netted the company $11 million in revenue.

It’s also riding the wave of earned media with a PR operation that includes its “Live Off Groupon” challenge, which came from CEO Andrew Mason. The winner, Josh Stevens, is trying to live off Groupons for a year.

He’s garnered 1,900 Twitter followers, nearly 8,000 Facebook Likes and, more importantly for building the brand outside the Web crowd, appeared on a Today show segment in May. The idea is to not only help build awareness of the service, but further cement its quirky brand image, said Cooper.

The question for Groupon is whether it can continue its meteoric growth with this playbook. Cooper said nothing is off the table, including more traditional branding approaches involving TV.

The company faces a raft of competitors like Yipit, Gilt Groupe and especially LivingSocial, which has raised nearly $50 million in venture capital. (Groupon has raised $150 million.)

LivingSocial CEO Tim O’Shaughnessy said that such social platforms have altered the marketing playing field. For instance, he said, LivingSocial has already built four products that have attracted over 1 million users.

“There’s not a lot of agencies that can say that, if any,” O’Shaughnessy said. “It’s a core piece of how we evolved. We know how to reach consumers and reach them with the right messages.”

Of course, history has shown that even fast-growing internet companies sometimes need to take more traditional steps, especially as the competition heats up. Google never advertised — until it ran a commercial during last year’s Super Bowl.

“There comes a time when a brand becomes big enough that it needs … to leverage the power of TV,” said Cotton. “But they can grow quite a lot more by continuing what they’re doing.”

September 27, 2010

McDonald’s may be a large brand, but it doesn’t always want to invest large budgets in marketing. With a little help from Foursquare this Spring, the fast food chain increased foot traffic 33% in one day with an investment of less than $1,000.

Rick Wion, head of social media at McDonald’s, is a big fan of such pilot programs. As he says, “the bigger your budget is, the harder it is to scale.”

Speaking at the Mobile Social Communications conference in New York, Wion explained that “an app is not a strategy.” However, for many businesses trying to get into the social marketing space, it can be confusing and overwhelming to figure out where and when to invest their time and money.

Wion suggests creating pilot programs with small amounts of money and using the results to win over executives and shape larger marketing efforts.

Wion started at McDonald’s just a few weeks before Foursquare Day this year, a consumer generated event that celebrated the check-in service on April 16. He noticed the postive word of mouth surrounding the national event and decided to contact the organizers to foster a partnership. McDonald’s ended up offering 100 giftcards to Foursquare users who checked into McDonald’s establishments on 4/16.

Rather than offer coupons to every person who checked into a McDonald’s that day, Wion decided to choose random winners. While not guaranteed a prize, many users checked into McDonald’s for the chance to win the $5 and $10 giftcards.

Moreover, even before the special went live, there was an uptick in check-ins to McDonald’s stores. McDonald’s saw over 50 articles and blog posts written about their special, and won 600,000 new fans and followers. Overall, there was 99% positive feedback.

The most important metric for Wion was foot traffic. On Foursquare Day, McDonald’s saw a 33% increase in check-ins from the day prior. And for the week of the special, check-ins increased 40%. Says Wion:

“I was able to go to some of our marketing people — some of whom had never heard of Foursquare — and say, ‘Guess what. With this one little effort, we were able to get a 33% increase in foot traffic to the stores.’”

Of course, the increase could have been attributed to McDonald’s current customers simply using the new digital interface of Foursquare, but creating a communication line between customers and a brand can help to increase both customer loyalty and sales.

With this special, Wion also sidestepped an implementation problem that chains may have with check-in services like Foursquare. Right now, consumers redeem specials on Foursquare by showing their phones to cashiers and employees of brands that have partnered with the company. But at an international chain like McDonald’s with 14,000 stores, it’s difficult to expect every cashier to know what specials are being offered on differing digital platforms. Says Wion:

“We want it to be point of sale so that the burden to know the different specials isn’t on the crew person behind the counter.”

In addition to this pilot program with Foursquare, Wion is working to implement all sorts of new digital marketing tools at McDonald’s. They’re looking to leverage To-Do’s and check-ins, mobile wallet technologies, bolster live events through digital and partner with multiple digital platforms.

“Ultimately we’re going to have a whole suite of ways to engage with people.”

But with all of those, the company is likely to use a similar pilot testing method. Says Wion of Foursquare Day:

“If it costs us $50,000 to do a pilot program in mobile social, that doesn’t scale.”

September 22, 2010

While celebrities have high numbers of Twitter followers, those followers usually have minimal reach and influence, according to social media consulting firm Sysomos.

Celebrity Followers Offer More Quantity than Quality
Celebrities seem to have large amounts of followers with low Twitter authority levels (see “About the Data” for more information on how authority levels are determined). Of five celebrities examined, the average follower of President Barack Obama had the highest authority rating on a scale of 0 to 10, 2.4. The most common authority score among Obama’s roughly 4.2 million followers is 1, held by 20%.

Interestingly, the celebrity whose fans had the second-highest authority score of 2.1, pop singer Lady Gaga, had the second-lowest following of about 4.5 million. The most common authority score of followers of all celebrities except Obama was 0.

Actor Ashton Kutcher had the highest number of followers (about 5.1 million), and the third-highest average authority score (1.8). Pop singer Britney Spears had the lowest average follower authority score (1.3) and second-highest number of followers (about 4.8 million).

Celebrities seem to have large amounts of followers with low Twitter authority levels. This could be because they attract everyone from all walks of life. Some people may only be on Twitter to see what their favorite stars have to tweet about. In addition, most celebrity followers tracked by Sysomos had few followers themselves, pushing down their authority scores.

Social Media Heavyweight Followers Have Most Authority
Social media heavyweights, private citizens who have made a name for themselves on Twitter, had the fewest followers but the highest average authority scores for their followers. Following the pattern seen with celebrity tweeters, the social media heavyweight with the fewest followers, Jason Falls (27,195), had the highest average follower authority score (4.8).

Conversely, the two social media heavyweights with the most followers, Chris Brogan (139,693) and Jeremiah Owyang (64,775), tied for the lowest average follower authority score of 4. The most common authority score for all social media heavyweight followers was either 4 or 5.

Online Media Beats Traditional Media
On the whole, the five news/media sources tracked by Sysomos show more variety among their scores than the celebrities or social media heavyweights. However, online media sources attracted fewer followers with higher average authority scores than traditional media sources.

Online media source Read Write Web, with about 1 million followers, had an average follower authority score of 3, which was also its most common follower authority score (19%). This tied online media source Mashable in average authority score, most common authority score and percentage of followers with the most common authority score. Mashable has more followers with about 2 million.

Online media source Tech Crunch ties traditional media source Time.com with an average follower authority of 2.4 and most common follower authority score of 2, at virtually the same percentage. However, Time.com has significantly more total followers (2.1 million) than Tech Crunch (1.4 million).

Traditional media source New York Times has the highest total number of followers (about 2.5 million) and lowest average authority score (2.2). It also has by far the lowest most common authority score of 0 (22%). Not surprisingly, sources that specialize in social media attract users that are more active on Twitter.

Facebook Fans More Valuable Customers
While there is variation in the value of different types of Twitter followers, on the whole Facebook fans of a brand provide more value as customers than non-fans, according to a new study from digital consulting firm Syncapse Corp.

The average value a Facebook fan provides a brand is $136.38, but it can swing to $270.77 in the best case or go down to $0 in the worst. This value is based on Syncapse analysis of five factors per fan: product spending, brand loyalty, propensity to recommend, brand affinity and earned media value.

On average, a Facebook fan participates with a brand 10 times a year and will make one recommendation. Value can differ significantly by individual brand. For example, in the case of Coca- Cola, the best case for fan value reaches $316.78 but is $137.84 for an average fan. In the worse case scenario, a fan is worth $0.

About the Data: Using its social media monitoring and analytics platform, Sysomos looked at the authority rankings of five celebrities, five social media heavyweights and five media organizations. Rankings were based on the kind of Twitter users following these celebrities, social media heavyweights and media organizations. Each Twitter user is assigned an authority ranking between 0 to 10 – with 10 signifying someone with very high reach and influence. This authority ranking is based on the number of followers, following, updates, retweets and several similar measures used by Sysomos.

Page 1 of 4
1
2
3
4