Ok, maybe it’s not a pun in the biblical sense but I think it’s a pun nevertheless. If you don’t agree with me, that’s perfectly fine. And while I am not the world’s greatest speller – although I did come in 2nd place in the 6th grade spelling bee a few years back, the reason for my incorrect spelling of the word “mover” is due to the fact that I want to tell you about something called “muuver.”

As per their description on the crowdfunding site indiegogo.com, “muuver is a simple to use social app that let’s you share your hypes and gripes, kudos & complaints, likes, and dislikes – about ANYTHING. muuver then takes your hype or gripe about an item and adds it to the ‘item page’ where you can see everybody else’s posts who hyped or griped about that item.”

Now I am a self-admitted social media junkie and anytime I hear of something new on the social media landscape I am usually drawn to it for at the very least to learn more about it.

Such was the case with muuver. When I heard about it then read about it on indiegogo.com, I was intrigued and wanted to learn more.

So I tracked down the president of muuver, Paul Marek to learn more. I asked him the obvious questions of what exactly muuver is, how it works, do we really need another social media network and so on. But I started off  querying him on why crowdfunding as a way to raise capital vs. the VC route – which other type startups seem to prefer.

SO: Why crowdfunding and not the traditional venture capital route?

PM: I  decided to go the crowdfunding route after attempting to put together a few pitch decks. It was then I realized I was focusing too much on getting VC funding, and not worrying enough about getting the tool built for people to use so it could gain traction, so I stopped pursuing VCs. But there is one VC I’d really like to partner with – Vinod Khosla. I love his attitude about failure. I’d really like to partner with him and his group to leverage their wisdom and connections.

Anyway, this is the power to the people tool, and I think turning to the people is the answer. I think the people should help build the tool, not have it in the hands of any one financial interest. In fact, we have a muuvment on the site called the “Use the tool to build the tool” muuvment. Essentially, since muuver is a tool for people to leave their opinion, we want to get their opinions about ALL the important aspects of muuver, from simple app functionalities, to helping us create our privacy policy.

This has to be built by the people, for the people, from the ground up. Therefore, in keeping with the theme of muuver, crowdfunding was the only road we could take.

SO: What is muuver?

PM: That’s a complex answer, but at it’s essence, muuver is a tool that is designed to give power back to the people. It’s designed to instantly connect and assemble people who share common ideas into groups, and uses the power of the collective voice of the group to create what we call a “muuvment”.

It’s complex because muuver is essentially a mashup of Facebook, Twitter, StumbleUpon, Yelp, Klout and Wikipedia, which is a lot of functionality all rolled into one. But, we’ve actually made it extremely simple to use. In it’s simplest form, muuver is a place where you share your hypes, gripes, kudos, complaints, likes and dislikes… about anything. But then muuver automatically does a whole lot more from there.

Here’s an example of how it works:

Let’s say you want to post a gripe about CompanyXYZ. Posting a hype or a gripe is actually quite easy – you just use our ‘muuvtags’ instead of Twitter’s ‘hashtags’. To make a muuvtag, you put a PLUS sign in from of something you like, or a MINUS sign in front of something you dislike. If your item is more than one word, you just close the phrase with a plus or minus sign. So, to post your gripe you would post it like this “I had a really bad experience with -Company XYZ-.

The complexity grows from there, but muuver takes over and does the rest by adding your post to a page that only displays posts about that same item. So, your gripe about Company XYZ will get added to the “Company XYZ Item Page”, which displays everyone else’s post about Company XYZ. Company XYZ can then “Claim” that page and respond to people’s hypes and gripes in full transparency. This is where the power is. But the item page not only shows everyone’s post about the item with Company XYZ’s responses, it also shows a bunch of stats about the item like its overall +/- score, it lets you “watch” or follow the item, it displays the item’s popularity on muuver, shows total number of posts about the item, it’s total number of ‘voters’, and lots more that we’ll be revealing soon.

The +/- score is the most impactful stat though, because I think people don’t just want to see how many people “like” a company, service, or product – they want to see how many people DISLIKE it too. Seeing both is seeing the truth. But muuver does this with ANYTHING that people put into it, not just products or companies. The users create the items.

But it goes even further from there. Since everyone who has an opinion about Company XYZ is now all in one place, we can then put this focused group into action. From here users will have access to a set of tools called a “muuvement” that anyone can create and manage. Muuvments are exactly what it sounds like – a group of people focused on a particular cause or action. Our muuvment suite of online tools has everything you need to inspire and manage your group into action, including their own status feed, forums, event management systems and calendars, petitions, and a whole lot more.

SO: What do you say to people who say “oh great, another social media network?”

PM: This is the issue I’m most focused on. My entire effort is to ensure that muuver is not just “another social network”.

From a user standpoint, I feel that the old social sites each have critical elements missing that make them far less effective than they could be. Twitter has the character limitation, Facebook only has a Like button, StumbleUpon and Yelp are missing the deep  networking aspect, and generally speaking, these sites are mostly just social fluff – pretty pictures and breakfast menus.

Yes, people have figured out ways to create huge social changes using these limited tools, people are innovative. But these old social networks were not designed specifically as tools to create social change – muuver is.

We take all the best aspects from each of the old networks, to make one that answers the yearning that people have had since the internet began – using it to create change. We’re also eliminating user friction by allowing users access to muuver with any other major social account. And they can share their posts to any social account as well.

SO: What effect will muuver have on brands and businesses?

PM: From a business standpoint, I’m almost afraid to predict what kind of impact this will have. Companies will have to address issues that people raise in on muuver in full transparency, directly with the person having the issue. Companies won’t have a choice about getting on muuver – the users will put them here. WHEN companies get involved will be the issue for them. But it’ll work both ways… companies will get the full benefit of people’s hypes, kudos and likes as well.

SO: When will the site will go into Beta and when will it go live?

PM: Our crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo lasts for 60 days, which is mid July. We’re hoping to launch our Beta platform a few weeks later at the end of July – it’ll depend how our crowdfunding campaign goes. Some of the perks we’re offering in our crowdfund campaign give the contributor immediate access to our alpha platform, and we’ll be using those lucky people to start creating a nice data set that Beta users can then begin to interact with when we launch at the end of July. When a full public launch will take place after that will be up to the Beta users to vote on and decide.

***

Ok, so what do you think of all this?

Do you think this sounds like something you would be interested in?

Me? I honestly don’t know if muuver is something I will ultimately use or not. I will more than likely kick its proverbial tires when it goes live.

Image source: Google Images

Back in April a headline on cnet.com read: Location information to make mobile ads more valuable. In the article the writer made reference to two interviews in which “the CEO of the mapping app Waze and ad executives Jason Spero from Google and Mollie Spilman of Millennial Media talked up the importance of users’ GPS location information to help tailor advertising.”

Seems the folks at Facebook are paying attention to the ever-growing popularity of location based advertising as witnessed in Parmy Olson’s Forbes column on May 9th in which she wrote of the fact that Facebook (is) In Talks To Buy Waze For $1 Billion.

But today I want to share with you a completely different take on location-based advertising. A take that has nothing to do with mobile phones or devices.

It’s what I think is a brilliant advertising campaign aimed at raising awareness of child abuse and its victims. It comes from the Spanish organization - ANAR Foundation (Aid to Children and Adolescents at Risk).  Working with their agency, they used lenticular printing to create outdoor ads that look different to an adult and child.

So, depending on your height, or your location, you will see a different ad.

Adults seeing the ad will see an awareness campaign message that reads: ”sometimes, child abuse is only visible to the child suffering it.”

But when viewed from the average height of a 10-year old child, the ad is completely different. It displays an image of a child who has been abused and includes the hotline number for ANAR where children who are the victims of abuse can get help and counseling. As I mentioned I think this is a brilliant campaign as it takes advantage of lenticular printing thereby delivering two messages through one ad.

It is also brilliant from the standpoint that the aforementioned phone number is only visible to those being abused with the thought being if a child abuse victim views the ad while with his/her abuser, they will see the number while the abuser will not.

The video below shows how the ad is seen in real time.

Source: YouTube, Google Images, cnet.com, Forbes

(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

And at that time I didn’t know if the rebrand campaign that ill-fated CEO Ron Johnson was undertaking would in fact be classified as epic when the dust settled.

Well, today, I can tell you from where I sit the rebranding campaign does not appear to have been an epic failure. At least not from what I’ve seen coming from JCP headquarters.

In case you missed this:

That of course was J.C. Penney’s latest television commercial which all but comes out and says “we screwed up, please forgive us.”

Forbes contributor  Clare O’Connor  in her May 1st column wrote how “J.C. Penney is going on the offensive, apologizing to shoppers alienated by Johnson’s controversial store revamps.” Also on May 1st, Will Burns penned With New Ad, J.C. Penney Plays The Card It Can Only Play Once. Will’s title is spot on as surely such a mea culpa campaign can only be used once. So it better work.

And I think it will.

Which brings me to Laura’ Heller’s column on May 2nd - J.C. Penney Is Listening, And Getting A Huge Response. In her article Laura writes of the increasing popularity of J.C. Penney’s Facebook page and in particular their “We’re Listening” post.

From The Man Himself

James Cash Penney once said “I believe in trusting men, not only once but twice – in giving a failure another chance.”

I wonder how the man himself would view this most recent rebrand and if he himself would label it as an epic failure and if he would in fact trust those who made the decision in the first place and thereby give them another chance to right their wrong?

Of course we will never know how he would’ve responded but I would imagine he would’ve been of the mindset that at the end of the day the consumer will tells us if we were right or not.

And since we live in an extraordinarily forgiving society and where our world is transparency on steroids – I believe this mea culpa will ultimately work in J.C. Penney’s favor.

Now of course there are provisos to this.

1. They must, MUST stay the course. Discounts and coupons are back and they need to stay that way. The people have spoken. Yes, you are listening JCP. Now keep listening.
2. Maintain complete and open transparency. You got down on your knees and asked for mercy from the court of public opinion. Fine. But once you’re off your knees, don’t forget where you came from.
3. Don’t overthink this. If you have a subpar quarter now and then, don’t fall into the trap of running to your ad agency with another rebrand edict at the top of your To Do List.

At the end of the day no one has a crystal ball of course. No one can predict the future. All we can do is learn from our past.

Clearly J.C. Penney is trying to do just that.

Now, we wait and see if they learned anything.

Source: Forbes

I prefaced my column that day because I am indeed a very curious person and in that particular context in that particular article I was referring to “programmatic advertising.”

In the piece I shared a conversation I had with Gurbaksh Chahal who is the Founder, Chairman & CEO of a company called RadiumOne. whose platform“is designed for today’s real-time,programmatic media landscape.” And while I had a great chat with Gurbaksh, my curiosity remained piqued, as it were.

As luck would have it  a few weeks ago I was introduced to a gentleman by the name of Eric Bosco, who is the new CEO of ChoiceStream - a company that deals in the world of  ”programmatic advertising” among other things.

Recently I had the opportunity to throw a few questions Eric’s way but instead of diving right into programmatic advertising, buying and bidding, I decided to start off with a much more global, all-encompassing query.

SO: How is digital advertising changing?

EB: The allure of digital advertising has long been its inherent one-to-one nature. However, until recently we have only realized one-to-one metrics – who clicked on an ad and who converted. Now, consumers are more complex than ever, forming fragmented audiences spread over plentiful and diverse content. Additionally, new technologies such as programmatic buying have enabled bidding on each ad impression separately as well. This empowers marketers to pick and choose one audience member at a time and show them a relevant ad.

We’re at an inflection point in the evolution of digital advertising. Media buying will become increasingly programmatic, campaigns will become much more efficient, and ads will become more relevant. The shift to programmatic buying is being driven by two catalysts.

The first catalyst is the ubiquity of the digital advertising method.  Now, on a large scale, digital ad technology is being used to deliver advertising in all sorts of channels including TV, mobile, tablets and even in-store kiosks. Where once there were many disparate platforms with separate technology, metrics, and delivery models, today’s market is converging and marketers can take advantage of a more unified stack in all these channels.

The second catalyst is the rapid growth of computational capacity, enabling scalable ad technologies including: Data Management Platforms, Real-Time Bidding, Audience Targeting, and Optimization. The intelligence resulting from these synergistic systems — when applied to programmatic buying in the unified stack — enables digital advertisers to gain performance while improving relevance for consumers.

There will be several of winners who profit from this seismic shift in digital advertising. The first set includes developers of the two distinct components of programmatic buying: Real-Time Bidding and Continual Optimization. The second set of winners will be publishers whose premium content and premium audiences will be bid up as more programmatic buyers enter the market. The third set of winners will be the marketers who acquire internal expertise and develop the partnerships necessary to operate in the evolving ad ecosystem.

Q: What are programmatic buying and Real-Time Bidding?

EB: At its heart, programmatic buying is an automated auction in which ad impressions are traded, one impression at a time. The systems that run the auctions are called exchanges and systems that buy programmatically in these auctions are called Real Time Bidders. IDC has projected programmatic buying will grow at a 53% clip per year in the United States between now and 2016, while Forrester Research has claimed that programmatic buying will ultimately capture the bulk of all digital advertising spending.

Two basic approaches are used in programmatic buying. In Price-Based Trading, the goal is to buy impressions as cheaply as possible –improving campaigns simply by reducing costs.  Targeting and optimization in these systems may be derived from analysis, but it is largely a manual (therefore infrequent) process.  Because these early systems treat all impressions like remnant and focus on price, we have witnessed a downward pressure on pricing raising concerns about a “race to the bottom.”  We do not see this trend continuing.

The second approach is Value-Based Trading, in which the system continually learns from ad responses and automatically values each impression based on the probability of a response and the value of a response for each campaign. Value-Based Trading works to achieve the greatest margin between media cost and response value for each campaign. By recognizing when expensive impressions are well worth the cost and when inexpensive impressions do not deliver value, value based systems maximize ROI.  These advanced systems will bid high for valuable impressions.  For example, our monthly Audience Cost Index provides some early evidence of wide pricing ranges where some impressions are recognized as premium and command significantly higher prices.

SO: Why should a CMO add this to the mix?

EB: Programmatic buying should be part of every CMO’s marketing arsenal. It is a labor efficient and cost efficient way to accurately reach huge audiences. When backed up by continual optimization for value, it can be very effective for performance focused campaigns.

Perhaps even more exciting for CMOs is programmatic buying of display ads to support top-of-the-funnel goals: such as acquiring “followers” or building awareness. Often, these top-of-the-funnel tactics are expensive (think Super Bowl ads) and the results can be hard to quantify. Now, brands can buy digital ad impressions efficiently and leverage the analysis to discover the right audience and gain insights. Programmatic buying may be the best way a savvy CMO can get cost-effective access to large numbers and wide varieties of consumers across all content, day-parts, and devices.

SO: What’s an example of a big brand using programmatic buying successfully?

EB: One brand seeing success with programmatic buying is Zappos!  The online retailer of apparel, footwear and more has a performance goal that they established through a year of experience with all of the partners in their plan. When we applied value-based programmatic buying techniques, the early results were 15 percent better than the goal. Programmatic buying backed by algorithms that continually learn and optimize campaign performance will show month-to-month improvement in performance.

Zappos! also worked with our creative services to deliver contextually relevant dynamic ads that show apparel or footwear that is in-line with local weather conditions. So Samantha, experiencing snow in Syracuse, will get an ad for boots and sweaters while Fred expecting fun-in-the-sun in Phoenix, will see an ad for flip-flops and shorts. Between these creative services and continual optimization, Zappos! has further improved results over the first few months to beat their goal by 30 percent.

SO: What do you suggest those new to programmatic buying do to get started?

EB: Pick a partner.  It’s really not any harder than that.  The right partner can bring a marketer up to speed quickly while managing the risk and performance for them.

No marketer can do this alone, so they need to get serious about identifying an internal advocate, then testing several vendors.

Choose vendors that can provide a breadth of audiences (access to exchanges) and depth of data to meet your goals. Deep data requires algorithms and computational power capable of analyzing third party data (available from a number of providers) and advertisers’ first party data (which includes CRM, email, customer data, etc.). The best programmatic buying partners will also be able to provide their own proprietary second party data that can enrich and inform the campaign. Those vendors should be able to demonstrate continual optimization and value-based bidding. Throughout each campaign, marketers should receive insights through audience profiles and performance breakdowns to inform not only the optimization of the campaign as it happens, but future campaigns and even overall marketing strategies.  After that, it’s important to look for something special.

We have a product we call “Active Audience,” which embeds a branded poll in ads. The self declared attitudes and intents gathered from poll responses reveal unexpected insights and greatly focus campaigns. Finally, vendors should act as real partners, providing full services and sharing the risks and rewards of success.

Image Source: Google Images

Back in November of last year I scribed The Need For Marketing Integration – The Defense Rests. In that now ill-titled piece, I wrote of something I came across on MarketingCharts.com: Multichannel Retailers Struggle To Create A Seamless Brand Experience.

In my foolish exuberance I wrote the aforementioned “Defense Never Rests” piece thinking (or maybe not) that I had now presented enough evidence to prove my point which was integrated marketing is essential for today’s brands. In case you didn’t know, I have written numerous articles on the topic of integrated marketing with the one referenced above just being among the latest.

See I figured there was nothing left to say, no further evidence was required to make my case.

I was wrong.

Of course I was wrong.

What was I thinking?

The defense can never rest until every marketer in every corner of the world understands and truly comprehends integrated marketing, and why it is so important for their ultimate success.

I Give You Exhibit ???

I have lost count as to what letter of exhibits of evidence I am up to and quite frankly don’t even care anymore.

What I do care about is when I see something like the following:

Accenture Study Shows U.S. Consumers Want a Seamless Shopping Experience Across Store, Online and Mobile that Many Retailers are Struggling to Deliver

As you can probably tell (you’re smart enough to pick up on this) I am referring to something from Accenture. To be honest it could’ve come from anywhere – well maybe not anywhere, but just the fact I saw this headline on a press release from earlier this month caused me to scream aloud: Not again!

The opening line of the release read as follows:

“Retailers that deliver on their customers’ expectations and provide them with a seamless shopping experience – whether they are shopping in a store, online or through a mobile device – will win their loyalty and gain a competitive advantage that drives sales.”

By the way it appears we have a new word for integrated: Seamless. Fine. Call it kumbaya marketing for all I care. Just do it and do it right or don’t do it at all.

Anyway as you can see the opening line to the release drove home the point and need for integrated marketing. It is what consumers want for crying out loud so why wouldn’t you give it to them?

Oh right, you don’t know how.

From the aforementioned MarketingCharts.com piece:

So, Mr. and Mrs. Marketer know what Mr. and Mrs. Consumer want. They simply do not how to give it to them.

That sounds like a problem to me, does it not?

Did I mention consumers want this?

The defense (never) rests.

Sources: Accenture, MarketingCharts.com

The amount of data brands collect today from all the various channels: social media, email, mobile, and on and on is enormous.

Over the past year or so I’ve written three different articles about Big Data including one in January 2012 entitled Why CMOs Need To Get Real About The Policy Implications Of Big Data.

In that particular piece I made reference to a study done by IBM the year before of more than 1,700 CMOs from around the world who were asked to identify their four biggest challenges  and at the top of the list was Big Data.

Also in that same article I interviewed an attorney who has worked with many Fortune 1000 companies advising them on issues related to cyber security, privacy and data breaches.

However, according to the aforementioned professors, all the talk about  Big Data and privacy may be, as they put it, “a tempest in a teapot.”

Do Not Track Legislation

Back in February of this year I read an article from the New York Times Senator Seeks More Data Rights for Online Consumers. The article dealt with the fact that Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia wants to “give American consumers more meaningful control over personal data collected about them online.”

So I decided to reach out to Eric Bradlow and Peter Fader, Professors of Marketing and Co-Directors of the Wharton Customer Analytics Initiative who have studied the problem of data-privacy from an empirical perspective. Their research shows that brands and companies who are on a “data diet” don’t necessarily lose that much customer insights because limited customer data in conjunction with aggregate information (less privacy sensitive) can still provide precise insights.

And when it comes to personal data, Fader says bluntly that “most sensitive data is worthless and firms are often making mistakes to try to use it (or even collect it).” And adds that “when you build a really good model, there isn’t a whole lot to be gained by bringing in personal data. ”

The concept of a “data diet” is nothing new for Bradlow and Fader. In a March 2009 interview with Knowledge @Wharton, the online business journal of the Wharton School, they spoke of something they referred to as “data minimization” or “data diet.” The concept behind this is relatively simple: Brands should keep the data they need to stay competitive and ditch everything else. In the interview Bradlow spoke of a trepidation among brands to discard ANY piece of data.

“I think there is a fear and paranoia among companies that … if they don’t keep every little piece of information on a customer, they can’t function,” said Bradlow. “Companies continue to squirrel away data for a rainy day. We’re not saying throw data away meaninglessly, but use what you need for forecasting and get rid of the rest.”

Click here to read the full interview with professors Bradlow and Fader.

Big Brands, Big Decisions

In addition to reaching out to the professors I also wanted to get the perspective of someone from the brand perspective to see how a brand – in this case a very large brand, is dealing with and handling the topic of the pending Do Not Track legislation and how they are currently handling the issue itself on their end.

So I tracked down, no pun intended, Christa Carone, the CMO of Xerox to get her thoughts on all this.

She told me from Xerox’s point of view they believe there are two issues that need to be addressed: First, is there value for the public to have the option to receive targeted advertising? And, second should the public make their own choice about this, or should governments/companies do it for them?

“Xerox selectively engages in behavioral targeting, and finds it to be effective,” she said. However, she added that Xerox is a long-standing supporter of giving consumers’ choice on whether they want to receive more targeted communications from brands. “We were an early adopter of AdChoices,” she continued. “And we began implementing the AdChoices’ icon on our corporate ad units in 2011.”

One telling statistic she shared me with was the fact across of their corporate units they had just one person elect to opt-out. She questioned whether this lack of action (opting out) was due to a lack of understanding or simply because the consumer chose to opt out. “It’s likely a combination of both,” she told me.

Full Transparency 

The need, or better still the benefit of coming clean and being as open and honest with consumers has never been more paramount than it is right now. The digital age affords no place to hide – be it figuratively or literally. Brands must be right up front with consumers and Carone is in full agreement.

“As an advertiser, we believe the industry can do a better job of being transparent about this issue — driving consistent practices, systems and policies and helping to educate the public,” she told me. She took it one step further saying  Xerox believes consumers should have a choice about whether behavioral targeting benefits their purchasing process.

So, regardless of just how much a given brand stores and uses, the bottom line is there is an inherent responsibility for brands of all shapes and sizes to tell consumers what it is they’re doing, why they’re doing it and how it can and will benefit them.

Sources: Google Images, New York Times, Knowledge @Wharton, Forbes

The article essentially spoke to the fact that some brands will do whatever it takes, regardless of such minor details as ethics and morals, to move their product, whatever said product may be. And that they will go right on doing what they’ve always done which is to essentially use any medium necessary – email, print, direct marketing, TV, radio, mobile and on and on to drive their message home to as many consumers they possibly can.

Seems I forgot to mention one medium: social media.

And it also seems a brand has offered itself up as an example of a brand who has no problem crossing that line.

‘Epicurious’ Enrages Followers With Boston Bombings Tweets

That was the headline in Mashable the other day and I’m sure you can find other stories about the same topic if you search.

In a complete ironic twist of fate the following was in an email newsletter I received via Smart Brief a few days ago:

The reason it was ironic is that I saw this chart on the same day I read about Epicurious’ Tweets is due to the fact that this was sent out via the Epicurious Twitter account:

Now I do not know who at Epicurious was at the Twitter helm when these Tweets were sent out but you can be darn sure – at least I hope so for their sake, that whomever did write and Tweet these messages should have all brand-generated Twitter (and social media) privileges revoked immediately.

My guess it was more than one person doing the Tweeting. But that’s only a guess.

The above Tweets were eventually removed when someone woke up and/or the backlash drove them to their senses and the brand did Tweet out the following mea culpa:

Ok so damage control was under way. That’s good. Owning up to a mistake is the first step.

But what’s truly bizarre in all this is the fact this Tweet below went out before the offending Tweets:

How in the world do explain the above Tweet going out and then sending out Tweets where they were clearly trying to capitalize on something that was both horrific and very popular among social media users?

Appalling and galling doesn’t even begin to cover it.

It is worth pointing out that at last check, there have been no new Tweets from Epicurious since the apology Tweet above. That’s two days and counting and nothing. Not a good move. Finding the nearest pile of sand and burying your head in it solves nothing.

You  made a mistake, you owned up to it, you apologized for it.

Move on. Get back to Tweeting what you usually Tweet about only be just a tad more sensitive going forward, huh?

One final Tweet to share with you which sums up my thoughts perfectly:

Sources: Mashable, Yahoo, Smart Brief, Forbes

They will go right on doing what they’ve always done which is to essentially use any medium necessary - email, print, direct marketing, TV, radio, mobile and on and on – to drive their message home to as many consumers they possibly can.

For these brands there is no line between capitalism and capitalization.

Before I continue let me put the word “capitalization” in its proper context for this particular article. As you will see when I use the word “capitalization” I am not referring to a brand “capitalizing” on an opportunity to further sales, i.e., a new product launch. No, I am referring to a brand capitalizing on or taking advantage of a given situation a consumer finds himself/herself in at any given moment of time – all to move their product, whatever said product may be.

Fair Weather Friends

Last October – the 31st to be exact, perhaps apropos given how “scary” this one act by this one brand truly was – I wrote an article entitled American Apparel’s Hurricane Sandy Sale – Brilliant or Boneheaded?

The basis of the article was my complete disdain for American Apparel’s decision to send out the following email on the heels of the devastating storm, Hurricane Sandy:

I will not rehash my thoughts on all this; you can read the full article for yourself. But you can probably tell by my use of the word “disdain” I was not a fan of such “capitalizing” emails.

The issue of using the weather as a barometer – pun intended – for placing ads came up again recently as I read a story in Ad Week about Ace Hardware running ads for such items as snow shovels and de-icers.

Jeff Gooding, Ace’s marketing director, told Ad Week that the company wants “to reach folks in real time and help them deal with the weather as it’s coming.”  And paraphrasing the brand’s tagline, he said that “the idea of helping has traditionally been part of our brand, and it’s becoming a part of our mobile strategy.”

Is This The Fine Line?

So on one hand you have a brand, Ace, selling shovels to people who clearly need them and as such would be more willing then to buy one than, say, during a sunny day.

And on the other hand you have same brand, Ace, who will also now run ads to help people know when to plant during a given planting season and of course where to buy all necessary planting materials – all based on the weather.

Is taking advantage of someone in need – those who need shovels, any different than helping someone know when to plant a flower?

I know full well that each of these examples differs greatly from the aforementioned American Apparel example. Obviously you don’t need jeans during a hurricane whereas you may need a shovel during a snowstorm.

Another example of a brand buying ads based on the weather is Taco Bell, who will run mobile ads on the very popular smartphone app from The Weather Channel. However, they will only run the ads when the temperature is above 48 degrees with the thought being that that’s the time when people are more likely to venture out for burritos and chalupas, according to Eric Perko, associate media director at Digitas, Taco Bell’s digital agency, as told to Ad Week.

Isn’t that kind of weather-generated ad less invasive, less exploitive than an ad that features shovels to someone who may need one?

Surely it is far less exploitive than trying to capitalize on a hurricane via an ad for apparel, right?

Paging Nancy Naive, White Courtesy Phone

I know that I may very well in fact be Ms. Naive in thinking that some advertisers and marketers won’t stoop to any level to move product – that those advertisers I mentioned earlier will go to any length to sell consumers something without regard one to their given individual situation – akin to selling a drowning man a glass of water. Or in this context selling a drowning man a glass of water in the middle of a thunderstorm.

Look, I want clients to be as successful as they can possibly be for when they are, everybody’s happy. I get that. Trust me, I get it.

The bottom line to me comes down to one word: responsibility.

Brands have a tremendous amount of responsibility to “do the right thing.”

But not only that, but to do the right thing at the right time.

Now whether or not those at the controls of a given brand know what the right thing is or not is an entirely different question and topic for another time.

Sources: Ad Week, Google Images, Forbes

Well, Mr. Pitt’s and my striking resemblances aside, the reason for my article is to share with you something I discovered that ties in the concept of Moneyball with sales and marketing. Now for those of you who are not familiar with the term “Moneyball” please allow me to explain.

The term itself comes from the title of a book written by Michael Lewis in 2003 called Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. The book is about the Oakland Athletics baseball team and the highly unusual and controversial methods they took to compete as a small market team with little money against larger market, bigger budget teams such as the Yankees.

The team’s general manager, Billy Beane (played by Pitt in the movie) decided to use a completely different set of statistics to gauge a player’s value and these methods often flew in the face of conventional baseball wisdom and the beliefs of many scouts and executives.

While the team never won a World Series (yet) using the Moneyball approach, the A’s have proven that their approach can work as witnessed by their 20 game winning streak in 2002, the longest of its kind in American League history – longer than even the most consecutive wins by the vaunted Yankees.

Moneyball For Sales And Marketing

A few weeks ago I was introduced to Peter Mollins, the VP of Marketing for KnowledgeTree - a company that specializes in helping companies use and improve their best collateral. Peter and I got to talking and he told me about the Moneyball approach to collateral and content marketing.

He also shared with me a very cool infographic he and his team put together to visually convey the concept of Moneyball for sales and marketing which is below.

SO: How does the theory of Moneyball apply to Sales & Content Marketing?

PC: You only have so many at-bats with a prospect. So, each interaction needs to have impact. And when the prospect is disconnected from you, they need to be producing a winning business case for your solutions. That’s why it’s so important to arm your prospect with great content. Content that advances a sales process. But what do you send? The same content you’ve always used? Generic content that doesn’t speak to their needs? Of course not. You need to test which content works and works for different sales stages. Versus different competitors. For different pain points. And then put the right content into play. That’s the Moneyball approach.

SO: What do you see as being the biggest mistake brands make when it comes to sales & content marketing?

PC: The biggest mistake that these brands make is to forget that they tune their messaging in email campaigns, website content, and more. But why aren’t they doing it for the content that your prospects build their internal business cases around, the content that closes business? Generic messages and generalized content don’t close deals. Deals get closed by sales people armed with content that’s focused on the pains that a prospect is trying to ease. B2B customers need to know that you are speaking their language.

SO: Why do you think these same brands continue to keep making these same mistakes?

PC: These organizations keep making the mistake because it is a gray area between sales and marketing teams. Collateral generally gets produced by marketing and consumed by sales. So, how do you make sure that the right marketing content is getting surfaced to the sales team. And how does sales get feedback back to marketing to make sure content continues to improve? The divide between sales and marketing, the communication around what resonates with prospects, has to be bridged.

Cover image via Amazon

Source: Forbes

As we turn the page on another season, it’s worth pointing out just how lucrative a tournament appearance can mean for a school especially if said school exceeds all expectations and goes on the proverbial Cinderella-esque run.

For those entrusted with marketing and advertising such a school, the financial impact such a run can be astonishing and quite beneficial in the ol’ piggy bank.

Without opening a Pandora’s box re: should college athletes be compensated, put this in your pipe and smoke it: Last year in 2012 sales from licensed collegiate retail items came in at $4.62 billion which ranks it second only to Major League Baseball in total licensed revenue.

The statistic is courtesy of the Collegiate Licensing Company, the licensing affiliate of IMG College, the nation’s largest collegiate marketing firm.  The $4.62 billion represents the the apex of a 10-year growth spurt that has seen collegiate licensing spike every year but one (2009) to increase from $2.9 billion in 2004.

Ben C. Sutton Jr., President of IMG College says schools of all sizes benefit tremendously from getting into the Big Dance. “An invitation to the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament is a big deal for schools, particularly the perennial ‘Cinderella stories,” he said. “Whether a school is an established powerhouse, or a David slaying a Goliath, the impact of getting an invite to ‘the Dance’ benefits universities any number of ways, including stronger licensed merchandise sales.”

Sutton shared with me some examples of those Cinderellas and just how they benefited from their improbable runs in the tournament:

• George Mason & VCU - In 2006 and 2011 the Patriots and the Rams made runs to the Final Four, respectively.
  • George Mason saw an increase of 143% in licensing revenue in the same year they made it to the Final Four
  • And online sales of licensed George Mason retail items were 200% higher than Florida, LSU, and UCLA (the other Final Four participants)
  • For VCU in the quarter after the tournament ended they experienced their largest royalty generating quarter in school history
  • In fact their quarterly licensed revenue was more than any they had seen in any year prior to making the Final Four
• Butler - In 2010 the Bulldogs not only made it to the Final Four, they made it all the way to the championship game. Despite losing to Connecticut the Bulldogs scored big time in the licensing pocketbook as sales in the Butler bookstore alone increased 500%. And according to Dick’s Sporting Goods, in the 5 days leading up to the 2010 Final Four, Butler was the #1-selling school of all Final Four participants – among powerhouse schools Duke, West Virginia and Michigan State.

Not Just Active Students

Of course not all the revenue that comes streaming in is from those who are actually attending a given university. As Marty Brochstein, SVP Industry Relations and Information, Licensing Industry Merchandisers Association tells it, it’s the alumni too and there’s always a human element to wearing your team’s colors proudly.

“Collegiate licensing is built on emotion, It might be the fond memories of or pride in your alma mater, but a huge percentage of the business is built on athletic success,” said Brochstein. “Just look at the crowd at any March Madness game, or the championship events in any of the other collegiate sports. You’ll see an awful lot of school colors!”

He also says that schools are getting smarter and taking advantage of the digital age. “Major universities have gotten much more sophisticated in how they approach the merchandising business, whether in the growing array of products they license or the retail distribution channels they populate, including much greater availability through online retail that makes products that much more available outside their immediate home markets.”

As for the schools themselves they know full well the financial reward that comes with an invitation to the tournament and subsequent extended run.

“For many programs, March Madness ranks up there with the holiday season and football kickoff in terms of importance for the licensing program, ” says Kris Kassell, Associate Athletic Director, External Operations at Gonzaga University. “Because of the anticipation of March Madness, particularly when a team is having a good season, a long tournament run can easily trigger one of the top licensing events over the course of the year.”

Even a more established school and brand can reap the rewards of a success March Madness run. “We have clearly felt the effects of the national championship” says Jason Schlafers, Senior Associate Athletics Director, University of Kentucky, last year’s champion. “Over the past year, there has been unprecedented retail interest in our licensed products. Many factors  lead to a successful licensing program, but you certainly cannot minimize the effect of athletics success in driving revenue.”

Sources: Forbes, Dallas News

Rutgers athletic director Tim Pernetti in announcing the decision said ”I am responsible for the decision to attempt a rehabilitation of Coach Rice. Dismissal and corrective action were debated in December, and I thought it was in the best interest of everyone to rehabilitate, but I was wrong. Moving forward, I will work to regain the trust of the Rutgers community.”

Here’s the videotape in question, first aired on the ESPN show Outside The Lines on Tuesday:

The Lesson For Brands

Lesson #1: Never put anything or anyone ahead of the brand itself.

When the videotape was first brought to the attention of both Pernetti and university president Robert Barchi in November, their collective decision was to suspend Rice for three games and fine him $50,000.

Really? That was it?

Could the fact that Pernetti hired Rice in the first place have anything do with it?

Could Pernetti have been trying to cover his own you-know-what by not acting in a more direct, forthright manner in the first place?

Of course no one will ever know for sure so it’s merely conjecture at this point but it is worth noting at the very least.

How can you explain that it took for the videotape to become public and the subsequent outcry via social media and every other medium to finally do the right thing? As Jeff Pearlman wrote in his piece for SportsIllustrated.com “Shame on Rutgers for not firing Mike Rice immediately.”

Lesson #2: Learn from the past.

Not even three years ago Rutgers University was witness to a truly horrific series of events culminating in the suicide of Tyler Clementi, an 18-year old freshman who took his own life after a roommate recorded him kissing another man in their dorm room and then posting the video online.

As Pearlman so astutely points out in his column “… while perhaps other colleges and universities could be excused for having a tin ear when it comes to gay bullying, Rutgers cannot. It is shameful.”

Shameful doesn’t even begin to cover it.

How could this university, this brand to put it into context, allow something like this to go on knowing that transpired less than 36 months prior?

Lesson #3: Trust is everything to a brand and once it’s gone, it’s very hard to get back.

In an article I wrote last August Did The Penn State Brand Get The Death Penalty? I told of previous examples of brands who were able to regain the public’s trust including Tylenol.

Father Time is always in control when it comes to these kinds of things of course but when Pernetti says he “will work to regain the trust of the Rutgers community,” he has his work cut out for him – and then some.

See not only must the Rutgers brand seek to regain the trust it must do so with the right people driving the proverbial bus.

At Penn State,  the decision was made, and rightly so I might add, to replace many high-ranking officials including the school president Graham Spanier.

And no, I am in no way comparing the heinous acts that occurred in Happy Valley. So please don’t get there.

What I am saying is how much trust can the public have – and I mean the public far outside “the Rutgers community” in both Pernetti and Barchi.

I for one have none.

And have zero interest in hearing anything either one has to say about things such as “moving forward” and any use of the word “culture.”

Spare me.

Look forward to your comments and thoughts.

Sources: SportsIllustrated.com, ESPN, YouTube, Forbes 

Image Source: Wikipedia

Regardless of the medium or platform or whatever word you prefer to describe all the ways we communicate with consumers, shouldn’t we all collectively been trying to establish a relationship and engage with our customers from the proverbial get-go?

Shouldn’t adopting this type of approach bring with it the subsequent increased revenue we all seek but done in so in a more, of I don’t know, natural way?

Instead of simply coming out guns blazing and bombarding consumers with one ad after another and then trying to relate and engage?

I don’t know, maybe it’s just me.

Maybe I am too naive.

Has The Future Finally Arrived?

Late last year in an article entitled Looking Back, Looking Ahead – CMOs Weigh In, Scott Olrich – who happens to be the CMO of the company I work for - Responsys, said in looking ahead to 2013 “We will see the beginning of what I refer to as “the relationship era” whereby marketers will move away from an acquisition first mentality to a relationship first one. Marketers will focus more on the entire consumer experience to build and foster a long term relationship with a consumer as opposed to just that initial purchase phase.”

Well based on what I saw in a recent eMarketer article, it would appear that both B2B marketers and B2C marketers are finally realizing that engaging and establishing a relationship with consumers is paramount to ultimate success.

Yes, I am fully aware that the above chart refers only to social media. Quite frankly, I don’t care. When I saw this I took it as a positive move toward ALL forms of marketing – not just social.

Was a little disheartened to see the percentage for “improve customer engagement” so much lower on the B2B side compared B2C, however. As soon as I saw that I was instantly reminded of something I wrote last year - Even Though It’s Called B2B, There’s Still A “C” On The Other End.

In that article I essentially reminded all your B2B marketers that no matter it says in the acronym, there’s still a live, breathing person on the other end of that line. Am wondering if too many B2B marketers still don’t grasp this concept and hence the significantly lower percentage re: customer engagement compared to their B2c brethren.

Why Has It Taken This Long?

So why has it taken so long for marketers to identify the need to relate and engage with their customers?

Has it simply been a case of generation after generation of marketer being raised on the fact that the bottom line is always the bottom line? That selling, selling and more selling is the most important thing and that if, along the way you establish a relationship and engage with a consumer, that’s a bonus. But at the end of the day as long as we’re moving product, all is well in the world.

Sources: eMarketer, Google Images, Forbes 

It is surely the curiosity side of my personality that attracts me to them. I love to dig into findings, results and cull what I think is valuable insight and overlay my knowledge and experience and in turn deliver what I hope are informative and helpful takeaways.

Of course said surveys, polls, etc., have to have some actual value to them; they need to bring something to the table, as it were. They can’t be just a survey that someone decided to “throw out there” just for the sake of creating a survey. Also helps if it comes from a reputable source.

Take the recently-released The Demographics of Social Media Users — 2012 from the Pew Research Center. Great example of a well-crafted survey with results provided which are easy to disseminate.

Not long ago I penned a piece entitled This Just In: A Lot Of People Don’t Trust Advertising. The basis for my article was a survey conducted by research firm Lab 42. The tongue-in-cheek title sought to speak to the obvious replies to some very obvious questions.

For example:

• 76% of respondents said ads in general were either “very exaggerated” or “somewhat exaggerated”
• 87% think half or more cleaning ads are photoshopped
• 96% think half or more weight loss ads are photoshopped

Can you believe that no one, not a single person voted for anything other than Yes?

Surely there are businesses and brands out there who believe that “investing in a post-sale relationship is a waste of resources.?”

And c’mon already, there has to be at least one marketer who believes that once a consumer has made a purchase, “they probably won’t have any need for us?”

I for one was shocked – shocked I tell you when I saw the findings.

Sarcasm Aside

Really?

Are you kidding me?

I’ve heard of slow news days but this is ridiculous. This is the best you can do re: a reader poll?

Do you think this insults our collective intelligence just a tad?

Or am I over reacting?

Be honest.

I can take it.

Sources: Smart Brief, Forbes

Photo credit: Wikipedia

The reason for the quotes is that line comes directly from a recently-released Forrester report entitled How To Build Your Brand With Branded Content.

Penned by Forrester Research Principal Analyst Tracy Stokes, the report is chock-full of valuable insight and while stating, as mentioned previously, that branded content offers brands the opportunity to differentiate themselves – “marketers are struggling to build content at scale — to get the right message to the right consumer at the right time.”

Insights & Learnings

As I said earlier, the report is full of great insight and this is perhaps the most powerful or telling.

It’s Forrester’s definition of the term branded content. Now I can see some people raising their eyebrows to say ‘How can a definition be so telling?’

Well, very easily:

“Forrester defines branded content in the consumer marketing arena as: ‘Content that is developed or curated by a brand to provide added consumer value such as entertainment or education. It is designed to build brand consideration and affinity, not sell a product or service. It is not a paid ad, sponsorship, or product placement.’”

To me the most operative and vital words in the above are “designed to build brand consideration and affinity” and “not sell a product or service.”

It is very much a fine line a given brand walks when it comes to branded content marketing. Just as the report itself states: “Branded content provides support to the brand when done right.”

In other words, branded content is not the place to go on and on about how great your brand is and how great your new widget is or anything even remotely tied to sales.

That Five-Letter Word Again

A few weeks ago I wrote post This Just In: A Lot Of People Don’t Trust Advertising. My tongue-in-cheek title aside, the article made reference to a study which showed that, well, a lot of people simply do not trust advertising.

It was not my first and surely will not be my last article where the main component and underlying theme is a certain five-letter word: trust.

The Forrester report touches on trust and sure enough it shows the same thing: people do not trust advertising – especially in Europe.

What they do trust, however, is what their friends and family say about a given brand.

So What’s A Brand To Do?

Well aside from enlisting some good old fashioned brand ambassadors to help spread the word, Forrester has identified four ways branded content can help build a true brand:

1. Educate and inform to build a trusted brand.
2. Create topical, shareable content to build a remarkable brand.
3. Develop stand-out content to build an unmistakable brand.
4. Become part of your customers’ daily routine to build an essential brand.

And among their recommendations Forrester says marketers need to shift from random acts of content to purposeful storytelling.

In other words don’t just post and share content haphazardly.

Have a plan, execute the plan and then measure the results over and over.

And by all means, tell a story.

But just not any story.

Skip the ones that start out “Once upon a time there was a widget on sale for $9.99.”

Sources: How To Build Your Brand With Branded Content, Google Images

So when I heard about “programmatic advertising” I knew I wanted to learn more. As I began to delve into it, I learned of some very interesting statistics related to it and specifically real time bidding (RTB). According to the IDC, “spending on real time-bidded display advertising will accelerate at a 59% compound annual growth rate through 2016, making in the fastest growing segment of digital advertising over the next few years.”

I am surely no math major but it doesn’t take an Al Einstein to know that anything that’s expected to grow at a percentage of 59% annually is something worth sitting up and taking notice of at the very least.

I know of at least one major brand that not only took notice, but put it into practical application and implementation: Kellogg.

Last November Brandon Gutman of Forbes had a conversation with Bob Arnold, Associate Director of Digital Strategy at Kellogg, on their experience with programmatic advertising and media buying. According to Arnold, Kellogg has “seen tremendous results when using programmatic buying” and that “depending on the brand, the digital media ROIs have increased as much as six times.”

Again, no math major here but an ROI of up to six times is nothing to sneeze at, to say the least. Clearly there is something to this “programmatic advertising.”

Need To Know

My desire to learn more about this incredibly exciting form of advertising was all-consuming. It was eating me alive. It kept me up at night. It was driving me crazy.

Ok, perhaps I was a tad melodramatic. Sorry. that’s the screenwriter in me.

But I did want to learn more and as luck would have it I was introduced to a man named Gurbaksh Chahal who is the Founder, Chairman & CEO of a company called RadiumOne. Their platform, as it says right on their home page, “is designed for today’s real-time,programmatic media landscape.”

They’ve worked with such brands as Hyundai, Nature’s Recipe and Disney Resorts.

Perfect.

So I set up a time for a Q&A with Chahal to learn more, what with me being naturally curious and all.

Had to start out with what I thought was the obvious first question – wanted to get his personal definition. And then learn more about his company, what they are doing in the arena and how they are different. And also what he thinks marketers are doing wrong when it comes to advertising in the digital space.

SO: What is “programmatic advertising?”

GC: Programmatic Advertising is the automation of the buying and selling of desktop display, video, FBX, and mobile ads using real-time-bidding. Programmatic describes how online campaigns are booked, flighted, analyzed, and optimized via demand-side software (DSP) interfaces and algorithms.  Our platform powers today’s real-time approach to advertising, reaching 26 billion impressions each day across 700 million users from its own proprietary first-party products.

SO: How is RadiumOne different than other companies/platforms?

GC: RadiumOne is different in how it weaves in social signals as well as campaign performance when amplifying and delivering advertising campaigns across the Web. It captures first-party social intent data from its mobile applications Ping.Me and social sharing and URL shortener tool Po.st and then combines this information with our intelligence layer Sharegraph, to reveal not only the right audiences, but also the first and second degree relationships that are also most likely to respond to a particular ad. If a consumer gravitates to a Hyundai advertisement, it is likely that his friend is also interested in learning more about the same brand. RadiumOne is also the first-to-market for hashtag targeting, creating a way for brands to leverage the public hashtags people use on Twitter to target them with relevant display ads on mobile and desktop.

SO: Tell us more about the “hashtag targeting technology” and how does, if at all, Facebook’s recent announcement that they are looking into incorporating hashtag technology, play into all of it?

GC: Advertising is moving towards capitalizing on “now moments.” We launched our innovative hashtag targeting technology back in Q4 of last year with great success. We found that people are already engaging in online brand conversations on social channels like Twitter, but to date, no one had found a way to monetize this form of social interaction. We are the first-to-market for this targeting technology to allow brands to purchase hashtags like keywords are purchased in search advertising, and then serve ads to the people who are explicitly using these terms.

While Facebook has begun to evaluate the potential of using hashtags just within their social platform, as an FBX integration partner We create a social feedback loop so that we can pull from campaign data across the Internet, from external social channels and then back into Facebook. Hashtags can encompass much more than just a company or a brand name. They can convey an emotion, a category or theme. For example, during holidays like Valentines Day, an advertiser like flowers.com or Mars may wish to target users who tweet #love, #commitment or #gift.

SO: What is the single biggest mistake you see brands making right now in the digital space when it comes to advertising?

GC: Connecting the dots with big data. Data has always been big but, it’s about capturing the right elements from a “big data” set and making it work that shows ROI. They can connect their earned media to make their paid media that much more smarter.

SO: Anything related to Big Data comes with it an issue of privacy. What do you say to brands who voice concerns over the use of Big Data as it relates to privacy?

GC: The beauty about our targeting technologies is that they are entirely opt-in and private. The targeting options are based on anonymous data that is collected over time and may range from targeting a user’s general geographic location to targeting involving a user’s interests and similarities between people. This data may be used to identify and predict the sites and groups of people that are most likely to create a response to an advertiser’s campaign.

Ok, your turn.

What do you think of programmatic advertising?

Have you ever heard of it before?

Have you ever used it before?

Will you consider it moving forward?

And do you think this form of online advertising is in fact the future?

Sources: The Drum, Ad Tech Australia, Forbes

This article is directly squarely at you or as we say in Philly – at yous. (Yes I know the grammar police will be after me but please pardon my brief colloquialism if you will.

If television advertising is on its death bed how do you explain the fact that almost two-thirds (62.4% to be precise) of all advertising dollars spent by the major media buyers was spent on television advertising?

The data, as Joe Mandese put it in his article on Media Post, was “the most empirical view yet of actual media-buying behavior among major ad agencies, because it is based on their actual buys, not the kind of estimates supplied by third-party syndicated researchers or industry analysts.”

In other words, the nearly 65% number is not some pie-in-the sky prediction here boys and girls, it’s a cold, hard fact. You know, the irrefutable kind of fact.

It’s A  Multi-Screen World After All

With the advent of so many different screens – in addition to our dear friend TV that is, surely television must be getting lost in the smartphone, tablet, e-reader, etc., shuffle, right?

Surely consumers who use multiple screens throughout the course a given day – and that number is most assuredly rising, are more apt to prefer viewing an ad on a screen other than television, yes?

Well you may want to hold that thought.

According to results from a Microsoft Advertising survey conducted with Flamingo Research and Ipsos OTX, nearly three-quarters of multi-screen consumers are open to advertising on TV, compared to 57% on computers and 51% on tablets.

Let’s Get One Thing Straight

I am by no means professing my love for television advertising as the sole medium for any advertiser.

On the contrary for as anyone who has followed me knows that I am a huge proponent of integrated marketing or cross-channel marketing. Obviously digital channels like social media and online advertising must play a role given the world we live in. And there’s a reason I wrote late last year that Mobile Marketing (is) Too Large For Brands To Ignore.

You would be a complete fool not to realize our world is now a mobile one for all intents and purposes.

But there’s also a reason I wrote Why Brands Need To Treat Computer Screens Like TV Screens.

Television advertising is not going anywhere anytime soon. Period.

Ok TV-is-dead people, bring it on.

I’m waiting for you.

Sources: Media Post, Marketing Charts

Photo credit: ccharmon

The report, a joint effort between Econsultancy and Responsys (full disclosure: the latter is my employer), highlights the findings of a survey conducted of more than 800 company and agency marketers.

Titled “Marketing Budgets 2013” the report clearly brings to a light a unmistakable paradox when it comes to digital marketing and digital marketers.

The Good

As mentioned, budgets for digital marketing are expected to increase in 2013 with nearly 3/4 of respondents replying they intend to spend more.

To take it one step further, of those companies increasing their digital marketing budgets, 56% will increase them by more than 20%.

So far so good, right?

In case you were out one day last week, we do live in a digital world now so you would think marketers would realize this and thus increase their spend accordingly.

And they are, and here’s specifically where they are planning on spending more:

No surprise here in that content marketing is atop the charts, however, I was somewhat surprised that the percentages associated with mobile marketing were not higher.

Could it be that mobile marketing remains “elephant in the room” for marketers?

Perhaps.

It is good, too, to see that dollars attributed to retention and engagement are increasing.

The Paradox

“A statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.”

That’s just one definition of the word “paradox,” but when you consider the following you will see that that description fits like a glove when it comes to digital marketing and those marketers entrusted with its future.

The following is culled directly from an article discussing the findings written by David Moth, Senior Reporter at Econsultancy:

“But despite the planned increase in investment, only half (50%) of companies surveyed claim to have a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ understanding of ROI from digital marketing. This is down from 55% last year and continuing a trend of decline since 2010 when the figure was 67%. Conversely, the number of businesses that said their understanding of ROI was ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ has steadily increased from 10% in 2010 to 18% this year.”

So, as the spending for digital marketing goes up, the understanding of it, specifically from an ROI perspective, comes down.

And the obvious question is why?

Is it because social media has continued its rampant growth over the same time frame and now mobile marketing is all the rage and both remain an enigma when it comes to true measurement and analytics? Or least to digital marketers?

It’s like going out and buying the latest and greatest whatever – a car, a tool, a piece of machinery, whatever. It’s as if marketers know they need to get this new “thing” because all the other kids have it so they don’t want to be left out.

The problem is when they get it home, there is no instruction manual. And they sit at home feeling frustrated that they can’t play with their new “thing.”

It would appear, however, that that level of frustration is spurring them to take action.

Looks like the “kids” want to “play” and they are willing to spend to learn how to do it.

Sources: Econsultancy, Responsys, Google Images

Well based on the results of a recent joint campaign between Chevy and mobile media company Zumobi, marketers may want to rethink long form content marketing and its potential use on mobile devices.

As part of the Chevrolet Technology Series campaign, the idea was to take a six-part print and digital advertorial series and transform it into a mobile experience that would run across Motor Trend’s print magazine and website, as well apps for iOS and Android devices.

Repurposing Content

The idea to repurpose existing content across other channel is nothing new of course but the idea of taking print and digital content and conveying that same content in a mobile format is unconventional to say the least.

For Carolin Probst-Iyer, manager digital consumer of engagement at General Motor’s Chevrolet Division this was unchartered waters but just another example of Chevy’s commitment  to innovation when it comes to content marketing.

“Chevrolet is always looking for new ways to provide content to consumers,” she said. “By repurposing our content from print and digital we were able to create a new experience for consumers and maintain a cohesive brand identity across mediums.”

She added that “this is the first time that Chevrolet has taken such rich content and provided a way for consumers to interact with this type of material on their  mobile device.”

Rise To The Challenge

Probst-Iyer made the challenge quite clear to the folks at Zumobi. “We presented Zumobi with a challenge to preserve the creative elements of our print and online campaign to create a cohesive brand identity across mediums,” she said. “And yet build a unique experience that addresses the specific usability and content aspects for mobile.”

For his part, Zumobi CEO Ken Willner was more than ready.

“We viewed this campaign as an opportunity to leverage our Zumobi Brand Integration (ZBi) platform and utilize the technology that we have developed in order to bring the Chevrolet Technology Series brand experience to mobile,” he said.

But he said the biggest task was to take content that was created for one medium and use that came content in another medium without losing any of its value.

“The primary challenge we faced was in how to translate this long-form content experience which was originally designed for print, to mobile devices,” said Willner.

Here’s a brief video of what a user would see on his/her mobile device:

The Results Are In

I would say that based on the results below the challenge was not only met, it was exceeded and then some.

• 37% overall mobile engagement rate, meaning that more than one-third of people interacted with the Chevrolet ZBi campaign
• Click-Through Rates (CTR) as high as 11.2% for the ZBi expandable Paso Doble ad units
• 6.8% of users saved the integrated content experience to their home screen via the ZBi Footprint feature, creating a leave-behind app on their mobile device
• People spent as high as 6.4 minutes interacting with the Chevrolet ZBi ads

Overall the campaign yielded engagement stats three times the industry benchmark of 12.8% for mobile rich-media ads as reported by Mobile Marketer and more than thirteen times the average CTR of standard mobile banners.

With all this going for it, you would think marketers across the land would be chomping at the proverbial bit to try this themselves for their clients.

According to Willner it’s not that marketers don’t see the future re: mobile marketing but that using mobile in this way is not second nature the way other mediums are. “While brands and agencies understand the huge opportunity offered by native advertising and branded content, it’s not intuitive that mobile can actually be a great medium to drive this level of user engagement,” he said.

As for what the future holds for marketers, brands, advertisers and so on, Willner says it’s bright.

“Now more than ever, there is an incredible opportunity to deliver on the promise of ‘brand as publisher in mobile advertising,” he remarked. “The appetite among marketers for more native, content-centric brand experiences is growing rapidly and the timing is right for the mobile marketing industry to embrace this movement.”

It’s A Mobile World Kids

I know that’s not breaking news but what are you, as a marketer, advertiser, brand manager and on and on doing to engage your audience where they are spending an increasing amount of their time at/on, AKA their mobile device?

Video Source: Vimeo

Image Source: Find That Logo

Now, ask them if they use any mobile marketing tactics and they’ll tell you that mobile marketing comes right after taking a magic marker and drawing an ad on a bathroom wall in terms of priorities and hierarchy. Am I the only one who finds it amazing – utterly amazing mind you, that despite it’s rapid rise in usage and popularity, mobile marketing – especially text message mobile marketing, remains a mystery and enigma to many marketers?

I am surely not the only one who thinks this way, right?

I know of at least one other person who agrees with me, James Citron, the CEO of a company called Mogreet - “the leader in video text message marketing and mobile technology solutions.”

During a recent conversation with him, he told me that despite the fact that we live in a mobile first society, “many marketers have yet to embrace this new reality.”

It’s Not A New Reality, Either

“Mobile text messaging, the same 160-character dispatches first popularized by nimble-fingered teenagers, may be the closest thing in the information-overloaded digital marketing world to a guaranteed read.”

That was the opening line to an article about text message marketing written in the New York Times – in 2009.

Four whole years ago and still it appears as if marketers would rather plan a campaign using Morse Code than do anything related to mobile and in particular, text message marketing.

So whether it’s fear, ignorance, both or something else, marketers across the land are not capitalizing on the bounty that lies before them. Ponder this little nugget of info James shared with me: “95 out of 100 of your customers who have opted into your text messaging program OPEN and READ your mobile messages within 3 mins.”

Now I am no math major but that sounds like a pretty good percentage to me.

Perhaps that’s the reason James and his team at Mogreet created the recently released 2013 Guide To Text Messaging Regulations & Best Practices. Well he told me they in fact created it “to help marketers better understand how to leverage the ubiquity of mobile messaging, while also staying abreast of the changing regulations and guidelines involved in using this channel of marketing.”

Ok, so there’s that reason, too.

Regardless of the reason, the need was clear to well, clear up any misconceptions and allay any fears marketers may have when it comes to text message mobile marketing.

And wouldn’t you know it, at the top of page 2 of the guide, Mogreet sets out to no, not bust a move, but bust a myth:

So while text message mobile marketing is highly regulated, it is not overly complicated – if you know the rules. And thanks to the folks at Mogreet, you have at the very least, some basic ground rules.

Their guide has some do’s and don’ts of text message (SMS/MMS) mobile marketing including some which can be filed under “common sense” including the fact that this type of marketing is permission based, you should always be completely transparent about your text marketing program, the need for full disclosure and to always get everything in writing.

Again, all of this should be second nature to marketers but of course that’s not always the case, now is it?

More Where That Came From

This is just the tip of the iceberg of course as there are lots of other valuable tips in the guide when it comes to text message mobile marketing including:

• Confirming the Subscribers’ Opt-in and Initial Messaging
• Switching Partners & Shortcodes – How to Migrate Your Mobile Subscribers
• Opt-ins expire. Be Aware of The Six/Eighteen Month Rule
• Now That Your Database Was Built Properly, Time To Message Your Fans
  • The What & When re: content

And lots more including risks and consequences if you do something wrong.I highly recommend downloading and using the guide as a reference.

Today, it’s content marketing.

While all the aforementioned mediums remain and always will be key players in any integrated marketing communications campaign, clearly content marketing is the next big thing – at least for right now.

And a major tool in the content marketing arsenal may be one that many of you have heard of and visited, but perhaps have not used to date - SlideShare.

As per their own site, SlideShare is “ the world’s largest community for sharing presentations. With 60 million monthly visitors and 130 million page views, it is amongst the most visited 200 websites in the world.” SlideShare has also been referred to as “the world’s largest professional content sharing community.”

I would say that’s pretty accurate given the impressive numbers re: visitors, page views and so on, wouldn’t you?

So with all this going for it, SlideShare seems to be an incredibly valuable tool for marketers, brand managers, etc.,  the world over. I decided I needed to get some expert advice for not only myself but for all of you for this tool is truly something I believe we all should be using to some extent.

I reached out to my friend, David Brier who is an award-winning brand specialist consulting small-to-medium sized companies and cities as well as a Fast Company expert blogger. In addition to his controversial blog posts, David incorporates his native New York City candor to his various SlideShare presentations that have in total exceeded 200,000 views across the globe.

Two of his presentations have each recently surpassed the 70,000 views milestone. The first one is “What’s Killing Your Brand (and how to kill it before it kills you)” (over 80,000 as of this writing)  while the newer presentation, “Why is it so hard to create a brand anybody gives a sh*t about?” reached 70,000 views in 10 days.

Clearly if anyone can help marketers and brands understand just how to use SlideShare to its fullest it’s someone like David.

So  I reached out to him to pick his brain.

SO: Why is SlideShare so important for brands and marketers?

DB: SlideShare is pretty unrivaled in being targeted to professionals seeking content and information whereas YouTube is essentially for video entertainment. SlideShare is a great resource, but more importantly, businesses can use SlideShare to get its message out in a venue that is already primed for and seeking information, insight and useful strategies.

SO: What are some Do’s when it comes to SlideShare?

DB: Here are a few guidelines I use:

• Show more. Talk less. (this presentation violates this)
• When in doubt, trim the fat.
• State the problem early on or forget it.
• The problem needs to be a “big picture” type of trend.
• Then you can talk about the solution.
• The solution cannot be “you” but it can be a strategy, a method, an approach
• Contest (or slaughter) a sacred cow. Pick one. Your opening has to have some big bang, or go home, so slaughtering a sacred cow is a good way to start.
• It’s been reported that 45% of the presentations on SlideShare have 10-30 slides with an average of 24 words per slide.
• I leverage the presentation by embedding them in posts I write for Fast Company and my own blog.

SO: What are some Don’ts when it comes to SlideShare?

DB: Some of the things I try to avoid doing:

• Never resorting to using the stock photography and imagery that everyone under the sun also uses.
• Forgetting it’s the audience whose interest I must serve.
• Using too many words to say something that could be said in less words.
• Not including enough humorous points that show the author has some insight (which is my way of rewarding them for showing up and looking at the presentation)
• Don’t make it a shameless self-promo piece, or if you do, it better be:

1. Funny
2. Self-effacing and
3. Able to poke fun at itself or its reason for being

If you used any or all of these words to describe your reaction to the title of this article and you are in marketing or advertising – you may want to seriously consider a career change.

I don’t care what medium we’re talking about – from traditional to digital to mobile to social media, when it comes to advertising, people will always look at it with a jaded eye.

But for some reason the folks at Lab 42, a research firm, decided to pose questions in that vein to elicit responses that quite frankly everyone – and yes their mother, should be painfully aware of.  The very first stat they show on their well-done infographic, with the oh-so-clever headline at the top “DOES IT REALLY AD UP?” – reveals the startling fact that 3% of describe claims made in ads as “inaccurate.”

Truth be told a) I do like the headline (big fan of puns) and b) there are other more-telling and insightful stats to glean from the infographic, which I will get to a little later.

But for now, let’s focus on the apparently not-so-obvious results or findings from the survey which served as fodder for the infographic:

• 76% of respondents said ads in general were either “very exaggerated” or “somewhat exaggerated”
• 87% think half or more cleaning ads are photoshopped
• 96% think half or more weight loss ads are photoshopped

Then there’s this one- a personal favorite:

Wow, so many men (77%) who believe beauty ads are ” very accurate.”

C’mon, it’s men we’re talking about for crying out loud. We want to believe the woman in shampoo ad really does have flowing, wavy hair as she prances in the field of daisies. We want to believe ALL women look like this when they use this particular product.

We’re men, we’re easily duped.

Hello, McFly.

Moving Right Along

As I mentioned there are in fact some insightful stats to glean from the infographic and I surely do not mean to come down on the good folks at Lab 42. They do good work and I have referenced their research in the past – at least I think I have? I’m pretty sure I have.

Anywho, the findings I found to be intriguing and telling were these:

A clear cut message to all brands and marketers come through in these findings.

Stop with the sponsored posts – consumers are not buying it. They see right through it as another attempt to sell them something.

And by all means, when in doubt infuse some humor into what you”re doing. I have long been a proponent of using humor wherever and whenever possible. And now, in today’s relationship-first era we’re in, it is even more important for humor breaks down walls, puts people at ease, relaxes them – all of which makes them more agreeable to at the very least consider buying your product.

Oh, yes I did notice the fact that so many men say a sexy ad leaves a lasting impression on them. Give me a break. The sexier the ad, the more a man is going to focus on the sexy part and less on the most important part – selling.

Here’s the full infographic for your perusal and pleasure.

Sources: Lab 42, Google Images

Let me preface this article by saying categorically I believe very much in the power of branding. I myself (isn’t that redundant?) have worked on many branding campaigns for marketers and advertisers of all sizes and shapes. I know first hand the value of branding done right and done on a consistent basis i.e. staying true to a given brand’s tone and voice over time.

But I also have been witness to a growing trend. A revealing trend that is bringing to the light the fact that more and more consumers are sacrificing brand loyalty for the best price on a given product, service, etc.

• 1/07/2013 - Is Brand Loyalty Dying A Slow And Painful Death?  ”Sponsored by AisleBuyer, a survey conducted earlier this year revealed that nearly 75% of consumers would switch brands if offered real-time discounts and promotions that were delivered to their smartphones in real time while they were shopping in a store.”
• 1/09/2013 - The Most Powerful Brand Ambassadors In The World May Not Be Brand Loyal ”A stunning 75 percent of women now say it’s important get the lowest price on everything they buy, up 12 percentage points. from 2008 and up 22 percentage points from 2004″

Exhibit B

Consider the above Exhibit A and the following to be, well, you get the idea.

The following (below) relates to a little something I like to call social media. Perhaps you’ve heard of it.

The lines have been skewing for some time now when it comes to brand loyalty and social media and with each passing day that line is skewing more toward the almighty dollar or if not currency in the monetary form, some other form of currency for sure.

From a Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) Council and Lithium survey in 2011.

Then there’s this (below) from a report put out by Forbes Insights and Turn late last year called “The New Rules of Engagement: Measuring the Power of Social Currency”:

And finally and most recently, this below, from a survey conducted by PwC:

Not So Breaking News

If there is a marketer out there who finds all or any of this news to be “breaking” he/she may need to start considering other employment for this should come as no surprise to anyone.

Consumers are people, people. Get it?

In general they want the best deal, period. Now juxtapose that thinking over a failing or still-recovering economy depending on who you speak to, and price just becomes all that more important in the pecking order.

‘Ah but Steve, what about those brands who can never win a price war for any number of reasons? Are they doomed to fail?’

Good question.

No, of course they are not doomed to fail.

If, if they realize that there’s more than one way to skin a cat or in this case win a consumer’s heart, that is – which ties into the “why it shouldn’t matter to marketers” part of the title of this article.

Obviously many brands consistently thrive and survive just fine without being the cheapest on the shelf. They do so for a myriad of reasons including something I like to call “quality.” Remember the old “you get what you pay for” adage? Yeah, that kind of goes hand-in-hand with this thinking.

So there are plenty of marketers, brands and so on who wake up every morning knowing they cannot possibly win a price battle but they know there’s a quality product so all is well in the world.

Not So Fast 

The real winners in ALL of this will be the brands who come to grips with the fact that while price and quality will always play a role in a consumer’s decision making process, it is the relationships they create with a consumer that will ultimately determine success or failure.

Make no mistake about it, we are or already are, in what Responsys CMO Scott Olrich referred to as “the relationship era” in an end-of-the year piece entitled Looking Back, Looking Ahead – CMOs Weigh In.

His exact quote was “We will see the beginning of what I refer to as “the relationship era” whereby marketers will move away from an acquisition first mentality to a relationship first one. Marketers will focus more on the entire consumer experience to build and foster a long term relationship with a consumer as opposed to just that initial purchase phase.”

The brands who understand how to cultivate and maintain relationships with consumers will be the ones who reap the biggest rewards.

Sources: PwC, CMO Council, Forbes Insights and Turn, Lithium, Photo credit: Wikipedia

That’s one big failure.

Alan E. Hall has seen many related mistakes during his 40+ years as a serial entrepreneur, angel investor and venture capitalist.  Like most of us, he’s made his fair share of foolish business mistakes along the way. Some even caused the end of a venture.

He’s watched others make mistakes in their businesses as well, some very visible.  Fortunately, Hall learned something powerful and vital from each mistake, no matter the outcome.  Big lesson learned: Don’t make them again.

From his personal experiences – and those he’s witnessed from afar, fortunately – here are six mistakes Hall believes leaders should avoid at all cost:

1. Not Doing Your Homework Before Launching

Failures don’t know their target markets. Successful entrepreneurs know their customers – the exact wants, wishes and buying behavior of specific individuals.  They know their competitors and specifics on how their product or service is better (or worse). They also know if they have a product or solution that’s viable and WHY – and are willing to make some changes to the product to deliver the right features and support to create positive buying experiences for these customers.  Knowing specifically what the market wants from the beginning, savvy leaders can build and deliver the precise solutions to meet customers’ needs

2. Not Listening to Your Customers

The homework doesn’t end once the company is launched. Company leaders who don’t listen to and respond to customer needs are making another big mistake.  Successful business owners are fanatically focused on taking care of their customers. They wake up every day with buyers on their minds. They think to themselves, ‘I must do everything in my power to keep my customers happy and buying often. I can’t lose them to a competitor.’ These alert entrepreneurs have worked long hours to win their customers’ hearts and minds and now labor every hour to retain and increase their buying activities.

Unsuccessful entrepreneurs believe their products are compelling; that they are well designed and correctly manufactured. They see no need to talk to potential buyers. They also see no reason to innovate to develop new offerings.  They suppose customers will never seek improvements or that competitors will never surpass them. They allocate no funds to research.  As a result, customers don’t care for their products and don’t buy them.

Unfortunately, the once formidable Kodak stopped listening to its customers – and failed. The 124-year-old manufacturer of film and cameras filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2012, following many consecutive years of negative financial returns. In 2007, its stock price was $90 per share. In January of 2012, Kodak’s share price had sunk to a dispirited 76 cents.  What happened? As excited customers were celebrating the arrival of fantastic digital images and digital cameras, Kodak management stayed the course with its traditional film and camera lines. Believing foolishly that its loyal customer base would never desert its famous products, Kodak ignored competitors Sony, Fuji and other innovative digital camera firms. Big mistake.

3. No Goals or Strategy

Consider the profound advice of Hall of Fame catcher Yogi Berra: “If you don’t know where you are going, you’ll end up someplace else.” Where do you want your company to be one year from now? What do you want to achieve? You’d better know or you won’t get there. To succeed in establishing and reaching your goals, you should focus well in advance on what needs to happen and spend all time necessary in advance to ensure their success, with established and repeatable processes to accomplish them.  While some goals may be harder to achieve than others, each experience will refine your focus and improve the time and energy you spend on reaching the key objectives that bring the bigger goal within reach.

In addition, when leaders do not understand why the company exists, or have a clear and knowledgeable view of what it can become and how to achieve that vision, the organization will not survive.

4. Not Having a Mentor or Being Teachable

Reaching out to someone who has “been there, done that” can be detrimental to any business. If you aren’t willing to learn from them, though, having a mentor won’t matter. The late Dr. Stephen R. Covey, who passed away in 2012, was a terrific teacher and a personal mentor of mine from my college days. Having had the privilege of studying with Covey, most of my business philosophy is centered on his Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Ray Noorda of Novell was another mentor of mine. From him, I learned that cash in a business is critical to success. “Cash is king,” he would say. “Make sure you have plenty and don’t waste it.”

Find your own mentor. Listen to them. Draw from their experiences, skills and substantial network to help guide you. Learn what has worked for them and what lessons they have learned from their experiences so you don’t make the same mistakes.   You may feel as if you know exactly what you need to do to launch and grow your business, but there’s always a different and potentially better way of which you might not yet be aware.

5. Mismanaging Finances 

Many firms with excellent potential end far too early because their leaders don’t know how to manage their finances. Often, company management has not developed a financial plan that considers conservative, expected or extraordinary performance, and what to do financially with each situation. Even worse is the company that can’t generate sufficient sales with appropriate gross margins. No firm can grow or prosper without planned revenue attainment. If there are insufficient paying customers, both current and potential to sustain an enterprise in the short and long term, economic viability is questionable

6. Lack of Integrity

Be honest. Period.  Otherwise, risk headlines you don’t want and the potential collapse of the enterprise, your people and your career. Unfortunately, every day we read of crooked business leaders – and their failing businesses – and it doesn’t seem to be getting any better.  Even a “white lie” will turn ugly if uncovered. Just ask Scott Thompson, the former Yahoo CEO who was fired this year after falsely claiming on his resume that he had a degree from Stanford.  Don’t risk it.

What mistakes have you made – or seen – that you never want to make again?

The term “street smarts” has many differing definitions but I like this one for this context: “shrewd awareness of how to survive or succeed in any situation.”

I like this particular definition because this particular brand has indeed shown, in my estimation, a shrewd awareness to succeed. That is if you consider success to come in the form of views as in how many people viewed a particular video you posted to YouTube which personified your wantonness to take it to the streets.

Say a video like this one:

In case you missed this last year, TNT, as a way to announce the fact that their channel would be available in Belgium decided to, well, here’s how they put it “We placed a big red push button on an average Flemish square of an average Flemish town. A sign with the text “Push to add drama” invited people to use the button. And then we waited…”

To date, the video has had over 43 million views.

In less than one year, this video alone has over 43 million views.

And is now the second most shared ad of all time.

Would you call that successful?

Again depends how you define successful but to me, yeah, this is pretty darn successful.

I was so impressed I wrote about it back in April - Taking It To The Streets – A Brilliant Example Of Street Savvy Marketing.

Play It Again, Sam

Not about to rest on over 43 million laurels (and counting) TNT decided to take it to the streets, again.

Now obviously time will tell if the sequel matches or even exceeds the original.

I don’t think it will if for no other reason sequels never equal or surpass the original save for perhaps The Godfather II.

But even if it doesn’t live up the lofty standards set down by its predecessor, it will still go down as a classic example of a brand that “gets it.”

They get the fact that in order to bring awareness to a heretofore unknown brand – which they were in Belgium, they needed to stand out, to be different all the while engaging their customer and leave them wanting more.

Not an easy task I assure you.

So my hat goes off, again, to the folks at TNT and their collective agencies on a job well done.

What do you think of TNT‘s campaign?

What would you do different?

What other ways could they have announced their brand to the people of Belgium while still standing out and piquing curiosity?

Photo credit: Wikipedia

If you sat in a room half filled with self proclaimed ‘SEO’s’ and the other half filled with marketing MBA grads, and you asked them: “What is the Future of mobile marketing SEO in 2013?” you’d get some very convoluted answers. And many, if not all of them, would disagree heartily with each other. It is rare to see 2 camps of people who should be very close bedfellows (excuse the metaphor) so opposed to the other’s point of view.

According to Richard Kelleher, M.B.A, self proclaimed as the World’s First Marketing Sociologist: “It is the teen years of the 21st Century, not 2005 – no matter what these intern infested former advertising and public relations firms are telling you. QR codes lead to purchases. Apps that give you information lead to purchases. [The] internet is great for the apps that compare prices at other stores.

NFC (near field communications) that delivers coupons tailored to your customer as they enter your store leads to purchases. Have these “social media” experts who tell you SEO is everything ever proven a #1 Google ranking leads to purchases? Then Google Phoenix pest control. #1 in SEO is Bulwarks, while the #1 pest control company is Truly Nolen.. Where’s your truth in SEO there?”

However, according to a survey by CMO.com, over 90% of marketers utilize SEO every year for lead generation. And that figure is growing. Justifiably, regular SEO lead generation, compared to mobile SEO lead gen, doesn’t seem to be broken out into it’s own separate category in many studies.

Which is why for this article, I posed 3 questions specifically about mobile SEO, to a some SEO agencies, MBA’s, and the like. Their responses cover a wide range of ideas; from how to actually optimize for mobile, to some interesting statistics released by Google showing that mobile advertising is set to go on a tear in 2013. For instance, according to a 2010 study by Google, advertisers experience, on average, an 11.5% increase in mobile click-through rates when they run a mobile-specific campaign as compared to a hybrid or PC-only campaign. What’s more, right now mobile advertising is one of the most inexpensive forms of online advertising.

In response to one of my questions, JoAnna Dettmann and Kaysha Kalkofen of SEO firm tSunela, had this to say about mobile specific optimization:

1. With the increase in mobile search, a listing with the online Yellow Pages is a requirement. Many mobile devices come with the Yellow Pages application pre-loaded, making it easy for consumers to quickly conduct searches for local businesses. Make sure your business is listed-and listed accurately.

2. Claim your listing-and comprehensively complete it- in Google Places, Yahoo! Local, and Bing Business Portal.

3. Be narcissistic; ask for reviews. Ask your network of contacts to review your organization, product, or service on Google. Don’t worry if not all of your online reviews are perfect. Although nobody likes to see unflattering reviews, right now, quantity means more than quality in the local search algorithm.

Every one of the respondents to my questions did agree on 2 things: 1) That mobile SEO and Local SEO are nearly synonymous. 2)Responsive web design is actually much better, and is taking precedence over, a separate mobile optimized site or style sheet.

Flynn Zaiger, CEO of Online Optimism, responded with this answer to one of my questions: “[We] regard our mobile customer’s as a completely different set than our laptop/desktop users. Mobile customers are typically out of the office, and looking for unique bits of information that desktop users ignore. We make sure they they’re not immediately “bouncing” off our page – and if our analytics indicate they are, we rearrange the page to make sure that the information they’re looking for is closer to the top.”

Josh Steimle, CEO of MWI nails it with this quote on the importance of mobile SEO in 2013: “Within the next 1-2 years your grandma will have a smartphone if she doesn’t have one already. She’ll have a tablet too. If we’re past 50% smartphone adoption now, we’ll see 85%+ adoption of smartphones within the next 2-3 years. And mobile SEO is going to make or break certain types of companies. Self storage is one of them. Restaurants are another. And throw anything else in there that is a product or service that serves a certain geographic market. Other industries will be affected as well, but “local mobile SEO” is where we’ll see massive activity.”

Basically, everyone who responded to my questions agreed 100% that mobile marketing SEO is huge in 2013. What’s more, it’s likely that mobile users will become a driving force of revenue for local retailers specifically, especially the ones who know how to optimize for that audience.

Photo credit: Wikipedia