Greg Verdino

Am I a feed floozie?

For a couple of years now, I've been addicted to RSS.  I would estimate that the vast majority of the online content that I consume, I consume through feeds.  I'll tell anyone who asks that I would be perfectly happy if I never had to visit a destination site again (as impractical as that may be.)

But recently it has come to my attention that I may be using RSS improperly and, man, that makes me feel weird.  In an email exchange a couple of weeks back, referencing my complaint that a nice pickup by Adweek and the resulting traffic spike netted me only two new subscribers, Steve Coulson pointed out that getting someone to subscribe is the equivalent of getting to "fourth base."  You typically need multiple touches (er, pun intended), the person needs to visit your blog at least a few times to really get a feel for it, before they're ready to take the RSS plunge.  Steve's not alone in this assertion -- I've seen plenty of other bloggers write about RSS as the reader loyalty holy grail.

I get it, but this isn't how I use RSS personally to manage the flow of content.  Of course I subscribe to the blogs I love -- that's a no brainer -- but I also subscribe to lots of bloggers that I've only just "met."  In fact, the first thing I do upon discovering a new blog (mostly marketing blogs) is subscribe to the feed. 

What if I didn't subscribe right away?  Would I ever find that blog again?  Is it likely that I'd get to sample its content a second, third or fourth time? 

Probably not. I'll never remember your URL; I probably won't even remember your name or where I came across the link to your site in the first place. I might eventually find you, but it will probably require lots of Googling and some old school hunt-and-peck.  This is time consuming and, more likely than not, unsatisfying.

I could bookmark you the old fashioned way -- in my browser.  But then I'd have to scour my long bookmarks list and, once I find your blog buried in there somewhere, I'd have to actually visit your site.  Isn't it a bigger commitment to visit your site than it is to have your updates come to me?

So for me, subscribing may actually be the lowest level of commitment.  After all, scanning the headlines from a new blog takes seconds -- and if after a week or two I realize that I'm not such a fan after all, it only takes one click to drop the feed out of my reader.  No second thoughts -- I gave you a shot and you just weren't for me.  Maybe we'll meet again, somewhere down the road.  But once I'm eating your feed, if you last more than a few weeks we're probably going to have a long, meaningful relationship.

Maybe you shouldn't advertise

This post may not be for everyone.  For example, if you're a challenger brand, suffer from low brand awareness or are trying to change people's perceptions about what you stand for, you might want to move along.

But what if you're a market leader -- not necessarily number one in your category, but certainly in the top two.  Maybe you're Coke or Pepsi, McDonalds or Burger King, Hershey or Nestle.  Or maybe you've got products that people just "gotta have."  You're Mercedes or BMW, Apple or Intel.  Or frankly -- you vs your competitor?  Six of one half a dozen the other.  You're Kellogg's or Post, Crest or Colgate, Dell or HP.

Why advertise?  Seriously...  You might argue that competition is still fierce, that you've run the numbers.  The data shows that when you heavy up in TV, print, radio and out-of-home you see corresponding lifts in sales.  Compared to what?  Tell me the last time you didn't see Coke or McDonalds ads. Find me someone (anyone) who isn't already aware of these brands.  Show me someone who buys a car because it looks good in an ad, rather than because it turns heads on the road.  My wife has wanted a BMW for years.  Why?  Because she wanted it.  Period.  When it came time to shop for a new car, we visited exactly one dealership.  Guess which one.  (Yes, even though we've seen plenty of ads for Mercedes, Lexus, Audi, Cadillac, etc.)

Sure, to make my point I'm painting this picture in black and white, but it strikes me that the billions these brands spend could be spent smarter.  Instead of running ads, what if these companies invested that same money in product improvements?  What if they used that money to serve their existing customers better and turn them into loyal evangelists?  Do you think better products, lower prices or better customer experiences might have a positive impact on sales, maybe even an impact greater than the awareness lifts that advertising delivers? Do you think remarkable products, pricing incentives or examplary service might get people talking, spreading the word?

I bet they would.  So why haven't any big brands come to the same conclusion?  Maybe it's because they have too much vested in the status quo, because "it's always been done this way," because doing the right thing isn't as easy as doing the easy thing. 

Or maybe I'm way off base - I'm willing to admit that.. So let me know what you think.  Chime in.

Blogger outreach round-up

I've been receiving quite a few pitches lately and, frankly, I haven't had the time to follow up on any of them.  So if for no other reason than clearing my in-box (and my conscience) I present to you the first "Blogger Outreach Round-Up."  Take a gander at four very different new media and marketing offerings, ranging from the bizarre to the commonsensical (you decide which are which.)  Maybe you'll see something you like.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Gottabet.com, a new niche market social network organized around dares and challenges is looking to attract 1 million members through a promotion that promises to give users $1 for every new member they get to join, with a maximum $1 million payout for the entire promotion.  To participate in the Gottabet Million Dollar Challenge, members create a bet/challenge/dare on the site and then build a campaign around it that makes other people join Gottabet to participate in that bet.  Pretty simple idea -- members reap the rewards for evangelizing the property and at $1 for each new member acquired, this sounds more efficient than more traditional advertising programs.  Watch this video for more information about how it works [feed and email readers click through for the video.]

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

ZSlide wote to let me know about Pictogame, an easy-to-use tool that lets web users turn any picture into a simple casual game widget and distribute it through blogs and social network profiles.   Here's just one example. (Note to Firefox users -- the game doesn't seem to embed properly in Firefox and I can't figure out why - so until I do, just click through to check out Pictogame's gallery.)

Put this game on your blog   Create your own   More games

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

MonetizeMedia offers a turnkey platform that allows any publisher to create fully interactive, branded broadband TV channels, easily and seamlessly monetize media assets through downloads, subscriptions, advertising and syndication and appeal to advertisers with contextually relevant, rich media video ads designed to maximize ROI.  The broadband video landscape is already pretty cluttered -- but with all the attention being paid to contextual video advertising, if their solution is as drag-and-drop as they say it is, it could be an interesting one to watch.  They're offering free trials.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

And finally, we have Balihoo, an advertising search engine geared toward media planners and buyers who are looking for new media advertising opportiunities.   Users can search Balihoo using a variety of variables -- demographics, geography, behavioral, media or channel specific -- and the application returns advertising opportunities that meet their needs.  Balihoo doesn't get involved with the sale of inventory (so it's not an exchange or marketplace) -- they are simply focused on helping buyers find the right media opportunities and connect with qualified sellers.  Balihoo is in a private beta now, with an anticipated September-October public launch.

An Amex card and a $5 million dream

I don't normally blog about Digitas work and, truth be told, I've been holding off on writing about this for that very reason-- but this program gets too many things right for me to not say something about it.  I'm talking about Members Project from American Express. 

Here's the scoop [feed readers and email subscribers, click through for the video.]

I know I'm biased, but I think Members Project represents next level social media marketing -- it proves that brands can leverage social media to both give and get.  It taps into American Express's existing (if loose knit) community, gives Cardmembers plenty of ways to participate, and provides a platform whereby American Express and its customers can collaborate for the greater good.  Yet for the ROI junkies among us, it's on-brand, may drive new Card acquisitions (fingers crossed) as non-Cardmembers apply in order to champion or support their favorite projects, and might even drive inceased usage by better connecting existing Cardmembers with the Amex brand. 

I'd love you hear what you think - so drop a comment.  If you like the program, consider blogging about it at your own site.  But most importantly, if you're a Cardmember get involved.

Perspectives from other bloggers: MP DailyFix, B.L. Ochman, Random Culture, Chroma, Thoughts Illustrated, Do Well & Do Good.

links for 2007-05-28

• Advertising Age | How to Succeed in Second Life
  Positive press for Coke's Virtual Thirst.
  (tags: secondlife brands metaverse emergingmedia socialmedia marketing)
• Arun Rajagopal | Getting to know 'Age of Conversation' Authors
  Arun profiles all 100+ bloggers contributing to the upcoming Age of Conversation e-book. I'm in update #8.
  (tags: bloggers blogging blogs community socialmedia reference)
• Advertising Age | Why Facebook's Open-Door Policy Is Good for Marketers
  Minor GV Sighting in Abbey Klaassen's coverage of what Facebook's open door means for advertisers who play in social media.
  (tags: adage advertising brands emergingmedia media mediabuying socialmedia socialnetworks web2.0 widgets marketing innovation)

links for 2007-05-25

• Findability.org: Social Information Architecture
  Good framework for social media, focused on motivations for participating rather than just the mechanics for the channels and functionality.
  (tags: community culture socialnetworking socialnetworks web2.0 design socialmedia)
• Publishing 2.0 | Facebook Platform Could Be A Google-Like Market-Driven Growth Engine
  Smart perspective on Facebook's move toward becoming a social media operating system.
  (tags: socialmedia web2.0 socialnetworking socialnetworks change business marketing technology)

Is naked the new transparent?

Maybe brands are taking "transparency" a bit too literally.  The latest video in the Ray-Ban Never Hide viral video campaign (a campaign that I praised a couple of weeks ago for breaking through the viral clutter) features enough nudity to have been flagged by the YouTube community as potentially offensive.  Here it is (despite the YouTube flag it isn't really NSFW.)

And skincare product marketer Elave not only never hides - they've actually got "Nothing to Hide" according to their latest campaign, which features enough nudity to earn a proper NSFW.  Check it out and click on the overhead projector for the full effect (seriously though, NSFW.)

[Censored screenshot swiped from Ariel Waldman.]

At the end of the day, both campaigns (and plenty of others like them) leave me wondering if shock value has taken the place of smart marketing -- just as it has in traditional advertising (consider GM's panned suicidal robot and Snickers' banned auto mechanic make-out from this year's Super Bowl.) Is this marketing?  Or are these just stunts?

We might pay attention to these campaigns -- hey, I've watched them,  I'm blogging about them and maybe that's the point -- but I'd argue that we're paying attention to them for the wrong reasons.  Even after a few viewings, I'm still not sure exactly what skincare products Elave actually sells and haven't gotten around to clicking for more info about their line or online store. 

So I wonder whether shock advertising like this actually sells any product.  Maybe -- but I'd guess that smart, strategic marketing programs would sell more.

links for 2007-05-24

• Madison Avenue Journal | Television Tap Dances to a New (Media) Tune
  Paul McEnany points the finger at advertisers and blames them, rather than the media companies, for the lack of innovation in video ad models.
  (tags: advertising bloggers mediabuying media video change television)
• New World Notes | Mixed Reality Headcount
  SL resident Tateru Nino is now reporting weekly (every Monday) traffic rankers for corporate sims. Not that traffic is the best or only measure of SL success, but still interesting data points.
  (tags: secondlife research statistics reference socialmedia metaverse emergingmedia brands)
• Adweek | Web Revenue Up 35%
  (tags: advertising adweek media internet statistics business digital)

PSFK London: check it out guv'nor

Regular denizens of the marketing blogosphere are no doubt already aware that Piers Fawkes is bringing his PSFK Conference to London next week.  Details here; booking here.  As my long(ish) time readers know, I absolutely loved the New York version of this conference for the great insights, interesting perspectives and lots of inspiration.  Unfortunately, I won't be in London for this one -- if New York was great, London looks to be even better.

If you're a Londoner gearing up for next week's event, or an out-of-towner interested in some vicarious thrills you might be interested in my PSFK New York-related posts:

Slo-blogging PSFK: talkin' 'bout trends

Slo-blogging PSFK: branding by design

Slo-blogging PSFK: advertising is...

Slo-blogging PSFK: links

If you will be at the London event and are interested in writing some summaries that I can post here, let me know.

Are you a giver? Probably not.

Earlier this week, Mack Collier read big business the riot act for missing the boat with social media.  The key benefit of social media, he argued, is not that it provides us with yet another channel for messaging, promotion and sales, but that it gives us a way to bring the voice of the customer into the corporation.  In other words, we might feel the urge to talk but we have much more to gain by listening.

I agree with Mack, but think that there's more to the story.

Listening to the community is vital.  So is taking what you learn and using it to change the way you do business.  And all of this certainly plays into the shift of power from the marketer to the consumer.  But more often than not listening still benefits the company far more than it benefits the individuals who do the talking.  We're still taking; we're just taking something else. 

Sure, some people may simply want the opportunity to be heard and, if a company uses consumer feedback to improve its products or services, of course there is some benefit delivered back to the people.  But I believe that brands need to deliver more value than that -- and nowhere is this more evident than in social media circles where consumer control is most prevalent.

For me, the bottom line is this -- in order to succeed in social media, marketers need to give more than they get.  In the new world of marketing, where we can tap into the collective knowledge of consumer communities, an open ear isn't enough.  We need to be prepared to deliver at least as much value as we extract -- and more likely deliver more value than we extract to justify the time, attention and input that we hope consumers will give us in return.  People have plenty of other places to devote their attention -- and the very fact that they've made the shift from consumer to creator, from passive audience to active participant means that they've already chosen a different path than the one mass media and mass marketers might have prescribed. If we want to regain their attention and we intend to do it on their turf, we'd better make it worth their while.

This is a difficult concept for many marketers because it runs counter to the way our world has always worked.  The consumer pays more for our product than it costs us to make it.  We ask consumers to willingly offer up their time and attention -- to watch our ads, click our banners, surf our sites -- and repay them with little more than "the chance to buy our stuff."  I mean come on -- we hold focus groups in which we garner insights that can materially change our go-to-market strategies and the participants who volunteer their opinions and intellectual capital get a token payment and some cookies.

I think the people who keep us in business deserve more than cookies.  What are your thoughts?