1. SalesView:

In recent years it seems as if E-Mail marketing has fallen by the wayside in light of emerging technologies and trends. Time and time again statistics have supported the profitability and legitimacy of E-Mail marketing, so it’s important to take a step back and see how E-Mail marketing is or more importantly isn’t, affecting your company.
Here are three questions to ask yourself or your marketing team in order to answer the bottom line; do we need to invest or reinvest in E-Mail marketing?

1) Have you forgotten about the basics?

In this new Web 2.0 world marketers are constantly scrambling to keep up with the latest trends, throwing money at anything deemed “cool,” “trendy,” or “popular.” At first glance new social outlets and advertising mediums may seem appealing, but sites such as YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and Myspace have short track records in terms of performance and viewership capabilities. These mediums aren’t poor investments by any means, but more often than not companies are blinded by the popularity of new social sites and forget about the basics of interactive marketing; E-Mail marketing. 
In one Forrester survey E-Mail more than 80% of businesses surveys achieved a significant return on investment - double that of most other marketing initiatives. I highly doubt any current social media site can boast 80% ROI satisfaction for use of their advertising and marketing platforms.

There’s a reason social media and Web 2.0 technology is called the “frontier” of internet exploration; IT’S UNKNOWN TERRITORY. If you’re hoping to catch the wave early and become one of the first settlers on the new frontier, be prepared to sacrifice quite a bit of blood, sweat, and treasure. A word of warning though for those looking to brave these mysterious, ever-changing virtual landscapes;  by the time you and other businesses jump on the bandwagon, the consumer has most likely started getting off to ride the new model bandwagon – the one that has three axels instead of two.

BOTTOM LINE: Like my great grand pappy use to say, sometimes the best things in life are the simplest things; E-Mail marketing may not be as flashy as a MySpace page, but 9/10 it will dole out a much larger reward upon investment.

2) Are you putting your data to good use?

For those already utilizing E-Mail marketing it’s important to take a step back and review your E-Mail marketing process. Do you simply click “send” every two weeks to blast your newsletter or promotion? One of the foremost reasons E-Mail campaigns fail or plateau revolve around the marketers lack of interaction, understanding, diligence, or experience analyzing and applying the data generated by their E-Mail campaign.  E-Mail is light years ahead of almost every other advertising medium in terms of accountability and tracking, the question is whether you’re leveraging this unique capability or not. With the ability to instantly review the results of your efforts, it’s important to analyze the outcome through multiple lenses rather than just a couple such as “E-Mails opened,” “conversions,” or “bounced rates.”

As a rule of thumb every time you receive the results of an E-Mail blast you should be changing at least ONE aspect of your next E-Mail strategy or design. It’s entirely possible to deploy E-Mail blasts without acknowledging the data and still receive a good response and return. As a marketer you need to apply the data you receive in order to run a GREAT campaign. Just because you’re running a “good” campaign with minimal effort doesn’t change the fact that in reality you’re really running a poor to mediocre campaign.
The most effective E-Mail marketing is an evolutionary process consisting of hours, and hours, and hours (and hours) of data compilation, review, and reform. If you or your marketing team takes performs no action other than clicking “send,” odds are you’re missing out on the true strength of E-Mail marketing; quick, intuitive, statistically supported campaign adaptation.  

BOTTOM LINE: We don’t live in a static world; neither should your E-Mail marketing.  

 3) Are you maximizing your dollar during the recession?

Marketing departments across the world have been laying off employees in droves. Even higher level management today is looking for any way possible to show their superiors that they add value to the company. What would your superiors say if they saw you could not only boost revenue but cut costs at the same time?
Marketing budgets have shrank, but thankfully E-Mail marketing prices have stayed relatively the same – cost efficient. Of all the advertising mediums both virtual and physical, E-Mail marketing is among the most cost effective with the privilege of being able to boast one of the highest ROI’s. A single print ad can cost thousands upon thousands after the cost of graphic design and ad-space. Instead of paying $10,000-$25,000+ for one month of magazine advertising, you can run a four month e-mail campaign which normally entails better audiences, conversion rates, and accountability. If you find the costs of traditional advertising to be exorbitant, it may be time to dust off the E-Mail marketing proposal and take another look.

BOTTOM LINE: As the great Benjamin Franklin once said, “A penny saved is a penny earned.”

So ask yourself:

1) Would it be beneficial to scale back on costly new-age technology investments in order to temporarily invest in more dependable marketing initiatives?

2) Would it be beneficial to engage in an E-Mail marketing discovery phase to see if you’ve truly been interacting with your campaigns and applying the data you find?

3) Would it be beneficial to divert your limited budget to more cost effective (and often times profitable) marketing venture such as E-Marketing?

 

At our Interactive Ad Agency we continually help our clients make good decisions regarding their online media usage. Social Media, eMail Marketing, PPC/Paid Search, Search Engine Optimization, Display, Mobile and Video are just the headers of the variety of options available to us. But recently Twitter has been owning the headlines.

David Martin, vice president, primary research, Nielsen Online, wrote in a blog post: "People are signing up in droves, and Twitter's unique audience is up over 100% in March."

But today I was sent a great article from MediaPost about an online / microblogging / SMS option to reach the masses that might not be the techno elite, but make up the mainstay of consumer America. More spending power and more of the participants in creating UGC for all our social media sites. The company is called Predicto and it is very focused on the celebrity world, think People, US, The View, TMZ, etc. http://www.predicto.com/

Between October and December 2008, Twitter had approximately 812,000 unique SMS users, but Predicto Mobile interacted with more than 2.3 million unique users. "We have a mainstream audience, which can help us grow faster," Kathein said. "Our members aren't necessarily the early adopters. Our customer base isn't made up of heavy iPhone users."  The full article can be found at http://bit.ly/M1QQy

I think this a great example of how Interactive Marketing is very niche and how you shouldn't fall in love with one channel, because your users might be better served with another channel.

Project Manager, Lisa Seals, shared a great case study with us that she found on the Marketing Professionals site.  The study talks about how the Days Inn chain uses mobile text marketing as opposed to mass email marketing and rich media advertising to communicate with guests, build loyalty, increase revenue and provide value-add services.  The article boasts text marketing as “customer service 2.0” for the hospitality industry.  Here are a few key items Lisa shared with our Client Services team…

1. Building the opt-in list.  The campaign began by generating awareness for the new texting program - front-desk associates ask guests at check-in whether they'd like to participate.  Special contests are set in place driving people to text (and opt-) in order to win a weekend getaway.  The program was promoted through elevator notices, keycard holders, and other key collateral.

2. Engaging the opt-ins.  The chain implemented a marketing plan of text messages which consisted of general promotions, hotel-specific promotions, and customized messages based on guests’ specific needs.

3. Lessons Learned.  The chain used a double opt-in program to attract only those guests who were truly interested – guests were reassured that their information would not be shared.  The time of day for messaging was considered for nationwide messages and messages were managed on frequency depending on a guest's length of stay.

Days Inn had a 22% increase in room upgrades and substantial increases in website traffic through their text marketing campaign.  There was even an increase in the use of hotel amenities with a 15-20% increase in reward program signups – not to mention the immeasurable increase in brand awareness.
 

I came across a Mediapost article that I found very interesting because as a technical project manager at an online agency, I work with several clients that do market to the Spanish speaking community. It shows that most US Hispanics who prefer to speak Spanish are using a lot of websites outside of the US.  In fact, 7 of the top 10 are websites in Spain, Mexico and Columbia.  So companies that need to reach out to Hispanics need to find ways to advertise on these non-US websites in order to bring those customers back to their US websites.

Here are a few key points I got from this article:

1.US Hispanics who prefer Spanish prefer to read Spanish sites and most of them go to websites outside of the US to get the content they want.

2.To reach US Hispanic consumers, companies need to run their media and advertising on non-US Spanish websites.

3. US Spanish speaking consumers use non-US sites more than the major Spanish portals in the US, such as Yahoo! En Espanol, Univision, Telemundo and AOL Latino.

In addition to builing multilingual websites, Definition 6 is an interactive ad agency who helps clients strategize on how to best market to different segments, which can include cultural, regional or age groups.
 

In my role as CTO of a company that utilizes technology as part of everyday life not only in how we work but in what we build as solutions for our customers it is of constant interest and concern to me how people use technology and emerging technologies. But equally important is how people misuse technologies. As a heavy consumer of social media, social networking, communication and collaboration technologies I am intimately aware of the value these can provide. Time saving communication technologies that also let you expand your reach, do more with less, and be more effective are wonderful but only when used appropriately.

Particularly, as more and more of the masses of people who are not necessarily technically elite or savvy become daily consumers of this same technology we begin to see confusion about what technology is appropriate for what use, and a reciprocal amount of misuse or lack of understanding of appropriate etiquette in their use.

That’s all my really, really, really nice way of saying that a lot of non-tech people are using these amazingly powerful communication technologies and driving me and many others completely crazy. Don’t get me wrong, I’m thrilled they are using them and that adoption is becoming so widespread. But many of these users jumped the adoption curve of predecessor technologies or aren’t aware of surrounding technologies and are thus left with no notion of how to use them properly or make discerning variances in how they use them. The results are creating scenarios that threaten to kill the use of the same technologies that can be so valuable to us. The digital highways are becoming littered with the early adopter corpses of people once enamored with micro-blogging and social networking who found themselves unable or unwilling to withstand the barrage of misuse. They have either abandoned use, retreated to more secretive and closed usage, or moved on to lesser known emergent technologies. And that’s a shame.

I’m going to address two main things in my upcoming rant: using the right communication technology for the right purpose, and good etiquette when using these technologies. I’m absolutely certain many will disagree with my assertions on both of these areas. That’s fine. We all have our perspectives. If you disagree, go write your own blog. This is mine.

I’ve noticed widespread use of one technology for a purpose another was intended to serve. Different communication technology is intended for different purposes and we need to be aware of this. Misuse leads to discontinued use. I’m sure we’ll eventually see some consolidation in the marketplace among vendors and tools leveraging capabilities of one platform and another into a combined format. But the ideas I’m talking about still apply. You need to take into account a number of principles in your communications before selecting a means and technology for that information dissemination: is it short form or long form, one-way or 2-way with dialogue, intended for the masses or reasonably private, one-to-one or one-to-many, synchronous or asynchronous, personal or business, welcomed as a constant or desired as occasional? All of these factors dictate how you should communicate your information and what medium you should use to communicate it.

To put it simply: I don’t want you to be my friend on Facebook if I just met you at a networking event or in a business meeting, that’s what LinkedIn is for. You are not my friend if we just met and I don’t care to see constant updates that you just enjoyed a great latte. And even if you are my friend I don’t need to see an update of every 5 minutes worth of a conversation you are having or a presentation you are listening to. I’m not saying you shouldn’t share it. I’m saying Facebook isn’t the right forum for it. Nor is text messaging or e-mail. But Twitter probably is right for that purpose. I could subscribe to your tweets and read them all day long if I wish. If you create more clutter in people’s lives which are already overloaded with digital information then you will become worse than noise and static, you become a negative force.

I recently opened up my Facebook page to see the same persons face staring at me 10+ times in a row. It was a series of updates on what they were doing, all centered around the same subject. I wanted to scream, “It is possible to comment on your own thread!”. It could’ve been a nicely condensed thread that people could expand if they wished. In this instance I suspect it was someone who’d tied Twitter to Facebook and didn’t even realize what kind of end experience they were inflicting on their friends and followers. Don’t get me wrong, the material was of interest and I’m ecstatic to see people engaged in sharing information so instantly and constantly. This kind of communication is making things extremely interesting. But consumers of these technologies need to really get to understand them from both their perspective as well as others. And unfortunately you simply can’t expect the providers of the technology to make everything 100% immune to improper use.

I don’t want to see a personal argument or discussion between people on a social media site. Do it in email or even better… call each other and talk! If you want to espouse your personal political, religious and social beliefs in long form then use a blog and tell people on MySpace and Facebook and Twitter to go visit it, keep your Status posts short and to the point. If you want me to know every web site you think is cool just let me visit your del.icio.us account. You can still post killer links in your various social networking forums, but if you find yourself posting a half dozen links a day I might suggest you are cluttering up a lot of people’s reading material who don’t necessarily care.

Text people when it’s important. Use email when it’s interpersonal, inter-team or intercompany and long form. Twitter to the masses. Facebook with your friends. LinkIn with your business connections to find out how far you are from Kevin Bacon and reach out when you need a job or need to reach that key client that you are just 2 degrees away from! Yammer to your business colleagues from atop the highest mountaintop from which you still get a signal!

And there is still something called a phone you can use to talk and avoid countless back-and-forths. You can still pull up a chat client like Skype and have a great textual conversation in real time. And you can still hop on a web meeting conference to work more collaboratively.

Now it’s one thing when an individual gets confused in this communication quagmire, there is a lot to take in and learn. I fully understand that my mother may have just heard from her friends about this new fangled Twitter thing and wants to know what her grandkids are up to so she can be a part of it and that some degree of misuse will occur in the valid purpose of moving to ubiquity. But what shocks me more is when I see companies failing to do their homework before embarking down the social media highway. These technologies can be tremendously powerful in helping drive sales and furthering your brand in the minds of consumers. There are great case studies on how companies effectively use social media and networking. But there are far more examples of those that do more damage than they do good. Use must be metered, highly targeted, and seen as useful and welcome by the receivers. Companies need to have more of a plan for their social media communications, just like they do for their websites, press releases, TV advertisements, and e-mail marketing campaigns. It’s a very different medium and you need to understand it well instead of playing ready-fire-aim. To do otherwise is to become noise, static, or much, much worse: an annoying nuisance who simply detracts from my effectiveness like that guy in Nigeria who keeps sending me e-mails so I can help him move his millions of dollars out of the country. Damn, I hate that guy.

Gabe Rand, a Definition 6 Client Manager, discussed an article he recently read in Fortune Magazine's Fast Forward...

Why Microsoft needs Yahoo to be competetive. The article discusses that even though Microsoft has caught up to Google search capabilties in terms of results that they are still losing market share.  This is due to a few factors, Microsoft uses live.com, which is relatively new and unknown as a search portal.  Microsoft is also battling the perception that Google is now the Technology giant, even beyond search, which is definitely not the case. For all of these reasons as well as the profitability and associated stock price of that profitability Microsoft will continue to pursue Yahoo's search business.  Microsoft is currently in talks with AOL and Time Warner about acquiring Yahoo's non-search business.

Gabe highlighted a few eye opening points from the article:
1. Microsoft needs Yahoo search to stay competetive.
2. Google is dominating the search market and is looking to partner with Yahoo, which would give an 80%+ market share.
3. Microsoft is willing to deal and push to make this happen.  Clients win with competition, no one wants Google to be the only one out there.

Gabe's closing thoughts to the group were that Google has operated successfully in a single business, search, and done extremely well, but that competition is healthy for web search engine optimization and to help control the costs of paid seo.  The full article can be viewed at: http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/03/technology/kirkpatrick_search.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008070714

The needs of a user searching on a mobile device are different than one searching from a PC.

Today, a search on Google from a PC generates a massive Web “crawl” and returns pages and pages of search results with rankings based on number of daily hits a website gets or paid advertisement placement.  These rankings have little to do with the quality of the product or service.

In the mobile environment, such thoroughness can be the digital equivalent of using a shotgun to take out a housefly — way too much firepower for the task at hand.  Mobile consumers are typically on the run and have little patience for pages of search results and no patience for ads.  They want highly relevant and useful information.


By 2010, a growing segment will use wireless services to access the Internet 95% of the time.


Today about 1 billion people have PCs; about 3 billion have mobile phones and that number is expected to grow to 4 billion by 2010.

Search engines are trying to replicate a 20-inch experience on a 2-inch screen, and that's leaving them, inevitably, about 90% short.

Search engines that don't change could wind up following in AOL's famous footsteps. AOL in the '90s was an online juggernaut with a gold-plated brand name and more than 30 million subscribers. Today, it's a free service with a dwindling base of about 8.7 million customers.

Google is making a few accommodations.  Instead of giving wireless users pages of search results, for example, it only offers "snippets" — Google-speak for the first few search results that appear at the top of the page.  It's also limiting the number of ads to one or two per search.

They are also pushing the development of an open wireless operating system — dubbed Android — that would make it easier for consumers to use Google's mobile services.  Android-loaded devices are expected to hit the market later this year.


Bottom  line:  Unless traditional search engines adapt, they will be come dinosaurs.

A lengthy article appeared in USA TODAY:  http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2008-06-09-mobile-search_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Definition 6 helps clients with mobile marketing campaigns and can help you understand Web 2.0 and 3.0 trends.

Lynn Moss
Def 6 Client Manager