I guess our “Don’t Leak Leads” marketing campaign is resonating with the Sale & Service team who brought it to life in their Halloween costumes.
Check out this site courtesy of Rob Baker.
Nice way to make your point Mr. or Miss designer who built it.
I updated my presentation from last year — you might say it's "new and improved" 😉
My team created this infographic to give an example of the consumer buying journey for a need-based service like plumbing.
Even in this simple scenario you can see the complexity involved in trying to get a new customer for your business. You must continuously build your web presence with fresh content across all the places consumers go to discover and research before they buy. Google calls this the Zero Moment of Truth. I call it imperative to stay in business today.
Just the facts Jack. My team's latest infographic with the basics of advertising to reach consumers as they search, surf and socialize online.
The "Good" – building your brand where consumers are spending over 50% of their media time
A comScore study last October showed that only 16% of Internet users click on display ads, with 8% of users accounting for over 85% of all clicks. Does that mean no one should use display ads? Hell no. It means that display is for branding your business not trying to drive action (that is what Search ads are for). Does anyone doubt that TV/Radio/Print ads can build awareness of a brand? They typically don't drive immediate calls to a business but they do build brand awareness over time so that when a consumer has a need they evaluate that product and hopefully buy it.
Studies by comScore and others have shown that display ads, regardless of clicks, generate significant lift in site visits and both online and offline sales by those exposed to the ads. This "lift" is has been proven time after time so why do businesses think their campaign isn't working when they see a low CTR? Just like TV ads or any other offline media advertising, display is about carving out space in someone's mind so they remember you when they are ready to buy. Fortunately, display advertising is so cost-effective (low CPM) that most businesses can afford to now brand themselves online where they couldn't with expensive traditional media alternatives.
The "Bad" – not running paid search ads on your business name
I saw this great article in Search Engine Land yesterday which dovetails perfectly with my prior post. While my colleague Nathan Hanks put forth the logical business reasons to "own" your name by bidding on your brand keywords, David Roth gives a semi-scientific way to prove the value. He recommends that you run a test site visits both with and without the PPC ad for your brand name and then determine the cannibalization/lift that is caused by using the text ad. Here's his definition:
“Lift” is the net amount of
traffic that is added to the mix by virtue of the PPC ad.
Cannibalization is the portion of PPC ad traffic that comes at the
expense of the organic link. If you can quantify cannibalization and
lift in any situation, you can then begin to think intelligently about
what to do.
It sounds like the research proves the value since David says he was ecstatic with the results of his test.
The "GBU" – compiling a giant list of holiday eCards for all to enjoy
Kuddos to bannerblog for sharing this compilation of 120 holiday eCards they gathered from many different agencies. As you would expect some are good, some are bad and some are downright ugly. Enjoy.
The "Bad" – not using a real/meaningful customer insight to build your ad campaign. Sorry, another consumer marketing example but I couldn’t resist.
I
watched a lot of football this weekend (Go Bears!) and really got tired
of seeing the same commercials over and over and over. One that really
perplexed me was the Wendy’s
commercial for their value meal. It features two guys sitting in a
library eating value meals … one is eating a Wendy’s value meal with
normal size burger/fries/drink and the other is eating an unknown brand
that is miniature in size. Of course the guy eating the Wendy’s meal
gloats that he has the better deal since both are the same $2.99 price.
First
of all, is a library the best setting for a battle of value meals?
Secondly, the message makes no sense. Wendy’s is trying to say that
their meals are a better value but does anyone really think that
McDonald’s or Burger King value meals are small compared to Wendy’s. If
anything those two chains have built huge brand awareness around "super
size." So why is Wendy’s trying to compete on size/value when they
aren’t differentiated at all on those attributes? The Wendy’s marketing
folks should ask themselves if there really is a large group of
consumers that have a problem with the value they are getting from
McDonalds, Burger King, et. al. Obviously I don’t have Wendy’s reams of
market research but my gut tells me there isn’t, and in fact both Micky
D’s and BK were running commercials about their dollar menus during the
same broadcasts. Instead of trying to manufacture a differentiation
where one doesn’t exist, Wendy’s should look at what their customers
really value about their restaurant and then try to build the
awareness/preference on that attribute … perhaps quality, taste or
freshness.
In contrast, during the same football games Subway
was running their commercial poking fun of ALL burger chain value
meals. The commercial shows a woman ordering a #6 value meal at a drab
burger counter and then changing her mind to order a #9 value meal. The
smug server takes the #6 box and turns it around to become a #9 and
then pushes it back to the customer. The commercial then shows the
Subway fresh value meal and mentions the variety of choices customers
have (bread, meats, veggies, etc.). It ends with the tag line "where
freshness meets value." Subway gets it. They understand their real
differentiation from the burger joints and have consistently reinforced
it in their commercials year after year.