Show me you're honest

Jay Deragon, in his insightful blog "The Relationship Economy", recently talked about online ads and how the advertising that supported the offline media for a generation or more is quickly falling from grace online. As we're all finding nowadays, no one's clicking.

It's not a surprise that, as Seth Godin's also saying, we need to abandon the old mass marketing fixation and embrace the new revolution of niche (community) marketing - as I've said countless times in conversations to colleagues, agencies and on here - it's all about talking with, not talking to.

Adverts are the acme of this outdated model.

An example for you: I'm currently testing a few adverts on Facebook to see what the network can offer and they're getting around a 0.15% clickthrough rate, a lousy return*.

It could be that the copy's rubbish, or the accompanying image isn't visually appealing, but if they are - and I feel the offer itself is sound - then it highlights what we're seeing on the web at large. And as "social" become the norm this situation will only worsen.

So instead there's the conversational, inclusive model. It's a hell of lot more work, but talking with potential customers, building a relationship based on trust and honesty, and working through the three Rs is actually a much more successful model, and one that has truly impressive, long-term outcomes.

So much so I personally coming to think that it's not a revolution as such, more a completely new dynamic in marketing and advertising that's a step beyond what we've done in the past - one-on-one and one-on-many customer relationships broadcast across the web, all helping your brand (and your own personal brand as an added bonus).

As Jay signs off in his article - "Show you the money? Show me the value". It's a nice summation of where we're going with online marketing and adverts. That, and "Tell me, honestly, why I should show you the money".


*I'll expand on my findings on Facebook once the results are fully in - the site's "social ads" are good for one thing, as I'll reveal soon.

Labels: adverts, community, online, social

"The Evolution of PR, Nothing Less, Nothing More"

Some wonderful quotes from a recent article on PR 2.0 by Brian Solis - co-writer of "Now is Gone" with Geoff Livingston.

It’s not just about “finally” getting on Twitter, blogging, podcasting, creating profiles on social networks, putting videos on YouTube or uploading artwork on Flickr. These tools will come and go. It’s about what you do with them to create mutually beneficial relationships within each online community.

Spin, hyperbole, messages, pitches, blasts, and voicemails have no place in the new world of communications.

In my opinion, there is no such thing as PR 2.0 as a practice. It is simply a game-changing mantra. But, if 2.0 is a mantra for evolution and change, then yes, it implies that there was, and still is, a traditional way of looking at things.

Fascinating and worthy quotes regarding ideas I subscribe to completely. I don't say I involve myself in online PR explicitly but I know I dabble in the public relations as much as marketing in this brave new world.

Are we approaching a time when online marketing and PR become the same thing - online social communication? I knew that old-school marketing practitioners were in big trouble; can we know say the same for old-school PR practitioners as well?

Labels: communication, marketing, pr, social

Being a phonebookwhack

Seeing the real world in a different way is a key to success in the new economy - it goes back to the transparent mirror I've talked about before. One interesting example is a name.

My name, in the real world, has presented a thousand and one problems over the years, whether it's through misspelling (Pier, Piers, Pierce, Peter) or mispronunciation ("Lowther" for Lawther, "Pierre" rather than Peer) or simply not understanding which letters follow which when I (inevitably) spell it out.

Online it's my biggest asset, a pre-internet version of a Googlewhack - a phonebookwhack if you will.

If I was to search for my old teacher John Smith online or on Facebook it would be impossible. Search for my name and, well, you can guess how many other people have the name "Peer Lawther". Same goes with the domain and handle "Rubbergenius".

On the internet unique names such as "Peer Lawther" and "Rubbergenius" are actually not only desirable but vitally important, a major asset to cut through the noise. Remember that when naming a new start-up. Of course "Google", "Digg", "Reddit" etc etc already have.

Of course my mother was not an impressively forward thinking lady when she named me (I think she was probably busy with more important matters at the time) and I can say with the utmost respect that she wasn't thinking about the internet and my career path 32 years ago when she conferred me my name. But unintentionally she was a trailblazer and a brilliant "brand manager".

Remember that when you mock some of the seemingly daft names celebrity parents bestow on their offspring. If nothing else, unique means memorable, something brands need to maximise in the 21st century if they want to cut to chase.

This riff was inspired by an old posting from Seth Godin, another phonebookwhack of a name I'd guess.

Labels: assets, lawther, mirror, peer, transparent, unique

Estate agents - trying to be the last one off the Titanic before it sinks

The housing market is facing a huge downward adjustment, first-time buyers are nowhere to be seen and the forecast is incredibly gloomy. So what are sellers and estate agents doing? Trying to be the last one off the Titanic before it sinks.

Home sellers pushed up asking prices for property last month, despite a significant slowdown in the housing market and a lending squeeze by the major banks, according to figures compiled by online estate agents Rightmove.

Of course, this isn't just the sellers being greedy - the estate agents want to maintain the status quo they've enjoyed for the last ten years for as long as possible so they can try and squeeze the last remaining drops of commission before we dive straight into Recession'08.

Trying to keep the prices artificially high may work on a micro-economic level if there's a monopoly in place (one estate agent controlling the whole region), but on a macro-economic level it's asking for trouble on a monumental level. At some point soon there's going to be a hell of a readjustment.

So what has this got to do with online marketing? Well, going back to the last point in my article "8 ways to find a great neighbourhood using social websites" Squidoo recently launched a way for estate agents to become 'mayor' of their own little slice of town and become an online knowledge base for their local region, an in effort to:

• Boost their agency's website (and brand)
  
• Show potential buyers that they know what they're talking about
  
• Exhibit trust and honesty (two qualities not usually associated with estate agents)
  
• Additionally, they could create long-term leverage with their past buyers by sending them a personalised email or getting in touch and being friendly; after all, past sellers might have start considering downsizing very soon...
  

So rather than trying to exploit house-buyers by selling less at inflated prices why not sell more at more realistic prices, but through using online tools to show that they know their job and know their area. Undercut the local market, be honest with the sellers and be realistic in the failing market. Or, if you're going to try and sell houses at the inflated prices at least offer extra value (free removals, help and support for the first year or two, free insurance etc etc). Think outside the box, not just about the wallet.

I mean, after over-inflating prices to the point at which houses aren't selling, it's not like estate agents actually have much work to do at the moment. Why don't they use this time to create a long-term business plan in the new economy that not only allows for the credit crunch/recession but embraces it, rather than one that's mercenary, plays with sellers' hopes and guarantees nothing but failure on a grand scale?

Labels: adverts, agent, estate, online, realtor, squidoo

Extraneous is uneccessary (short is sweet)

Seth Godin mentions how he's used a lot of qualifying adverbs in recent times; it's something I've noticed in his books. Saying the definite article can be so much better in terms of a call to action and if nothing else, is less "fluffy".

One of the things I've tried to enact in my online copy is ridding my text of similar constructs, as they tend to be extraneous (but I don't doubt some survive).

Going to the nth degree, always try to remember that while it might be good for certain users to hear that you "engage online communities in conversations about your business, in an effort to gain recognition and respect for your offer with both new and regular audiences", most of the time all you're saying is that you "talk to potential customers online". Which is better?

Labels: copy, online, seth, text

Adwords "gives Google tremendous latitude to adjust advertiser spending"

There's an excellent, useful and important article on The Register about Google Adwords presently.

It's six page long and nearly as difficult as the Adwords program itself to wade through at some points, but the important conclusions for smaller advertisers seem to be:

• Page 1: Seriously consider switching off "Automatic Matching" on your keywords otherwise Google will (without your knowledge) post adverts against a lot of untested phrases if you've not spent your full daily budget (ones that Google deems to be targeted).
  
• Page 2: The Adwords program (to avoid game the system towards the spammers) is too far in the opposite direction - stacked too far in Google's favour.
  
• Page 3: Unless you're really confident and understand Embedded Match you should switch off "Broad Match" which targets wrongly spelt keywords and keywords in different orders (use if you're often seeing your company's name spelt wrongly or with typos, but otherwise then consider abandoning until you know more).
  
• Page 4: Opt out of appearing on Google's content network if possible (for example, sites on Blogger like, ahem, this one) as that can drive prices up, especially on domain parked sites that reap clickthrough money without offering any content (ie, not like this one!)
  
• Page 5: The Quality Score factored into keyword bids is different for each advertiser leading to an uneven playing field - to get into the game you may have to pay a vast amount more in bids than another advertiser it already deems "quality". Read and understand "Quality Score" before getting involved.
  
• Page 5 (cont): All advertisers are entitled to a free account "optimization" (watch the YouTube video here). Unless you know the Adwords game already, use it.
  
• Page 6: "[Adwords design] gives Google tremendous latitude to adjust advertiser spending" - whether you have time for it or not, you have to remain vigilant.
  

In other words, like most things in an online advertiser's life, the overriding trend to follow is best practice - daily tweaking, monitoring and reporting.

Labels: adverts, adwords, google

Yet another company that just doesn't get it: Husker turns Huckster

Latest story over the mojo wire about companies just not "getting" the new marketing economy; guy buys a BMW M3 on sale for $10,000 less than the book price via an Ebay auction, and the seller (a dealership in Nebraska) refuses to honour the deal. The winning bidder posts his displeasure at dealer's unhanded ethics on a BMW forum and it's taken up by BMW blogs, Fark, Reddit Consumerist. The seller reaps the negative press whirlwind.

When will companies learn that being bad just to one customer in the new economy can create a tsunami of negative press worldwide?

So from a position where the dealership could have lost money but saved face by using some canny tricks, they've failed twice over. They'll end up having to sell the car at the original bid, but the unintentional costs of appearing aloof, uncaring and unprofessional will hit them much more over a much longer time period.

As a poster said today on the original forum, they could have given the buyer a ring;

“Yeah, this is the BMW dealership, we messed up on the price we set, but you won the deal, fair and square. Man, the boss is really going to be steamed at me...Say, how about doing me a favor and telling your buddies and my boss how well you were treated by me (sales guy) and how we (the dealership) did the right thing even though that did not turn out like we planned?"

This would have turned the negative into a positive, avoided the incriminating digital footprint which'll plague the dealership, will probably lead to them losing their official BMW franchise status (and ultimately, maybe job losses), all because of a measly a few thousand dollars when they thought they could ignore one buyer.

For one company and its staff a totally avoidable issue (let's repeat that: a totally avoidable issue) was unnecessarily thrust into the limelight because they cared more for the money than the customer in the new economy. Again, when will companies learn?

Labels: bmw, consumerist, customer, ethos, fark, internet, reddit

Turning Point: Fall of Codemasters?

Bruce Everiss, an old colleague from my Codemasters' days, has been musing all week about how it went wrong for the Leamington Spa-based video game company (latest game Turning Point is garnering yet more poor scores). The articles are well worth reading and detail some of the poor decisions made behind the scenes that have held Codemasters back from becoming a world-class games company.

I'm holding my tongue on my opinion of his diatribes at present as he's still got another article to publish (although I think the phrase "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" must have been coined with Codemasters in mind), however I always felt that my small part of it, working with the web team, was one of the best and most focused areas of the company. We did some great stuff in there, and as such, "props" to the designers and developers I worked with. They were instrumental in our department's own little successes.

In this switched-on world where Metacritic thrives and Amazon customer reviews are more important than any marketing or flashy website, good online work is nothing though - it's just a new way to mollify the angry customers if you haven't got the rest of the deal right.

Marketing nowadays incorporates everything, from the original concept writer to the lowly developer to the bug-fixer to the customer service department. Everyone is in marketing now, and as Seth Godin says in Meatball Sundae, marketing doesn't support the company any longer; the company has to support marketing.

As I've said before, companies need to listen to those people on the ground floor and act on it. Promise to learn from it, and actually learn from it. Without that revolution in thinking, top-down business is doomed to apathy, falling profits and failure.

Labels: codemasters, customer, ethos, point, turning

Visitors are Visitors are Visitors

When will it be time for companies to put physical and the virtual visitor on a similar footing and count all as "visitors"?

I recently had a meeting with the CEO of the hotels division of Expedia, along with the MD of Openads (online advertising agency), both highly focused and a delight to chat with. Both men were forthright in their view that it's now got to the point that the number of visitors an company/organisation receives (the footfall) should include those that have interacted with the brand via the website.

I personally was thrilled about this (four months into the job and I've doubled the company's visitor numbers!) however, as always, there are reservations...

In the real world we talk about visitors but actually it's visits - perhaps a specious difference, but unless we scan retinas or fingerprints of all visitors and establish "unique visitor numbers" all real customer-facing operations have no idea whether a million visitors a year actually means one bloke coming a million times or one million people coming once (or more likely, shades of grey in-between). Web stats are much more focused and can tell (within reasonable boundaries) exactly how many people interacted with the brand, purchased goods, etc.

However, web stats also record how transitory a visit is - average time spent and bounce rate all show that the web visitor stays around for a minute or two then usually departs. This is less likely to happen in the real world (in all but the worst stores).

Plus there's definitely some reticence to count one with the other, in that they're not equal (and no doubt that they still don't appreciate the web as a platform of the future yet). The question from the top would surely be how can we count the web visitors when we don't call those that watch the company's TV advert "visitors"? (Of course, this exposes the fallacy that all advertising is equal and that mass marketing still "works".)

So apart from in the most progressive of companies this like for like equating hasn't happened yet. But it'll come.

So when does the tipping point occur on a micro-economic level? Some would say it's when virtual visitors outweigh actual visitors, but I'd say more importantly it's when recurrent virtual visitors outweigh actual visitors (maybe once the bounce rate is taken out of the equation). When that happens, the sea change has definitely occurred.

So when does the tipping point occur on a macro-economic level? Much harder to say, but I'd hazard a guess as when the internet isn't treated by the majority of businesses as a marketing medium to aide and assist the physical, but as an equal way to interact with brands. And when the phrase "I'm going to the shops" garners a follow up question "real or virtual?".

Labels: customer, ethos, metrics, visitors, website

Why use online social marketing?

Why use online methods rather than focusing wholly on offline marketing? Because today's newspapers aren't even tomorrow's fish and chip wrappers any more.

3 shorter steps to an online community

On Tuesday I posted "3 steps to an online community" - at 36 words the steps are way too long in today's era of short attention spans so let's break it down into three empathic feelings:

• Recognise
  
• Respect
  
• Rhapsodise
  

The three Rs, at the heart of social marketing.

Labels: community, marketing, recognise, respect, rhapsodise, social

3 steps to an online community

A riff I was thinking about today; the route to creating an online community can be broken down into a process featuring three simple steps:

• Turn unaware stranger into a cautious stranger via a trusted third party
  
• Turn a cautious stranger into a guarded friend through (y)our website
  
• Turn a guarded friend into a good friend through honest and trustworthy communication
  

And that's it. Rinse and repeat.

Labels: community, ethos, process, website

"The ordinary crappie in the street..."

The BBC website is brilliant at producing great content, but even they needs to spellcheck. God knows I've made enough typos in my career, but still, a "crappie"?!

Embiggen the image on Flickr, here.

Labels: bbc, journalism, typo, web

Build it - then tell them about it - and they will come

A great article from Rae Hoffman on the modern take on the old (web 1.0) adage, "build it and they will come". I agree completely with her reasoning that "content is no longer king"; not in a web sense anyway.

The internet tried to instigate the push model seen in classical marketing and failed completely - I saw that played out from the inside during my time at ZOOfootball (which is coming up to five years since it was switched off by its owners later this month - my how time flies).

Instead Rae implores the web journalist/writer/marketeer to build it, then tell them about it (through pull marketing), and they will come.

It's not a blinding revelation to read that, especially as that forms the core of my work on a day-to-day basis, but as the anniversary of the death of my first foray on the web comes around again, it's the kind of advice we should always need reminding of now and again.

Labels: advice, marketing, pull, push, web

Shelter from the Storm

At the moment there's a storm approaching the UK - the weather service predict it'll hit overnight. And we've known about it for days, which something of a rarity.

In business a lot of storms and PR disasters we see on the web seemingly come out of nowhere and hit at any point; but if you can predict when effects might be felt you can ride it out a lot better.

Seth Godin advises that if a company is creating storms then it's time to get the hell out of there, as they've not invested enough in the product's development and don't understand the new economy that you'll have to deal with. However I'd contend that sometimes this isn't possible.

So if you can't get away try and assess the worse points of the product you're advertising as well as its USPs and try and predict where the tempest will come from. And then when the wind rises, the rain starts to fall and sky blackens, you know where to talk and who to talk to. Chat extensively in an honest way and don't ever try to fight back, and then ensure that your company learns from it.

If you do that the sun will come out sooner than you think.

Labels: disaster, ethos, pr, storm

The Long Valley

Within the sizeable older generation of the country's workforce, among a fair few decision-makers, the internet is still distrusted, a great unknowing of this disposable age where (they believe) Monday's fad is Tuesday's failure. They set the argument as such: why get involved in something so transitory, so temporary? If on a micro level a website can be a wasteland quickly, surely the macro is doomed to follow the same path?

I've worked with the web for around a decade now; around one-third of my life, more than I spent in secondary education. This is no "fly by night" medium for me - this is real, this is the future, and this is what companies, cultures and countries should embrace. I try not to mock those that belittle the internet but find myself railing against this apparent prejudice even if I know my words are tinged with sarcasm, and not a little disappointment. But within me I know also I'm casting doubts on their experience and wisdom, which isn't something that should be belittled so readily.

So why the disconnect, something that I find explicitly in my work-life (but extends to envelope every generational gap)?

John Steinbeck, the great and good author of Grapes of Wrath, Of Mice and Men and East of Eden, gives a good explanation of this innate supposed ignorance in his book Travels With Charley. He focuses on why we distrust the new; the supposed fad.

"Humans had perhaps a million years to get used to the fire as a thing and as an idea. Between the time a man got his fingers burned on a lightning-struck tree until another man carried some inside a cave and found it kept him warm, maybe a hundred thousand years, and from there to the blast furnaces of Detroit...how long?"

In our collective past we had time to adapt not only to external forces that light our way (and also had the power to destroy us) but to learning and knowing. Fifty years ago when Steinbeck wrote those words we had little time to digest what was happening around us. In 2008 we have no time at all. We've just got to get on with it, and if you don't understand, stand aside and let someone else light the way.

A senior director can be determined to continue the old ways of thinking, the old methods in the face of a Canute-ian rising tide against him or her. However the web is about engaging people within the discussion, and forming communities based around like-minded folk - what you're supposedly good at doing (that's correct, isn't it?). And what could be more like-minded than working for the same company and having the same goals? You're focused on talking to a community, engage the internal one as well as the external ones to find on your travels.

So my advice is to meet these statesmen and women halfway, be learn to be adept at slowing time down so they have chance to gain their footing and both you and they will gain, he explicitly, you implicitly.

As while they're learning for the first time and gaining confidence in web medium, you're engaging someone, the essence of what the social web is about. You'll be putting those high-minded ideas of Seth and his ilk into practice. You need to follow the rules of the social web as much as anyone or you've failed to understand the concept, just like the generation you belittle.

Labels: ethos, gap, generation, social, web

A journey to 1000 fans begins with one step

Not often does an article come along that makes it all seem very simple; Kevin Kelly's "1,000 True Fans" is one of those riffs.

Aim for that number of dedicated followers of your work, cut out any middleman, and if you achieve this (give or take) you can survive comfortably. That's it, only 1,000 true fans. No need to be a huge megastar (and what a failure the old marketing/sales paradigm was for a lot of them), just poking your head above the rest of the long tail.

Of course, he's a web 2.0 spin on the old microcelebrity culture, but it doesn't mean it's any less relevant or timely.

It's never been easier to quit the day job, focus on your passion and survive comfortably. Even if that first step is frightening.

Labels: ethos, kelly, kevin, network, social, true fans

To those who've StumbledUpon...

I've noticed an upsurge in site visitors from StumbleUpon, a nice surprise for a Sunday evening when all I had to look forward to was a preparing for a management meeting tomorrow. So first off, welcome to anyone who visits the site via StumbleUpon!

Rubbergenius is all about online marketing riffs - how companies use the internet for promotional purposes and how some companies don't. This site has a UK bias so apologies to those good people of the US of A, Canada and the rest of the world; you might not have much of a clue when it comes to First Capital Connect, HMV music stores or Grand Central trains. However the ethos, morals and rules mentioned in these posts are universal; as such some people (and some companies) get it, and some obviously don't.

If you want a marketing article to take away with you, have a scan through the "10 things to do on holiday weekend" post, or if you're moving home soon take a read of the "8 ways to find a great neighbourhood using social websites" post. Or, if you want one quick riff to send you on your way, read through "case study two" in this post. Yes, this person decided not to buy a video game for that reason alone.

If you've got any constructive criticism or comments then post them up; hope you enjoy the site and keep on StumblingUpon.

Labels: lawther, peer, rubbergenius, stumbleupon

Contextual adverts = recursive news

Contextual adverts are the norm nowadays, but remember that they may have unintended and bitterly hilarious consequences - and add a cruel post mortem to a person's life.

Witness this recent Digg post about the sad suicide of the advertising guru famous for the tagline "I'm Lovin' It". And the two contextual adverts that appeared in the original post, in the USA at least.

Nothing much can be done in this case, although "upper floor" is perhaps not the best phrase to put your company's advert against - if indeed it was a contextual advert in this case. Nothing much, except perhaps to avoid advertising contextually on news websites. If you do that your company runs the risk of becoming the news itself.

Labels: adverts, advice, contextual, news, social

I'm tellin' y'all it's sabotage...

It's strange seeing a business sabotage themselves. It's exactly what HMV* have been doing; in the midst of 21st Century "long tail" economics, they're pushing potential customers away and into the arms of online retailers. They're giving up without a whimper.

We all understand HMV know they can't compete on price with the online behemoths, the "pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap" big box stores, or the "right here, right now" downloadable MP3 model. It's not a surprise that a lot of the niches HMV used to occupy have been sewn up by Amazon, Wal-Mart, Tesco and iTunes in the last few years.

But there are still niches available for HMV even now; if they can't compete on price of the hit albums (big box stores) or along the long tail (Amazon), or on instant deliverability to MP3 players (iTunes et al) what can they compete on? My ideas:

• A knowledgable ethos among the staff and on the shelves
  
• The availability of albums other than the "hits" on the high street
  
• The ability for customers to physically browse the stock
  
• The chance to pick up an album on a whim
  
• The fact you'll get a box, artwork and a physical disc
  

How much of a premium are those things worth? A pound or so per item maybe (when added to capital costs)? Taking the downloadable model's price of £7.99 (which is overpriced in itself), we'd then expect that virtually all albums in HMV would be less than £10. Get change back from a tenner and it's a good deal.

So why are they pricing music out of their own stores by setting the margins way too high? Album upon album is £14 or £16 still, forcing music buyers like me into the open arms of download sites and online ordering.

Those niches are deal-makers. If I've got an hour's lunch and fancy buying an album then I'll peruse the stock. I'm after more of the long tail rather than the short head (so the "misses" rather than the "hits") and if HMV priced single albums at a couple of quid more than iTunes then I'd be happy to take a punt. But I'm not daft enough to buy if it means spending double the amount of money. I'll wait until I get home and download instead.

Zavvi, the only other big name in music retailing on the high street nowadays, aren't great, but at least they seem to get their customer's profile. More and more they employ the low prices that were to be found at the likes of Fopp before they imploded (which wasn't down to the rise of the internet as much as one ultimately-catastrophic business deal).

So HMV are actively discouraging people like me from their shop. Why do this? To prove a self-fulfilled prophesy? If so it seems a bizarre way to act: say "the internet is ruining our business" and then keeping prices artificially high to ensure it does. Wanting to be a martyr is all well and good, but you'll still end up dead.

It's sad that music is disappearing from the high street altogether, and when that happens (probably within the next five years) it'll be the death of new music in its physical form. But to see stores like HMV trying to hasten this revolution by sabotaging their own sales is just stupid.

*To clarify, I'm referring to the physical HMV stores and not the website in this post, which at least seems to understand the nature of the new economy (although their attempt to enter the downloads market has been patchy at best - I mean, how's this for a poor landing page for "downloads"?).

Labels: consulting, ethos, internet, music