Brands should learn from my wife

Brands shouldn’t ask customers what they want.

One of the worst things I can do is ask my wife what she wants – whether it’s an innocuous question about what we should have for dinner or a request for a hint as to what she might consider a good Christmas present. I have been, repeatedly, told that if I had paid better attention to her I’d know exactly what she wants.

Customers think like my wife. Few are willing to answer street questionnaires, take calls at home; fill online questionnaires or participate in focus groups – unless they are paid.

And yet, companies keep insisting. They rather ask than listen. If companies really cared about the customers they should know what they want!

Everyday, all day long, customers are expressing what they want and what they’d like to have improved. All it takes is listening and observation: see how happy the customer is by the time they get to the front of the queue to pay; how much time they spend with the product; how wide they smile then consuming it.

Social media (social networks, blogs, et al.) provides ample opportunities for companies to listen to what customers are saying about their products and services; uninhibited and unaffected by facilitators and stimulus material.

A friend of mine at a leading consumer goods company told me that a sweeping review of blogs, forums and notice boards led to the surprising knowledge that one of their soap bars was used for onanistic practices. My friend dismissed it as an indication of the folly of a few. To make a point I pushed back and suggested they should have launched a bar specially designed for these people’s interests. I argued that, of all the product extensions the consumer goods company had launched over the years, this was one which, at least, had a proven market.

On a similar note, Coke famously chose not to listen to customers, over the summer, as a wave of videos showing Diet Coke bottles spouting geysers when mixed with Mentos began to appear on YouTube (today there are over 6,040 videos with the top 25 having registered over 15.5 million views) and other video sharing sites. At the peak of the craze, Coke’s response was to say “we want people to drink our soda, not play with it.” Mentos on the other hand, embraced it. Belatedly, in October, Coke commissioned the EepyBird Guys, the producers of the most spectacular Coke/Mentos videos, and announced a competition. Alas, they have only attracted 5 entries so far. Read B.L. Ochman’s blog for an analyses of this fiasco.

Listen, participate.

$445m ad spend on social networks

eMarketeer released a report showing that global ad spending on social networks is expected to reach $445 million in 2006 and nearly triple to $1,125 billion in 2007. They predict that the US will account for about 80% of the ad spend.

In a related article, Google announced that Its 2006 UK revenues are expected to surpass Channel Four’s (*) predicted £800m ($1.5bn) returns.

Since much of the advertising on social networks are contextual text ads like Google’s AdSense (Google owns the ad space on MySpace which eMarketeer estimates to account for 60% of social network ad spend) this all seems to indicate that

1. Social networks are real businesses – some are here to stay;

2. Broadcasters really need to start developing their response to user/viewer migration online.

(*) Channel Four is the UK’s second largest network, with about 9% share of viewers, that airs advertising in the UK (the BBC is paid by though a TV tax).

tags: social networks TV

Sun newspaper’s MySun misses the mark

Two weeks ago The Sun, the biggest selling newspaper in the UK, launched MySun, an interactive service will fell far short of the capturing the potential of social media.

Before I criticize MySun let me congratulate The Sun for this initiative. I can’t understand why other publications are not experimenting with social media. It is becoming apparent that Internet users are expecting much greater participation that, I believe, is the gist behind Web 2.0. Publications need to move away from a pure editorial model.

I think social media is particularly relevant for niche publications, specialist magazines, which have a strong voice (and brand) on topics that are the passion of a select few. Surely, these select few would appreciate being brought together and would have a lot of stories, insights and information to contribute.

Back to MySun. I tried to login before going on holiday but couldn’t because it was down. Today it’s taken me over 15min to register largely due to a very slow email validation process. So far so bad.

Once logged on I didn’t find any of the features that define social networks. I my profile is buried a few clicks away. That means my home page is really not my home page; it’s The Sun’s. “My” page looks essentially like something Yahoo has been offering for a decade: a personalized news page – except that all the news comes from The Sun. The other thing I see on “my” home pages are discussion. Err, these are forums, again, old stuff.

The strangest thing is that I couldn’t see anybody else. I felt all alone. There is no networking here. I don’t know who else is registered. There is no search. A “Take me to” function first gave me a 404 (dead link) and on a second try took me to a Sun’s columnist blog which was very unpersonal.

I couldn’t see any place on “my” home page for my friends. I can’t upload any content though I could blog (to who? who is looking?). The Sun doesn’t even invite me to send scoops or stories the way CNN does with i-report.

So, overall, MySun is a disappointment. It is just a personalized news page, something I have been able to get from Yahoo, Netscape, AOL, Google… hell loads of places, with the enormous disadvantage that all the news I get comes only from The Sun. They have failed to attempt to create a sense of community and shunned any and all content I may have wished to contribute to (and in the process enrich) the newspaper.

Prediction: If MySun is to last, it will need to undergo major changes that embrace social media.

tags: media social networks Sun

Beginning of the end for MySpace?

The Wall Street Journal (behind their pay wall) reported today on Nielsen/NetRatings figures showing a decline in the number of U.S. visitors at MySpace (4% and Facebook (12%).

The article says it might be due to excessive spam, privacy fears or just a seasonal fluctutation (last September a similar drop was recorded).

I believe all that. It’s too early to call the beginning of the decline of MySpace. But, I think it will come sooner rather than later.

Prediction: Over the next year we will see significant growth in specialist/niche social networks at a cost to the giant social networks. We are going to see birds of a feather flocking together. <=link>

tag: MySpace Facebook

Update: Go online in 3D

The last 4 months since returning from my first expedition into SecondLife in has seen a flurry of activity in that virtual world with big brands like American Apparel, Starwood Hotels, Reuters, Nissan, IBM, Universal, PA Consulting and artists like Duran Duran and Suzanne Vega creating a in-world presence. This week the first pure SecondLife company, Crayon, announced their launch.

For regular information about SecondLife, I recommend you read Giff’s blog.

tags: virtual worlds SecondLife social networks metaverse

Web 2.0 defined

The term Web 2.0 (and, worse, the “2.0” suffix) has gained widespread usage this year. I think it is safe to say that 2.0 is the new .com. But what does it mean?

The term has been used and overused to the point that it vaguely means “something new” as in “AOL is so Web 1.0, MySpace is Web 2.0.”

Tim O’Reilly claims he first coined the term in 2004 and has rather opaquely defined it.

I have been looking for more succinct in response to the queries of my clients and friends. I have now found two answers that satisfy me. [NB: As with anything Internet-related, it has three facets: a creative one, a technical one and a business (strategy) one. Being a fee paying cardholder of the strategist union; I will only speak for my lot.]

I favour two very similar definitions of what Web 2.0 are from a business perspective:

1. A site where user actions increases the value of the service. (I lost the source)

2. Dotcom (Web 1.0) was about ‘taking’. Web 2.0 is about ‘giving’. (thanks Hugh MacLeod)

So, yes, Web 2.0 is something radical. Traditionally companies offered consumers a carefully vetted and edited list of things. Web 1.0 preserved this approach. Web 2.0 let’s the user have more control. Everything you bought was selected by retailers; now you have eBay. All the news you read was vetted by editors; now you have digg. All the programmes you used to watch were picked by channel controllers; now you have YouTube.

Companies should ask themselves how they can open up to consumers. Let them participate. Surely, there is no better way to gain the customer insight than to listen to them. In other words, companies should experiment with being user-centric to the extreme.

tags: web20 user centric

MySpace is getting older: over 50% are over 35

Companies who reject social networks in the belief that they are for teenagers should rethink their positions.

MySpace today disclosed that their demographic is skewed towards the over 35s.

Social networks are emerging thick and fast, targeting all demographics and interest groups.

I bet that for whatever segment a company wishes to target, there is a dedicated social network out-there and a large contingent of the target segment in the generic social networks like MySpace, Faces and Vox.

 

tags: social networks MySpace

How to advertise on social networks

Yesterday I was asked to make a presentation about social networks to a direct marketing agency. The topic was “How to advertise in social networks.”

I drew on the insights from some of my trusted sources of information and ideas. Together, I thought they provided a broad view of how companies should approach this new medium.

“We’re headed for a major shift in online marketing, whereby users become “friends” with brands they relate to” (Tim O’Reill

Social media brings to the table several coveted building blocks that advertisers let slip a long time ago: trust, credibility, authenticity and, often, restraint. [It] thrives because consumers trust other consumers more than advertisers, period. (Consumer Generated Media)

There are three basic approaches to advertise in a social network:

1. Corporate Member Profile: A profile of a company, real or fictional persona. Real world equivalent: Autograph signing by costumed actor

2. The MySpace Group: A group of MySpace members, administered by a leader. Real world equivalent: suggestion box, town hall meeting, focus group, mailing list

3. Branding MySpace: Pieces of code that add background images, icons, video, audio cursor icons, slideshows and color schemes to member profiles. Real world equivalent: Branded giveaways

(e-fluentials, Burson-Marsteller’s blog)

 

All the rules of viral marketing apply to advertising in social networks: success bares no relation to investment; it does not have a timeline (so it calls for a different type of planning); number of views bare little relation to reach or impact (more people hear about it than view it).

The best approach is to:

1. Experiment: Treat it as an innovation exercise – expect failure, so “fail faster so you can succeed sooner”.

2. Monitor: Measure how consumers are reacting to the message – there are many tools to measure social media behaviour

3. Respond, Amplify: When things take off be ready to respond, participate and engage in the ensuing conversation; prepare to amplify what’s happening.

(Experience Curve)

 

Finally a tacky quotation: “Tell me and I forget. Show me and I remember. Involve me and I understand.” (Confucious)

tags: social networks social media advertise

Learning from the closure of Walmart’s social network

I am a big believer in the potential of social networks. I think that social networks are a new medium that companies need to embrace. But, Walmart went too far in trying to build one.

Today Walmart closed MyHub, their attempt at building a social network after 10 weeks. As far as I know, this hasn’t been a surprise to anybody outside the firm.

Surely, freedom to express one’s passion is one of the key factors behind the success of a social network. Ultimately social networks are a means for individuals to share their passions with other like-minded people. Birds of a feather will flock togethe. Cat lovers should run to Catster, Goths to vampirefreaks. There are dozens of niche social networks emerging – I need to build a directory soon.

So, what is the passion that Walmart represents? Saving money? Buying great clothes (as MyHub implied)? I can’t think of the emotional reason for someone to congregate around the Walmart brand. Worse, Walmart actively censored content thus curtailing self expression.

I doubt there are any non-media brands that can pull off building a social network. Maybe Apple? Maybe a leading cosmetics brand can build a social network where women share health and beauty tips? Maybe a sports car company like Lotus with the hope of stimulating discussion about their car performance and track days to race them?

The challenge is to attract people that will contribute enough content (the much lauded user generated content (UGC)) to cause members to keep returning to the social network.

I exclude media companies/brands because they naturally pack emotion. MTV, E!, SkySports, Cosmopolitan, Rolling Stone; all these titles stand for something and already inspire some user generated content in the form of letters to the editors.

Perhaps, Walmart was aware of this lack of passion which is the only explanation behind them creating four fake stereotype profiles to see the network.

Learnings from the closure of MyHub

1. Foment a passion: identify the passion of a particular customer group and use the social network to enable those people to meet, discuss and share ideas.

2. Don’t meddle: act as a master of ceremony not a head teacher. Let members express themselves; let them decide what is appropriate and not appropriate. Only step in to mediate or ban a member if called upon to do so by the members. Editing member’s content will kill the network. Member’s will stop contributing content.

3. Don’t fake it: let users populate the soclal network. Putting up fake profiles is very lame.

4. Give it time: social networks can’t spring-up in a matter of weeks.

Prediction: Over the next year we will see the membership and number of niche social networks grow significantly and see the widespread launch of social networks backed by media companies/brands.

tags: social network Walmart

Go online in 3D

I have spent the last month visiting SecondLife. I return to RL (shorthand for Real World, that’s how SecondLIfe members refer to life outside the social network) convinced that I’ve seen the future.

If you haven’t heard of SecondLife I recommend you read BusinessWeek’s cover story on them and other virtual worlds. Briefly, SecondLIfe is a social network in a 3D virtual world. It’s not a game. There a is no goal. You enter SecondLife to talk to friends and make new ones; to express yourself and find entertainment.

But, unlike other flat, 2D social networks like MySpace where you only exist as a ghost, by the marks you leave behind (eg, blogs, pictures, comments), in SecondLife you exist as an avatar. You create a 3D, head to toe character. Of course, it doesn’t have to be a true representation of yourself but… so what?

In addition to SecondLife, other social networking 3D virtual worlds include Cyworld, HabboHotel.

Prediction: 3D virtual worlds are the end-game. MySpace and all the other web-page based social networks are just a stepping stone. In 3D virtual worlds will become better and better at offering individuals a rich interactive, personal experience. Brands should start experimenting with these worlds… go have fun and learn.

tags: virtual worlds SecondLife social networks metaverse