Famine City

Facebook Engagement: a strategy about nothing

I haven't heard anyone say this yet about Facebook, but I've heard it before. The idea is growing on me that the best Facebook engagement model might be to share content (to blatantly steal from Seinfeld) about nothing. When I look across brands with tens of thousands of followers and see what gets the most response, it's about nothing. 

I visited a few pages, like McDonald's and Honda on Facebook for the purposes of writing this piece. When I start looking at the types of content that get the most likes and responses, they aren't super interesting brand news. It's about fill-in-the-blank types questions, what do you think about this and small bits of trivia. It's not high brow stuff. It's the mundane, the nothing if you will, that gets the most conversation. Now don't get me wrong, it's strategic as heck in some cases too. McDonald's helped build the buzz for the McRib Sandwich and Honda is activating their loyalists. So the nothingness can have some strategy behind it, don't get me wrong. 

I understand that conversation is the medium. Conversation is approachable, it's the everyday "how ya doing" in a new medium. It's the caulk in between events in our lives. However, I'm continually amazed that when I look at some brands like a high end car company based in Germany that I won't name, you can tell they are looking for the keys  The keys to unlock the conversation on Facebook. Maybe I'll send em' a note and tell them it's about nothing.

find me on twitter @martyb

Social Media Principles Do Not Apply to Everything

Social media principles do not apply to everything, especially to matters of national security. I've recently looked through some of the content of the WikiLe**s.  In the event that you didn't know, they released documents in the number of  391,832 reports called ('The Iraq War Logs'). These were classified documents detailing the nature of the Iraqi War, they were leaked by somehow. I won't link to it for purposes of further endorsing their efforts, you can find it easily if you search. This is an effort I cannot endorse and am adamantly against for the protection of our country, our soldiers. 

In full disclosure, I served in the U.S. Army. I held no particular special rank or access to privileged information and I wasn't in that long of a period. I did not serve in war either. I also don't believe my position here is one of a political stance on whether or not I'm defending poor behavior from a government(s). My wife says it in a much more succinct way, "sometimes you don't want to know how the sausage is made." I believe that matters of national security aren't ones that deserve the same social principles that we apply to the rest of our lives, which I am openly in support of the notion of transparency in our personal lives. But that notion does not extend to matters of national security. 

I am a staunch believer in that there are many truths that many people cannot handle. It's that famous Jack Nicholson quote from A Few Good Men, "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth." You don't want to know how some decisions are made. You don't want to know the harm's way that people are in and cannot imagine the situations that people are in when they make certain decisions. I am fully aware there are terrible outcomes to some of these decisions. Terrible. Lives are lost. Futures are ruined. Nevertheless you are putting people into known high stress conditions and it's not for us to judge absent of the facts. Moreover, it's one that is not the subject of crowd sourcing or armchair judgement. 

I won't belabor this issue. Some things are not subject to the world of the web, crowd sourcing and not ready for public consumption. While I am openly acknowledging that some of these facts and situations deserve scrutiny, there are people paid and elected to do this. It's not me from the comfort of my computer to decide or contribute to the jury. I think most of us are better off saving our discretion to the election polls.  

follow me on twitter @marty_b

 

 

The other day I said I was going to try to write some more for the blog. So here's my effort of sharing out some things that are certainly interesting to me this week.

- Check out the war that Zuck is going to wage on the Googles, along with the good kids in Redmond:

http://bit.ly/9KXyjm

- New version of Skype is integrating with FB. Finally, a video conferencing client that is going to use my existing network. This will put Skype way ahead in terms of 1:1 communication video ownership, at least on desktop devices (may finally crack the business barrier as well). Read on: http://usat.ly/atYaXk

Stuff worth sharing right there,
Marty

Dear Blog,
I miss you. I miss writing. It's not that I haven't thought about you since my trip down to the waters of Lake Norris, but I've been pretty busy. Please understand. I've written at least a few partial blog posts, responding why the web isn't dead and so forth, why Google TV is like a crackpipe for marketers, but alas, they are not ready to publish. So here's my commitment to you, my dear blog: if I am not able to muster up at least three posts between now and Turkey-day, I'll go gently into that good night. Promise.

Marty

Things I Think I Think About Digital This Week…

Note: I wrote this blog post last week on my vacation, but did not have great wifi service to post or something may have come up, like relaxing. Can't remember, but nevertheless, here it is.

I've been spending this week in the serene hills of Lake Norris, Tennessee. I've had some time to boat, read, steal a bit of wifi, hunt chupacabra, barely get phone service and recharge a bit. To be honest, I need a month of this, but alas I only have a week. Throughout this week I've been reflecting on a bunch of things digital and wanted to capture a few of them for the blog.

If you've heard the title of this post, sans about digital, you are correct. This is a complete rip off of Mr. Peter King from Sport's Illustrated. He maintains a section in his weekly column, "Ten things I think I think". Thanks Mr. King for the inspiration and if you want to read his much better writing on the NFL, you can find his weekly column here on SI.com. Onto my version of ten things I think I think…

1. Facebook as your Social CRM. Yes, I like the role of Facebook as a CRM for many companies, especially those that don't necessarily sell online and ROI defined as unique subscribers in their database. I think of big companies with big CRM programs, like Kraft, and this makes incredible sense to me. Obviously there's a community and engagement aspect bonus as well, but you knew that already.
   
2. We're entering a post-digital era in the U.S. Note: I said in the U.S. According to Wikipedia, the definition of post-digital is this: "It points to an attitude that is more concerned with being human, than with being digital." Said another way by Nicolas Negroponte, "We won't recognize things by their digital presence, only its absence." While developed countries will obviously lead in this post-digital era, expect developing countries to spend much less time in the "digital" era. Mobile will lead the digital era in developing countries.
3. Your mobile device will be your wallet in a few years. Mark that down. While I don't expect this to have any impending effects on purse sales, I can't wait until I can pay at point-of-purchase with my mobile device.
4. The NFL better send a thank you note to Facebook and Twitter. Twitter and Facebook are creating more outlets for NFL propaganda, fan content and updates than ever before. Further driving up the fame and fortune of that enterprise.
5. Journalists, like Peter King, are exploiting the use of Twitter to drive their popularity. While I don't know if it's driving Sports Illustrated readership, online or offline, I see that he answers many of the individual questions posted to him. That's great for his readership, the fans and the NFL at the end of the day, see number 4.
6. Mobile coverage was better in the remote hills of India than in the remote hills of Tennessee. True that—no contest for Vodafone vs AT&T. Vodafone of India has a better coverage network, but I cannot comment on the data speed (to be fair).
7. All of these Facebook application providers will be commoditized within a year and prices will bottom out quickly. There are tons of application providers that are just too expensive today for the functionality they provide—it'll mimic email service providers. Timeframe: 12-18 months.
8. MLB.com, you've got the best network of shared sites, with shared components and content that I've seen to date in any industry, bar none. Whether on a mobile device or a desktop computer, you've done it very well. Thank you.
9. The food revolution of the last few years has mimicked that of digital. When the digital revolution turned social, so did the food revolution in America. Less haute cuisine and greater refinement of the American staples, like the rejuvenation of the burger. Do regional fare, simply, but extremely well. Go local. I'm amazed at how our digital behaviors reflect that of offline behavior as well. Maybe that Google company was onto something knowing that our search habits reflect other things about us. Maybe?
10. Social commerce will be huge. We're in the infancy of this technology, but if word of mouth is one of the strongest drivers of any purchase, social commerce will remove the distance between purchase intent and actual purchase. Bet on this technology.

Last thing, promise, I'm going to work on telling more stories here on the blog in the upcoming months. I think that's a part of my writing and speaking style that really needs to be developed. While you certainly did not need to know that, it's something that I'm thinking about nonetheless.

Back to boating or chupacabra hunting, or something.

Follow me on twitter @marty_b

If you're in marketing and down on your luck today, you could be writing these headlines.

Depth of conversations: where have they gone?
I was having a great conversation about the depth of conversation and thinking today caused by the inundation of stimulus from our different inputs, think social/email.The question basically posed is: Has the amount of content that we must consume and the depth of responses (essentially) lessened the quality of our relationships?

So there are two clear distinct camps of thought here for me:

- The rational side of the coin might look like the amount of content that I must consume actually forces me to be shorter, more concise with the points that I must make when communicating. Therefore I choose only to respond to the emails/tweets that actually interest or may be required of me. Now I'm not confusing multitasking (or the fallacy of it) here. Instead of having a conversation on the phone where I talk more about the ongoings of life and so forth, my communications are more pointed because I must mull through the mountains of content or communication.

- The other side of the coin might be that emotional connections are irrational. The real value of a more in depth conversation isn't the pointed question at all. It's the stuff in between the pointed conversation that binds us together. It's the water cooler stuff in life, outside of meetings, that make life more interesting and the connections more bonding.

It's an interesting question and thought. I'm not sure that I have a concrete answer yet, but it makes me really consider going on Tim Ferris's Low Information Diet, link below. I wonder if the cease and desist of one type of communication, say email, would eliminate the noise to build more relationships. I don't know yet, but thinking I might have to find out soon.

find me on twitter @marty_b

http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/category/low-information-diet-and-selective-ignorance/

iPhone: at&t should welcome a competitor (T-Mobile)

I've read a few articles on Techcrunch and Wired about Apple's possible introduction of a competitive network and most talk about the downsides to the at&t/Apple relationship. Both of these articles have great perspectives and insight, but it seems to me that they missed a couple of the huge upsides of a competitor entering the marketplace. 

"I never knew that I wanted to buy a BMW, until I drove an Acura." - Self admission

We are all consumers and we need a source of comparative to make our best judgement. I had no idea how much better BMW's performed until I drove both. Until consumers have a comparison, they won't appreciate the best product in the market. 

Beyond any other reason, at&t needs a counterbalance for the loudest of consumers. The truth is that any phone network is going to struggle to keep up with the data demands associated with the iPhone consumer. Mobile data isn't there unless you are in 4G territory and that's some time from today. Until then, realize that iPhone users are a demanding bunch. They are early adopters and have devices that are designed with consumers in mind. This means they are high bandwidth, read mobile unfriendly, network devices. The phone on these devices is an application may be considered secondary (until it doesn't work). What at&t should (hopefully) find is that the most vocal consumers about the lack of service, connection and bandwidth will jump ship. While that will hurt some profit margin, it's my estimation that we should revisit dear old Pareto. The 20% of the loudest, most unrelenting consumers, will jump ship. This is great for at&t. Let T-Mobile, current predicted competitor, or any other network deal with them and provide the resources to field their complaints; people problems are expensive. For this reason alone, at&t should welcome a competitor. The grass is never as green as we think it is on the other side. 

Second, at&t needs to catch up. It's no secret, reading the aforementioned pieces and knowing the industry, that mobile data is behind. Invite more players, brainpower and cash to the table. We'll find solutions; we just need the problem to be big enough. If you don't think that T-Mobile engineers are shi**ing themselves about a potential windfall of consumers sucking up their bandwidth, you're wrong. Very wrong. The second they get enough iPhone 4 consumers on the network using their apps, they'll realize the devil they coerced into their bed. Any competitor will grow gross revenue, but margins on those dollars won't be as peachy as one may think. They'll be too busy upgrading their network to service their influx of consumers. Moreover, at&t will be able to sit back and do a marketing campaign that basically says, "come back to service you expect, it wasn't that bad now, was it?" You hate to compare to the negative, but we'll see some variation of this and I'd predict that 20-30% of the consumers will return to at&t. In short, they'll get a six to twelve month window to catch up. at&t needs innovation in this space and competition will bring more dollars and cash to the table. They'll see more innovation and hopefully (some) that will be usable back on their network.  

In the end, I do applaud Apple in this case. They have kept the eye on the consumer experience more than other mobile providers, know that. It's been a step change for devices to drive the mobile technology and not the other way around. This is good for us all. We should not let the experience for consumers concede to the limitations of today's technology. While this is a consumer-centric point of view, at&t should welcome the growth of the category. They'll quickly find that the problem or business opportunity (more appropriately in this case) is big enough and we'll magically find better technology solutions. Sometimes a competitor can be a welcome opportunity. Don't miss opportunity when it knocks. 

find me on twitter @marty_b

LBS: Amateurs and Best Practices

 

From Yelp to foursquare to Gowalla, the location-based service industry is growing fast. While I could say a lot of the potential twenty billion dollar industry, here's a great infographic (above) on the subject courtesy of gigaom.com (great site) that better explains it than I could here. Needless to say, we have a lot of people entering the space for good reason. With this growth comes a lot of amateur marketers creating poor marketing and it's going to suck for consumers. My hope is that we can provide value to consumers before it's just another channel that we (all) wish to avoid.

To date, my experience with marketing through location based services has been rather amateurish at best. Now I will say that banner ads are not included here. I'm geared to ignore them when using specific services like Yelp. When I use Foursquare, I get content pushed to me from surrounding businesses, hard to ignore those. Most often it's from small businesses that don't necessarily know how to create value for opt based location based services. If you want the CTIA's guide on legalese, you can find that here. While the CTIA is focused on privacy and security, my focus on best practices here is on opt based behavior and creating value for consumers that chose to disclose their location via check-in. How should you think about marketing with location based services?

1. Respect the consumer above all else.
   I'll repeat the CTIA, it's opt based information. This means that you're self-disclosing location and in return, as a marketer of some product, we'll try to provide you value.
2. Premise awareness.
   People have figured out how to publish awareness of Facebook or Twitter either on premise or their other channels, time to add LBS to the list. Foursquare offers clings to participating businesses, find and use them. Better yet, how about reminding people on the bottom of their receipt. I too often forget to check in when visiting a business, I just need a nudge.
3. Cross-channel support.
   Support your location based programs across your other marketing programs. I like to think of this like adding the Facebook or Twitter icon in a conspicuous place. I debated on differentiating this from premise awareness, but I think it's warranted. Premise awareness is about driving action on site. BTW-this doesn't mean when people check-in, telling them to find you on Facebook. I don't think that adds value to the consumer when checking-in to an establishment.
4. Inspire the consumer by providing value.
   Focus on driving action from the consumer. Remember this consumer is probably a talker or publisher at some level. Idea: Inspire your consumers to organize a flash mob for a twenty percent discount on your slowest day. In a poor example, I saw a local business advertise a social media seminar that's already free, but their touting it as free via their LBS program. Be transparent. If it's only a message that only benefits you, then I think you're probably being short-sighted. Get creative and inspire your loyalists.
5. Reward the consumer's loyalty in a genuine and unique way that only your business can.
   Recently in Palo Alto, I checked into a location and received marketing from a nearby theatre. For the tenth check-in, I will receive a small popcorn. Um, for real? Follow American Eagle's lead, they are offering a 15% discount for the consumer's next purchase. That's an awesome reward. Want to get crazy? You might consider rewarding consumers with a special seat, automatic reservations, early notices, mug, t-shirt or otherwise. I'll repeat the tired drum of the social marketer, be genuine and I'll also suggest unique as well.
6. If you are a retail establishment, tell your employees that they cannot be mayor.
   You're taking away that possibility for one of your most loyal customers. Us interweb people are pretty savvy and this turns us off. I've been in many businesses where the mayor is an employee. It's like when employees take the best parking spots—it's insulting to your loyal customers. Apparently one day business owners will be able to tag their employees through the LBS portals, but I haven't been able to locate this functionality just yet. Until then, no employees can be a mayor.
7. Don't just think about the mayor.
   Keep other people engaged in the program as well. A suggestion might be to reward someone for every fifth check-in or something that continues to inspire the consumer to participate. Mayorship is a unit of one. Think about the rest of your customers.
8. Continue the conversation.
   Talk to customers that publish their location. You'll find their tweets and or posts on other social networks. Don't miss this opportunity to thank someone for their business. Think about it, you have someone that is already talking about your business (hopefully in a positive way), use it to your advantage. Continue to engage them, thank them for their business and tell them you can't wait to see them again. Don't market to them, respect the consumer. You're now in the consumer's space. This is a conversation space, not a megaphone.

Obviously if you are familiar with both Gowalla and Foursquare, you can see that I more heavily use the latter. It simply has more penetration here in Cincinnati and amongst my friends. While I love some of the trading features on Gowalla, I prefer to see where my friends are located and that happens to be on Foursquare. Looking for a great comparison? Start with this Fast Company article and then Google it. At the end of the day, it's about your social network if your publishing your location in the first place. How many or much of your social network is using one or the other service? 

Comparisons aside, I find the principles and examples should be universal enough to apply to most location based programs that require check-ins. I really tried to make sure these principles were ones that were specific enough to LBS, trying to "sage" so generic that it isn't helpful. Hopefully we'll find marketers using the space to provide value and meaning to us before it becomes another channel that we just want to ignore.

Have a better idea? Please share links below or feedback. 

Find me on twitter @marty_b

Blog catch up edition: ecommerce (Woot/Amazon), free wifi @starbucks

 

"Deadlines and commitments, what to leave in, what to leave out " Bob Seger, Against the Wind

As I was committing mentally to actually blog yesterday, these are the words that went through my head. Sorry for the cheez whiz. Typically I'd apologize for the absence, but the good thing is that I'm busy. It's good for me and it's good for digital marketing that I'm busy. That means we are all moving forward. No apologies, as we've all been there.

So Amazon bought a big bag of crap, Woot?

I wish I was clever enough to have come up with that headline, but alas, it was Woot that came up with it. This is a perfect marriage for Woot and Amazon.

Woot fills a need in its portfolio, just like Zappos did. Woot is a place to unload all of the stuff that gets damaged in shipping, especially electronics (though Woot has expanded). There's a willing audience base with Woot, instead of having to build an audience. Most importantly, there are business efficiencies that Amazon can bring to Woot - supply chain, shipping and some scale savings. Amazon will have to try hard not to "eff" it up, but I think they buy these organizations with the notion of not touching them. I believe that Amazon understands that the most important thing in some acquisitions is not to go in and try to needle with too much. Bring your scale to bear to drive some cost efficiencies and don't over manage it. We'll see, but I certainly see the role that Woot plays in the Amazon portfolio. Let's see if it lasts.

Does free wifi @ Starbucks make a difference?

I recently received this message from some email marketer. Dumb email, but to their credit it did get me thinking. My response, "duh". Yes it makes a difference. The real competitive advantage is there are over 11k locations in the United States. My estimation is that pretty much covers me wherever I am in the U.S. It also prevents me from getting tagged at my overpriced hotel room for $12.95 for my ten minutes of checking email before meetings. If I can count on Starbucks to be my road wifi, gratis, with my $4 cup of coffee, then yes it's an advantage. I won't fool with the coffee maker in my hotel and will head to Starbucks. I wanted coffee anyway, you just gave me a reason to go to your location. Don't worry, the hotel will keep buying Starbucks cups/coffee because they have to keep up with the competition. If I do this 5-6 times per year and there are 50-60 million people like me, Starbucks just made a lot of money. Essentially Starbucks has turned free wifi into a commodity. Smart.

A pet peeve on wifi: If you are a business and you don't give it away, you probably don't get it. Wifi is such a low cost, it should be free anymawho. It's probably more expensive and more painful to actually manage the wifi than give it away. When you charge for it, you have to support it, answer questions and then defend why you charge for it in the first place. Most of us will have some sense of recompense. Give it away, use it as an advantage and if it doesn't work, then so what. We'll look at it tomorrow or whenever the tech guy gets there. Giving wifi away is beautifully easy to do and effective. However, don't think (like Starbucks) it's a competitive advantage. It's only an advantage for Starbucks because they have over 11k locations.

Now it's timeto head out to my local coffee house, Reality Tuesday, for my morning cup of brew.

Find me on twitter @martyb