Firstly, I joined last year and didn’t really get the concept at all, dismissing it as a bit too simple to add value to my life both, personally and professionally. Well, 9 months later and determined to understand what the ‘hype’ is about and have re-registered.
My first starting point was to try and find fellow peers in the digital marketing arena and start to follow them. I have found some interesting articles, listing the top digital people on twitter and used this as my starting point.
It is from here I can start to see the useful side to tweeting. These people are not telling me what they had for breakfast (thank god) but highlighting interesting articles they have read, good blogs, latest research and providing URL links so followers can see too. This, on top of my own RSS feeds means I can ensure my knowledge is bang up to date with all the latest digital thinking from a much wider variety of sources than I am currently monitoring.
In addition, I have grasped the viral effect that retweeting must have – it is just the same as forwarding on an email. However, the key about twitter is you don’t have to know your followers or people you follow personally so the viral effect has more breadth when it first starts.
Although, I can see benefits on a professional level, the jury is for me out on whether brands will adopt Twitter in the long term. I am off to resarch and review some more. so watch this space for a further update from me as I delve further into the world of twittering!
Wednesday, 25 February 2009
Monday, 23 February 2009
Why have an 'always on' paid search campaign
Having read a Google retail newsletter, I was interested in the article on the benefits of a margin-based paid search strategy. For once I agree with Google and believe in the ‘always on’ search approach. I know from experience though that clients rarely employ it.
Based on the nature of search, you should not employ a fixed budget. This set-up is most appropriate when testing keywords and the channel for success. If you have gone through the testing phase, know it is working, my advice would be not to cap the budget.
At this point, my definition of working is probably worth clarifying. To me this means delivering effective return on investment. ROI though, may not just be a linear result from keyword to online sale. It might be in the form of eyeballs to a web page for the site to resell, leads and enquiries to respond to by phone, new customers applying online or indeed sales offline.
Search advertising is working when the ROI is profitable. At this point the spend against this channel should be maximised and un-capped.Clients who should be ‘always on’ and spending significantly on search typically have their advertising budgets controlled at a senior level by people who are not familiar with how paid search works. Often, when a digital specialist requests more spend for the search channel, it comes at the expense of other advertising activity. Typically marketing managers need to reduce spend on ATL advertising such as a press ad or TV advertising to fund this request.
This can make traditional marketers nervous. The sort of change often required to fund an ‘always on’ search strategy is a significant change to the marketing mix. What I think they don’t realise is if you are not in search but running a high impact peak TV campaign you are generating demand for your products. This demand, after viewing a TV ad, typically will go online to search for more information on the products advertised. If you are not there, that demand is likely to go to people that do have search listings live – more often than not these are your competitors or internet specialists.
The ‘always on’ approach prevents you losing this demand stimulated from ATL advertising. Being ‘always on’ means you have the opportunity to capture all ‘active seekers’ looking for your products and services. But, the ‘always on’ approach is rarely adopted because the channel is not funded in the correct way. I think it is best to view Google as a commission only sales person - if it delivers ROI the earnings should not be capped.
Based on the nature of search, you should not employ a fixed budget. This set-up is most appropriate when testing keywords and the channel for success. If you have gone through the testing phase, know it is working, my advice would be not to cap the budget.
At this point, my definition of working is probably worth clarifying. To me this means delivering effective return on investment. ROI though, may not just be a linear result from keyword to online sale. It might be in the form of eyeballs to a web page for the site to resell, leads and enquiries to respond to by phone, new customers applying online or indeed sales offline.
Search advertising is working when the ROI is profitable. At this point the spend against this channel should be maximised and un-capped.Clients who should be ‘always on’ and spending significantly on search typically have their advertising budgets controlled at a senior level by people who are not familiar with how paid search works. Often, when a digital specialist requests more spend for the search channel, it comes at the expense of other advertising activity. Typically marketing managers need to reduce spend on ATL advertising such as a press ad or TV advertising to fund this request.
This can make traditional marketers nervous. The sort of change often required to fund an ‘always on’ search strategy is a significant change to the marketing mix. What I think they don’t realise is if you are not in search but running a high impact peak TV campaign you are generating demand for your products. This demand, after viewing a TV ad, typically will go online to search for more information on the products advertised. If you are not there, that demand is likely to go to people that do have search listings live – more often than not these are your competitors or internet specialists.
The ‘always on’ approach prevents you losing this demand stimulated from ATL advertising. Being ‘always on’ means you have the opportunity to capture all ‘active seekers’ looking for your products and services. But, the ‘always on’ approach is rarely adopted because the channel is not funded in the correct way. I think it is best to view Google as a commission only sales person - if it delivers ROI the earnings should not be capped.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
