Author Archive
What a Google & Yahoo! Image Search Reveals
My friend, Juan Guillermo Tornoe’s Hispanic Trending blog is always a good read. His post Search Engine’s Perception of Hispanic vs. Latino made me think.
First, the headline made me consider why I think of myself as Hispanic but never use the term Latino to describe myself. For those of you confused by that, Spanish is my first language. I never learned English until I went to school. My parents immigrated to the US from Argentina in 1962 and my mother’s family spoke Spanish as their first language centuries before Columbus bumped into the island of Hispaniola, they are Sephardi jews.
Second, the image search is revealing. The way people use the terms, Hispanic & Latino, is often interchangeable. However, it’s obvious that the people using the term have different ideas about what they means. I simply never thought before about how valuable image search is in understanding the underlying terms. Marketers take note; what an interesting way to determine relevance.
Read the post, it’s short, but it might make you think too.
So what is the right term, Hispanic or Latino? If there isn’t one right term then how do you choose which one to use?
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Recession-Proof Your Online Marketing
Yes, it’s that time again!
Recessions are the economy’s little reminder that your marketing needs to be more efficient. Lots of our friends and clients are being asked to produce more sales with less resources. (And if you’re reading this post, that might sound familiar to you.)
Traditionally, in the offline world during recessions, marketers had their advertising budgets cut, then pressure was placed on sales teams to close more sales. But in the online world, marketers are expected to deliver both traffic from advertising and sales from the customer experience.
The math is simple. More sales with the same or less advertising means higher conversion rates. If your conversion rate is higher, not only will you be more profitable but you should also gain market share from competitors.
You may not always be able to control the cost of your advertising — except for when you cut it — but you can control your conversion rate.
In the interactive marketing world, many companies seem confused about what to do in a recession. Companies need to improve their online conversion rates. It seems obvious to most of us, but not everyone.
We want to ask you, our readers, for feedback. Have conversion rate improvements become a higher priority for your organization? If not, is it because you aren’t feeling the effects of the recession yet, or does your organization simply not believe it can control conversion? Or is it something else?
. .
Read the follow-up post, “3 Steps to Recession-Proof Your Online Marketing“
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Now Available: “The Soccer Mom Myth” by Holly Buchanan & Michele Miller
We’re very proud to announce that Holly & Michele’s new book, The Soccer Mom Myth — Today’s Female Consumer: Who She Really Is, Why She Really Buys, is now available.
The book addresses the most common mistakes in marketing to women, both online and offline, and shows us how to really understand who our female customers are. The authors then pull back the curtains for a realistic look at what women really want. Or, as they warn on The Soccer Mom Myth website, “This is not your typical dry business book. It includes politically incorrect views, some unladylike language, and tequila stories.”
The early reviews have been fantastic, and we’re looking forward to hearing what the rest of you think.
You can read sample chapters at TheSoccerMomMyth.com or order your copy today from Amazon.
Congratulations, Holly & Michele!
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Is Your Reputation Worth $15 Billion?
Before you answer that question, consider this: At Facebook’s current valuation of $15 Billion, a lot of folks think your network’s net worth is about $258.62 — give or take some pocket change.
Since the middle of last year, when they opened up the platform to third-party Web developers and Microsoft invested in the company, Facebook has been the marketer’s gold rush du jour. From books and hobbies to zombies and “hotties,” it seems everyone’s trying to get in on the action, regardless of whether they’ve actually stopped to consider whether a real business model is there. What’s even more troubling — or should be — are the ways some companies willingly exchange their brand’s reputation, and occasionally yours, to dive head-first into social media marketing.
In our debut op-ed for Forbes.com, Bryan & I ask, “Is Your Reputation Worth $15 Billion?”
Oh, and don’t forget to check out the slide show that goes with it.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Is Microsoft Yahoo’s Salvation?
Microsoft made a bid for Yahoo!.
On paper this deal might look right, but how about the cultures?
What do you think; is it a good deal?
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Wasting Money Targeting Influentials? Another Tip…
I’ve never been a huge fan of Gladwell’s book, The Tipping Point, because it oversimplifies how ideas spread. I intuitively knew that idea spreading was more complicated than that. In the February 2008 issue of Fast Company there’s an interesting article that I think provides additional context for understanding viral marketing: “Is the Tipping Point Toast? — Marketers spend a billion dollars a year targeting influentials. Duncan Watts says they’re wasting their money.”
Here’s just a small excerpt:
In the past few years, Watts–a network-theory scientist who recently took a sabbatical from Columbia University and is now working for Yahoo (NASDAQ:YHOO) –has performed a series of controversial, barn-burning experiments challenging the whole Influentials thesis. He has analyzed email patterns and found that highly connected people are not, in fact, crucial social hubs. He has written computer models of rumor spreading and found that your average slob is just as likely as a well-connected person to start a huge new trend. And last year, Watts demonstrated that even the breakout success of a hot new pop band might be nearly random. Any attempt to engineer success through Influentials, he argues, is almost certainly doomed to failure.
“It just doesn’t work,” Watts says, when I meet him at his gray cubicle at Yahoo Research in midtown Manhattan, which is unadorned except for a whiteboard crammed with equations. “A rare bunch of cool people just don’t have that power. And when you test the way marketers say the world works, it falls apart. There’s no there there.”
And this is not, he argues, mere academic whimsy. He has developed a new technique for propagating ads virally, which can double or even quadruple the reach of an ordinary online campaign by harnessing the pass-around power of everyday people–and ignoring Influentials altogether.
Not everyone appreciates the mind bomb Watts has tossed into their midst. He says one music executive pronounced his work “bullshit” on the spot. But a growing group of marketers believes Watts is radically altering the way companies attempt to produce trends. “He is changing the way people think about the way we communicate,” raves Robert Barocci, president of the Advertising Research Foundation. “He’s one of the best thinkers in the industry today.” But is Watts right?
Whether you agree or not, the article is worthwhile reading for every marketer. Sneeze all over us and let us know what you think about Watts’ ideas.
Does it change your mind at all about how viral marketing works?
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Should You Cancel All Your Advertising?
In February 2003, Amazon.com canceled all their advertising and put that money towards free shipping as a word of mouth strategy. Many thought Jeff Bezos was crazy and that Amazon.com would never turn a profit. In 2007 they were solidly profitable with over $15 billion in revenues. Bezos knew that marketers used to get paid to make promises the business had no intention of keeping.
He understood that, in an increasingly transparent environment, being truly customer focused would matter more than telling customers about how great your service was.
Recently, Joe Nocera of The New York Times told millions of people that Amazon puts customers first in his part article, part testimonial, part morality tale, “Put Buyers First? What A Concept.” You should read it in full but here are a few excerpts:
“They care about having the lowest prices, having vast selection, so they have choice, and getting the products to customers fast,” [Mr. Bezos] said. “And the reason I’m so obsessed with these drivers of the customer experience is that I believe that the success we have had over the past 12 years has been driven exclusively by that customer experience. We are not great advertisers. So we start with customers, figure out what they want, and figure out how to get it to them.”
Anybody who has spent any time around Mr. Bezos knows that this is not just some line he throws out for public consumption. It has been the guiding principle behind Amazon since it began.
[…] Amazon says it has somewhere on the order of 72 million active customers, who, in the last quarter, were spending an average of $184 a year on the site. That’s up from $150 or so the year before. Amazon’s return customer business is off the charts. According to Forrester Research, 52 percent of people who shop online say they do their product research on Amazon. That is an astounding number.
[…] Indeed, in a presentation to analysts in late November, the company’s chief financial officer, Thomas J. Szkutak, showed one slide that read, “Over $600 Million in Forgone Shipping Revenue.” And that was just for one year.
Wall Street, however, has never placed much value in Mr. Bezos’ emphasis on customers. What he has viewed as money well spent — building customer loyalty — many investors saw as giving away money that should have gone to the bottom line.
[…] There is simply no question that Mr. Bezos’s obsession with his customers — and the long term — has paid off, even if he had to take some hits to the stock price along the way. Surely, it was worth it. As for me, the $500 favor the company did for me this Christmas will surely rebound in additional business down the line. Why would I ever shop anywhere else online?
Clearly, it was worthwhile for Amazon to cancel its advertising.
Am I advocating that you cancel your ad budget? Perhaps. How are your products, service and customer experience doing?
Your customers’ delight matters even more tomorrow than it did yesterday, especially online.
When a visitor comes to your website, will they brag to their friends about what they bought and who they bought it from, or will it be somebody else they rave about?
Can you tell me why they shouldn’t brag about you, your products, and your service? After all, it’s the customer experience that matters. So why aren’t they buying?
Do you need help figuring out why they don’t buy from you? We can’t fix your products or services but we can help you improve your online customer experience, increase your conversion rates and help you understand your customers better.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Top Ten Best (and Worst) Communicators of 2007
Bert Decker trains executives to communicate better. He’s nationally recognized as a persuasive presentation coach and has an impressive client list. Not only is he a friend but we send people to his trainings. That’s why his “Top Ten Best (and Worst) Communicators of 2007” is a must-read.
I’ll give you his top three, but you’ll have to read the post for the other seven and Bert’s analysis.
Top Three Best
1) Gov. Mike Huckabee — What but for communicating would get a presidential candidate so far so fast?
2) Dr. Mehmet Oz — He became “America’s Doctor” in one short year, because of his communications (and Oprah of course.)
3) Al Gore — Even if he hadn’t won the Academy Award, Al Gore would get the communicator’s comeback of the year award.
Top Three Worst
1) Alberto Gonzales — He not only lied, but showed he was lying because of his behaviors.
2) Michael Vick — When you want your public AND the judges empathy, it is not the time to ‘gut it out’ and put on a stone face.
3) Robert Eckert — The Chairman of Mattel was caught in a toy recall disaster probably not of his making, but ‘the buck stops here.’
This is a long post with lots of worthwhile meaty commentary.
Read the “Top Ten Best (and Worst) Communicators of 2007” for yourself.
P.S. Barack Obama has proven to be an excellent communicator. It’s not just what he is saying but how he’s saying it that’s turning people on. I’m registered as an Independent, and I’m not yet committed to any candidate, but he’s making a great case for himself.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Spooked by Spock?
Logically, just a few days ago, I received an email from the Spock Team:
“So and so Jones” has added you as a trusted contact on Spock. By accepting trust, you will be able to search each others’ network, share contact information, and get news.”
It continued…
“Since you are a person I trust, I would like you to join my network on Spock so we can always stay up to date on how to contact each other.”
Now it’s like a Klingon invasion! First, on impulse power, came another invite, and then another, until now, when they are approaching warp speed. In the name of tribbles, what gives?
First it was LinkedIn and Facebook, and now we all feel compelled to “socialize” using the latest shiny new object. Any ideas what will start appearing on my tricorder in the near future?
Spock said, “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one,” so consider that, lest you photon torpedo contacts from your address book with similar invites — your friends may not have their phaser on stun. Besides, we wouldn’t want you to wind up a casualty of the Social Network Wars of the early 21st century.
I’m in a no-win situation. I would have sent you to StarTrek.com to help you fetch a universal translator to decipher this post, but it’s shutting down. 
The solution to my own Kobiyashi Maru test is to go where all the fans have gone before.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
Opting Out of Facebook’s Disruptive Ad Model
Joshua Porter of Bokardo.com has taken a serious look at Facebook’s new so-called “opt-in” ad model.
…Facebook is now partnering with 3rd party sites and selling your information to them for money. How does this work?
Here’s a scenario: you go to Blockbuster.com and rent a movie. A little interface element pops up and tells you that Blockbuster is sending information to your Facebook account. It gives you ten seconds to say no…and then it sends it anyway. This is called “opt-out”. You only have the option to say no. It sends your personal information by default. “Opt-in” would be where no action is taken by default.
You then log into your Facebook account, and it says that “Blockbuster is sending a story to your account”. You have the option to say no to this, but it is not apparent at all. In fact, Facebook gives you the option “Don’t show me this again”, which seems to suggest that they agree this message is annoying. They have designed this screen for you to focus on the pain of having to read a silly message and dismiss it. But what isn’t very clear is that when you do so you’re also giving implicit instruction that all services can send information to your news feed in the future. This is a HUGE deal to Facebook…this is how they’re going to make money. [Continue reading “Facebook’s Brilliant but Evil Design”… ]
It’s an important read for anyone who uses, or advertises with, the popular social networking site.
Related Posts:
Written by:Jeffrey Eisenberg
