It is refreshing to hear more discussion around the shortcomings...

of social media rather than the constant proselytizing of a still baby-fresh and

misunderstood communication channel. However, possibly a more constructive way

of thinking about those shortcomings is to consider the growing gap in

expectations of what social media can and should achieve for a brand.

The IBM Institute of Business Value just published a study

comparing the differing perceptions of business leaders and consumers regarding

social sites. The most interesting find from the study was the ironic business

misperception that consumer's would rank discounts and purchase opportunities at

the bottom of their list of reasons to engage with a company's social site. It

actually ranks at the top of their list.

Companies need to design experiences that deliver tangible value in return

for customers' time, attention, endorsement and data. -IBM Institute of

Business Value.

Time and attention really are the currencies of our customers. Those expenses

are precious for them and they want something in return for it. Simply providing

conversation's will never be enough. No brand is interesting enough to entice

just by being available. Although the social space is cheaper, quicker, and

ever-present, a brand still needs to provide those nuggets of material value to

drive significant engagement.

And Interactive Communication does all that...and more! To discover more contact:

Paul Ashby on (UK) 01934 620047 or paulashby40@yahoo.com. Cell 'phone 07586259605.

The End of Marketing and Advertising?

The End of Marketing and Advertising?

　
What about all the marketing, administrative, accounting, and IT jobs that we

think can't be outsourced or automated? Well, retail enterprises now tailor any

number of special offers directly to individual customers by mining data from

reward programs. That doesn't take an expensive ad budget or a huge marketing

department, since it's all automated. Have you ever noticed that most of the

advertising you see while you surf the Web is tailored to things you might be

interested in buying? That's all automated , huge numbers of marketing

professionals are just not needed.

And the only way to make this work effectively? Why Interactive Markating Communication...that's what!

Contact Paul Ashby on 01934 620047 or paulashby40@yahoo.com

Despite today's buzz on all things

digital, despite global interactive advertising being forecast to reach US$147

billion by 2012 from the current US$45 billion*, and despite three online media

platforms making it to the Fournaise 2007 top 10 marketing Effectiveness Ranking

(or EFFER), in the day-to-day reality of generating incremental customer demand

for their products or services, marketers seem to have a major trust issue when

it comes to the overall reliability and credibility of online advertising.In such a skeptical context, it is not

surprising that 40% of marketers around the world did not run online campaigns , a figure

reaching 65% in high GDP growth markets such as Greater China, India andSingapore.The top five concerns

marketers have about online advertising are:

They don't know if they actually get what theypay for.

They don't know if they can trust the visitor and/or traffic profile online media owners and publishers claim their sites have delivered.

They have the feeling there is a lot of click fraud.

They don't know if their ads appear in the sites and/or sites' sections where they should appear.

They don't trust the traffic and click-through reports digital media owners give them. This could explain

why marketers globally are planning to still take a prudent approach and to spend a small percentage of

their marketing budgets online.

Across the thousands of online campaigns audited for our clients worldwide through we have

been observing consistently poor results: Click Through Rates (CTRs) have fallen

as low as 0.15% (sometimes even lower), Conversion Rates (CVRs) are barely

reaching the 3% average, and as far as Returns on Marketing Investment (ROMIs)

are concerned, our clients are most of the time flirting with the sub-30%

numbers," said Jerome Fontaine, CEO and Chief Tracker of The Fournaise Marketing

Group.

"One of the main reasons for such poor results is that for more

than 70% of the online campaigns we audit track across all types of online

media platforms (including display ads, emails, paid search, referrals, rich media

and sponsorships), our clients did not get what they paid for: one million

impressions purchased often ended up with 800,000 impressions served; an email

blast to a third party 10,000-record database was more often than not sent to a

7,000-active-email base. The bottom line: the discrepancy between what is

claimed and/or purchased and what is actually delivered is beginning to cast a

shadow on the long-term credibility of the industry. Online media have now the

immense challenge of winning the trust and confidence of marketers and must be

prepared to be audited and be accountable for the results they deliver,"

Fontaine continued

ACCOUNTABILITY AND INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATION

With corporations under increased pressure to show that every dollar they spend delivers results, marketing expenditures are now being held to the same level of accountability as other investments.

Clients expect to see detailed, quantifiable results for their marketing and advertising efforts that demonstrate a positive return on their investments.They want to know which elements of their marketing plan helped achieve their goals in the most efficient manner—and which did not—and be able to allocate their budgets on an ongoing basis accordingly.

This corporate attitude change comes just at a moment in time when advertisers face major challenges because:

Consumers are more difficult to reach than ever.

Reasons include:

Media options available to consumers have increased. Technologies that have been designed to suit consumers’ growing desire to be in control of what they see and hear have given consumers

the option to reject advertising messages.To determine what will yield the best results in planning their advertising efforts, advertisers and their agencies turn to research and analytic tools more and more to guide them in making decisions. However, the multitude of analytic options has led to confusion about what constitutes accountability and how to measure it.

With Interactive Communication, properly executed, this confusion ends and proper accountably exists. One exposure to an Interactive Programme is far more effective than "frequency" and allows Clients to cut, substantially, their heavy marketing expediture (s).

“It’s not sexy…”

...and other asinine observations made by ad agencies!


Interactive Communication has been extensively researched by independent companies in Australia, The United Kingdom, U.S.A. Japan, Singapore, New Zealand and The Philippines. A total investment of £5m has been made to make the technique totally accountable. This research has established that whilst the technique might not be very "sexy" it is far more effective in producing verifiable sales than conventional advertising as espoused by todays crop of Advertising Agencies!



Would you like to learn more about interactive communication? Please visit:
http://effectiveaccountabablecommunication.blogspot.com

Blog-Search.com

The secret of communication!

"It is not what you say but how a person interacts with what you say that determines the effectiveness of the communication process. Further, a direct request to a reader or viewer to pay attention to a particular advertisement significantly increases the numbers doing so and the level of concentration they devote to it."

Professor Wilbur Schramm –University of Harvard










http://effectiveaccountablecommunication.blogspot.com

So how much more cost effective is Interactive television?

Interactive communication is really much more cost effective!

Professor E.L. Roberto, PhD, Coca-Cola Foundation Professor of International Marketing reviewed the £5 million of independent research conducted on behalf of Shopper’s Voice and provided this summary as to the techniques cost efficiency:

"The Shopper’s Voice participating advertisements generated recall scores that are more than 50% productive than normal advertising. The effect on purchase intention is just as impressive if not much more.

All these productivity increments are attainable at a reasonably inexpensive budget. One Shopper’s Voice Client revealed that for its participating brand, its quarter television expenditure was $5.7 million as compared to its Shopper’s Voice budget of $0.5 million.

This 1:10 ratio has been obtained in Shopper’s Voice experience in other countries."

Source: AGB: Gallup: Martyn Research: Bourke: NOP. City Insights & more.