Archive for 2008

April 17th, 2008

Google trades marks

So Google is planning to relax its current restrictions and allow keyword advertisers to bid for trademarks and brand names belonging to other companies, including competitors. This means that Company A can bid for keyword searches on Company B - and display an ad in search returns for Company B’s name. Clearly this raises issues for both consumers and company lawyers.

From the consumer perspective, it seems slightly odd that Google is going down this route. One of Google’s stated missions is to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”. Serving up the wrong brand terms against specific brand name searches could cause confusion and even lead some consumers to adjust their respect for the integrity of Google’s search processes.

As far as I can ascertain (and I’m no lawyer), the legal position is complicated. Google is using trademarked terms in its search algorithm. The issue is whether or not a company can prove that there has been a trade mark infringement or passing off. Under the terms of trade mark law this occurs where you use someone else’s name so as to capitalise on their goodwill. For this to apply you have to be actually displaying the name – when the law was drafted the concept of google ad word searching could not possibly have been imagined.

Assuming that Google has not made this move to stimulate mass class actions, it must have done its legal homework and be confident that no case for trademark infringement can be brought against it. It is interesting that these issues are emerging faster than the case law. It may be that that the law itself has to change and that can only come if advertisers feel they are being sufficiently disadvantaged to make them consider lobbying. In the meantime, consumers will have to get used to searching for one thing and being served another - certainly as far as paid search goes.

April 1st, 2008

Ooops

March 31st, 2008

BA should create a Terminal 5 community

I read today that Sir Tim Bell has suggested that BA or BAA close Terminal 5 for a couple of weeks in order to prevent the piling of this week’s new woes on top of those from last week.

In my view, BA or BAA should go one step further and use digital media to create a community area which can be used to restore relations with travellers. My suggestion would be a database-driven solution which links up with booking details and allows travellers to register their experience on a multiple choice questionnaire. Answers could be matched to ticket type and traveller type and “bespoke” compensation offers made. Customers could be segmented by:

1. Ticket type
2. Ticket value
3. Customer value (if known) or stated frequency of flights in last year
4. Amount of baggage lost (items or weight)
5. Type of contents (Holiday, business etc)
6. Time without baggage
7. Whether departure was prevented or trip cut short

Why bother with all this you may ask. Well the digital age means that disgruntled travellers can form themselves into communities and create havoc with brands. As in all marketing, and particularly service marketing, a failure presents an opportunity to either a) lose a customer and make a “brand enemy” or b) create a life-long brand advocate.

In short, failures give marketers and their companies an opportunity to shine and show just how much they really love their customers. BA/BAA should get to it now, before the sentiment of many travellers swings irreparably against them.

March 17th, 2008

Search Marketing: A new era for TV effectiveness?

For many years TV advertising has struggled to present convincing arguments about its effectiveness. Whilst it has been possible to show the linkage between TV activity and advertising awareness, it has been far more difficult to identify and statistically explain a causal relationship between TV advertising and sales.

What’s missing is the numerical stepping stone that forms a quantifiable link between TV advertising and sales response. If such a measure were in place, it would become easier to create and cross the “bridge” between TV advertising and attributable sales - and to build compelling arguments for TV advertising in the Digital Age.

Search traffic data may now be providing this bridge. There is increasing and compelling evidence that TV advertising drives search traffic and that the linkages are highly quantifiable. For example, the AA have teamed up with Hitwise and i-Level to contribute the ‘Hitwise UK Media Impact Report‘. This report contains two case studies, from the AA and Sky, which build on the TV advertising to Search traffic argument.

The effect of TV advertising on search metrics may be as deep as it is potentially broad; There is evidence that TV advertising affects conversion metrics within search activity. When these effects are quantified they can produce dramatic ROI results. For example, if TV advertising increases a) search volumes b) conversion rates from click to bona fide lead c) conversion to sale and d) sales value, then the argument for TV advertising becomes extremely compelling. In fact, the sorts of uplifts that are being reported against these deeper metrics are at the levels that can make a TV campaign potentially self-funding.

Whilst many in the marketing community discuss ‘either or’ arguments about TV advertising and search marketing, they may be more amply rewarded if they move to a synchronisation point of view. TV advertising and search marketing may be so closely linked that we embark on a new era of TV effectiveness.

February 25th, 2008

New Internet Measurement Panel

This month, the Internet Advertising Bureau (IAB), the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA), the Association of Online Publishers and ISBA (Incorporated Society of British Advertisers) have announced a joint venture to create a BARB* style audience measurement panel for the Internet in the UK. The panel will be managed through JICIMS, the Joint Industry Committee for Internet Measurement Systems.

The advent of this panel could herald a major stepping stone in online’s journey to full maturity as an advertising medium. But equally, the creation of such a panel creates a Premier League of online media owners. What does this mean for those online media owners who don’t make it into the top flight?

It’s great to be in the BARB Club

In the TV world, being on the BARB panel puts your channel firmly on the radar of media planners. When measured by BARB, your channel is part of a Premier League of measured media options. These are the channels which have high critical mass; they have enough audience to value being measured and enough cash to pay for being measured. Planners use presence on BARB as a proxy for quality. Because all channels on BARB are measured in the same way, using the same currency, planners can make a fair assessment of media value when evaluating a range of channels. So, if you’re on BARB it is far easier to command the attention of media planners and therefore much easier to get your site included in the planner’s media recommendation.

But not so good if you’re on the outside

Unfortunately the average media planner is short on time. If he or she can solve a communications planning problem from within a pre-selected group of measurable channels, then they will. Why should they extend their attention beyond 200 or so BARB measured channels? Channels outside BARB tend to be small (they don’t think being on BARB will help them because their audiences are so small) or cash strapped (not able to afford to £25k+ fee required to be included on BARB). For many time-starved media planners, these marginals simply aren’t worth the bother.

What does a BARB style panel mean for online?

It’s obvious from the experiences of the TV market that panel members will become part of an elite group of media owners - the Premier League of online. This select group of media owners will inevitably form the start point for many online media planners and they will find it easier to be included in media recommendations. Those sites not on the panel will struggle to be included on plans and consequently struggle to gain revenue.

To cut a long story short, life without an online measurement panel makes it easier for smaller sites to survive. With the online panel in place that emphasis is likely to shift; making it easier for larger sites to gain revenue and build reputation, and push smaller sites onto the outside margins of planners’ attention. So, rather ironically, the desire to make online a more measurable medium could favour the few and disadvantage the many.

* For those not familiar with BARB, the BARB panel is a panel of 5,000 homes in the UK which uses a ‘Peoplemeter’ device to track the TV viewing patterns of occupants of the sample household.

February 15th, 2008

Scrabble, Scrabulous and Facebook

It has amazed me that Hasbro and Mattel have demanded the removal of Scrabulous, the online Scrabble application, from Facebook. Scrabulous was a social marketer’s dream; many agencies spend endless hours developing Facebook applications hoping to catch a big social media wave, but very few ever make it. The “stars” reach more than 500,000 active users. Scrabulous was one of that elite group; it reached over 650,000.

So, given that Scrabulous was effectively a social marketing campaign to die for, why did Hasbro and Mattel ban it? Their lawyers have argued copyright was being infringed. Executives at these leading toy companies probably felt that players playing Scrabulous would dent or damage sales of the original Scrabble board game. Let’s not forget that before all this happened, Scrabble was a tired brand. It was a fifties product owned by an over fifties audience. It needed a shot in the arm. I can just imagine the agency brainstorm convened to resurrect the brand. It might go something like this:

Q. What’s the business problem?
A. Sales are going down

Q. Why?
A. Scrabble is getting old. The players who bought it in the 60’s and 70’s are either dead or in retirement.

Q. What shall we do?
A. Let’s attract a new, younger audience and show them what fun Scrabble can be.

Q. How do we do that?
A. Well younger and educated audiences are piling into social networking sites like Facebook. Ideally we’d have an effective social marketing campaign on Facebook.

Playing the Facebook application would raise both awareness and consideration of the traditional board game amongst those consumers who’d either forgotten about it and even those who’d never heard of it. There’s a very good chance that with the game back on peoples’ radar screens and shopping lists, sales would have increased.

It’s worth observing that Scrabble has been the beneficiary of outstanding good fortune before. Launch sales back in the 1950’s were initially sluggish until the Chairman of Macy’s noticed that the store didn’t stock the game and placed a bulk order in 1952. Sales then took off. Scrabulous was a chance of similar magnitude. The Scrabulous Facebook application was one of the best free gifts ever given to a brand. After all, what other ways are there to reach that highly elusive younger and educated target audience free of charge and with such potent credibility? It could have been Scrabble’s second coming.