Advertising is a form of communication that typically attempts to persuade potential customers to purchase or to consume more of a particular brand of product or service. Many advertisements are designed to generate increased consumption of those products and services through the creation and reinforcement of "brand image" and "brand loyalty". For these purposes, advertisements sometimes embed their persuasive message with factual information. Every major medium is used to deliver these messages, including television, radio, cinema, magazines, newspapers, video games, the Internet and billboards. On the internet search type advertising are impressive and banner advertising is also a good option. Mostly people not like to click on banner advertising so that type of advertising becomes useless from time to time. Advertising is important to companies. It is used to exploit all aspects of their product in a positive way. Ads convey crucial information about the price, quality, and availability of products, they save consumers time and energy. In addition, advertising images are responsible for part of the pleasure people take in making purchases. Advertising doesn't sell to your audience. Its job is to get you noticed for the specific things you do well. Advertising promotes the distinguishing features, benefits and advantages of your offer to a wide market. The goal of advertising is to bring in valuable leads for the selling process to take place. Advertising is important, what are its strengths and what are its weaknesses, making a judgment on how it's important to your business. Depending on how good your product is, you will be able to use different kinds of advertising.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Sunday, September 28, 2008
positioning on the web
Jacob Hawkins speaks in his interview about overstock.com and their choice of positioning that has made them the online success that they are. When it comes to positioning, Hawkins doesn’t make any greater difference between the online and offline world, meaning that either way it’s all about finding a customer niche and trying to fulfill it.
I’m however not too sure about this, thinking his approach may have been a bit too general, looking maybe too strictly at the process of positioning, and not really answering the question of what works on the Internet. The way I see it there has to be some significant differences, at the least in how you choose your position in the online in comparison to the offline world. To me the number of positions you can take on the Internet must be somewhat more limited that in the real world. There are several positions and niches that I just can see doable on the Internet, like selling products through the experience approach, like Starbucks and their coffee. I can’t even see it possible to sell true exclusiveness in the online world, since I think there’s a certain point where the price makes the customer want to touch the product before buying it, which of course you can’t do on the Internet.
The value niche in which overstock.com competes can’t in any way be unique. It may have been unique back in the very beginning, but I think it’s more likely that this position is today one of the most common you can have on the Internet. The reason being that I think most customers do online shopping strictly for lower prices. If they can find the same prices in a real store, they would probably go there instead.
So the value niche, selling branded products for cheaper prices, is probably a good position to take, explaining Overstock’s success. Problem however now being that this market must be quite saturated already, Internet business being easy to start up, leaving a whole bunch of tough competition. I think to be successful in today’s market a company has to niche itself even more, position itself even more specifically under the value niche, and going that extra mile for the customer. Just like Overstocks working hard to satisfy theirs, a new company has to find a way to satisfy their customers, maybe by e.g. offering speedy deliveries.
Except for this customer beneficial positioning, I can only see one other position working in the online world, and that’s offering more unique products (but not necessarily more expensive ones). I think that except for those who shop for cheaper prices there’s an additional group of people that shop online for products not available in their local stores. In the end however, I think it's always about the prices.
I’m however not too sure about this, thinking his approach may have been a bit too general, looking maybe too strictly at the process of positioning, and not really answering the question of what works on the Internet. The way I see it there has to be some significant differences, at the least in how you choose your position in the online in comparison to the offline world. To me the number of positions you can take on the Internet must be somewhat more limited that in the real world. There are several positions and niches that I just can see doable on the Internet, like selling products through the experience approach, like Starbucks and their coffee. I can’t even see it possible to sell true exclusiveness in the online world, since I think there’s a certain point where the price makes the customer want to touch the product before buying it, which of course you can’t do on the Internet.
The value niche in which overstock.com competes can’t in any way be unique. It may have been unique back in the very beginning, but I think it’s more likely that this position is today one of the most common you can have on the Internet. The reason being that I think most customers do online shopping strictly for lower prices. If they can find the same prices in a real store, they would probably go there instead.
So the value niche, selling branded products for cheaper prices, is probably a good position to take, explaining Overstock’s success. Problem however now being that this market must be quite saturated already, Internet business being easy to start up, leaving a whole bunch of tough competition. I think to be successful in today’s market a company has to niche itself even more, position itself even more specifically under the value niche, and going that extra mile for the customer. Just like Overstocks working hard to satisfy theirs, a new company has to find a way to satisfy their customers, maybe by e.g. offering speedy deliveries.
Except for this customer beneficial positioning, I can only see one other position working in the online world, and that’s offering more unique products (but not necessarily more expensive ones). I think that except for those who shop for cheaper prices there’s an additional group of people that shop online for products not available in their local stores. In the end however, I think it's always about the prices.
user generated content and travel
On page 50 of the Glueck interview we are once again brought into the topic of social networking., more than clearly one of the hottest trends on the Internet right now. With the risk of repeating myself from previous blog entries, I want to point out how it’s the influence of generation Y that’s shaping the future of the Internet; both by structure and by content. Although what Travelocity is doing on their website isn’t strictly social networking, which Glueck also emphasizes, he instead uses another for today’s Internet important keyword, which is “user-generated content”. And the way I see it, Generation Y is just as much about user generated material as it is about social networking. I think this is something that comes rather natural in a time that’s all about communication and connectivity, and where information’s so easy accessible and distributable. Everybody with an Internet connection can easily share their expertise and thoughts. And the information seekers find trust in having multiple and independent sources on the same topic, rather than just having one source, even if it may be of high stature. We can just take the growing popularity of Wikipedia as an example for that. And I believe this type of user generated knowledge will just keep on spreading
But except for the typical generation Y traits I’ve already mentioned, I believe one of the forces that’s thriving all these knowledge sharing communities and reviews may be this generation’s strong focus on individuality. I think it’s an attitude of wanting to be unique and to be seen and stand out from the masses that drives members of this generation to share knowledge, skills and experiences.
Now going back to topic of discussing Travelocity’s website, I find it quite interesting how Glueck mentions travel to be one of the biggest areas of communities on the Internet. After first thinking that this can’t be right what he’s saying, I’m now coming to realize that this may actually be true. There’s a lot of websites and more specifically user generated content out there about travel. I can mention a very popular Swedish website as an example, resedagboken.se. This is a website where users write diaries about their travels, during their travels, with optionals like maps, pictures and videos. They post their diaries so that their family and friends can travel with them in spirit, but I truly believe that it’s more often about sharing their experiences so that other people planning on doing a similar trip can share their joys and avoid their pains. I think it’s human nature to share like this. In the past it’s only been to family and friends, but this generation has now taken it all to a higher level, making our sharing’s available to everyone.
There must be an extreme demand for information about travels and destinations, with travelers like myself wanting to get the most out of our trips, so integrating user reviews into their website must have been a very rewarding strategic move by Travelocity. As I already mentioned today’s generation have come to trust other individuals more than if Travelocity had just posted some information, but I think people trust other individuals even more if they can tell that they think alike, which would make the categorized reviews yet another good move.
But except for the typical generation Y traits I’ve already mentioned, I believe one of the forces that’s thriving all these knowledge sharing communities and reviews may be this generation’s strong focus on individuality. I think it’s an attitude of wanting to be unique and to be seen and stand out from the masses that drives members of this generation to share knowledge, skills and experiences.
Now going back to topic of discussing Travelocity’s website, I find it quite interesting how Glueck mentions travel to be one of the biggest areas of communities on the Internet. After first thinking that this can’t be right what he’s saying, I’m now coming to realize that this may actually be true. There’s a lot of websites and more specifically user generated content out there about travel. I can mention a very popular Swedish website as an example, resedagboken.se. This is a website where users write diaries about their travels, during their travels, with optionals like maps, pictures and videos. They post their diaries so that their family and friends can travel with them in spirit, but I truly believe that it’s more often about sharing their experiences so that other people planning on doing a similar trip can share their joys and avoid their pains. I think it’s human nature to share like this. In the past it’s only been to family and friends, but this generation has now taken it all to a higher level, making our sharing’s available to everyone.
There must be an extreme demand for information about travels and destinations, with travelers like myself wanting to get the most out of our trips, so integrating user reviews into their website must have been a very rewarding strategic move by Travelocity. As I already mentioned today’s generation have come to trust other individuals more than if Travelocity had just posted some information, but I think people trust other individuals even more if they can tell that they think alike, which would make the categorized reviews yet another good move.
P27 Jacob Hawkins: Overstock.com_Online promotion
“The Internet is a direct marketer’s dream”
“The key is to help them find what they are looking for as quickly as possible.”
There are brand marketers, like Ford or Visa, don’t measure which advertising dollars are driving which revenue dollars and direct marketers, like Overstock.com, do measure which advertising dollars are generating which revenue dollars. Overstock.com advertises anywhere in online, so far as website is not illegal. The Internet is a direct marketer’s dream. Overstock.com developed an in-house tracking system that allowed them to track the performance of each online advertisement they did. They were able to remove poor advertisements and invest in the great campaigns. Overstock.com was one of the first companies that use such datas and it gave them great advantages over competitors. They can select advertisements efficiently. But increased competitor they find underpriced advertising deals and have spent a great deal of time optimizing their company. The companies who survive long-term are the ones that discover how to best meet the needs of their customers.
I agreed with a marketing plan which Overstock.com did. I think Overstock.com survived because of datas and analysis. Figure out needs of customers and select advertisements efficiently. But with many competitors, E-mails or online banner can turn away from customers. To survive online market, I think multifarious way of marketing is need like on & offline linkage marketing or advertising in online game or others. Massive Inc (Research & analysis Company) announced that advertisements in game raised recognition and consumer preferences of brand. Online is a huge place for a study of successful marketing.
“The key is to help them find what they are looking for as quickly as possible.”
There are brand marketers, like Ford or Visa, don’t measure which advertising dollars are driving which revenue dollars and direct marketers, like Overstock.com, do measure which advertising dollars are generating which revenue dollars. Overstock.com advertises anywhere in online, so far as website is not illegal. The Internet is a direct marketer’s dream. Overstock.com developed an in-house tracking system that allowed them to track the performance of each online advertisement they did. They were able to remove poor advertisements and invest in the great campaigns. Overstock.com was one of the first companies that use such datas and it gave them great advantages over competitors. They can select advertisements efficiently. But increased competitor they find underpriced advertising deals and have spent a great deal of time optimizing their company. The companies who survive long-term are the ones that discover how to best meet the needs of their customers.
I agreed with a marketing plan which Overstock.com did. I think Overstock.com survived because of datas and analysis. Figure out needs of customers and select advertisements efficiently. But with many competitors, E-mails or online banner can turn away from customers. To survive online market, I think multifarious way of marketing is need like on & offline linkage marketing or advertising in online game or others. Massive Inc (Research & analysis Company) announced that advertisements in game raised recognition and consumer preferences of brand. Online is a huge place for a study of successful marketing.
P63 Lauren Freedman: the e-tailing group_Customer Expectations
“It’s easier for a small person to compete now than it was ten years ago.”
When customers are shopping online, customer expectations are very high. Last 14 years many changes have taken place. Customers are starting to expect better service or product. Fast delivery, real-time feed back or service and in-stock product. Those elements are what customers want from a merchant. These are a lot of pressure, from a merchant perspective. As time goes by, customers gain more experience toward shopping. The experience customers are using rich media like audio, video or multiple views to test or observe their product. They also use tools like customer reviews to get detail information. These kind things make more confidence toward buying product. And merchants should consider these kind systems. Because of customer expectation, better techniques of marketing are required.
When customers are shopping online, customer expectations are very high. Last 14 years many changes have taken place. Customers are starting to expect better service or product. Fast delivery, real-time feed back or service and in-stock product. Those elements are what customers want from a merchant. These are a lot of pressure, from a merchant perspective. As time goes by, customers gain more experience toward shopping. The experience customers are using rich media like audio, video or multiple views to test or observe their product. They also use tools like customer reviews to get detail information. These kind things make more confidence toward buying product. And merchants should consider these kind systems. Because of customer expectation, better techniques of marketing are required.
Oldani(p.40) + Freedman(p. 67) Customer service
Both of the two questions I look at this week from Oldani(p. 40) and Freedman(p. 67) talk about the customer services/reviews. A few thoughts on on-line customer service.
1/ With the personal media, like blog, it is so easy to publish consumer complaints by themselves, but, for companies, it is so difficult to manage them. Look at "AOL cancellation issue" by Vincent Ferrari (http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=xmpDSBAh6RY), which became an issue even in main TV station news. This is a new challenge for companies.
2/ Oldani emphasized that they UNEDIT consumer complaints. That's very important. Before web 2.0, company website EDIT and only showed good news for them, but, in web 2.0, where individual can own and run a media, companies should not edit and open even to consumer compalaint. Why? Because, if you don't contain them(complaints), then, it doesn't mean it will go away, but, those complaints will be expanded outside the company website, which will be even more difficult to influence. Look at Dell's blog, they now talk about consumer complaints too.
3/ For the customer service, speed would matter. As people enjoy shopping 24/ 7, they want a faster speed.
4/ While, customers can easily put complaints online, in the web 2.0, customers also can easily put and spread complements too. Companies should pay attention to this phenomena. Transparency applies not only to bad news but also to good news. Consumers are the best PR persons.
5/ Companies used to manage in-bound consumer complaints, but, moving forward, they should manage out-bound too. This means, companies closely monitor consumer complaints/complements online, and approach them to fix the problem, address it, and build relationship with online consumers and reviewers.
1/ With the personal media, like blog, it is so easy to publish consumer complaints by themselves, but, for companies, it is so difficult to manage them. Look at "AOL cancellation issue" by Vincent Ferrari (http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=xmpDSBAh6RY), which became an issue even in main TV station news. This is a new challenge for companies.
2/ Oldani emphasized that they UNEDIT consumer complaints. That's very important. Before web 2.0, company website EDIT and only showed good news for them, but, in web 2.0, where individual can own and run a media, companies should not edit and open even to consumer compalaint. Why? Because, if you don't contain them(complaints), then, it doesn't mean it will go away, but, those complaints will be expanded outside the company website, which will be even more difficult to influence. Look at Dell's blog, they now talk about consumer complaints too.
3/ For the customer service, speed would matter. As people enjoy shopping 24/ 7, they want a faster speed.
4/ While, customers can easily put complaints online, in the web 2.0, customers also can easily put and spread complements too. Companies should pay attention to this phenomena. Transparency applies not only to bad news but also to good news. Consumers are the best PR persons.
5/ Companies used to manage in-bound consumer complaints, but, moving forward, they should manage out-bound too. This means, companies closely monitor consumer complaints/complements online, and approach them to fix the problem, address it, and build relationship with online consumers and reviewers.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Jeffrey Glueck: Changes in travel market p.49
Asked about the changes made in travel market by Travelocity, Jeffrey Glueck puts it into three stages. Stage 1: from the first foundation of the company as the first online travel company till their establishment in this industry and the popularity earned among the customers. First stage is about tools and prices, he says. Tools being the Internet for searching flights and the convenience earned by that. Unlike before, when the customers had to go some travel agencies to arrange flights, which would only be in service certain hours a day, now Travelocity changed the direction of the market. People can access any traveling info by internet 24/7 and by a lower prices than traditional traveling companies. The second stage is about "brand affinity and being customer's champion". Now, Travelocity got brand name/reputation among the customers (intangible resources) and have earned their trust. The third stage was about relevance and experience. They not only provided flight information, but also, planned out the whole journey for the customers by their wishes, including where to eat, what culture programs to visit and many more.
I think, Travelocity had a great first mover advantage by completely conquering the market at first and earning much popularity among the customers by that. Although there wre many competitors later as Expedia, or TripAdvisor, by regular innovations and improvements, it succesfully beats the competition. Everytime they come up with new things, like this time the costumer review/community function that provides the travleres opportunity to share their experiences with others so that later onews get even smarter at traveling. In this kind of competitive market, with relatively low entry and exit barriers, Travelocity is doing pretty good I think.
I think, Travelocity had a great first mover advantage by completely conquering the market at first and earning much popularity among the customers by that. Although there wre many competitors later as Expedia, or TripAdvisor, by regular innovations and improvements, it succesfully beats the competition. Everytime they come up with new things, like this time the costumer review/community function that provides the travleres opportunity to share their experiences with others so that later onews get even smarter at traveling. In this kind of competitive market, with relatively low entry and exit barriers, Travelocity is doing pretty good I think.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Media Planning and Measuring Marketing Efforts, page 55
Jeffrey Glueck of Travelocity has some really fresh and interesting views on where to spend your marketing money and how to measure the return on investment to maximize the efficiency of your efforts.
It’s not rocket science, Glueck’s idea is indeed very simple, but at least I hadn’t thought of this before, though of course I haven’t really been involved in running TV commercials or other such advertising campaigns.
Glueck is basically saying two things: a) Clicks on search engine ads can sometimes be derived from TV commercials or other marketing efforts that made the user make the search, and b) a lot of the searches that result in clicks are made specifically for a brand name, which makes it misleading to bundle all search words together when generic words (such as “Hawaii hotel”) aren’t pulling their weight.
Another issue, that I don’t believe Glueck discussed in his answer, is that to me it seems quite pointless to pay for your own brand name, at least if you are a somewhat big brand – because you will still end up at the top of the search list. In the case of Travelocity, Glueck’s company, searching for “Travelocity” on Google results in their paid ad at the top, followed by the exact same link at the top of the ordinary search results. The following three results are also links to various Travelocity sites.
If I were Travelocity, or any other major brand, I wouldn’t pay for my own brand name, which may sound like a small deal, but the numbers in the interview said that as much as three quarters of the search engine clicks are done with your own brand name as the search word. In other words this practice would cut costs of search word advertising with 75 per cent.
It’s not rocket science, Glueck’s idea is indeed very simple, but at least I hadn’t thought of this before, though of course I haven’t really been involved in running TV commercials or other such advertising campaigns.
Glueck is basically saying two things: a) Clicks on search engine ads can sometimes be derived from TV commercials or other marketing efforts that made the user make the search, and b) a lot of the searches that result in clicks are made specifically for a brand name, which makes it misleading to bundle all search words together when generic words (such as “Hawaii hotel”) aren’t pulling their weight.
Another issue, that I don’t believe Glueck discussed in his answer, is that to me it seems quite pointless to pay for your own brand name, at least if you are a somewhat big brand – because you will still end up at the top of the search list. In the case of Travelocity, Glueck’s company, searching for “Travelocity” on Google results in their paid ad at the top, followed by the exact same link at the top of the ordinary search results. The following three results are also links to various Travelocity sites.
If I were Travelocity, or any other major brand, I wouldn’t pay for my own brand name, which may sound like a small deal, but the numbers in the interview said that as much as three quarters of the search engine clicks are done with your own brand name as the search word. In other words this practice would cut costs of search word advertising with 75 per cent.
Retail Stores and E-Commerce, page 43
Mark Oldani of Circuit City is asked how he utilizes and coordinates the company’s retail stores with its online sales. The answer is simple and quite intuitive: A seamless customer interface across all channels.
It really makes sense since it makes it easy for customers to deal with the company, and rids them of the headache of a split “company personality”, and instead lets them deal with a company that has a single identity. As customers, I don’t believe we think of the underlying structures of companies, we see the brand and expect every channel of the brand to recognize us as its customer.
While this may seem trivial from this perspective, I imagine that a company starting out with a retail business and a traditional bricks-and-mortar business model may very well carry the “baggage” (as named by Afuah and Tucci) that would make it separate the channels more sharply, even from the customers’ perspective.
Oldani goes on to describe the popularity of in-store pickup, which I can really identify myself with. At least when purchasing technological items I almost always make the order online to be sure I get exactly the right item and not have the stress of a line of people waiting for me to get done when discussing with the cashier. If I don’t have an online order when I get to the store I often times even use the computers there to place an online order and then use the quick pick up line to simply pick up the item.
However, when buying things that are not technological products, such as clothes or similar products that are easily evaluated physically, I prefer in store shopping.
To summarize, strong coordination between retail and online (and whatever other channels there might be) is essential, and quite an obvious conclusion looking at it from a top down – and not from a traditional retail business’ – perspective. Other than that, there is not really much to add.
It really makes sense since it makes it easy for customers to deal with the company, and rids them of the headache of a split “company personality”, and instead lets them deal with a company that has a single identity. As customers, I don’t believe we think of the underlying structures of companies, we see the brand and expect every channel of the brand to recognize us as its customer.
While this may seem trivial from this perspective, I imagine that a company starting out with a retail business and a traditional bricks-and-mortar business model may very well carry the “baggage” (as named by Afuah and Tucci) that would make it separate the channels more sharply, even from the customers’ perspective.
Oldani goes on to describe the popularity of in-store pickup, which I can really identify myself with. At least when purchasing technological items I almost always make the order online to be sure I get exactly the right item and not have the stress of a line of people waiting for me to get done when discussing with the cashier. If I don’t have an online order when I get to the store I often times even use the computers there to place an online order and then use the quick pick up line to simply pick up the item.
However, when buying things that are not technological products, such as clothes or similar products that are easily evaluated physically, I prefer in store shopping.
To summarize, strong coordination between retail and online (and whatever other channels there might be) is essential, and quite an obvious conclusion looking at it from a top down – and not from a traditional retail business’ – perspective. Other than that, there is not really much to add.
Lauren Freedman: e-tailing group – Online shoppers
Lauren starts out with the claim that most online shoppers shop online because of convenience and time saving, and that price, while still being a factor, comes in second place. I really don’t understand this claim. The impression I get form my friends and surrounding is that the main reason to shop online is price, or in some cases availability. I can understand what she means with time saving, you don’t have to go to the store to buy something. However, when buying online it will take longer for you to actually get the product because of shipping. For convenience I assume she also refers to the fact that you don’t have to go to the store, but there are some cases when a store is preferred. I’m thinking about the times when something goes wrong. Maybe the product had some factory fault, maybe it breaks and you want to use your warranty or maybe you just change your mind and want to return the product. At these times, the decision to shop online may prove to cause some big inconvenience. If you bought the product in the store you simply go back and talk to someone and they will help you out. However if you bought it online the procedure is usually longer and more difficult. You first have to get in contact with the company by mail or telephone. Depending on what company you are dealing with this can take allot of time. Then you need to wait for the company to send you a waybill. After this you have to send the product back. This means packing everything back in the box and making sure it won’t get damaged in the mail.
I truly feel that shopping in a store is more convenient than shopping online. That’s why I often choose to buy a product from a store over online if the price deferens isn’t that big.
I mentioned availability as a reason to shop online. By this I mean when you want to buy a certain model of a product but you can’t find it in a store. This usually happens when you want a model that only is available in another country. I find that this is most relevant when it comes to clothing or accessories. I personally went online to buy a pair of shoes from USA because they had stopped selling that particular model in Sweden.
I truly feel that shopping in a store is more convenient than shopping online. That’s why I often choose to buy a product from a store over online if the price deferens isn’t that big.
I mentioned availability as a reason to shop online. By this I mean when you want to buy a certain model of a product but you can’t find it in a store. This usually happens when you want a model that only is available in another country. I find that this is most relevant when it comes to clothing or accessories. I personally went online to buy a pair of shoes from USA because they had stopped selling that particular model in Sweden.
Jacob Hawkins: Overstock.com - Customer reviews
Jacob points out that customer reviews indeed are very important for any company. This because buyers generally want to get information about the product through reviews rather than from the product specs. I can strongly relate to this. Even tough the product specs interest me, the reviews and experiences from others are the most important thing. The reason for this, as Jacob accurately points out, is that the customer reviews feel less jaded. Information coming from the company itself can’t be trusted, or so you feel, because they obviously want you to buy the product. So to get information about a product from a source who definitely won’t point out any possible flaws isn’t worth much.
An important fact about reviews is that most people who actually takes the time to write about a product, writes a good review with the intention to help other customers.
Jacob points out that reviews actually can benefit the company as well. As mentioned before, reviews give customers good information about the products, something that all serious businesses should appreciate. But above that, something that is maybe even more valuable, the company gets feedback from their customers.
Jacob also talks about the fact that his company monitors the reviews to, as he claims, get rid of reviews that aren’t helpful to the other customers. He claims that they don’t delete negative reviews simply because they are negative, and I think that might be true. However, I will always be suspicious since us users can’t check what reviews was deleted. A better solution to minimize the effect of bad reviews (with bad I mean pointless slander or spam) is to keep them visible on the site, but minimize them as default and mark them as bad. This way all suspicion can be cast aside and those who want to read all review have the option to do so, while others doesn't have to be bothered.
An important fact about reviews is that most people who actually takes the time to write about a product, writes a good review with the intention to help other customers.
Jacob points out that reviews actually can benefit the company as well. As mentioned before, reviews give customers good information about the products, something that all serious businesses should appreciate. But above that, something that is maybe even more valuable, the company gets feedback from their customers.
Jacob also talks about the fact that his company monitors the reviews to, as he claims, get rid of reviews that aren’t helpful to the other customers. He claims that they don’t delete negative reviews simply because they are negative, and I think that might be true. However, I will always be suspicious since us users can’t check what reviews was deleted. A better solution to minimize the effect of bad reviews (with bad I mean pointless slander or spam) is to keep them visible on the site, but minimize them as default and mark them as bad. This way all suspicion can be cast aside and those who want to read all review have the option to do so, while others doesn't have to be bothered.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Page 68 last question comments
The basic purpose of every business is to satisfy the customers. A business must identify their customers and also their needs and what they buy. For this purpose I think surveys results, or face to face communication is effective. The business will learn a lot about their customers and its cost effective tools for the business to adapt. The firm must try to offer some thing creative and unique over their competitor and their product or service functionality must be different. The firm must try to prepare their list of priorities like what to do first what to do this year what to do next and so on. The customer service also matters if the service the business provides is better than the customer remember their good service for the long time in their mind rather than the price. The firm must learn a lot from the Ecommerce evolution and try to adopt the right action in the right time and place. Also firm needs to improve their shipping as I told earlier because customers need sudden satisfaction. In the website the firm publishes those items which they have in stock the absence of products in the stock, so customers needs to be informed about that. The richer media for advertisement is also very important for the business.
page 27 How do you attract new customers to the site?
I think the one basic tool which is very attractive to customers is price of the company products. It’s a basic marketing tool for both online or offline business. The customers will be attracted by offering qualitative products at bargain prices. Pricing includes discounts, seasonal discounts, prizes, bonuses etc. the 4p, s strategy for the firm is very important to adapt effectively like product, placement, pricing and promotion. Time is also under discussion to include in 4p, s category. More than that if a business offers its products and services in a wider location means cover huge geographical as well as offering different brands to customer’s that business will be successful and customers are more and more. The advantage of offering more brands is that one brand profit will help other brands business like some brands are in question mark stage, some in star position, and some in cash cow and so on. The other useful source for firms to attract customers is advertising and also the advertising media which one to use is also important for the firm. If a firm use such source of media for advertisement which can’t target the targeted segment of customers so that will be useless. Emails, television commercials are common sources but nowadays advertisement through mobiles are very effective source. Because that advertisement will reach to target customers individually and he will be up to date every time. More than that every customer needs satisfaction and it is very important for both firm and customer. If the customers are well satisfied they will use their word of mouth source positively will have an impact on firm business indirectly.
It is important for every firm if firm leads over competitor that will be very positive affect to the firm business. Although such points looks very easy to use and adopt but it need a lot of planning, controlling, motivational activities in the firm organization structure.
Other way to attract customers is if the firm focuses in niche marketing like target each individual for their product use. In offline example like small tea bags introduced by Tapal or Lipton a liver brother company products and in the online environment I think mobile and emails are used to be as niche marketing. The customers what they are looking in to website can find as quickly as possible is also a reason. The longer time it takes for a customer what they are looking for on the firm website, seems to be less chance of visiting again. In the offline world persons goes to that shops which are near to their doors. In the online world firm must personalize their website store for each visitor. The customer reviews also affects the efficiency of the firm like many customers pay more attention to the customer review than they do the other information that firm provides customer about their product.
It is important for every firm if firm leads over competitor that will be very positive affect to the firm business. Although such points looks very easy to use and adopt but it need a lot of planning, controlling, motivational activities in the firm organization structure.
Other way to attract customers is if the firm focuses in niche marketing like target each individual for their product use. In offline example like small tea bags introduced by Tapal or Lipton a liver brother company products and in the online environment I think mobile and emails are used to be as niche marketing. The customers what they are looking in to website can find as quickly as possible is also a reason. The longer time it takes for a customer what they are looking for on the firm website, seems to be less chance of visiting again. In the offline world persons goes to that shops which are near to their doors. In the online world firm must personalize their website store for each visitor. The customer reviews also affects the efficiency of the firm like many customers pay more attention to the customer review than they do the other information that firm provides customer about their product.
Jacob Hawkins: Advice on moving to Online Business. P.32
Reading Hawkins, we once again are assured that having a strong foundation = identifying your business model clearly and following it during your business is crucial for your business’ success.
I am currently reading a book on product innovation, where the writer emphasizes the very first stage of inventing/innovating a product – asking the right questions on what task a product has to perform. The correct implementation of this stage will lead to a right understanding of customer needs, then eventually the product parameters. However, if carried out wrongly, you get what is called mutations (imitation of existing products) rather than innovations, or even a failure of your design. I found the book really interesting and useful, however it’s whole another topic.
The reason I thought of it is that, just like the problem definition in product design, a business model in marketing is an extremely essential part of the whole process. You screw it up – you screw up the whole business.
As much as Hawkins emphasizes the importance of moving online, as much I am convinced that only online retailing would not be the potential to take up the whole market. I think still a lot of people will be preferring shopping offline, where you can actually see the product/test it rather than just relying on reviews or other sources. Perhaps, here the best option is what Hawkins calls multi-channel retailing, i.e. having both online and offline integrating with each other. Thus, in addition to “moving-online” and “integration” factors Hawkins is encouraging, the keypoint, I think, is to keep track of everything. Online/offline stores/catalogs should all cooperate in what service they provide, and in cases replace one each other’s disadvantage by others’ advantages.
I am currently reading a book on product innovation, where the writer emphasizes the very first stage of inventing/innovating a product – asking the right questions on what task a product has to perform. The correct implementation of this stage will lead to a right understanding of customer needs, then eventually the product parameters. However, if carried out wrongly, you get what is called mutations (imitation of existing products) rather than innovations, or even a failure of your design. I found the book really interesting and useful, however it’s whole another topic.
The reason I thought of it is that, just like the problem definition in product design, a business model in marketing is an extremely essential part of the whole process. You screw it up – you screw up the whole business.
As much as Hawkins emphasizes the importance of moving online, as much I am convinced that only online retailing would not be the potential to take up the whole market. I think still a lot of people will be preferring shopping offline, where you can actually see the product/test it rather than just relying on reviews or other sources. Perhaps, here the best option is what Hawkins calls multi-channel retailing, i.e. having both online and offline integrating with each other. Thus, in addition to “moving-online” and “integration” factors Hawkins is encouraging, the keypoint, I think, is to keep track of everything. Online/offline stores/catalogs should all cooperate in what service they provide, and in cases replace one each other’s disadvantage by others’ advantages.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Short thoughts on Amazon Daily
With the introduction by Prof. Naveen, I had a chance to visit Amazon Daily (http://www.amazon.com/gp/daily/ref=cm_dly_open). I also thought it is not organized by Amazon, but, it seems like it is organized by them. Here's an explanation by Amazon on Amazon Daily.
"Amazon Daily is a blog—short for "web log"—that contains posts by editors from all over the company... Each post gives you the opportunity to provide private feedback to the editor as well as leave public comments for other customers to see."
Whether it is posted by them or not, this could be a good example of corporate blogging in the following context:
1) For corporate blogging, it is wise to limit the writer to people company chose. While "openness" is a spirit of blogging, that doesn't mean companies should allow anybody to be a writer who can post in their yard(blog). Actually, who writes does matter. Somebody who knows the business, corporate history, and how to tell stories(in a transparent way) should be writers. In this case, editors of amazon contribute to this blog.
2) While there are limited writers, still, it should open for comments to visitors/customers, which Amazon does. Using this customer reply, or by responding to outside blog posts on Amazon, company can share conversation.
3) "Story Asset": As blog posts are accumulated, people can easily search whenever people want to know about a specific aspect of a company or product. While old website holds a bunch of 'facts', and promotional slogans, blog shows interesting 'inside stories.' People can build relationship by exchanging 'stories', not just by facts. So, blog posts, for example, becomes a 'story asset', what I would call. All the posts at Amazon daily is certainly an example.
"Amazon Daily is a blog—short for "web log"—that contains posts by editors from all over the company... Each post gives you the opportunity to provide private feedback to the editor as well as leave public comments for other customers to see."
Whether it is posted by them or not, this could be a good example of corporate blogging in the following context:
1) For corporate blogging, it is wise to limit the writer to people company chose. While "openness" is a spirit of blogging, that doesn't mean companies should allow anybody to be a writer who can post in their yard(blog). Actually, who writes does matter. Somebody who knows the business, corporate history, and how to tell stories(in a transparent way) should be writers. In this case, editors of amazon contribute to this blog.
2) While there are limited writers, still, it should open for comments to visitors/customers, which Amazon does. Using this customer reply, or by responding to outside blog posts on Amazon, company can share conversation.
3) "Story Asset": As blog posts are accumulated, people can easily search whenever people want to know about a specific aspect of a company or product. While old website holds a bunch of 'facts', and promotional slogans, blog shows interesting 'inside stories.' People can build relationship by exchanging 'stories', not just by facts. So, blog posts, for example, becomes a 'story asset', what I would call. All the posts at Amazon daily is certainly an example.
Why do you think companies create bad websites (I.E. using too much flash, ActiveX and other technologies)?
Holman makes the case that the people that are actually making the websites are mostly concerned with things like looks and how “cool” the site is, and not about things like usability or loading time. The reason for this, she claims, is because the “techies” are trained to use the fancy technological tools, and thus will use them.
I have some experience with making websites for companies and have friends who actually work in this field, and I'm not sure if I agree fully with Holman. Sure, I have seen the type of websites that she is referring too and you have to put blame on the person/persons who made the site. However I feel that a big portion of the blame should lie on the company, or the persons in the company that actually hired the people that made the site. No matter if you buy a shirt or if you hire someone to do a job, the buyer always needs to do some research and quality control. There are enough people/companies out there who actually knows how to make a website, they have the technological and artistic skills needed as well as the knowledge to make it fast and user friendly. And they are actually not hard to find.
But of course, if you give the job to someone who only knows the technological parts of making a website, the end result is not going to be great.
Holman also emphasizes the role of the marketer when it comes to building a site today. Ten years ago you could get a competitive website that was more or less only made by techies. But the world has changed. I fully agree that the role of the marketer is very important. One good example of this is how can people find the site? Sure, you can do advertising and other things, but that costs money. What people usually do if the want to find something is use a search engine, like google. This is especially important for smaller businesses or newcomers that perhaps don't have allot of money to spend on advertisement, but also for the bigger already established companies.
The goal is to get as high up on the list of search results as possible when someone is using you keywords. But this is not an easy task. There is a whole science devoted to this. Companies whose only product is to make you site higher on the list.
So yes, the marketers part in building a website is very important if you want a competitive end result.
I have some experience with making websites for companies and have friends who actually work in this field, and I'm not sure if I agree fully with Holman. Sure, I have seen the type of websites that she is referring too and you have to put blame on the person/persons who made the site. However I feel that a big portion of the blame should lie on the company, or the persons in the company that actually hired the people that made the site. No matter if you buy a shirt or if you hire someone to do a job, the buyer always needs to do some research and quality control. There are enough people/companies out there who actually knows how to make a website, they have the technological and artistic skills needed as well as the knowledge to make it fast and user friendly. And they are actually not hard to find.
But of course, if you give the job to someone who only knows the technological parts of making a website, the end result is not going to be great.
Holman also emphasizes the role of the marketer when it comes to building a site today. Ten years ago you could get a competitive website that was more or less only made by techies. But the world has changed. I fully agree that the role of the marketer is very important. One good example of this is how can people find the site? Sure, you can do advertising and other things, but that costs money. What people usually do if the want to find something is use a search engine, like google. This is especially important for smaller businesses or newcomers that perhaps don't have allot of money to spend on advertisement, but also for the bigger already established companies.
The goal is to get as high up on the list of search results as possible when someone is using you keywords. But this is not an easy task. There is a whole science devoted to this. Companies whose only product is to make you site higher on the list.
So yes, the marketers part in building a website is very important if you want a competitive end result.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Some thoughts concerning Generation Y
On page 89 in the Steve Rubel interview the question arises whether there may be a way of reaching Generation Y through its addiction to instant messaging and social networking. Although I think the question may have actually been referring to how to exploit this addiction in a marketing approach, Rubel replies more generally about the struggle this generation is causing on the work market. He does however make some interesting points. Being of Generation Y myself, I really can identify with when he speaks of how people of this generation expect to be able to come and go from work as we please. I certainly do. This comes from knowing it’s possible. Today you don’t have to be at a desk in some office to be able to answer your phone, since you always have your phone with you. And this at all times. You don’t need to be at your desk to write or reply to emails, since you can access your email from any device with internet connectivity. You don’t even need to be at your desk to access your office computer, since with the help of VPN and remote desktops you can access your computer from any other computer anywhere in the world. The conventional going to work from 9 till 5 just doesn’t make any sense anymore. We get the work done, and we get it done on time, but we’ll do it when we want to do it. We no longer work 9 till 5, we work always, 24 hours a day, and we work never, always having time for family and friends. This new mentality of work etiquette is what’s causing a struggle. But as Rubel says, the only way for companies to hold on to any new talent is to adapt.
Today’s generation is simply all about connectivity. It’s all about communication. And the manner of how connected we are just grows more and more intense with the constant advances in mobile internet technology. We are now reachable anywhere, anytime. And because of this, we communicate, a lot. We communicate with family and friends, with people we know, and people we just met. We communicate so much today because it’s all so simple and accessible. And being that we communicate with a lot more people than a few close friends,. And because of this social networks are expanding. Online communities, like Facebook and its superseder, are so popular because they help us to keep track of all these people we communicate with. We simply need this tool.
So how can we use this in marketing? How can we exploit this constant and instant communication? We all know how we feel about spam. It just doesn’t work. Whether it be as an email, an instant message, or a post in your blog, it just doesn’t work. Partly because we are all so connected we’ve already learnt how to disregard spam and also any ads placed around a website, and partly because of the annoyance spam creates. As Rubel mentions in one of the following questions, the moment you put advertising into a social network, it’s seen as very intrusive. Why? Well because the networks are used to communicate with people we already know, with our friends. We don’t want any stranger trying to sell us something while talking with our friends. It’s not like we would invite a salesperson to a private Tupperware party.
As Rubel says, it’s really a matter of adapting the approach. But the greatest question is of course how to do this? Using traditional means on a new playing field clearly doesn’t work. Finding creative new ways is the way to go. But I believe the reason Rubel didn’t give a straight-on answer of how to reach generation Y is that there’s no clear answer. Nobody has quite figured it out yet, at least not how to do it effectively. Blogging is of course a good first approach, and so is being present in social networks, since it opens up 2-way communication, and as mentioned communication’s all what this generation is about. This is a generation that wants to be able to question everything and make demands, and shape products according to their own taste and feel. They want to have a say, and not just be handed something. In the words of Rubel, these platforms have to be used for collaborating towards a shared outcome. In short, we have to communicate.
Today’s generation is simply all about connectivity. It’s all about communication. And the manner of how connected we are just grows more and more intense with the constant advances in mobile internet technology. We are now reachable anywhere, anytime. And because of this, we communicate, a lot. We communicate with family and friends, with people we know, and people we just met. We communicate so much today because it’s all so simple and accessible. And being that we communicate with a lot more people than a few close friends,. And because of this social networks are expanding. Online communities, like Facebook and its superseder, are so popular because they help us to keep track of all these people we communicate with. We simply need this tool.
So how can we use this in marketing? How can we exploit this constant and instant communication? We all know how we feel about spam. It just doesn’t work. Whether it be as an email, an instant message, or a post in your blog, it just doesn’t work. Partly because we are all so connected we’ve already learnt how to disregard spam and also any ads placed around a website, and partly because of the annoyance spam creates. As Rubel mentions in one of the following questions, the moment you put advertising into a social network, it’s seen as very intrusive. Why? Well because the networks are used to communicate with people we already know, with our friends. We don’t want any stranger trying to sell us something while talking with our friends. It’s not like we would invite a salesperson to a private Tupperware party.
As Rubel says, it’s really a matter of adapting the approach. But the greatest question is of course how to do this? Using traditional means on a new playing field clearly doesn’t work. Finding creative new ways is the way to go. But I believe the reason Rubel didn’t give a straight-on answer of how to reach generation Y is that there’s no clear answer. Nobody has quite figured it out yet, at least not how to do it effectively. Blogging is of course a good first approach, and so is being present in social networks, since it opens up 2-way communication, and as mentioned communication’s all what this generation is about. This is a generation that wants to be able to question everything and make demands, and shape products according to their own taste and feel. They want to have a say, and not just be handed something. In the words of Rubel, these platforms have to be used for collaborating towards a shared outcome. In short, we have to communicate.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Comments: Steve Rubel's Interview on Corporate Blogging Mistakes
What are the common mistakes when a company starts their own corporate/brand blog? Steve Rubel pointed out "They're using it as a place to just talk and less of a place for action." It is quite true and common.
1) Talking, talking, talking, without Listening: Let me give you an example. If you visit the official website of Korean Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family(www.mw.go.kr), you willl notice a new section called "Open Blog for Policy Formation Process." But, by reading this, you will easily notice that it is not "OPEN" at all. The blog is used as a "megaphone", meaning they just throw 'their news' to audiences, not, use it as a conversational tool. They use a blog platform, a "NEW media", but, their mind is still in "OLD mind." This is a clear mistake when an organization launches a blog. It is different from a traditional corporate web site: it was a one-way corporate promotion tool. But, blog is a two-way street.
In a recent book "Groundswell" by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff at Forrester Research, they told the blogging should start by listening. Blogging is similar to a cocktail party, as they wrote. In a cocktail party, when we join a new group of people for conversation, we first listen what they are talking about, and then, talk our own thoughts. Same for blogging. If we launch a corporate blog for a drink, let's say, then, we need to first search what have been said in blogosphere, and then, we got to respond to them (not all, but, at least some) in posting stories in blog.
Let me give some more blogging mistakes.
2) transparency: Web 2.0 is all about transparent conversation. Flog, Fake Blog, is a good example. Walmarting Across America blog sponsored by Edelman was an example, as it turned out to be a "flog." (http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2006/10/16/edelman-rubel-respond-on-walmart-flog) Still, you can see companies pay or give products to some bloggers to review their products. Is it a right thing to do? Still, there are debates on this. But, at least, if a blogger get paid or products to review, then, the blogger should disclose the fact, and the company also should transparently communicate what they do with bloggers, in this kind of cases.
3) story, not just the list of facts: Most companies these days have their own corporate websites. But, do people visit those company websites? No. Even employees rarely visit their company websites. Why? Traditional company websites show lists of facts about their company and products. Simple facts make people boring. Homepages were not for conversation, but, rather functions as a 'web catalogue.' Blog is different. It is a conversation tool, and in a conversation, we share STORIES, not just simple facts. Digital storytelling becomes quite important in web 2.0 era for companies.
4) personality: Blog should come from a real person, like CEO or employees, not, a certain deparment (except when it is a team blog), or anonymous source. Blog is public, but, at the same time, it should be personal. People want to share conversation with real people, not organizations.
1) Talking, talking, talking, without Listening: Let me give you an example. If you visit the official website of Korean Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family(www.mw.go.kr), you willl notice a new section called "Open Blog for Policy Formation Process." But, by reading this, you will easily notice that it is not "OPEN" at all. The blog is used as a "megaphone", meaning they just throw 'their news' to audiences, not, use it as a conversational tool. They use a blog platform, a "NEW media", but, their mind is still in "OLD mind." This is a clear mistake when an organization launches a blog. It is different from a traditional corporate web site: it was a one-way corporate promotion tool. But, blog is a two-way street.
In a recent book "Groundswell" by Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff at Forrester Research, they told the blogging should start by listening. Blogging is similar to a cocktail party, as they wrote. In a cocktail party, when we join a new group of people for conversation, we first listen what they are talking about, and then, talk our own thoughts. Same for blogging. If we launch a corporate blog for a drink, let's say, then, we need to first search what have been said in blogosphere, and then, we got to respond to them (not all, but, at least some) in posting stories in blog.
Let me give some more blogging mistakes.
2) transparency: Web 2.0 is all about transparent conversation. Flog, Fake Blog, is a good example. Walmarting Across America blog sponsored by Edelman was an example, as it turned out to be a "flog." (http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2006/10/16/edelman-rubel-respond-on-walmart-flog) Still, you can see companies pay or give products to some bloggers to review their products. Is it a right thing to do? Still, there are debates on this. But, at least, if a blogger get paid or products to review, then, the blogger should disclose the fact, and the company also should transparently communicate what they do with bloggers, in this kind of cases.
3) story, not just the list of facts: Most companies these days have their own corporate websites. But, do people visit those company websites? No. Even employees rarely visit their company websites. Why? Traditional company websites show lists of facts about their company and products. Simple facts make people boring. Homepages were not for conversation, but, rather functions as a 'web catalogue.' Blog is different. It is a conversation tool, and in a conversation, we share STORIES, not just simple facts. Digital storytelling becomes quite important in web 2.0 era for companies.
4) personality: Blog should come from a real person, like CEO or employees, not, a certain deparment (except when it is a team blog), or anonymous source. Blog is public, but, at the same time, it should be personal. People want to share conversation with real people, not organizations.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Comment on Joan Holman's answer on how to improve company websites
I chose to discuss the following question in the Joan Holman interview (page 3):
“So if a company already has a web site, what would they look for in trying to improve that site, with online marketing in mind?”
Essentially, Holman answers the question of what companies should look for in trying to improve their websites with mistakes commonly made, and how to avoid making them.
In her answer, Holman stresses the importance of usability testing. Holman states an example of a web site with high technological requirements aimed at a market segment that is not really expected to possess such technology. The technological limitations discussed are bandwidth and software, such as Flash and ActiveX.
The usability testing that Holman discusses seems simply aimed at making the website available, and doesn’t touch on the more complex issues of how to organize the information on the website and how to actually communicate a company’s message. Though obviously limited by the format of an interview and the somewhat vague question, it would have been nice to see Holman answer a question of such great interest (to many, I assume) not quite as trivially.
Sure, the mistake made by the exemplified company owner is grave, but these days – how often do we really come across (serious) websites which do not put content and usability first? I believe it’s been a while since Flash web sites and dramatic animations entranced us enough to lead us astray. By now we all know and hate the Flash intros and the unnecessary animations, and so we won’t make the same mistake when producing our own web sites.
What I would have liked to see Holman discuss is how to present content and what content to present, though she does touch the area briefly in one of the previous answers. For example, would she let users freely discuss a company’s product on the company website? Is it ok to link to price comparison web sites? Does she believe in staff blogs? Also, examples of company web sites she believes stands out from the crowd and why they have succeeded would be great. The current perspective in the answer seems only about getting a web site that is passable, not one that really creates an advantage.
Another example of this quite defensive stance is that Holman sees the users’ technological characteristics as limitations (the web site must be usable by all users), while they in my mind also could open up possibilities. For example, if a user has a large screen (high resolution) then that user is likely to be somewhat wealthy and an early adopter of new technology. You can utilize the large screen to show larger spots at the side of the web site promoting for example high end technology equipment, which the user is likely to be interested in.
In a similar manner one could make conclusions about users of Google’s new web browser (Chrome). Using it suggests that you are both somewhat tech savvy and an early adopter.
In summary, I would have liked to see some more new things from Holman, and not just the basic reminders of common mistakes, and I would have liked her to not just discuss usability as the ability to use something (as with technological constraints), but rather the effectiveness of the usage (as with the way in which you present content).
“So if a company already has a web site, what would they look for in trying to improve that site, with online marketing in mind?”
Essentially, Holman answers the question of what companies should look for in trying to improve their websites with mistakes commonly made, and how to avoid making them.
In her answer, Holman stresses the importance of usability testing. Holman states an example of a web site with high technological requirements aimed at a market segment that is not really expected to possess such technology. The technological limitations discussed are bandwidth and software, such as Flash and ActiveX.
The usability testing that Holman discusses seems simply aimed at making the website available, and doesn’t touch on the more complex issues of how to organize the information on the website and how to actually communicate a company’s message. Though obviously limited by the format of an interview and the somewhat vague question, it would have been nice to see Holman answer a question of such great interest (to many, I assume) not quite as trivially.
Sure, the mistake made by the exemplified company owner is grave, but these days – how often do we really come across (serious) websites which do not put content and usability first? I believe it’s been a while since Flash web sites and dramatic animations entranced us enough to lead us astray. By now we all know and hate the Flash intros and the unnecessary animations, and so we won’t make the same mistake when producing our own web sites.
What I would have liked to see Holman discuss is how to present content and what content to present, though she does touch the area briefly in one of the previous answers. For example, would she let users freely discuss a company’s product on the company website? Is it ok to link to price comparison web sites? Does she believe in staff blogs? Also, examples of company web sites she believes stands out from the crowd and why they have succeeded would be great. The current perspective in the answer seems only about getting a web site that is passable, not one that really creates an advantage.
Another example of this quite defensive stance is that Holman sees the users’ technological characteristics as limitations (the web site must be usable by all users), while they in my mind also could open up possibilities. For example, if a user has a large screen (high resolution) then that user is likely to be somewhat wealthy and an early adopter of new technology. You can utilize the large screen to show larger spots at the side of the web site promoting for example high end technology equipment, which the user is likely to be interested in.
In a similar manner one could make conclusions about users of Google’s new web browser (Chrome). Using it suggests that you are both somewhat tech savvy and an early adopter.
In summary, I would have liked to see some more new things from Holman, and not just the basic reminders of common mistakes, and I would have liked her to not just discuss usability as the ability to use something (as with technological constraints), but rather the effectiveness of the usage (as with the way in which you present content).
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Joan Holman: About publicity, Thinking outside of the box and creativity (p.7,8)
In the asnwer she talks about how a company gets publicity on the internet. And she recommends a so caleld direct-to-consumers methods. Right away I remembered about the junk emails that we get on our inboxes trom time to time. Perhaps now it sounds like some cheap way of promoting your company, because most of the times, users just delete those and get annoyed.
But, I might predict that in veyr near future, that method could be one of the main means to promote your company. If they already do promotion by junk mails you get in your mail boxes, I am sure junk emails will follow up soon as well. But I really do not think it is a good idea though.
And she also talks about bad press being helpful as you get your name in front of people, creating awareness and visibility. I do not quite agree with that. Perhaps that is true in several cases, however very bad impression/reputation can scare away customers.
Basically this is all what PR is, right? Regadring bad press, there is one interesting observation I noticed. In Russian language there is a concept of PR = пиар = [pronounced: peeare] (didnt probably know how to translate it correctly, so just took the pronounciation of PR in russianized sound) should mean basically the same, but i noticed how distorted the meaning gotten in the mass usage of the word. Piar means smth like advertisement, but sort of in non-formal way. Like, Britney Spears going out and driving in crazy speed along the streets and showing up in parties = thats one of the examples of the term piar . Perhaps, I am getting a bit offtopic, but I thought it is kind of interesting.
In the following question, she talks about outside-the-box thinking approaches, and particularly about involving young people for novice ideas. I have either read or heard a very meaningful sentence regarding this, that goes: "If you do what you have been doing, you will get what you have been getting". Indeed, if you dont have anything innovative, it is very hard to compete in the market. Her response raised a question regarding old expertise vs. young energy. i have a professor, who is over 60 yrs old and it takes her at least five minutes to find the course website and get the file from there, another five minutes to put the screen up and turn the beam projector on, and five more mintues to make sure everything is working properly. And this happens every single time. Which is obviously already fifteen minutes of class time being wasted. I certainly do not blame her, she has not grown up in this digital era with computers at home and cell phones to use. She even did not have a calculator until she was in her middle ages, so at school they always had to calculate all the problems and equations by hand. And now compare somebody like her working in some digital-related field. That could be a disaster. Whereas for young people it would be simply easy to get adjusted to that atmosphere. This is just one example, but overall, I do agree that young people sometimes bring crazy ideas, adding up creativity to the process. However that does not mean, the whole company should have only young staff, good expertised employees are very important as well. One of my teachers regarding this topic said a brilliant thing: the difference between established entrepreneurs, marketers, f.e. Bill Gates or Iaccoda and etc and us is the key of creativity. We all - the human beings - have all same twenty four hours.But this key point, the creativity helped people like Bill Gates and etc become billionaires and create empires. Thus I want to emphasize the non-traditional methods of marketing that most of the times lead the company to success.
But, I might predict that in veyr near future, that method could be one of the main means to promote your company. If they already do promotion by junk mails you get in your mail boxes, I am sure junk emails will follow up soon as well. But I really do not think it is a good idea though.
And she also talks about bad press being helpful as you get your name in front of people, creating awareness and visibility. I do not quite agree with that. Perhaps that is true in several cases, however very bad impression/reputation can scare away customers.
Basically this is all what PR is, right? Regadring bad press, there is one interesting observation I noticed. In Russian language there is a concept of PR = пиар = [pronounced: peeare] (didnt probably know how to translate it correctly, so just took the pronounciation of PR in russianized sound) should mean basically the same, but i noticed how distorted the meaning gotten in the mass usage of the word. Piar means smth like advertisement, but sort of in non-formal way. Like, Britney Spears going out and driving in crazy speed along the streets and showing up in parties = thats one of the examples of the term piar . Perhaps, I am getting a bit offtopic, but I thought it is kind of interesting.
In the following question, she talks about outside-the-box thinking approaches, and particularly about involving young people for novice ideas. I have either read or heard a very meaningful sentence regarding this, that goes: "If you do what you have been doing, you will get what you have been getting". Indeed, if you dont have anything innovative, it is very hard to compete in the market. Her response raised a question regarding old expertise vs. young energy. i have a professor, who is over 60 yrs old and it takes her at least five minutes to find the course website and get the file from there, another five minutes to put the screen up and turn the beam projector on, and five more mintues to make sure everything is working properly. And this happens every single time. Which is obviously already fifteen minutes of class time being wasted. I certainly do not blame her, she has not grown up in this digital era with computers at home and cell phones to use. She even did not have a calculator until she was in her middle ages, so at school they always had to calculate all the problems and equations by hand. And now compare somebody like her working in some digital-related field. That could be a disaster. Whereas for young people it would be simply easy to get adjusted to that atmosphere. This is just one example, but overall, I do agree that young people sometimes bring crazy ideas, adding up creativity to the process. However that does not mean, the whole company should have only young staff, good expertised employees are very important as well. One of my teachers regarding this topic said a brilliant thing: the difference between established entrepreneurs, marketers, f.e. Bill Gates or Iaccoda and etc and us is the key of creativity. We all - the human beings - have all same twenty four hours.But this key point, the creativity helped people like Bill Gates and etc become billionaires and create empires. Thus I want to emphasize the non-traditional methods of marketing that most of the times lead the company to success.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Page 88 Last question comment
The email is always in the text form from the very Begining, some may call it old technology also and off course it is, but I think it will remain in text always. To change its other features along with email I think that is important. In a website which has the text message facility is considered to be good one .In marketing we will do things which are always dynamic, innovative and creative.e.g at first customers used the hotmail then they switched to yahoo and nowadays a lot to Gmail. Because Gmail is more informative and innovative. Gmail have the maximum size, quicker uploading and attachment, and more than that use of the Google messenger in ones inbox. Using Gmail one can easily switch to Google, orkut and YouTube as well by entering the Id once. In Gmail one can also upload funny videos, music, Mp3, and also get access to the whole world communities. In short it’s a complete personal website having profile, photos, videos etc and also doesn’t need to install direct X or other popup blockers etc. In short to use such email and website which is speedy, simple to use, more funny, more availability of information, open to criticism and suggestion and more than that having more comparative advantage over others.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Welcome to GCT 681 Media Marketing's Blog
This is where you will submit your assignments for the course in blog format.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)