It is a question that plagues every socialite and socialette across the county; how many friends can one person have? Although this may seem like a complicated question with too many factors coming into play such as gender, geography and teenage acne levels, there is actually a simple answer. British anthropologist Robin Dunbar claimed that this number is 150. Beyond this, the brain cannot cope with any more he claims. Of course, this does not include people who you used to be friends with or people who you no longer maintain an inter-personal relationship with. The question I want to ask is do we need to revise this number? Due to the rise of social networking, is this number more like 1500, as would be suggested by the number on many teenagers friends lists?
I recentley re-did my Facebook due to work reasons and for a great opportunity to declutter (which also begs another question; can we now get rid of friends more easily?). In going through my old friends list, I added no less than 200 people who I felt a need to have on Facebook. All of these people I still maintain contact with, even if it is just a Happy Birthday comment once a year (or twice a year, if my friends have kindly taken over my Facebook account!). However, how real is that connection? Does chatting on Facebook account as a social interaction?
I don't think many people would argue that Facebook (and other Social Media outlets of course) don't make it easier to connect with people. Whether you want to or not, you can now keep up with your old schoolmates, work colleagues or distant family at the click of a button. But have a think; are these people really your friends? Can you really call them friends if the only reason you keep in touch with them is because Facebook makes it easier?
My opinion is yes. Just because a friendship is easier, does that make it any less valuable? We are always looking at ways to make our life easier. Remote controls for the TV, washing machines for the laundry and microwaves to cook our food. So why not make our social relations easier? Making them easier means we can have more right?
To sum up, I think Dunbar's number does need to be revised. Of course, there are already theories that put the number around 300, but these do not include the Social Media revolution. This is not to say that Social Media has replaced a social relationship, and in actual fact it can aid them. Facebook, as well as making contact easier online, allows much easier contact offline. Some people may feel sad that our lives are being reduced to the clicking of a button, but they may just have to accept that relationships are one thing to add to the list. If you don't agree, I can just defriend you anyway...
Tuesday, 14 August 2012
Sunday, 5 August 2012
Facebook is faking it...
You have probably seen in the news recentley about over 80 million of Facebook's users are 'fake'. By 'fake', Facebook also means duplicate users and it is estimated that 8.7% of these users fall into this category. This also includes people who make profiles for other things; an unborn baby or a pet for example (trust me, it happens!).
A lot of the news has focused on how this is bad news for marketers, but is this the case? On the one hand, it could have serious consequences. Facebook Adverts allow you to target whoever you want, from anywhere in the world and from whatever demographic. Of course, if you use a one-size-fits-all approach then it is inevitable that you will catch some 'fake' users for the fee that you pay. As you pay per click or impression, some of this money will be wasted.
However, I am of the opinion that more is being made of the situation than needs to be. For me, Facebook is about conversation and interaction. The amount of Facebook likes at the top of the page does mean a little something, but it is what it leads to that is important. The real way to utilise Social Media is to measure ROC (return on conversation), which isn't easy, but it is important. Facebook allows you to raise brand awareness and build some sort of relationship with a consumer. If you manage to do this with a fake user, well done! However, this news doesn't affect bottom line.
The real consequences are going to be bore by the marketing budget. For marketers who do operate a blanket marketing strategy, it may be difficult to avoid these fake accounts. However, with a rethink of tactics and a realisation that what really matters is the true interaction with the real users, this news shouldn't scare too many people.
Facebook may have more fake users than Instagram has real users, but it also has 875 million real users. I wouldn't pull out of Facebook just yet...
A lot of the news has focused on how this is bad news for marketers, but is this the case? On the one hand, it could have serious consequences. Facebook Adverts allow you to target whoever you want, from anywhere in the world and from whatever demographic. Of course, if you use a one-size-fits-all approach then it is inevitable that you will catch some 'fake' users for the fee that you pay. As you pay per click or impression, some of this money will be wasted.
However, I am of the opinion that more is being made of the situation than needs to be. For me, Facebook is about conversation and interaction. The amount of Facebook likes at the top of the page does mean a little something, but it is what it leads to that is important. The real way to utilise Social Media is to measure ROC (return on conversation), which isn't easy, but it is important. Facebook allows you to raise brand awareness and build some sort of relationship with a consumer. If you manage to do this with a fake user, well done! However, this news doesn't affect bottom line.
The real consequences are going to be bore by the marketing budget. For marketers who do operate a blanket marketing strategy, it may be difficult to avoid these fake accounts. However, with a rethink of tactics and a realisation that what really matters is the true interaction with the real users, this news shouldn't scare too many people.
Facebook may have more fake users than Instagram has real users, but it also has 875 million real users. I wouldn't pull out of Facebook just yet...
Saturday, 4 August 2012
The Happiness Machine
So after writing about Ambush Marketing in my last blog, I thought I would concentrate on another one of my favourite types of marketing; Experiential Marketing. This is also known as engagement marketing and this is exactly what it does; it engages people. The idea of it is to create a connection with the consumer (or a stranger, with the hope that they become a consumer of your brand) that they will never forget, hopefully leading them to purchase your product.
A good example of this which has been doing the rounds recently is the Coca-Cola happiness machine. In the example given below, the students approached the vending machine as they would any other. However, this wasn't normal vending machine and there is somebody sitting inside! It starts off by giving free Coca Cola to passers-by, but the ideas and gifts become more interesting and exciting. As you can see, the students love it!
Another benefit of this type of marketing is that it can be very cost-effective if done in the right way. It doesn't cost too much to set up a vending machine and stick a guy in there I think most students would sit in there just for the free Coca-Cola.
Coca-Cola was perhaps too kind to the consumers though. To get something in life, you normally have to earn it. An Adelaide based snack brand, Fantastic Delites, set out to prove this point. Instead of just setting up a machine to give away free samples, they required people to do something to earn it. This started off with somebody having to press a button 100x, rising to 5000x and ending with a small child doing a pretty impressivee robot dance, leading to a well-deserved round of applause from the crowd who gathered to watch!
Tuesday, 24 July 2012
Adverts that I love - Suzuki - Never-ending Test Drive
Have you ever took a car for a test drive and not wanted to take it back to the showroom? I doubt you have ever been that obsessed, but it is difficult not to see the funny side to this advert.
The story begins with a salesman who takes a man out for a test drive. However, the man drives home and we see the salesman present at important moments in the family's life. He holds the man's hand during the birth of their child, helps out with a spot of DIY and features in the family photo (a personal favourite touch of mine).
I think this advert works very much like the Pringles advert, which claimed that "once you pop, you can't stop", though of course a very different product. Suzuki are also trying to target middle-aged families and this advert talks to this demographic exactly. The message is clear, the theme tune memorable and it is clear that Suzuki is being advertised.
Most normal people would buy the car and let the salesman back to his job, but then the advert wouldn't be as fun?! I am sure Suzuki will be able to increase their very small market share in the vehicle market with this bit of marketing gold. Nothing fancy, nothing flash, just a simple message targeting the right people.
The Olympics have been ambushed!
Not many people will have missed the news about Nicklas Bendner flashing a pair of Paddy Power pants after scoring a goal for Denmark recently. The kind souls at Paddy Power agreed to pay the £80,000 fine that the striker was handed for his stunt, but in actual fact the bookmakers got the last laugh. With all the publicity they gained for the lucky pants, they are predicted to make that £80,000 back 100 times over. Not bad for a pair of sweaty boxers...
Most people realise that Paddy Power knew they were breaking the rules and knew they would benefit from the publicity. In the Marketing world, we call this Ambush Marketing. According to Google, this is where a brand or company creates a marketing campaign around an event without paying sponsorship fees. This is essentially the reason LOCOG have featured in the news recently, as brands are now not allowed to mention the Olympics, or certain words (such as Gold, Silver, Bronze) in their marketing and this will last until the end of the games. This is in order to protect the rights (and the bank balances) of important sponsors such as McDonalds, BT and Visa who collectively, amongst overs, invest billions of pounds into the games.
The most creative piece of ambush marketing I have seen so far has been released today by Oddbins. They are offering discounts to anybody who wears Nike trainers, buys a Pepsi at KFC, owns an iPhone and drives a Vauxhall! The reason for this is that they are all rival brands to the Olympic sponsors. They also have promotional posters stating that they "can't mention the event, cant mention the city and can't even mention the year". This is of course with obvious reference to the Games, but without breaking any of the rules. Another arguable piece of Ambush Marketing is Subway's recent Athletics-based adverts, where they state their 'personal best', which is in fact their favourite Subway sandwich.
Ambush Marketing is something that splits the industry but not many people can deny the creativity of it. Another examples of it include American Express stating that "you don't need a visa to visit Spain" during the Barcelona 1992 Olympic Games, an obvious attack on a rival card provider. Another favourite mine is Selley's, an Australian Brand, who were forced to remove ads which stated that they were proud sponsors of "the cricket", despite not being an official sponsor of the league or any teams. They were in actual fact referring to an insect called Dave, but the authorities wouldn't allow this!
Not all brands are so intrusive. For example, Fujifilm sponsored television broadcasts of the Olympic games in 1988 whereas Kodak were the official sponsors, and Nike sponsored a number of 1998 Fifa world cup teams despite Umbro being the Official Sponsors of the tournament.
Ambush Marketing is a grey area legally as there are so many ways to associate yourselves with an event without breaking the rules. The example from Oddbins is the first of many we will see over the summer, and the benefit for us consumers is that we get to see some pretty creative advertising. I think most guys are hoping that Bavaria play their part like they did in the 2010 world cup...
Unsurprisingly, Bavaria sold a lot more beer after this publicity stunt...
No matter what rules are in place, the most creative and best Ambush Marketers will always win. Rules were made to be broken, and many companies are proving it might even be worth it too!
Follow me - @paulcoffee
Look out for my next Marketing blog soon!
Most people realise that Paddy Power knew they were breaking the rules and knew they would benefit from the publicity. In the Marketing world, we call this Ambush Marketing. According to Google, this is where a brand or company creates a marketing campaign around an event without paying sponsorship fees. This is essentially the reason LOCOG have featured in the news recently, as brands are now not allowed to mention the Olympics, or certain words (such as Gold, Silver, Bronze) in their marketing and this will last until the end of the games. This is in order to protect the rights (and the bank balances) of important sponsors such as McDonalds, BT and Visa who collectively, amongst overs, invest billions of pounds into the games.
The most creative piece of ambush marketing I have seen so far has been released today by Oddbins. They are offering discounts to anybody who wears Nike trainers, buys a Pepsi at KFC, owns an iPhone and drives a Vauxhall! The reason for this is that they are all rival brands to the Olympic sponsors. They also have promotional posters stating that they "can't mention the event, cant mention the city and can't even mention the year". This is of course with obvious reference to the Games, but without breaking any of the rules. Another arguable piece of Ambush Marketing is Subway's recent Athletics-based adverts, where they state their 'personal best', which is in fact their favourite Subway sandwich.
Ambush Marketing is something that splits the industry but not many people can deny the creativity of it. Another examples of it include American Express stating that "you don't need a visa to visit Spain" during the Barcelona 1992 Olympic Games, an obvious attack on a rival card provider. Another favourite mine is Selley's, an Australian Brand, who were forced to remove ads which stated that they were proud sponsors of "the cricket", despite not being an official sponsor of the league or any teams. They were in actual fact referring to an insect called Dave, but the authorities wouldn't allow this!
Not all brands are so intrusive. For example, Fujifilm sponsored television broadcasts of the Olympic games in 1988 whereas Kodak were the official sponsors, and Nike sponsored a number of 1998 Fifa world cup teams despite Umbro being the Official Sponsors of the tournament.
Ambush Marketing is a grey area legally as there are so many ways to associate yourselves with an event without breaking the rules. The example from Oddbins is the first of many we will see over the summer, and the benefit for us consumers is that we get to see some pretty creative advertising. I think most guys are hoping that Bavaria play their part like they did in the 2010 world cup...
Unsurprisingly, Bavaria sold a lot more beer after this publicity stunt...
No matter what rules are in place, the most creative and best Ambush Marketers will always win. Rules were made to be broken, and many companies are proving it might even be worth it too!
Follow me - @paulcoffee
Look out for my next Marketing blog soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
