Marketers Studio - David Berkowitz's Marketing Blog

Sheep and Wolves

I've been busy with the new job and especially busy at Search Engine Strategies - NY so I'll keep this entry brief. It's hard to make time for blog when having two lunches (but only one 10oz soda). Thanks to Gord Hotchkiss, Steven Prisco, Greg Zola, Chris Heun, Brett Crosby, and others present for the excellent company over the course of the two meals.

Today, special thanks go to Greg Saks of Compete, Inc who provided the research for today's column. At some point I might also post some outtakes from the cutting room floor; a previous version got even deeper into some of the data Greg sent over, but in such a stats-heavy piece, it became hard to read, especially without the charts to make sense of it all.

From the column:

Personalization serivces are often considered ways to engender customer loyalty. Yet, according to new research, subscribers to search engines' personalization services can be the most fickle. So what do you do, go after the loyal sheep or the aggressive wolves? ...

Compete developed a Share of Search Activity (SOSA) metric to determine search engine user loyalty. The firm takes a search engine and assesses the percentage of searches its users conduct across all engines. For instance, 71 percent of Googles users' searches are conducted on Google, while the other 29 percent of Google users' searches occur on other engines (as of December 2005). Compare that with Lycos, bringing up the rear, where less than 6 percent of its users' searches are conducted on Lycos; 94.2 percent of searches by Lycos users occur on other engines.

Read the column for Greg's interpretation for why personalization doesn't always engender loyalty. This could have been a much, much shorter column since all I needed was an intro and Greg's insight, but alas a 200-word piece just doesn't offer much to advertise around. An aside: this is also my least favorite column headline in a long time - it's just not that catchy - so please note the title's all me, not the editors.

There's No I in 360i - I Mean...

Okay, maybe that doesn't work so well. There's no "i" in team, but, yes, there is one in 360i, and I'm proud to announce I've joined the 360i team as Director of Strategic Planning. It's an incredible bunch of people here, and when I have a few minutes, I'll fill you in more about what's going on here.

Meanwhile, I can share that I'm taking a big picture look at the interactive industry even while keeping a focus on search engine marketing. I'll be getting up to speed on new technologies, partnership ideas, the latest research, and the buzz of what's going on both in the headlines and behind the scenes. If you have any thoughts on such matters, send a line my way: dberkowitz @ 360i.com.

MSN's Pay-Dirt

Fittingly, the first e-mail flagged by the spam filter at my new job was my own column. I really need to stop sending myself unsolicited e-mail. I'll have an update on just where I landed as soon as the press release crosses the wires.

As for the column at hand, I looked at MSN's new Search & Win promotion. I can't claim my overall stance is original - I'm hardly the only one to offer a skeptical take about this. Yet I had fun reliving my psych major days and poring over the research to add another dimension showing why Search & Win could be a deal where everyone loses. This led to comparisons between psychology and economics. I can't say I'm an expert in either field, but in a 750-word column, I have the liberty of throwing some ideas out there. If you're better versed on either subject, or even if you're just hazarding a guess like me, I welcome your take in the comments.

From today's Search Insider:

Thanks in large part to Google Scholar, I took a cursory glance at psychological research on how external rewards impact intrinsic motivation. Much of the initial research that came out in the 1970s said that tangible rewards such as money hampered people's motivation. Pay someone to do something he would have done anyway, and he will soon be conditioned to valuing the task for the reward, not for his interest in the task. More recent reviews of the entire body of research on the subject have shown the effects aren't quite as pronounced...

Other reviews, finding the effects of decreased intrinsic motivation more pronounced, note that psychology often butts heads with economics, which assumes that anyone will do anything for the right price. There's room for both theories. You've seen those Klondike Bar commercials, right? People will do crazy things even for ice cream. Meanwhile, NBC's lineup proves that people will go to extreme lengths, such as eating bugs or sequestering themselves with Donald Trump, for a potential payoff.

MSN is thus choosing economics over psychology.

More at MediaPost...

MSN Search & Win's Paris Vacation

Thanks to former colleague Mike Goldberg, now with Datran Media, my next piece in MediaPost is on MSN Search & Win, where MSN desperately tries to bribe (err, I mean, reward) people who use its search engine.

One curiosity: the site is redirected via magicsearch-2.com. Checking the WHOIS information, that domain's owned by someone in France from the Hook Network who seemingly has no connection to Microsoft. I wrote him.

Emmanuel Boutte, Hook Network Director, promptly wrote back, "Actually, Hook Network is the company in charge of the technical realization of the 'msnsearchandwin' websites, at the international level, for the account of MSN."

Mystery solved. You can sleep better now.

Gmail + Chat: Cool or Creepy?

Personalization's one of my favorite themes to write about because it evokes very personal responses. Additionally, it ties into some heady issues, such as how much trust we'll place in a third party to respect our personal information in return for a richer experience. At a basic level, we trust banks with our money in return for the security provided and benefits of being able to best access our savings. We trust signing up with phone companies for the convenience of connecting with others, and we expect that they won't listen to our conversations (though if they really want to hear me pestering my sister and ordering lo mein, they can go right ahead). This ties into a slew of issues involving life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Personalization is connected to how we express our personal selves, which thus ties into privacy as well. Roe vs. Wade, the Patriot Act, and gay marriage are all connected here.

The column this week adresses a much smaller slice of the issue, and I tried to prevent myself from getting off on too many tangents (fortunately, I have no such limits on the blog). I look at what it means for Gmail to archive Google Talk conversations:

Almost any type of targeting and personalization has a degree of creepiness to it from the consumer perspective. iTunes recommending music based on songs purchased through iTunes was acceptable; recommending music based on one's library stored on the desktop generated a mini-uproar. MSN targeting paid search ads based on demographics of registered users is fine, but any search engine targeting based on user behavior on other sites will make some users uncomfortable. Yahoo Mail banner ads are a fair price to pay for the free account, but Gmail's targeting text ads based on message content was panned during initial trials.

Now, Google Talk and Gmail are becoming one and the same. Cool or creepy? Both. But the biggest issue for marketers is a lack of control over where their ads appear.

More at MediaPost. Your thoughts welcome.

Rockvertising

A friend of mine, Cara, remarked today, how even people living under a rock know it's Valentine's Day tomorrow and we don't need any more reminders, thank you very much.

Yet some people living under rocks may not get the message.

In light of that, I have a new marketing strategy: Rockvertising.

I will emblazon your message underneath rocks. I'll find rocks matching the demographic profiles of your target audience (fun fact: igneous rocks work best for those elusive 18-35 year old males). I'll even mix media, spreading your message underneath every size rock from pebbles to boulders.

Contact me to be the first rockvertiser ever.

And please also contact me if you already own a patent for rockvertising. I swear, I'm not infringing. I hope I'm just making this up.

Why Wikipedia Works: A Case in Portia

I was very excited yesterday, in a first for me, to stumble on a definitive falsehood on Wikipedia. A discussion with a friend about Arrested Development led my friend to mention something about AD star Portia de Rossi dating Ellen DeGeneres. All this was news to me, so we turned to Wikipedia to sort through it.

Sure enough, Wikipedia confirmed the Portia-Ellen relationship, but added this gem:

On February 10 2006, Portia reversed her sexual orientation when she was seen in public, getting [bleeped] by the unknown stranger, Khaleel Zaman.

Nine hours later, it was corrected. You can see the erroneous version at the entry's history under Feb 10.

Some might use this as an example of why not to trust Wikipedia, a favorite media whipping boy among the insecure. But traditional outlets run much more egregious errors that never get corrected. This one, an obvious joke on something as insignificant as a celebrity's sexuality, was cleaned up almost instantaneously.

Austin, Anyone?

Sam Decker, a veteran marketing and e-commerce pro from Dell, wound up at Bazaarvoice in Austin, TX, and they're hiring.

Bazaarvoice aims to help retailers easily implement ratings and reviews on their sites. Sam writes on his blog at www.deckermarketing.com:

Online businesses understand the value of word of mouth. Typically, online businesses have failed to deploy ratings and reviews because they lack the necessary IT resources, staff, and expertise. Only 26% of 137 high-profile retailers surveyed offered customer ratings and reviews, although 96% of them ranked ratings and reviews as an effective or very effective tactic in improving conversion. (Source: Shop.org and Forrester Research, "The State of Retailing Online 8.0", May 2005).

Bazaarvoice offers a fast, easy way for businesses to facilitate and listen to online customer-to-customer conversations, increasing sales, margins, and customer loyalty and retention.

Consumer feedback helped make Amazon the e-commerce giant that it is. It's fueled CNET's various properties, such as Download.com and its product reviews. When I was recently in the market for a new digital camera after mine was stolen (mid-flight no less, by the passenger sitting next to me), I couldn't get enough of user reviews. Those reviews didn't actually help me. I returned the Panasonic that I got from Amazon in favor of an upgrade of the Sony that served me well (outside of when it broke three and a half months in) since mid-2003. But the reviews are addictive nonetheless, even if most of the reviewers have no clue what they're talking about.

Meanwhile, if you're in Austin or thinking of spending some time there, Bazaarvoice is hiring.

Today's Online Ad News: 10 Words or Less

For awhile, I've wanted to combat the news overdose by summarizing the day's stories in 10 words or less. Here's a first stab, from MediaPost's Online Media Daily:

Amazon Tests AdSense Alternative
E-commerce giant offers affiliates contextual ads. Spare change can't hurt.

Dell Mulls Google Software Bundle
Next step in relationship. Joint portal already exists at http://www.google.com/ig/dell.

Lazard: Time Warner Flubbed AOL
Icahn-commissioned report: AOL botched search, broadband strategies. Hardly news.

Brightcove To Distribute Broadband Video For Times
NYT syndicates video, welcomes consumer generated media. New Times indeed.

IAB Updates Bot and Spider List
Goal: honest impression counting, better ad measurement. Arachnophobia's overrated.

Showtime to Distribute on iTunes
Everybody's doing it. $2 gets you some Weeds.

Search Plus: "Ringing the Common Sense Bell"

This week, I lash out against search engine marketing fundamentalists with a "can't we all just get along" integration approach, replete with political undertones:

So why are some so disdainful and dismissive of SEM? Much of the blame falls on search marketers themselves. There are a vocal few with this god complex, preaching the salvation of search marketing. "Search is everything!" they scream. "Shift all your budgets to search or repent! Everyone is searching billions of times a day, and they're telling you what they want. If they're not searching then you will never figure out what they want so you shouldn't even bother reaching such heathens!"

Fanaticism provokes fanatical responses. Every time a preacher cries out from the Evangelical Church of Search, an apostate will bristle and repudiate all of SEM. Ideologues hamper the dialogue we should engage in; it's the moderate approach that will foster the healthiest growth of search engine marketing. To this end, I propose Search Plus.

You can read the entire piece at MediaPost.

Meanwhile, theAgency President Heidi Hayes, appreciating my ringing "the common sense bell," had a great addition to the piece: "You overlooked the all-important Search Plus Print. Even more than direct mail, print advertising has a greater opportunity to engage the end user and deliver a targeted message."

She's dead on. There are quite a few Search Plus examples I couldn't get into with the word count; yours are welcome.

Also, please send a line if you know how to make my URL work without entering the WWW. I need to figure that out one of these days.