Marketing Pilgrim Published: “Foursquare Retail Checkins Up During Holiday” plus 3 more

Foursquare Retail Checkins Up During Holiday
Astroturfing: Maybe it’s Not as Bad as it Seems
Apple Gets Hit with Privacy Suit: A Poem
The Online – Offline Marketing Chasm

Foursquare Retail Checkins Up During Holiday

Posted: 29 Dec 2010 06:56 AM PST

I will say that one of the hardest things to do when writing a post is to get all of the pertinent information in the headline. There are some days where I feel like I am feeding the machine with headlines like this since there are many people who don't read these posts but just shuttle them on with retweets (Can you believe that people would do that in this day and age of such reliable information? ).

Well today's data comes from AdAge and Foursquare by way of the SAI Chart of the Day. Here's the information.

So why was I wondering if this may not be monumental as it appears? That's because my question on any data showing percentage changes is always what was the original number? How many people were checking in? Early stage companies love to show percentages because it could hide the fact that when you go from 48 of something happening to 60 of something happening that is a 25% increase in overall activity but the numbers aren't big enough to get excited about. However, you are perfectly within your rights to show a 25% increase because, well, it is just that. Unfortunately, it tells a bad story.

I ask these things because I experiment with checkins from time to time. Overall, they don't do much for me because I am just not the right market. I understand these tools but I am not out on the town all the time. So when I am out I like to see just how many people have checked in and I am usually underwhelmed.

A case in point. I was recently at a Carolina Hurricanes hockey game in Raleigh, NC. While a small market, Raleigh is considered to be one of the more tech savvy markets around so you would think that out of about 15,000 fans there would be some "checking in" going on. Well, there were about 20 people who checked in at the RBC Center which represents .0000017 percent of those people at the event who used Foursquare and were interested enough to check in. Better than zero but not much (and admittedly not very scientific but you get the point). I would suspect those numbers would go up at a San Jose Sharks game. Anybody know? I have read that the Washington Redskins used Foursquare this year and they had about a 2.6% checkin rate but there are a lot of questions in that number as well (which I will address in another post – see update below).

The bottom line is this. Foursquare has about 5 million users right now. It is under some serious pressure from Facebook who can muscle in on their territory at scale because of their massive user base. Of course, how many people in that user base actually use new services is a big question I have for Facebook. In fact, I'll ask here – Has anyone signed up to use the Facebook messaging service? Let us know in the comments.

The bottom line here is that, as always, how we see numbers often skews the importance we place on products and services. If we allow the service provider or the industry to give us the 'rosy' picture without questioning just how real the information is then we, as marketers, run the risk of rabbit-trailing and wasting valuable resources on things that may have very limited returns.

Used in the right places with the right businesses who have the right customers and prospects there is no telling where this could go. There is certainIy a market for location based services like Foursqaure. I caution, however, to not let the numbers you see persuade you to do anything until you have done a thorough examination as to whether location based services can do anything at all for your business. Just doing a cannon ball into the deep end without looking may just leave you all wet.

UPDATE: Rather than write a post about how the Washington Redskins used Froursquare and the numbers they generated it looks like a better move to read the post over at the Social Media Examiner. I have a ton of questions about the numbers as you might as well.

Astroturfing: Maybe it’s Not as Bad as it Seems

Posted: 29 Dec 2010 04:36 AM PST

Astroturfing is defined as the act of creating a false sense of grassroots support. The two most common examples are politics and online reviews. For example, a Senator receives a flood of letters that appear to be a spontaneous response to a political event but the letters are actually from an organized group who will gain something by swaying the vote.

Online, it could be a series of very positive product reviews that seem to come from Average Janes when in reality they were posted by an employee of the company.

Back in September, R2Integrated did a survey on the topic and not surprisingly 87% of the people said they thought companies planted reviews. What’s interesting is that only 35% said it was “highly unethical” and only 9% said they’d stop buying from a company if they found out they were astroturfing. Why that’s particularly fascinating is that the news coverage which followed the survey all leaned heavily on how it proved astroturfing was bad for business. Really? I’m not getting that. Many studies have shown that people trust the reviews of people they know over ones they don’t, so a whole page full of astroturf reviews probably aren’t helping the cause anyway.

Still, there is that old “truth in advertising” issue. That’s why the FTC busted Reverb Communications last year after it was revealed that they were paying people to put positive reviews on their client’s iPhone apps.

But when we look at social media and how we use it to promote products, aren’t we all astroturfing to some extent? Tell me you’ve never hidden behind a fake Twitter account, or an anonymous blog comment. The internet was designed to allow people to be who they want to be at any given moment. Right now, I’m a middle-aged marketing writer but later today I’m going to be a hip, twenty-something who knows all about fashion. Like Hollywood, marketing is about creating an illusion and I don’t see where that’s so bad. (Barring the use for illegal purposes, of course.)

I prefer to see creativity over safe. If I’m drawn in to a clever YouTube video of a ten-year-old doing off-the-cuff movie reviews, then I don’t care if it’s actually been scripted and filmed by a studio.

When it comes to stocking a site with company written reviews, as long as their telling the truth, does it really make a difference if they were paid to write them or not? I say no. What do you say?

Apple Gets Hit with Privacy Suit: A Poem

Posted: 28 Dec 2010 12:27 PM PST

Twas the week after Christmas and all through the land, millions of folks were making merry with iPads in their hands. In their pockets were iPhones, both fresh from the box. This Christmas was the best, they shouted, it really does rock!

But off in the distance they heard a small sound, the noise of a lawsuit slapping Apple around! They're stealing our info, the lawsuit did shout. Leaving folks all to wonder what the fuss was about.

It's the apps, said the lawsuit, they're selling us out, they're smashing our privacy of that there's no doubt. Our names and locations, age, gender and more, if the app companies want it, we should show them the door! Apple can't be allowed to sell our info this way, without our consent and without giving us pay. It's our information and we want it kept quiet, so the court needs to stop them so no one can buy it!

Privacy is important says the lawyers from New York, whether you're Joe the Plumber or that singer named Bjork. So now the court must decide as we broach the new year, whether Apple is liable for harshing our cheer. The lawyers, they claim, it's about protecting our rights, but I say it's a billion dollar settlement that they've got in their sights.

iPads can't be evil, they've got people readin', but then it was the Apple that got man tossed out of Eden.

The Online – Offline Marketing Chasm

Posted: 28 Dec 2010 09:02 AM PST

I just saw a chart from MarketingSherpa that shows the most important objectives of an e-mail campaign. The findings make sense to a point. Here is the chart showing what is deemed most important in descending order.

I was a little surprised at the difference between the most important e-mail objective (to generate revenue) and the idea of e-mail supporting offline marketing programs. It's data like this that should create some serious head-scratching amongst marketing executives.

Why? It's because it shows that the online and offline marketing world are siloed more often than not and that is just bad policy. 25% of the respondents didn’t even think that supporting offline efforts through e-mail was important at all. Huh? Really?! Over the years the Internet marketing community has worked so hard to establish itself that it may be moving toward alienating itself to some degree.

Whether we Internet marketers want to admit it or not there is still a substantial offline marketing world out there that is very effective. One of the great things about the online marketing space is the ability to help make offline channels more efficient and more lucrative. By identifying places where offline marketing spend is being under-utilized or outright wasted we can save money. The areas that are left stand to benefit from the online efforts thus creating a holistic approach to reaching the customer or prospect rather than building fences around the online and offline channels.

If companies are serious that revenue generation is the number one objective for e-mail marketing the idea of supporting every marketing effort, both offline and online, should be a very close second in importance.

Until marketers stop being territorial and actually integrating online and offline efforts fully, success won't be what it could be. That's too bad.

How do you view your offline marketing efforts in relation to your online efforts? Are they mutually exclusive? Are they distant cousins or are they joined at the hip?

Let us know in the comments. Thanks.