3 Facebook Flyers Advantages vs. Google AdWords

Facebook Flyers Google Adwords
With Google netting over $1 billion in profits per quarter, obviously the Google AdWords program that provides ads contextualized to search terms is highly effective for marketers. In a previous post I discussed how the Facebook Flyers program may give Google a run for some of that money.

It’s not that I see AdWords spending declining, but as marketers move their advertising away from TV and into web-based vehicles, I see Facebook having potential to capture a nice chunk of that growth. Google’s program, being based on search, means people are looking for something in particular and are inclined to click some link to go to some other web site. As Alec Saunders says, there is more likely to be an intent to buy, which may “bias advertisers in favor of Google Adwords.”

I think they should be biased in favor of Google Adwords. It’s obviously a great business that’s already working. In Facebook, people are focused on their networking, not looking for someplace else to go.

But Facebook Flyers do have at least three significant advantages that could lead to them being successful in grabbing a nice share of online advertising revenue.

First, Facebook has no external incentives for Click Fraud.

With Google’s Adsense program, by contrast, people who have Google ads on their site have a financial incentive to participate in click-fraud rings.

For example, if Arnold runs up clicks on the Google ads on Bob’s site, and Bob clicks on Google ads on Carl’s site, and Carl clicks on Arnold’s Google ads, the only losers are the advertisers. Arnold, Bob, Carl and Google all share the proceeds from the extra clicks. Google claims to be cracking down on click fraud to protect the viability of its pay-per-click model, but its partner sites have powerful incentives to pile on extra clicks.

With Facebook Flyers, the people on whose profiles the ads appear don’t share in the revenue. Facebook is the only beneficiary of the clicks, so no one else has any incentive for click fraud. And if Facebook employees run up the clicks, it will only hurt the long-term viability of the Flyers program.

Google has to pay the site owners to have its ads included. Facebook owns the site where lots of people are spending lots of time. Some people say companies are factoring click fraud into the price of their Adwords bids. Probably so. But even if the click-through rate is low, if the clicks are more likely to be real, this gives Facebook a major advantage.

Second, Facebook has a huge amount of demographic data about its users.

It’s great for Google to bring up ads related to a keyword search, when someone is out looking for a particular product. But in Facebook, particularly as its keyword targeting becomes more sophisticated, it should be possible in some cases to serve ads to people before they know they want something. That’s what Amazon does with its book recommendations. I don’t know whether my wedding video flyers targeted to engaged women in my local community will work or not (I probably need to raise my per-click bid above $.10), but if my ad shows up before the brides-to-be think to use Google to search for video and photography services, Facebook might beat Google to the Altar.

Third, less competition for Facebook Flyers may mean lower per-click rates than what you find with Google.

Everyone is using Google, so they are bidding up the price on keywords. The Facebook Flyers program is newer, so you may have a better chance of getting clicks at a lower price, at least until it becomes widely perceived that this is a worthwhile advertising platform. So there is an early adopter advantage here.

And if no one clicks your ads, you’re not out anything.

On the other hand, the Facebook Flyers are limited to one per page, so the inventory to sell may not be as big, which may drive up the price you need to pay to have your flyer seen. The engaged women I’m seeing as potential customers may also be college students, and a company offering used textbooks online may be bidding to have its flyers displayed to the same people.

And of course, Facebook has its Flyers Basic program, on which you pay for display instead of paying per click. If Facebook has a choice of getting a guaranteed $0.002 for each flyer it serves, as opposed to $.10 per click, it may make sense to bias toward the guaranteed revenue. The break-even for Facebook in the PPC program, at $.10 per click, is a 2 percent click-through. (So yeah, I definitely need to raise my bid.)

I’ll keep you posted on what I learn, and will appreciate hearing any examples of Facebook Flyers success you have.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , , , , ,

Facebook PPC Marketing: The Next eBay?

Facebook PPC marketing
Facebook‘s new pay-per-click (PPC) advertising program through Facebook Flyers Pro looks like it could be a strong rival to Google’s Adsense program. It’s really easy to use, as I discovered tonight. You might want to try it, too.

I think it might be the next eBay, creating broad-based marketing opportunities, especially for home-based businesses.

Think about what kinds of people are most likely to appreciate your company’s products or services. Then go to the Flyers Pro page and enter those demographics in the search fields, and you’ll get a feel for how many potential customers you can reach through Facebook PPC.

For example, I decided to check out how many married Canadian men ages 39-41 are in Facebook, and here’s what I found:

Canadian Men

I have no idea what kind of product someone might want to try to sell to that demographic.

But with Facebook, you could.

So then I got to thinking, “What if I was promoting a concert in Minneapolis for, say, Lionel Richie? How many people could I reach?”

Lionel Richie

Maybe in this case, promoting through an all-80s radio station would be a better approach. But if I were marketing Lionel Richie memorabilia nationally, I could advertise via PPC Facebook flyers to about 6,640 of his fans.

I think for some products and services, Facebook Flyers could enable a version of what David’s Bridal calls, “Lifestage marketing.” The idea is to understand what services people might be needing based on where they are in life, and putting information in their path that they might find valuable.

So I’m giving it a try with the fledgling wedding photography and video service my brother Mark and I are exploring. It started with my daughter Rachel’s wedding (She met her husband, Kyle, on Facebook. He says they actually met at Caribou Coffee, but that was only after they had arranged the meeting through Facebook.)

Anyway, Mark is a photography buff, and I enjoy making videos, so for Rachel and Kyle’s wedding Mark took lots of candid shots and I worked with a friend to get several video angles on the ceremony and reception. I did a 10-minute highlight video of the vows, and we got prints of Mark’s several hundred photos. Given the cost of most professional photography, and the reprint restrictions most photographers place on the photos, we thought there might be some couples that would appreciate being able to pay a flat rate and then own all of the photos and footage.

Since then, I’ve shot video at a couple more weddings (although I still have to edit the second, and I still owe Rachel and Kyle their full-length Director’s Cut version). Mark has a great job, and so do I, but we’re thinking this might make some nice weekend work. And maybe we can train our sons to do this, too, which would be a good way for them to work their way through college.

So I created an Aase Wedding Photography and Video Facebook group (go ahead and click that link: it’s not costing me anything!), where I uploaded a sample video and some photos. And then I created the Facebook flyer you see above. But instead of paying for how many times it is displayed, now I can pay per click. I’m targeting about 960 engaged women over age 19 in Rochester, MN. Maybe later we could expand the flyer run to elsewhere in Minnesota, Iowa or Wisconsin, but we wouldn’t want to travel beyond those states.

Facebook PPC
I just created the ad tonight, so I don’t know how well it will work. I may need to raise my bid level to get it shown. But the fun part is that I can experiment, and it isn’t make-or-break for my livelihood. Mark and I don’t need the wedding work. But it might make a nice family business.

I’ll let you know what I learn through this experiment.

Do you have a story to tell of your experience with advertising through Facebook Flyers? I’d love to hear it.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Priceline Music


Sometimes the juxtaposition of news events is, as one of the major credit card companies says, “Priceless.” This is one of those times.

In TechCrunch, Erick Schonfeld put it well when he said “Court Victory for Music Labels Won’t Save Their Industry” in regard to the RIAA winning its first copyright infringement case to go to trial, and getting a $220,000 jury verdict against a Minnesota woman.

Over the past four years, the RIAA has sued 26,000 of its customers, but it won’t get the same windfall from all of those cases, since most settle for about $4,000. This was the first to go to trial. So the verdict (if it is not reduced on appeal) sets an important precedent. All the music industry needs to do now is win another 52,000 lawsuits with the same size penalty to match its revenues of $11.5 billion last year.

Someone should create some software for the RIAA that automates the serving of subpoenas, because they really have to step up their efforts if they want to save their industry. Or, the industry can spend its time and money trying to find new business models that encourage and profit from the way people actually listen to music today—on their ipods, streaming from the Web, shared among friends and peers. As music goes digital, it becomes more fungible. People are going to do with it what they want because they can. The law may be on the RIAA’s side, but the market is against it.

But while the RIAA anchors its hopes on the deterrent effect of lawsuits, recording artists are dropping the record labels like, well, an anchor. Two days after Schonfeld’s post, the UK Sunday Times Online reported that Radiohead had developed a Priceline-esque “name your own price” model for its newest album.

Having waited four years for their heroes to finish another record, Radiohead fans were understandably excited last week to learn that the band’s seventh album, In Rainbows, will finally be released on Wednesday. But what really rocked the fanbase – and heightened the air of gloom enveloping the global record industry – was the news that In Rainbows could be preordered and downloaded perfectly legally for as little as 1p at Radio-head.com.

Currently out of contract and thus entitled to dispose of their recordings as they see fit, one of the most popular bands in the world had decided to let the fans decide how much their latest album was worth. An MP3 file of In Rainbows would have no price tag. Honesty boxes, it seemed, were the new rock’n’roll.

And the very next day TechCrunch reported that the record industry’s coffin is being sealed Nine Inch Nails.

Nine Inch Nail’s Trent Reznor wrote on the NIN site that the writing is on the wall for the traditional music distribution model, saying that the music business has radically mutated from one thing to something inherently very different today and that “it gives me great pleasure to be able to finally have a direct relationship with the audience as i see fit and appropriate.”

As the incremental cost of providing the goods or services approaches zero, free can actually be a compelling business model. Especially if the fixed costs aren’t that high.

That’s why bands are ditching the record labels’ scarcity model and going for a more direct relationship with their fans. Once they’ve recorded a song and converted to mp3, the cost of letting people download it is almost zero. So they can put their fans on the honor system with a “name your own price” proposition. And that way, they create more goodwill and find more fans, because the promotional value of having their songs widely distributed far outweighs what they can get by restricting access and attempting to charge premium prices.

It’s much better to attract bigger crowds for concert, to sell more souvenir T-shirts and otherwise profit from an expanding fan base.

The music label model worked when fans had few options for hearing new music (FCC-limited radio station licenses.) Now, with the web enabling anyone to distribute music directly to consumers, the value added by the labels is declining. Sure, they have promotional power, just as the mainstream media do. Both mainstream media and music labels are still the biggest things going. Most artists would love to have a recording contract with a label, and mainstream media enable you to reach a mass audience to which only the most contagious viral phenomena can spread.

But just as the mainstream media have lost their oligopoly and therefore are seeing continual declines in audience and circulation, so will the music labels see their market share dwindle in the new world of democratized media.
TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , ,

Microsoft PR Measurement

microsoft PR measurement
This morning at the IPR Measurement Summit we are hearing from Microsoft’s Chris Frank, Senior Director for Corporate Market Research. His co-presenter is Andrew Bernstein from Cymfony.

Chris saw the challenge that there is lots of counting, but not enough evaluating. There is no weighting of the massive coverage. He said Microsoft is the most written-about company in the world. They had too much output, but not enough study of outcomes.

Microsoft’s objective was to Develop a consistent, global measurement system to assess effectiveness and impact of PR.

…built on a framework of a set of common metrics

…along with competitive benchmarks to provide

…learning to reinvent the PR discipline globally.

PR turned to Market Research because they wanted an outside team to develop a new standard. They wanted rigorous quantitative background, and a neutral third party to develop the system.

They aren’t tying it yet to reputation data or to the bottom line, but are starting with baby steps. They do a global image measurement study, and government elite study, but they aren’t trying to connect yet.

The system also needed to take into account the increasing role of digital marketing, and roll it all into one number, the PR Index Scoring Model. They boiled it down from a blizzard of 17 factors into six that would be components of the one score.

Buzz – quantity/volume of coverage. Am I being talked about? Am I being talked about by the people I most want talking about me?
Advocacy – is the opinion embedded in the buzz. How am I being judged on the attributes I care about? What course of action is being advocated? For example, Walt Mossberg reviewing Windows Vista advised readers to wait for service pack 1.

Steps of the Microsoft process:

  • Define topic & Geo
  • Assess Buzz levels
  • Evaluate Advocacy
  • Score PR Effectiveness

PR Score = Number of impressions x influence of publication/author (between 0.0 and 1.0) x score on advocacy dimension measured (between -1 and 1)

Challenges:

  • Developing methodology – Defining the variables of the scoring system: How do you weight each variable?
  • Cost efficiencies – What has been don to make more efficient?
  • Segmentation of information – Microsoft one of the most talked-about brands in the world. How do you take an enormous amount of coverage and data and make sense of it?

Microsoft only rolled out this program October 1 (last Sunday), so they don’t have any real results to show yet for this scoring system, but it’s interesting to hear the PR measurement direction a company that has virtually unlimited resources is taking.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , , , ,

Free Copywriting Seminar from a Crook

I have a debt to pay, so I need to tell you about a free copywriting seminar.

I wrote in an earlier post about some free book offers, (PDFs and audio files), and how that is a growing trend. I’ll have more reflections on that trend in a related post soon, but first I need to share another of those offers.

I saw another example yesterday on Lee Hopkins’ Better Communication Results blog, via his link from Walter Jennings’ blogroll. I had heard Lee (gotta like the name) previously on the For Immediate Release podcast, where he’s a regular contributor. Walter and I met (sort of) at the Page Society conference in California last week (we actually met via our blogs and Facebook afterwards.)

Free Seminar copywriting
The other Lee had an interesting post about a 10-hour copywriting seminar Trevor Crook formerly offered at $197, but which he is now giving away for free from his web site. I did it and started listening, and as Mr. Hopkins puts it, “Blimey, they’re good!”

All Trevor asks is that you pass the offer along to at least three friends (Oh, and you have to give him your email address, too.) Here’s the suggested text for an email to my friends that he sent with the download link:

What if I did you a favor, something big, something powerful and
proven to help you grow your business which you would usually have
to pay for and instead of paying for it, you simply pay it forward
to 3 more people as full ‘payment’.

You may think there’s a catch.

No, there isn’t. World class copywriter, Trevor Crook gave me his
10 hours of Copywriting Blueprint audios, his proven blueprint for
creating compelling sales copy and letters which he usually sells
for $197.

Trevor gave it to me as a favor because he has started a
revolution to help one million entrepreneurs in the next 30 days
and you and get a brilliant gift to help you get more sales plus
you can help change history at the same time.

You do not have to buy anything. There’s no gimmicks.

Too may people want to ‘take’ in today’s world instead of giving
and this is a recipe for a complete disaster.

When you understand the ‘Laws of Reciprocation’ like I do, you will
understand how much your life will change when you give freely
of yourself without any thoughts of getting anything back in return.

The sound quality on these isn’t great, but the content is really good. In the first session, for example, he focuses on the most important priority for successful sales copywriting, which is honing the offer: developing a compelling value proposition for your potential customers.

He’s putting that tip into practice, offering this seminar at an unbeatable price. Obviously, he’s betting that people who have heard his seminars will want to either engage him as a speaker, consultant or copywriter, or will want to buy some of his other products later.

So, instead of sending this in an email to a few targeted friends, I’m doing like Lee H and linking to it from my blog. I’m also posting it on my Facebook profile.

You may be asking, “Why would I want a teleseminar from a direct mail copywriter?” But that’s just like the problem I’ve been describing with how too many people see social media tools; they fail to think creatively about how Facebook or Twitter or MySpace can help them achieve business goals.

Even if you’re not in the direct marketing business, you’re probably selling your ideas in some way. Take the lessons you learn from Mr. Crook (admittedly not exactly the best name for someone in the mail order sales biz) and see how you can apply the concepts to your situation.

I’m going to continue listening, and hopefully Trevor’s tips will make my blog posts more compelling, too.

You’ll have to let me know whether it’s working, but remember: I’m only on the third lesson.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , , , , ,