Tag

reviews

Browsing

Just let people do their thing, you’ll have more success.

Online user reviews have become an essential tool for consumers who increasingly rely on them to evaluate products and services before purchase. The business models of online review platforms such as Yelp and TripAdvisor, and e-commerce sites such as Amazon and Expedia critically depend on them. Should such sites pay users to encourage them to write reviews?

According to a forthcoming study in the INFORMS journal Marketing Science, a leading academic marketing journal, that is a bad idea. Paying users suppresses the number of reviews on social platforms, especially among those users who are socially well-connected and likely to be more influential.

The study is authored by Yacheng Sun of University of Colorado, and Xiaojing Dong and Shelby McIntyre of Santa Clara University. The authors examine user response from a sample of customers following the introduction of a monetary payment program for user reviews by a social shopping platform in China.

The payment was roughly the equivalent of 25 cents per review in credit for purchases from sellers affiliated with the platform. To the company’s surprise, the number of user reviews declined by over 30 percent in the month after the payment program was introduced, relative to the month before. “The familiar “Law of Supply,” that implies supply increases in response to higher prices, does not seem to hold true when it comes to paying for reviews on a social platform,” said Sun.

The paper explores why reviews drop in response to the monetary payments. The authors conjecture that the drop in reviews could be the result of community members’ concerns that their honest reviews – motivated by an intrinsic motive to either help others with relevant information or to present themselves as knowledgeable about the product or service – may now be interpreted by the community as simply driven by the less honourable extrinsic motivation of making money. If this were true, the drop in user reviews would be greater among users who had more friends on the social network, who could potentially misinterpret the user’s motivation for writing reviews.

The authors empirically test their conjecture by comparing the change in reviewing behaviour among “socialites” (more than five friends on network) against “loners” (no friends on network) after the introduction of the payment scheme. Indeed, the reviews from socialites drop 85 percent, from just over 0.4 reviews a month to just under 0.06 reviews a month. In contrast, the loners who had little to lose in terms of social capital increase their reviews from close to zero to about 0.03 per month. The increase in reviews from the loners however does little to offset the massive drop among the socialites, who are the heavy contributors overall. Hence the aggregate drop of 30 percent.

“Nobody wants to be seen as a paid shill for brands, so the users with more friends and followers, who were likely more influential and wrote more originally, are the ones who stop writing. A real double-whammy,” said Dong.

“Our results support the approach of industry leaders like Yelp or Amazon, who do not compensate for reviews. In fact, they tap into the intrinsic motive for social recognition through status badges for frequent contributors,” said McIntyre. “There may be still ‘under the radar’ ways to pay only the less socially active users for their reviews, but such targeting can be risky as the heavy reviewers may perceive it to be unfair and therefore stop writing reviews, if and when they learn about it.”

The complete paper is available here. 

 

By Nicole Buckler

Singles Day, held in China, is a day where Chinese shoppers go mental, buying themselves all sorts of nice stuff. This is all in aid of cheering themselves up while living the single life. The day is now the biggest day for e-commerce sales in the world.

The celebration for Singles Day held on 11/11 used to celebrate people who were proud to be single. So about those 1s in the date – obviously, single means “1.” But also, the four 1s evoke “bare branches,” the Chinese expression for the unattached. So the day became an anti-Valentine’s day of sorts. It was a self-love day. It was nice. Ahh.

But since the day started out, a lot has happened. There are now lots of single dudes in China. And, they are slowly getting richer. They have Yuan to burn and no one to spend it on but themselves. But let’s not forget the Chinese women too. They are now richer, taking their time to marry, and certainly love a good spend-up. And, if these women can afford it, it is the day where luxury brands get a solid burst of credit card love.

Even up until the Noughties, Singles Day used to be a small celebration. Then Billionaire Jack Ma of Alibaba came along (Alibaba is the Amazon.com of China.) Ma decided that he would do huge promotions around the day and plug it as an online shopping fiesta. And it worked. It is now the biggest online sales event in the world.

People who have gone on to marry have kept buying themselves stuff on Singles Day, jealous of singles and their self-spoiling. Singles Day is now a 24-hour-period where just about every demographic goes utterly mental with their credit cards. And if we don’t adopt it in Europe I was be very distressed. It sounds awesome.

While Alibaba was the first to link Singles’ Day to a shopping craze, plenty of rivals have joined in. Xiu.com is a Chinese luxury e-commerce platform. It just released its sales report for this year’s Singles Day.

So much to buy, so little time…

Here are the sales stats generated via Xiu.com:

Online shoppers born after 1990 have become the leading consumer group in China

Online shoppers aged between 25 and 30 (born between 1987 and 1992) took up the biggest share of Xiu.com’s total sales on this year’s November 11. Purchasing behaviours vary significantly across age groups. Citing a few examples: the favourite fashion brand among women shoppers born in the 2000s was The Kooples, an emerging French street fashion brand featuring a Brit-pop style that, to date, had not yet proven popular in China.

Shoppers born in the 1990s preferred Dolce & Gabbana. Burberry was the top-selling fashion brand among women born in the 1970s and 1980s.

Giuseppe Zanotti was the best-selling shoe brand among male shoppers born in the 1990s and 2000s, while men born in the 1980s preferred Gucci. Men born in the 1960s and 1970s opted overwhelmingly for Prada. Surprisingly, Chanel was the favoured brand among male shoppers born in the 1950s.

Burberry remains the country’s favourite brand

The top selling brands overall were Burberry, Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Prada, Dolce & Gabbana and Chanel.

However, obvious differences existed between different cities. In Beijing, Moncler was the bestselling brand, while in Shanghai, Hermes, which was barely mentioned in other cities, proved to be the best seller. Philipp Plein was favored by Shenzhen buyers, while Emporio Armani sold best in Chongqing.

Male buyers spend more in fashion field

This year saw a huge increase in the average sale among men for fashion items, outspending the women. Male shoppers preferred the casual style of Armani Jeans and the avant-garde fashion style of Philipp Plein, while women remained with traditional luxury brands represented by Valentino, Dior and Chanel.

Beijing is where most of the shoppers are

Beijing ranked first on Xiu.com’s list of the top 20 Chinese cities in terms of sales during the one-day event, followed by Shanghai, Shenzhen and Chengdu.

The overall results showed that while there were more luxury-item shoppers in the bigger cities, people from smaller towns spent more per person, although there were fewer of them. So this seems to show that there is more money in bigger cities, which seems to be true of every country in the world.

If we can learn anything from this, it is that European luxury brands are killing it in China. And, that we must institute Singles Day here at once, people. Let’s get on it!

Mistakes are part of digital marketing. What’s important, however, is making sure you’re avoiding preventable mistakes that could kill your campaign.

When it comes to digital marketing, mistakes are all but guaranteed to happen. After all, marketing your company is very much a process of trial and error.

The key, however, is minimising the impact of these mistakes and avoiding those you shouldn’t be making in the first place. Of course, this is much easier said than done, especially for businesses, many of whom still practice and believe in many traditional marketing techniques.

Not that there’s anything wrong with keeping things classic, but there’s no denying that traditional marketing – even “traditional guerrilla marketing”– is sometimes completely different from internet marketing.

And this is where mistakes often happen. Writing for Inc., Neil Patel notes, “These mistakes cost money, traffic opportunity, and growth. Unfortunately, marketers make these mistakes because they fail to truly understand how to leverage their skills and improve their approach.”

Digital marketing requires a significant investment in terms of time and resources. The last thing you want to do is to waste your efforts doing things that are taking your online presence farther away from your goals.

Here are some of the most common digital marketing mistakes your company might be guilty of making.

Marketing Without any Goals

If you’re writing on your blog or posting on social media without any real goals, you might as well as be wandering around aimlessly on the internet. One of the most common mistakes many digital marketers make is not setting any goals before launching their campaign.

Goals are critical for evaluating the success of your digital marketing efforts, whether it’s in the context of sales, sign ups (for newsletters), messages, or phone calls.

“Goal setting is the backbone of marketing. Goals help us prove how effective we are, keep us focused and push us to succeed,” says Amber Klein of Hive Digital Strategy. “And while we know how important goals are to measure our success, more than 80% of small business owners do not keep track of their business goals.”

With no goals, you have no direction. With no direction, you have no way of knowing your campaign is successful. And if you don’t have benchmarks for success/failure, what’s the point of marketing your business?

You Don’t Know Who Your Audience Is

Marketing your small business on the internet is one thing, but all you are doing is wasting time and resources if you do not know whom you’re reaching out to.

It’s not enough to just say “potential clients,” because that could mean anyone.

Even if you’re creating insightful killer content, you’re only setting yourself up to fail if you’re not promoting your content to the right audience at the right time. Chances are your niche is already saturated with content, making it difficult to stand out.

The trick is figuring out just whom you want to market to.

“Identifying your target audience is the first step in any type of marketing endeavour,” says Neil Patel in a Forbes write-up. “Tragically, it’s also easy to overlook. Don’t make this mistake. Study your audience, and much of your marketing will take care of itself.”

The most basic way to understand your audience is by creating buyer personas – semi-fictional representations of your ideal customer/client, complete with personal descriptions as well as behaviours.

You’re Not Putting Your Customers First

Many marketing teams make the mistake of boxing themselves inside echo chambers, where all they do is strategise and plan about things they like, but not so much the things their customers actually do.

This rookie mistake is something you can easily avoid if you focus your entire campaign on putting your customers first.

At its core, digital marketing is about doing the following:

  • Attracting
  • Engaging
  • Educating
  • Nurturing
  • Converting
  • Retaining

And naturally, all these things involve your customers. The experience you provide must be tailored to their needs and preferences, which fortunately you can know through data analytics and engagement evaluation. To put it simply, the customer must always come first.

You’re Not Being Social on Social Media

While there are certainly many businesses building a presence on social media, many of them use platforms like Facebook and Twitter not so much to engage their audience, but as a way to simply promote their firms with ad-like content.

This is not what social media is about. Yes, you can broadcast information about yourself, but this should not be your priority. Social media is a way to be social—to interact and engage your audience with genuine dialogue.

In other words, you need to respond to your audience and not just post something and leave them alone in the comments section. Your community will come to respect you more if you genuinely want to build a relationship with them, which can only be a good thing for your firm in the long run.

Conclusion

In summary, the 4 most common mistakes digital marketers make are ignoring the importance of setting goals, failing to understand your audience, not putting your customers first, and misusing social media.

Although it would seem these are ‘no brainer’ mistakes, you would be surprised just how many marketers, even those with quite a bit of experience under their belt, are guilty of making them.

 

Author: Qamar Zaman a Dallas based website conversion expert.

 

 

There’s a whole genre of music that has grown inside the world of gaming. Many now-famous bands got their mainstream breakthrough thanks to this process. So if you have a band, you need to read this.

By Nicole Buckler

The symbiotic relationship between music and video games is now so established that a games studio called Bugbear Entertainment is searching for bands to submit music to them. The winning tunes will be played inside their latest racing game: Wreckfest.

Bugbear Entertainment specialises in action driving. They have been making car games for sixteen years, starting with Rally Trophy. They are best known for the critically acclaimed demolition racing series FlatOut (2004-2007, PC, PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360) and street racing title Ridge Racer Unbounded (2013, PC, PS3, Xbox 360).

As of yesterday, Bugbear are calling for bands everywhere to send in their tunes to accompany gamers while they race and smash the crap out of each other in their latest game. The winning prize is $3,500 and there are nine runner-up prizes of $1,000 per track. But it is not the money that’s the real prize: it is exposure to their gamers that is the real coup. There are hundreds and thousands of them.

The winning music will be featured on games released on Playstation 4, Xbox One and PC. Bands featured in previous Bugbear releases have included upcoming indie bands and household names like Megadeth, Rob Zombie, Fall Out Boy, Audioslave and Skrillex.

So if you have a band, get on it. You can apply here.

Want to check out the competition? You can listen to the other entries here.

This innovative approach to sourcing music is evidence of a growing realisation amongst game designers, that there are thousands of unheard of bands out there. According to Bugbear, “They just need the right chance to have their music heard internationally, and by the right demographic to get to that critical mass of fans to push them to the next level of popularity.”

For more established bands like Megadeth, putting their music inside high-selling video games offers a symbiotic relationship. Gaming studios can promote Megadeth music to their gamers, and Megadeth’s fans might be more open to buying games that have their favourite tunes in it. It’s a match made in cross-promotion heaven.

Bugbear is very interested in getting the sound right for their games, which is why they are letting their gamers cast their votes on the tracks they want to hear while playing the game. Happy customers, more sales. Well, in theory, anyway.

Music has always been a vital part of the gaming experience. The aim of Wreckfest is to create an immersive experience for the player, one where the in-game radio feeds the road rage in all of us. While you can blast your tunes out on your REAL car radio, you can’t smash the crap out of other drivers while doing so. But, in Wreckfest, you can. What’s not to like? Smashing other people up and decent tunes? It’s win-win.

The Wreckfest title will be published soon by THQ Nordic. While it is not yet for sale, you can have a little preview play of it here.

Drivers…start your engines.

An Insta-grandma called “Baddie Winkle” says she has been stealing your man since 1928.

By Nicole Buckler

Hotels.com have got together with a bad-ass granny who calls herself “Baddie Winkle” to encourage people to go travelling (staying in their hotels, of course). Using the hashtag #BadAssBucketList you can follow her adventures and even contribute yourself to the hashtag should you be a granny looking to feel up some prime young beef. I’m only in my 40s and I’m ready to join the squad.

Don’t touch, Weinstein

Baddie is promoting Hotels.com Rewards program, which gives players a one-night freebee in a hotel for every 10 stayed. She says, “I have always wanted to party in London, go to the Moulin Rouge in Paris and watch cheeky volleyball players do their thing on a beach in Brazil!” Now as a micro-influencer, she can unlock the “Perve Level: Brazilian” and other treasures on hotel.com’s dime. Which is nice work if you can get it. All the Insta-grandma has to do is to flit around a number of hotels, staying there and showing fans what she gets up to inside them. Baddie wrote on her Instagram page last week; “I’m international baby!”

International indeed. The 89-year-old microinfluencer even has her own celebrity fans, including Miley Cyrus, Khloe Kardashian and Nicole Richie. Perhaps they will be watching with glee as she mixes rooftop cocktails in NYC, rubs shoulders with NFL players, and helicopters over The Grand Canyon. It’s a tough life, but someone’s Nana has to do it.

Hmmm… slutty but hot.

It’s not just the rather wealthy grandparent market hotel.com are going for. According to the astonishing results of a recent survey, one in five people under 30 have confessed that their travel plans are inspired by their favourite oldies. Who knew that oldies could be travel inspirators? The marketing people at Hotels.com knew. Oh hell yes, they knew.

Damn she’s bad.

Baddie is bringing her granddaughter along on the trip, and this seems to fit in with accusations that millennials are a bunch of home-loving family-stalking squares. The previously-mentioned survey shows that 40 percent of millennials would prefer to complete their bucket lists with their parents or grandparents – that’s more than celebs (11 percent), siblings (28 percent) or on their own (25 percent).

What the….?

One in eight confessed that their gran (or nana) was cooler than them and travelled more than them. I am ashamed of millennials. Stop protesting over stupid crap and go and see the world you wasters!

Squad goals: Polyamory

And for those of us in marketing? Let’s remember that the best micro-influencers might be someone you haven’t considered before. Like grannies in leather dresses. Who are on their way to steal your man. Now would be a good time to panic.

 

Is the world becoming swamped with content?

By MediaStreet Staff Writers

A recent survey by 10Fold has revealed that marketing executives now focus a substantial portion of their budget on creating and constantly delivering new content at an ever-increasing frequency. According to the research findings, nearly one-third of respondents are now producing content daily or hourly.

The report looks at current and planned content marketing budgets, frequency, type, development and measurement of content programs. It found that three-quarters of technology marketers plan to generate three times more content in the next 12 months than they did in the previous year; and 42 percent will spend €250,000 or more in the next 12 months on content.

Measuring the effectiveness of content is still a challenge for marketing executives. But it seems that soliciting customer feedback never goes out of style.

Key Research Findings:

  • Social media, video and webinars are cited as the best content “types” among all respondents
  • Top executives prefer video as a content medium
  • 44 percent of respondents say that lack of domain expertise is the top barrier for creating quality content
  • 99 percent of respondents use third parties to create at least 25 percent of their content
  • 83 percent of respondents report that third party generated content is at least above average
  • 80 percent leverage basic tools (Google Analytics) to track and measure content impact; followed by 60 percent using marketing automation systems

“The marketplace is constantly changing,” said David Gehringer, principal of Dimensional Research. “Based on the results of our research for 10Fold, there is no doubt that there is an insatiable demand among technology companies for content that has technical relevancy and that is delivered in a form, such as video and blogs, that is appealing to their buyers.”

It seems that the saying “content is king” still rings true, for now.

 

A large number of reviews is not a reliable indicator of a product’s quality.

By MediaStreet Staff Writers

When we’re trying to decide which mobile phone case to buy or which hotel room to book, we often rely on the ratings and reviews of others to help us choose. But new research suggests that we tend to use this information in ways that can actually work to our disadvantage.

The findings, published in Psychological Science, indicate that people tend to favour a product that has more reviews, even when it has the same low rating as an alternative product.

“It’s extremely common for websites and apps to display the average score of a product along with the number of reviews. Our research suggests that, in some cases, people might take this information and make systematically bad decisions with it,” says researcher Derek Powell of Stanford University, lead author on the study.

“We found that people were biased toward choosing to purchase more popular products and that this sometimes led them to make very poor decisions,” he explains.

As opportunities to buy products and services online multiply, we have greater access than ever before to huge amounts of first-hand information about users’ experiences.

“We wanted to examine how people use this wealth of information when they make decisions, and specifically how they weigh information about other people’s decisions with information about the outcomes of those decisions,” says Powell.

Looking at actual products available on Amazon.com, Powell and colleagues Jingqi Yu (Indiana University Bloomington), Melissa DeWolf and Keith Holyoak (University of California, Los Angeles) found no relationship between the number of reviews a product had and its average rating. In other words, real-world data show that a large number of reviews is not a reliable indicator of a product’s quality.

With this in mind, the researchers wanted to see how people would actually use review and rating information when choosing a product. In one online experiment, 132 adult participants looked at a series of phone cases, presented in pairs. The participants saw an average user rating and total number of reviews for each phone case and indicated which case in each pair they would buy.

Across various combinations of average rating and number of reviews, participants routinely chose the option with more reviews. This bias was so strong that they often favoured the more-reviewed phone case even when both of the options had low ratings, effectively choosing the product that was, in statistical terms, more likely to be low quality.

A second online experiment that followed the same design and procedure produced similar results.

“By examining a large dataset of reviews from Amazon.com, we were able to build a statistical model of how people should choose products. We found that, faced with a choice between two low-scoring products, one with many reviews and one with few, the statistics say we should actually go for the product with few reviews, since there’s more of a chance it’s not really so bad,” Powell explains. “But participants in our studies did just the opposite: They went for the more popular product, despite the fact that they should’ve been even more certain it was of low quality.”

The researchers found that this pattern of results fit closely with a statistical model based on social inference. That is, people seem to use the number of reviews as shorthand for a product’s popularity, independent of the product’s average rating.

According to Powell, these findings have direct implications for both retailers and consumers:

“Consumers try to use information about other people’s experiences to make good choices, and retailers have an incentive to steer consumers toward products they will be satisfied with,” he says. “Our data suggest that retailers might need to rethink how reviews are presented and consumers might need to do more to educate themselves about how to use reviews to guide their choices.”

 

By Mediastreet staff

People who run companies need to check out what their customers are saying about them online. In the long run this could stop a problem from becoming a total and utter crisis. Here is a perfect example: U.S. bank Wells Fargo.

Last year, the bank was fined a whopping $185 million in fines for bad business practices. However if they had started looking at what customers were saying about them long before the excrement hit the fan, they would have avoided the fines and kept their rather okay reputation.

Here’s how the New York Times reported what was happening at the bank over a number of years:

“For years, Wells Fargo employees secretly issued credit cards without a customer’s consent. They created fake email accounts to sign up customers for online banking services. They set up sham accounts that customers learned about only after they started accumulating fees.  These illegal banking practices cost Wells Fargo $185 million in fines, including a $1oo million penalty from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the largest such penalty the agency has issued. Federal banking regulators said the practices, which date back to 2011, reflected serious flaws in the internal culture and oversight at Wells Fargo, one of the nation’s largest banks. The bank has fired at least 5,300 employees who were involved.

In all, Wells Fargo employees opened roughly 1.5 million bank accounts and applied for 565,000 credit cards that may not have been authorized by customers, the regulators said in a news conference. The bank has 4o million retail customers.”

According to an analysis completed by customer feedback company ReviewTrackers, customers of Wells Fargo were writing negative reviews about the opening of fake accounts prior to the breaking news in September 2016.

Reviews hinting at these illegal practices were posted as far back as August of 2015 – more than a year before the news broke in the media. This analysis only extends back until August of 2015, however; with further research, it is possible that the reviews might reveal that the fraud was happening for even longer.

The research shows reviews containing negative sentiment from separate dates in August 2015 to December 2016. The following were negative phrases found in the reviews:

– 08/17/15: “wrong fees”

– 08/31/15: “unethical sales tactics”

– 04/09/16: “illogical fees”

– 08/17/16: “hidden fees”

– 09/08/16: “phony customer accounts”

– 09/30/16: “bogus fees”

 

Reviews from Citibank, Bank of America and Chase were included as well. However; these same negative phrases listed above were not found in any of the competitor reviews.

In addition to negative sentiment, the average star rating of Wells Fargo decreased month after month, with a 19.9 percent decrease from August to September 2016.

By looking at their online reviews they could have seen the negative feedback about the fees and used that as an opportunity to immediately correct the situation and save $185 million in fines.

We live during a time dubbed “The Age of the Customer.” Customers are more informed, connected and empowered than ever. For the first time, they are taking the power seat and utilising their voice through online reviews to talk about their experiences. It is a time when brands must acknowledge this shift and use online reviews as an opportunity to connect with their customers. And, in the case of Wells Fargo, to mitigate a large-scale business disaster.

You can hire a company to “listen” for you, like ReviewTrackers. They sell customer feedback software that collects review data from 85+ review sites to surface customer insights that enable brands to listen, comprehend and make data-driven decisions about what their customers truly need or want.

But you don’t necessarily have to hire a company to “listen” for you. But you need to do some listening yourself. Stay on top of feedback and you may stop a small problem from becoming all-out bedlam.