trends

Creepy – Dynamically Targeting Display Ads Based on Items and Pages Viewed

The 3 business projectors I viewed yesterday on NewEgg.com and the one I added to my shopping cart to check the “special” price now appear in a display ad on news site The Guardian.

Where’s “the line?”  When will consumers rise up and say enough is enough and stop allowing advertisers to buy and sell their personal information without their permission for the sake of “targeting” them with more ads.

See also – The Power of Social Media: The Voice of the Consumer Expressed Rapidly and Vigorously Through Social Media. 

 

targeting based on products viewed

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 3rd, 2012 display advertising, trends No Comments

Why Flash is Evil

Why Flash is Evil! Slideshare by Tery Spataro and Augustine Fou, ranks #5 in about 4.7 billion results.
Slideshare

Inline image 1

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 22nd, 2012 news, trends No Comments

Digital Footprint Score ™

UPDATED:  March 5, 2013

luxury hotels Digital Footprint Score March 2013

 

Digital Footprint Score 13.3  (2013, March)

Site: 1) visits per person, 2) pages per visit, 3) Hubspot Marketing Grade

Search: 1) domains linking in, 2) keywords driving traffic, 3) # pages cached

Social: 1) Klout Score, 2) Kred Score, 3) bitly clicks

 

UPDATED:  April 5, 2012

Digital Footprint Score - 2012 April Luxury Hotels

UPDATED: March 16, 2012

The version of the score below is 12.3 (which means year 2012, month 3).

Digital Footprint Score 12.3

 

Site

- Hubspot overall marketing grade, indexed against others in the industry/sector
- pages per visit
- visits per unique user

 

Search

- keywords driving traffic
- sites referring traffic (inbound links)
- # of pages cached by Google

 

Social

- Kred Influence score, indexed against others in the industry/sector
- Kred Outreach score, indexed against others in the industry/sector
- Facebok Fans

 

Mobile

- unique mobile content or mobile version

 

 

 

UPDATED:  April 5, 2011.

The Digital Footprint Score(tm) is a metric that will be published quarterly by the Digital Strategy Institute.

The parameters that go into it are the following – under 4 vectors, 1) site, 2) search, 3) social, and 4) mobile.

The version of the score below is 11.4 (which means year 2011, month 4).

Digital Footprint Score 11.5

Site
- pages per visit
- visits per unique user
Search
- keywords driving traffic
- sites referring traffic (inbound links)

- # of pages cached by Google

Social
- twitter followers
- unique retweeters
- unique mentions of handle

Mobile
- unique mobile content
- mobile app?  (1/0)

Meaningful comparisons are made among brands in the same industry/category, using the raw DFS score. the indexed DFS score can also give directional indication across industries (e.g. which industries as a whole are better in digital than others).

The parameters that go into the score were chosen mainly on the following criteria — that they are easy to obtain, easy to understand, AND straightforward to impact. For example if you have a low pages per visit parameter, then you impact that by adding more content pages to your site.

UPDATE:  March 25, 2011.

Digital Footprint Score 11.4

Site
- pages per visit
- visits per unique user

Search

- sites referring traffic (inbound links)
- keywords driving traffic

Social
- twitter followers
- unique retweeters

Mobile
- excluded in this version

DFS Score for fashion (highest)

Digital Footprint Score 11.4 - Fashion (Highest)

digital footprint score (lowest) fashion

DFS Score for Fashion Brands (lowest scores)


Original Post

The Digital Footprint Score(tm) is a new multi-metric index that helps brand marketers assess their digital marketing activities and compare it in apples-to-apples fashion to other brands in similar categories.

It takes parameters from the following 4 key areas: 1) site, 2) search, 3) social, and 4) mobile. It can be used to inform digital strategy and digital marketing tactics — those tactics will impact these parameters and improve the brand’s digital footprint score.

It is deliberately focused on measurable actions created by users NOT the size of the audience to which the ad was delivered, as in the case of the following 2 old metrics.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_Rating_Point

Gross Rating Point (GRP) is a term used in advertising to measure the size of an audience reached by a specific media vehicle or schedule. It is the product of the percentage of the target audience reached by an advertisement, times the frequency they see it in a given campaign. For example, a TV advertisement that is aired 5 times reaching 50% of the target audience, it would have 250 (GRP = 5 x 50% –) i.e., GRPs = frequency x % reach. To arrive at your total Gross Rating Points, add the individual ratings for each media vehicle you are using. You can also calculate GRP by dividing your gross Impressions by the population base and multiplying the answer by 100. GRPs are also used by broadcasters to sell their advertising space to potential customers.

A related metric is TRP, or Target Rating Point, a measure of the purchased targeted rating points representing an estimate of the component of the targeted audience being reached by an advertisement.

DFS score (digital footprint score)

Digital Footprint Score Trademark

See also – online reputation management

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What’s a CADB? What does CADB stand for?

CADB

Celebrity Amplified Digital Business

Celebrity Accelerated Digital Business

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011 digital strategy, trends No Comments

Prepare for the Era of Area Code Snobbery

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5616122/prepare-for-the-era-of-area-code-snobbery

Prepare for the Era of Area Code SnobberyUnbeknownst to this New Yorker, if you live in the Big Apple and don’t have a 212 area code, you’re a certified nobody. Says one privileged 212-haver: “I don’t pick up 917, 646, and definitely not 347.” Ughhhh.

While Elaine Benes grappled with the difficulties of the non-212 area code years ago, a post on the WSJ’s Metropolis blog explains how the 212 area code is now becoming a status symbol in the New York tech scene, like some really cool New York Foursquare badge. Unsurprisingly, the cool kids at Foursquare are right at the center of 212 mania:

“I had been thinking about it for a long time,” [Foursquare co-founder Naveen] Selvadurai said. After moving to New York from Connecticut, he had to get a new phone and carrier. “I swapped my number to something new – 646 – to match my New York billing address but I really secretly wanted a 212,” he says. “But I never really went after it.”

That is, until Selvadurai noticed that one of his Foursquare employees had a 212 number. When fellow Foursquare co-founder and CEO Dennis Crowley pointed out that Twitter co-founder (and Foursquare angel investor) Jack Dorsey, a California resident, “rolls 212,” Selvadurai had heard enough. (Crowley admits to coveting a 212 himself. “Sure, I’d upgrade. All the cool kids are doing it,” he says.)

The idea here is that a 212 area code signifies your status as a real, old-school New Yorker—one who was around when Times Square was full of sex workers instead of tourists. Of course, that was way before cell phones were around to begin with, so this whole business is pretty silly. One internet dude described its appeal as being akin to that of “fake vintage T-shirts,” which sounds about right. Yet, as the WSJ points out, 212 numbers can fetch up to $2000 on Ebay.

I guess it’s unsurprising, in this era of jockeying for the shortest Twitter handle, to want the coolest cell phone number around. But I think I’m going to start screening 212 calls anyway. [WSJ]

Image credit alq666

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, August 19th, 2010 trends No Comments

Two Social Success Stories – Groupon and FourSquare

Groupon can add the following useful features:

- allow users to request the category, type, or even specific coupons they want — this can generate insights about demand and also tailor the offerings to the individuals; right now, most of the offers are local but are not relevant to me

FourSquare can add relationships with local businesses to offer specials or deals to frequent check-ins or Mayors — down to the specific Starbucks store or local hardware store.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010 analytics, trends No Comments

Interesting Search Observations – chocolate covered cherries vs chocolate covered strawberries

Chocolate covered cherries are more popular (more searched) at Christmas; but chocolate covered strawberries are more popular at Valentines.  By observing what people pull for, we can derive insights that are useful in business strategy, inventory planning, and marketing (by ads around chocolate covered strawberries for valentines but cherries for christmas)

chocolate-cherries-strawberries

Source:  Google External Keyword Tool – Search Volume Trends

via Niall McKinney, uTalk Marketing. At Valentines, women need more help picking gifts (search volume for “gifts for guys” consistently higher every February for the past 5 years). But “gifts for girls” shows dramatically higher volume every Christmas.

gift-for-guys-for-girls

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 3rd, 2009 analytics, trends No Comments

What is Web 3.0? Characteristics of Web 3.0

2009 06 16 What Is Web 3.0

2009 06 16 What Is Web 3.0 – Presentation Transcript

  1. What is Web 3.0? Dr. Augustine Fou June 16, 2009. June 16, 2009.
  2. Evolution of the Internet microprocessor 40 yrs 10 yrs 20 yrs 5 yrs present web internet 2.5 yrs social networks e-commerce 1.5 yrs Web 1.0 Web 2.0 Web 3.0? June 16, 2009.
  3. Evolution of the “Web” content commerce search social networks social content social search social commerce As each stage reaches critical mass, the next stage is tipped into present June 16, 2009.
  4. Key Characteristics present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • Speedy
    • more timely information and more efficient tools to find information
    • Collaborative
    • actions of users amass, police, and prioritize content
    • Trust-worthy
    • users establish trust networks and hone trust radars
    • Content
    • content destination sites and personal portals
    • Search
    • critical mass of content drives need for search engines
    • Commerce
    • commerce goes mainstream; digital goods rise
    • Ubiquitous
    • available at any time, anywhere, through any channel or device
    • Individualized
    • filtered and shared by friends or trust networks
    • Efficient
    • relevant and contextual information findable instantly

June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – retail/shopping present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • what friends bought or want to buy
    • drag-to-share items which friends know friends are looking for
    • item collections
    • value in the aggregation

overstock.com amazon.com FB app: MyFaveThings

    • contextual reviews
    • reviews of reviews
    • what others bought
    • individualized recommendations

June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – social networks present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • aggregates all your online identities
    • syndicates all your updates to all social networks
    • social actions visible to friends
    • trust networks across geography, time, and interests
    • collection of personal homepages

geocities.com facebook.com peoplebrowsr.com June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – restaurant reviews present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • Yelp content vetted through a user’s trust network and individual recommendations made based on situation and need, in real-time
    • user submitted reviews
    • related items based on similarity of user preferences
    • infrequent publication
    • centralized editorial control

zagat‘s yelp need reco for great Italian + GPS + Yelp 5-star Babbo, been there, love it June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – photos present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • real-time, contextual “do you like this knit shirt?”
    • friends give immediate feedback
    • share photos with friends and strangers
    • enable visitors to tag and comment
    • individual albums

kodakgallery.com flickr.com ? June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – real estate present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • information vetted by fellow users, recommended directly an in context
    • listings plus relevant information like school zones, comparable sales, alerts
    • listings based on parameters

corcoran.com streeteasy.com trulia iphone app June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – encyclopedia present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • content is ubiquitous and available through any channel or device
    • trust network proactively forwards relevant info to user who needs it
    • created, updated, and edited (policed) by user actions
    • digitized version of printed encyclopedia

britannica.com wikipedia.com chacha.com June 16, 2009.

  1. Illustrative Examples – online coupons present web 1.0 web 2.0 web 3.0
    • coupons delivered contextually and proactively when user needs it (without the user even asking for it)
    • instant feedback
    • community action makes it more accurate and useful for others
    • collection of online coupons – value in the aggregation

dealcatcher.com retailmenot.com June 16, 2009.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

the overall advertising pie will shrink

the greater efficiencies of “digital” mean that the same amount of “advertising” can be achieved with fewer dollars because more waste can be eliminated. The decreases in ad spending in traditional media channels like newspapers will only be partially replaced by ad spending online.

For example, the dollars that used to fund newspaper classified advertising has been replaced by free online classifieds through Craigslist. While newspapers had incremental costs due to materials, printing, labor, and distribution, online classifieds have virtually no incremental cost.

Similarly print advertising, which was based on targeting ads to specific demographics of readerships are being replaced by online ads which can be more finely targeted to even more niche readerships — e.g. contextual advertising. And the revenue models based around cost per click are inherently more efficient (and thus lower cost) than the impression-based revenue models of magazines. Again for every dollar taken out of print advertising, only a few cents are needed to replace it in “digital.”

100544-ad-spending-by-media

Agree with me or tell me I’m stupid @acfou

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hulu’s superbowl halo

search volume actually stayed up after the Superbowl jump

hulu

Tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009 analytics, SEO, trends No Comments

Dr. Augustine Fou is Digital Consigliere to marketing executives, advising them on digital strategy and Unified Marketing(tm). Dr Fou has over 17 years of in-the-trenches, hands-on experience, which enables him to provide objective, in-depth assessments of their current marketing programs and recommendations for improving business impact and ROI using digital insights.

Augustine Fou portrait
http://twitter.com/acfou
Send Tips: tips@go-digital.net
Digital Strategy Consulting
Dr. Augustine Fou LinkedIn Bio
Digital Marketing Slideshares
The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing