rank
Most Product Reviews On Amazon Are Crap
Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/you-probably-shouldnt-take-amazons-reviews-at-face-value-2012-6
Those glowing reviews you see on Amazon.com aren’t all they’re cracked up to be, according to a study performed last year.
Tech entrepreneur Filip Kesler and Cornell professor Trevor Pinch, found that more than 80 percent of the reviews on the site were positive all because 85 percent of prolific reviewers receive free stuff to review. (Hey, everyone loves a freebie.)
“Amazon’s top reviewers do receive some sort of direct material reward, however small, for their endeavors,” wrote the authors.
This was particularly true in the book realm. Reviewers in the top 1,000 rank told the authors they received a large number of Advance Reading Copies (ARCs) of books from small agencies and self-published authors. Those in the top 500 rank said they received even more, and so it went up the totem pole.
One member of Amazon Vine, the site’s members-only review program, described how his rank attracted more freebies in the study:
“I started getting offers at about rank 800 (Classic Rank). When I got to 500, the offers increased, but I did not get many until I got to about 250. Under 150, it increased some more. At that point is was an average of one offer per week (not including Vine). When my New Rank appeared, placing me in the 50s, I started getting several offers per week, mostly for books.”
For consumers looking for a deal and great products, it might be better to go the old-fashioned route, i.e., asking family and friends for suggestions.
SEE ALSO: Surreal photos of America’s housing crisis >
Please follow Your Money on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »
Why Google Is The Grinch Who Stole Your Business
Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-grinch-who-stole-your-business-2011-12
It’s that time of year when we all reflect on the past, search our souls and determine what we want for the next year. I’ve been reflecting on what it means to work with a company that controls so much of the market, provides such a broad set of capabilities and delivers such a large percentage of monthly revenues to publishers. Of course, I’m thinking of Google and what their dominance in the ad market means for a publisher’s future and its ability to remain relevant to marketers.
What do we know about Google? They are this great company that gives consumers some of the best digital products available on the Web: search, email, maps, Android, apps and more. This has catapulted Google to the rank of second most valuable brand, behind only Apple, according to Millward Brown. This seems to be great for consumers, but what about the businesses who are now reliant on Google for search and display revenue, advertising technology and various business applications like Google docs, Android OS, Chrome, etc.?
Many of the businesses I meet with hold Google in high regard because of the products they represent and the amount of revenue they provide. However, these businesses are equally concerned about Google’s consumer stranglehold, their influence over the ad ecosystem and their focus on automation, all of which lessens the publishers’ worth in the value chain as a whole. Google’s market dominance stretches well beyond search, which in itself is obviously enormous. This expansive dominance should be alarming for every marketing-related business, including publishers, advertisers and agency and marketing services technologies. Here are a few stats on Google by category that will likely frighten even the largest of these businesses:
- 65.38% Share of Search, Oct-11 Hitwise
- 44.1% Share of Ad revenue, Oct-11 PCMag
- 43.8% Share for Video, Oct-11 Comsccore
- 30.03% Share for Travel, Oct-11 Comscore
- 22.38% Share for Automotive, Oct-11 Comscore
- 18.69% Share for Shopping, Oct-11 Comscore
- 16.29% Share for Health, Oct-11 Comscore
If these stats weren’t enough to dampen your holiday spirit, Google now is even prioritizing their own products above the paid search listings on their search engine. This creates a major conflict for the advertisers that have made Google what it is today and may force those clients to pay even more if their advertising is to remain competitive in this new bidding landscape. Google clearly is leveraging its position of power with consumers to launch new products and ensure their own success. The latest example of this is the promotion of their Chrome browser on the Google homepage. As you can see from the chart below, Chrome is rocketing to the position of #1 browser, a rank it is projected to achieve by June 2012.
Google is now a major threat to every business in the publishing and advertising marketplace. In the short term, while they may appear to be a superior partner that provides revenue and marketing innovation, I believe that over the long term they are eroding the value of each and every business in the media sales and publishing value chain. And, worst of all, they are charging heavily for the privilege. I’d estimate that for every dollar spent by an advertiser in the media buying process, Google captures upwards of 25% in tolls (via their various ad services, DFA, Invite, DFP, AdX, Motif, Admeld, etc.), thereby minimizing revenue and profits for publishers and other vendors along the way
So as you reflect on 2011 and consider whom you want to partner with in 2012, give some thought to the short versus the long term. What is your value proposition to clients? And who do you ultimately want to run your business … the Grinch or You?
Have a great holiday and Happy New Year!
The views expressed here reflect the views of the author alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of 24/7 Real Media, its affiliates, subsidiaries or its parent company, WPP plc
Please follow Advertising on Twitter and Facebook.
Join the conversation about this story »
See Also:
- Advertising Firms Need To Be Downsized Before They Become Too Dumb For Their Own Good
- Why Is Windows Phone Failing?
- America’s Dirty Little Housing Secret Is Rocking The Suburbs
—
drag2share – drag and drop RSS news items on your email contacts to share (click SEE DEMO)
Nielsen IAG Top Ten Most-Recalled In-Program Placements: Dramas/Comedies
Sex sells … well, sex .. but not much else. Victoria’s Secret was the most recalled product placement on TV — fortunately they sell products related to what was recalled. Not so sure about the mayo and cell phone.
Source: http://adage.com/madisonandvine/article?article_id=143808
![]() |
||||
Rank | Brand | In-Program Placement Description | Program Airing Info | Recall Index |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Victoria’s Secret | Michael interrupts meeting to offer Donna a retail store’s catalog | The Office (NBC, Apr 29) | 214 |
2 | Ford | Cole Austin points to his Mustang and says he still owns it | Cold Case (CBS, May 2) | 190 |
3 | Skype | Joyce tells Benson and Stabler that she talks to Andrew online | Law and Order: SVU (NBC, Apr 7) | 183 |
4 | Yamaha | Susan explains to Mike that she has inherited a piano | Desperate Housewives (ABC, May 2) | 181 |
5 | Rolex | Provo tells Fin that Jack stole his watch; member of the cooking staff is wearing it | Law and Order: SVU (NBC, Apr 7) | 178 |
6 | MedTec | Name is visible on the ambulance doors | Trauma (NBC, Apr 5) | 176 |
7 | Toyota | Mitchell and Cameron park their car at Charlie’s house | Modern Family (ABC, Apr 14) | 161 |
8 | Chevrolet | Winston drives with Guerrero, who identifies the car as a Camaro | Human Target (FOX, Apr 7) | 155 |
9 | Porsche | Zack asks Nick where he got his car from | Accidentally On Purpose (CBS, Apr 21) | 152 |
10 | Chevrolet | Pres. Hasaan rides in a black SUV after turning himself over to terrorists | 24 (FOX, Apr 5) | 147 |
The numbers vary depending on who you ask or whose data you use
Bing search volume continues to drop despite tons of ads and cheating — redirecting traffic from live.com, msn.com, microsoft.com, and windows search (see also – http://bit.ly/7qDBEz) .
The Nielsen Company today reported December 2009 data for the top U.S. Search Providers.
MegaView Search data – including total searches, unique searchers, search share, and all other search figures – cannot be trended with search results prior to October 2009 due to recent methodology changes.
Searches represent the total number of queries conducted at the provider. Example: An estimated 6.7 billion search queries were conducted at Google Search, representing 67.3 percent of all search queries conducted during the given time period.
versus Oct 2009 numbers from hitwise
Occasions and Holidays Drive Movie Box Office Sales, Not Advertising
Taking the top box office results for each of 52 weekends from the past 10 complete years (1998 – 2008; Source: IMDB.com) we see consistently that occasions like Valentines, Memorial Day, July 4th, and Thanksgiving show increased movie going activity. People have more time during these holidays to go to the movies and Valentines is a date+movie occasion. Also, during the summer, many people go to the movie theatre to escape the heat so there is an overall hump every year during the summer months — from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
People go out during Valentines, Memorial Day, July 4th, and Thanksgiving. And they still spend what they planned to spend — 2 tickets for movie — they didn’t buy 2 more tickets and see a second movie on the same date or holiday weekend. If they had several good movies to choose from (often, they don’t), they would choose to spend the finite dollars on the one movie they really wanted to see. The overall movie spending “pie” did not increase much, if any, year over year.
1998 $4,055,194,733 n/a
1999 $4,253,601,768 5%
2000 $4,496,554,005 6%
2001 $5,003,433,737 11%
2002 $5,489,974,199 10%
2003 $5,581,797,720 2%
2004 $ 5,697,299,530 2%
2005 $ 5,524,566,579 -3%
2006 $ 5,660,826,625 +2%
2007 $ 5,968,027,963 +5%
2008 $ 5,887,193,490 -1%
The chart below shows a red line which is the average of all 10 years. The 10 thin blue lines are the annual lines from1998 – 2008, inclusive and these are plotted as actual dollars. They come out right on top of each other.
Movie advertising, which runs into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year, has failed to noticeably increase the overall spending year-round or even during specific times. The chart below shows the differentials (difference between an annual line and the 10-yr average line). These all hover closely in the +$50M and -$50M band. The amplitude of the 10-yr average (red line) is larger than $50M in the summer hump — implying that the average change in movie ticket sales due to normal seasonality is larger than the change in amplitude caused by ALL movie advertising combined.
And the summer “hump” is due to actual demand (people going out to movie theatres, some to escape the heat) not due to advertising. The only effect of advertising is to share-shift from one movie to another — the total spending remains consistent and even seasonal variations are consistent — a “zero-sum game.”
All-Time USA Box office
Source: IMDB.com
Rank | Title | USA Box Office |
1. | Titanic (1997) | $600,779,824 |
2. | The Dark Knight (2008) | $533,316,061 |
3. | Star Wars (1977) | $460,935,665 |
4. | Shrek 2 (2004) | $436,471,036 |
5. | E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) | $434,949,459 |
6. | Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace(1999) | $431,065,444 |
7. | Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (2006) | $423,032,628 |
8. | Spider-Man (2002) | $403,706,375 |
9. | Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith (2005) | $380,262,555 |
10. | The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King(2003) | $377,019,252 |
11. | Spider-Man 2 (2004) | $373,377,893 |
12. | The Passion of the Christ (2004) | $370,270,943 |
13. | Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) | $367,614,540 |
14. | Jurassic Park (1993) | $356,784,000 |
15. | The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) | $340,478,898 |
16. | Finding Nemo (2003) | $339,714,367 |
17. | Spider-Man 3 (2007) | $336,530,303 |
18. | Forrest Gump (1994) | $329,691,196 |
19. | The Lion King (1994) | $328,423,001 |
20. | Shrek the Third (2007) | $320,706,665 |
21. | Transformers (2007) | $318,759,914 |
22. | Iron Man (2008) | $318,298,180 |
23. | Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (2001) | $317,557,891 |
24. | Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull(2008) | $317,011,114 |
25. | The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring(2001) | $313,837,577 |
Digital Consigliere
Collaborators – Digital Profs
Pages
Popular Posts
- The JKWeddingDance video was real; the viral effect was MANUFACTURED - Post 1 of 2
- What is Web 3.0? Characteristics of Web 3.0
- Samsung 52 inch HDTV $9.99 at BestBuy - purchase receipt below (6:21a eastern time August 12, 2009)
- Facebook advertising metrics and benchmarks
- The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing(tm) - Digital String Theory
- Marketing Costs Normalized to CPM Basis for Comparison
- Digital Footprint Score (tm)
- Social Media Is Changing How Supply And Demand Works For Big Brands
- Netflix vs Blockbuster - Perfect example of an industry replaced by a more efficient version of itself
Tags
Prototype Web Services
- drag2share – quickly share news items by drag and drop on email addresses
- LivePhotoFrame – upload and remotely manage a digital photo frame via unique URL
- MedleyTuner – create a continuous listening experience by uploading mp3s
- MusicSamplr – discover new artists and music, listen to samples
- SharedMost – what links on ANY webpage are shared most?
- Signatory – sign and date a document and verify it hasn't been altered since that exact time.
- WebTeleprompter – just what it says it is
Archives
- February 2016 (2)
- January 2016 (6)
- October 2015 (2)
- September 2015 (7)
- August 2015 (6)
- July 2015 (2)
- June 2015 (5)
- May 2015 (4)
- April 2015 (32)
- March 2015 (57)
- February 2015 (79)
- January 2015 (86)
- December 2014 (69)
- November 2014 (98)
- October 2014 (150)
- September 2014 (109)
- August 2014 (44)
- July 2014 (92)
- June 2014 (118)
- May 2014 (173)
- April 2014 (130)
- March 2014 (247)
- February 2014 (167)
- January 2014 (222)
- December 2013 (167)
- November 2013 (111)
- October 2013 (116)
- September 2013 (214)
- August 2013 (210)
- July 2013 (200)
- June 2013 (87)
- May 2013 (87)
- April 2013 (70)
- March 2013 (114)
- February 2013 (89)
- January 2013 (136)
- December 2012 (96)
- November 2012 (130)
- October 2012 (147)
- September 2012 (93)
- August 2012 (93)
- July 2012 (112)
- June 2012 (71)
- May 2012 (82)
- April 2012 (80)
- March 2012 (122)
- February 2012 (114)
- January 2012 (129)
- December 2011 (60)
- November 2011 (54)
- October 2011 (29)
- September 2011 (17)
- August 2011 (30)
- July 2011 (18)
- June 2011 (19)
- May 2011 (22)
- April 2011 (23)
- March 2011 (52)
- February 2011 (69)
- January 2011 (108)
- December 2010 (82)
- November 2010 (67)
- October 2010 (68)
- September 2010 (44)
- August 2010 (101)
- July 2010 (61)
- June 2010 (28)
- May 2010 (28)
- April 2010 (26)
- March 2010 (33)
- February 2010 (21)
- January 2010 (13)
- December 2009 (4)
- November 2009 (2)
- October 2009 (14)
- September 2009 (6)
- August 2009 (19)
- July 2009 (34)
- June 2009 (11)
- May 2009 (4)
- April 2009 (6)
- March 2009 (13)
- February 2009 (32)
- January 2009 (25)
- December 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (1)
- June 2008 (1)
- November 2007 (1)