From the Compete charts below, it is clear that Facebook is seeing a decline in pageviews, average stay, and pages per visit. But why?
I know that I have reduced the time I spend on Facebook and I have also reduced the number of messages and other social actions as well. And I have deleted virtually all of my personal and family photos and will not upload any more. These may be the first signs of a waning of Facebook due to a number of factors.
I can’t get my stuff back out
For example, Facebook has stated that it will not participate in OpenSocial because they do not want people to be able to export their content, conversations, photos, etc, out of Facebook and use on another social network. I am concerned that I will not be able to retrieve or back up content which I believe is mine. I like to have control over my family photos, conversations with friends, etc. I am willing to accept as a “cost” of using the Facebook system the fact that they know who my friends are. But I am less willing or unwilling to continue putting my content where I cannot get it back, in its entirety. (Google Docs, for example, just launched a feature where you can back up everything back out of Google Docs into Microsoft Office formats).
Ads in the stream, erosion of trust
A second issue mentioned in a previous post is the increase in advertising on Facebook and also the more unscrupulous practice of injecting ads “into the stream” — ads masquerading as status updates. These are harmful to the overall trust built up in the community and I have un-friended quite a few people whose accounts were clearly used to promote events, products, etc.
Ad-effectiveness sucks
From a prior post – http://bit.ly/EhiW9 – Facebook advertising metric are absolutely abysmal. They keep trying to sell advertisers on the hundreds of billions of pageviews they throw off. But advertisers are getting smarter and more and more of them will buy ads on a cost-per-click basis (instead of CPM, cost per thousand impressions basis). This means that the ad revenues that Facebook enjoyed from gross INefficiencies will be decimated.
2009 06 16 What Is Web 3.0 – Presentation Transcript
What is Web 3.0? Dr. Augustine Fou June 16, 2009. June 16, 2009.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
As a scientist, I like to run experiments. And I like to make stuff. So my team and I made a few Facebook apps that solved needs that we had (a few samples listed below) and shared them publicly on Facebook to see if they were also useful to other people too.
I beta tested some apps with a few friends by inviting them directly. Then to get it out to a larger number of people, we decided to try Facebook advertising, the much-hyped, holy grail of display advertising on one of the largest and most active social networks.
- social commerce – I’ll buy what he bought; things I have, things I want
But what I found was eye-opening to say the least. Despite the potential of social ads where the social actions of your circle of friends could make the ads more targeted, none of the anticipated positive effects were observed. Despite the promise of mass reach, there was not the corresponding attention or clicks. And despite the use of demographics-based targeting, there was no statistically significant difference between different targets nor the control sample, running during the same time period.
What we saw were click-through rates of 0.01 – 0.05% — and the 0.01% often seemed like rounding because they did not report more than 2 decimal places. As a result of these click rates the effective CPMs turned out to be $0.01 – $0.19 and average CPCs ranged from $0.05 – $0.25. I’ve been running these Facebook ads for more than 12 months; and millions of impresisons later, there is no observable improvements to CTRs and thus CPMs and CPCs. But since I set up the campaigns to only pay when there is a click (CPC basis), I can let these run indefinitely because I am getting so few clicks, it’s not even making a dent on my credit card (which I use to pay for the ads).
detail of low click through rates of facebook display ads
Ideas for Facebook
In the spirit of openness, as an advertiser who wants to continue using Facebook advertising, perhaps there are a few things they can do to improve the effectiveness of Facebook display ads.
1. reduce the number of ads per page to 1 – displaying multiple ads artificially depresses click-through rates because users can only click on 1 thing at a time, even if they liked more than one of them. Displaying 3 on a page simply increases the denominator while the numerator does not increase — in the click-through rate equation: clicks / impressions.
2. make ads sharable – in the rare instance a user views an ad, it may or may not be relevant to her, but she may know that it is relevant and timely for a friend. By making ads sharable, she can click and send to a friend, who is very likely to find it useful and valuable, especially having been sent by a friend.
3. let users opt-in to ads in specific topic categories - when users are in the market for specific things, they are more likely to subscribe to pertinent news feeds, offers, etc. related to that topic or category. By giving users more power over what they want to see, it will also give advertisers more targeted and engaged prospects to target.
4. expand search-based advertising – when users search they are looking for something and are open to discovering something they didn’t know to ask for. So ads served up in response to a search is usually a lot more effective than ads served up simply when a page is loaded (display advertising). Facebook can serve display ads based on pertinent search queries.
Earth to Facebook… anyone listening?
By Dr. Augustine Fou. Dr. Fou is Group Chief Digital Officer at Healthcare Consultancy Group a group of agencies within the Omnicom family specializing in pharma and healthcare. He helps clients develop digital marketing programs or improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness existing campaigns via advanced analytics, social marketing, and digital strategy. You can read more of his writing on digital marketing on this blog and follow him on twitter @acfou.
Excerpt from TechCrunch: “Click fraud is serious business on the big search engine advertising networks because the bad guys can make serious money. Sign up for an Adsense account and put those ads on parked domain names or wherever. Then all you have to do is start clicking those ads like crazy, using bots or cheap labor.” On Facebook, “advertisers are clicking on competitor ads to drive up their costs and drive down their ROI.”
“So the bad guys just create thousands of fake Facebook accounts with a wide variety of demographic information. This sounds like a lot of work, but it’s highly automated. the going rate was just $10 per 100 accounts if you supply the unique email accounts. Once the accounts are created, they use software to fill out the varied demographic information, and that software also manages all these accounts. The fraudster then logs in to Facebook via these accounts and views the ads that are displayed. The right competitive ads come up and Bingo, the software then clicks them. Facebook rules allow an account to click any advertisement up to six times in a 24 hour period, and all those clicks are charged. All you need is a few accounts to view the ads and then click to the max.”
Despite click fraud, the click through rates are still incredibly low. So if you subtract all the click fraud, is ANY advertiser making ANY money from facebook advertising?
Others have found similarly dismal click through rates from Facebook advertising
Facebook Ad Click-Through Rates Are Really Pitiful
April 7, 2008 – 5:03 pm
Quite by coincidence, I’ve encountered a few statistics on Facebook’s advertising platform. I thought I’d post links to the results I’ve uncovered, in case anybody is wondering about average CTR rates for Facebook.
First up, Rod Boothby got a click-through rate of 0.01%:
This week, I ran $105 worth of Facebook Fliers. That bought me 52,500 impressions. It looks like the flier bought me about an extra 500 site visits. That’s about $0.21 per hit.
Michael Ferguson ran a bunch of Facebook ads for Kinzin:
Click-through rates are abysmal. I was running the identical ad in about 15 different regions (you need to run them as separate ads to get the stats broken out), getting just over 10M views. Our average clickthrough rate was 0.06% (that’s 1 in 1513, for those counting at home). The best we did anywhere was 0.14%.
He later reports that the conversion rate was “at a pretty reasonable clip” at about 5%. By ‘conversion’, I think he’s meaning people who actually signed up for Kinzin’s free service. All of this stuff is contextual, but if visitors had to lay down money, the conversion rate would be considerably lower.
The folks at Valleywag report similarly dismal numbers:
Media buyers — the agency people who book campaigns — report that the college social network is a truly terrible target. They’re mainly students, with low disposable income, of course; but, beyond that, the users appear to be too busy leaving messages for eachother to show much interest in advertising. Facebook’s members appear indifferent even to movie advertising aimed at their demographic. Clickthrough rates, the percentage of time users click on an ad, average 0.04% — just 400 clicks in every 1m views — according to one report seen by Valleywag.
From AllFacebook:
Fred Wilson has been updating the world about his venture in Facebook advertising over the past week. Today, Fred posted and updated screenshot of his ad campaign’s performance and it doesn’t appear to be too stellar. For one of his campaigns, out of 10,080 impressions there were only 8 clicks. The average cost-per-click for Fred was $0.08 and the average CPM was $0.06. This is a less than stellar performance. This is nothing new though.
And lastly, from a digital student marketing blog in the UK. This would seem like a natural fit for Facebook’s audience:
Our most recent campaign saw 1.4 million page impressions delivered at specific universities – and only a 0.04% clickthrough rate. Ouch.
Click-through rates seem to sit around 0.04%, which is profoundly lame if you ask me. I’m no online advertising expert–it’s not really our thing–but I’ve run a bunch of Google AdWords and other contextual advertising campaigns. We regularly get click-through rates of 3%, and I gather that’s nothing special.
Here’s my theory on Facebook: it’s a silo. People visit the Fun House of Facebook, and conceptually treat it slightly different than the rest of the web. They’re in Facebook, interacting with friends, playing games, sending messages and now chatting on IM. As such, they’re really unmotivated to leave. Who wants to leave the Fun House?
We’ve seen similar results across Facebook. It’s really difficult to drive visitors out of the app and to your own website.
What is the ROI (define) for social media? It’s zero. That’s because there’s no such thing as “social media.”
People’s conversations are not media; they can’t be purchased as such by advertisers. In other words, people don’t talk whenever advertisers want them to and they won’t say whatever advertisers tell them to — so it isn’t “media” like TV, print, and radio.
If you treat people’s conversations as media, you’d be doing it wrong. Social marketing done right means asking for and respecting people’s conversations and giving them a public place to talk so others can hear. If the advertiser’s product is already great, much of the conversation will be positive. But even if it isn’t the advertiser will have the benefit of free “product research” because people will give them ideas for improvement.
Untargetables are hard to reach. Unreachables are not reachable by traditional advertising media or channels.
the brilliance of its simplicity has irked social media pundits and experts – “why didn’t I think of that first?”
And if marketing campaigns are supposed to drive traffic, it drove traffic.
If viral campaigns are supposed to drive chatter and discussion, it did.
If social marketing is supposed to drive social actions (like friending or becoming a fan on Facebook) it did.
and on top of all that, they are getting free consulting from all social marketing experts, gurus, pundits, specialists, etc.
pro or con, this experiment will tell Skittles and their agency what worked and what didn’t and next-up, they’ll do more of what worked, thank you very much.
if you had a dollar to spend today, where would you spend it? on paid advertising or on social marketing? why?
Paid advertising – it’s over once it’s aired
Social Marketing
1. peers telling peers – a lot more effective and trusted by modern consumers than a paid ad
2. archived conversations – when people take social actions like rate, review, comment, recommend, and share, these actions are archived for everyone to see online (valuable to future users doing research)
3. it yields a continuously increasing stream of free traffic (enhances SEO efforts)
in a budget-constrained environment, the best thing an advertiser can do is shift more attention (notice, I didn’t say money) to social marketing and stimulate social actions among target users and customers. While paid media used to just get people to some place (like a website), social marketing is about stimulating social actions — so the people actually do something — share, rate, comment, recommend, etc. These actions lead to an accumulation of value over time such that future visitors will get the benefit of all of the actions that went before (e.g. I only watch the highest rated or most viewed videos on YouTube; I don’t have to wade through and find the good stuff myself). Furthermore, social actions are free to the advertiser — think “advocacy.” When real people carry the message forward to their friends, it is free amplification for the advertiser — social amplification.
Many clients have asked about social media benchmarks or social marketing benchmarks. They ask things like how many fans should they have on Facebook? They are concerned if they cannot project 1 million fans on their fan page.
But that is because most clients are coming from a reach and frequency background. Some have moved to unique visitors, pageviews, and time on site. But what is more important today is not that people get to the site or the time they spend, but what they do … so social intensity is a benchmark which captures the quantity and frequency of social actions like sharing, discussing, commenting, voting, etc. All of these actions lead to value that accumulates for other future visitors to the site.
Adwords – lower cost per click
Clicks Impressions CTR Avg Cost per Click Total spent
511 61,894 0.82% $0.47 per click $242.16
PayPerPost - optimal is lowest payment per post
dollars pageviews/clicks
$122.50 2630/120 $1.02 per click 4.6% CTR ($5 per post)
$183.25 1324/114 $1.61 per click 8.6% CTR ($10 per post)
$291.25 2369/260 $1.12 per click 11% CTR ($20 per post)
ReviewMe – www. johnchow. com
$300 – nearly no value; JohnChow pioneered link sharing to get his blog up to about rank 100 on Technorati before they changed the way they calculated authority; despite the many links to his blog, it was practically useless in driving any useful customers. Now his site has been penalized by Google and is only PageRank 3 site.
social networks – the places where people go online to socialize
social actions – the act of socializing on social networks
social intensity – the frequency and quantity of social actions; this can/should be a new KPI (key performance indicator) for marketers to assess whether digital marketing efforts are working and yielding positive results against business objectives
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.