Posts Tagged ‘New York Times’

Is A “Deal of the Day” Right for You?

by on Tuesday, December 7th, 2010

Every year some online concept seems to catch on with users, commentators and venture capitalists alike. This year’s hot concept is the “deal of the day” pioneered by Groupon. The daily deal is a deeply discounted product promotion available for one day only. Groupon features the deal on its web site and blasts emails to users who have opted in. It can provide substantial exposure to a marketer or product, although it doesn’t necessarily pay for itself. Is Groupon (or one of its many imitators) right for your business and its products? As usual, it depends.

The marketing psychology behind Groupon’s deals is simple: an ultra-low price to stimulate interest plus very brief availability to stimulate action. You’ve seen the same thing on direct response infomercials on late night TV. But those infomercials work. And so, at least to some extent, do Groupon’s deals.

The New York Times business blog “You’re The Boss” recently analyzed the math behind a typical Groupon deal. Separately, a team at Rice University studied how satisfied merchants were with their Groupon experience, and how likely they would be to use a Groupon deal again.

via Sofianos Rezk (Creative Commons)

In the Times article the bottom line was whether it cost more to acquire net new customers via the Groupon promotion or through conventional channels. That like a perfectly reasonable metric, although perhaps not the only relevant one. In the Times’ example the hypothetical business spent about the same to acquire net new customers through the promotion as through other channels, which made the promotion a wash, but the author pointed out that even small changes to the many variables could alter the result significantly.

That’s important because the Times example described more than a dozen different variables, from the the percentage of coupons redeemed to the percentage of redeeming customers who were not previously customers of the merchant. Depending on these variables a Groupon program could be anything between a home run and a disaster.

But running the numbers is not the only way to decide whether a deal of the day makes sense. The Rice University study led by Professor Utpal M. Dholakia (full pdf available here) reported a wide range of views from merchants concerning their satisfaction with the Groupon promotion and the likelihood of their using Groupon again. The three key predictors of repeating a Groupon promotion were

  1. Effectiveness in reaching new customers
  2. Percentage of Groupon users buying more than its value during the visit
  3. Employee satisfaction with the Groupon promotion

In other words, the promotion would be considered less than successful if it promoted trial but did not produce net new repeat business; did not result in substantial on-premises upsell of Groupon users; and did not satisfactorily account for reductions in commissions and tips. Merchants reported that unless these factors were present they would not be inclined to repeat a Groupon promotion even if their promotion had been profitable:

There is widespread recognition among many business owners that social promotion users are not the relational customers that they had hoped for or the ones that are necessary for their business’ long-term success. Instead, there is disillusionment with the extreme price sensitive nature and transactional orientation of these consumers among many study respondents.

Is Groupon too much of a good thing? The suggestion in the Rice study that Groupon shoppers are qualitatively different from ordinary shoppers would be troubling if true. This would suggest that consumers who are highly motivated by the brief availability of an extreme price reduction are not willing or able to see beyond the deal and are not particularly open to learning about the merchant or her (non-discounted) products.

Are there any benefits to a tool that brings traffic but maybe not genuine trial? It depends on the business. A retailer that does better when the store is full (e.g., because of a social element to the brand) may be able to leverage the traffic Groupon can bring. A restaurant that cannot adequately service a Groupon-driven wave of first-time customers (who may not be the best tippers) is likely to have an unsatisfactory experience regardless of the numbers. The key is to understand the process, understand the numbers and have realistic expectations.

The Zavee takeaway:

  • Groupon isn’t as much about promoting trial of your product as it is generating buzz about your brand.
  • For the right business, Groupon can result in incremental sales to one-time customers and an acceptable level of new customers, all without upsetting and under-compensating your staff. But it doesn’t seem to happen very often.
  • Brands aren’t built with magic bullets. Surprise and delight your customers, reward their continued loyalty, and make it easy for them to share their experiences.

Can Social Media Help Toyota Repair Its Reputation?

by on Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

As most of the world now knows, Toyota’s US unit has announced the recall of approximately 2.3 million vehicles to repair a condition that has resulted in gas pedals sticking while the car is being driven. Safety issues are perhaps an automaker’s greatest threat, and Toyota clearly is taking the situation seriously. The company has even halted production of the affected vehicles until the problem can be solved. Nevertheless, according to auto blog The Truth About Cars, the Japanese business publication Nikkei (think Wall Street Journal) claims that the crisis “is seen as a major dent in the side of the leading Japanese automaker’s reputation as a builder of reliable automobiles.”

The Toyota issue is the largest product recall since the rise of Social Media, but it is not the first. In November, 2009, UK stroller manufacturer Maclaren recalled approximately one million strollers after reports that children were getting their fingers caught in the folding mechanism. The company put recall information on its web site, which, according to the New York Times, promptly crashed. Like Toyota, Maclaren’s stellar reputation resulted in a case of “the bigger they are, the harder they fall.” Time reported that parent blogs were merciless toward the company. Maclaren posted a video PSA to YouTube announcing the recall and the availability of a repair kit, but apparently did not take advantage of either Facebook or Twitter to communicate with parents.

Moving Forward?

Moving Forward?

Toyota is already receiving some criticism for being insufficiently engaged with its customers. The company has a page on its site dedicated to the recall, with links to FAQs and a video news release consisting of talking head sound bites from COO Jim Lentz along with ad-quality footage of the cars and the factory. The video is disappointing: Lentz’s comments sound blandly reassuring but never manage to engage. Today’s Ad Age reports that Toyota’s video is now on the company’s Facebook page, where it is said to have been well received. If the video is posted on the Toyota page, however, the company has not made it easy to find. Most of the wall postings appear to be from car owners and most are in the “I love my Toyota!” genre (it’s not called a fan page for nothing). There appears to be no company-supplied content relating to the recall (unless that video is there somewhere) and certainly no conspicuous attempt to leverage Toyota’s 70,000+ Facebook fans.

Toyota does have a presence on Twitter, but until yesterday the company was using the feed to point to information on the company’s web site. On Monday afternoon Lentz spent 20 minutes fielding questions on Twitter. The Q&A was announced only shortly before it began, and greater lead time might have yielded more participants. However, car bloggers such as @jalopnik and its editor @raywert were on the feed as well as several Toyota dealers. Although this was not the smoothest exercise, it strikes us as a good first step toward engaging with customers, not just making announcements to them.

Toyota is using a wide range of media to announce that it knows how to repair the faulty parts. Now let’s see how Toyota uses Social Media as it tries to repair its reputation.

NBC, NYT and Loyalty

by on Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

In the course of an entertaining post about NBC’s current “two hosts, one spot” late-night nightmare, Dean Bairaktaris asks, “Where is everyone’s Brand Loyalty? Is it with NBC, Leno or Conan?” This is an insightful question, because the expensive and embarrassing contretemps has been presented largely as Jay vs. Conan, Old Guard vs. Young Turk, homespun vs. hip.

via mashable.com

via mashable.com

The potential impact on NBC as a major media channel has largely been ignored, except in posts like Dean’s, as Conan is widely presumed to be able to shift his audience, more or less intact, to Fox or another media outlet. But it’s fair to ask whether the broadcast networks actually have brand equity apart from the shows they carry. Is there an “NBC-ness” to the Tonight Show (or any other NBC program) that would not carry over to another network? That arbiter of absurdity, The Onion, would certainly say no.

The soon-to-be-announced decision by The New York Times to put some or all of its content behind a pay wall also involved a debate over the brand equity of the Times versus that of its content (in this case, the paper’s prominent columnists). An outstanding article in New York Magazine details some columnists’ concerns that in its pursuit of subscription revenue the Times would be sacrificing its position as a leading online news brand, giving up both traffic and influence (as well as premium advertising rates, apparently).

I think the two situations have a lot in common. In both cases, the underlying question was whether the locus of customer loyalty is the channel (NBC and NYT) or its content (shows and columnists). I’m not sure the answer is the same in every case. I don’t think broadcast TV networks are differentiated enough to generate brand loyalty, but I’m not sure that’s equally true of newspapers (I grew up reading the New York Times so I might be biased – or just conditioned).

For small businesses, the lesson is to think about what aspect of your brand your customers are loyal to, and not to assume that all customers are loyal to the same thing or for the same reason. You want the locus of loyalty to be your overall brand so that customers will stay with you as your business changes, whether those changes involve staffing, product assortment, location or even store closings. However, until you have the conversation with your customers, you can’t be sure that they are loyal to your brand or to your personable store manager, convenient location or frequent sales.

As a smaller business, you have the ability to engage with customers directly and provide an overall customer experience that embodies your brand’s unique promises and values. Larger brands often (but not always) provide a product experience that is not as closely connected to the brand. This is an advantage for smaller businesses which, unlike large brands, should never need to market brands and products separately. To leverage the direct connection with customers, treat loyalty as a two-way street. There are many ways to demonstrate your loyalty to customers, but the easiest is to listen to what they have to say.