Disqus - Latest Comments for mrhames

Re: Location, Location, Location

mrhames — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:17:40 -0000

Consider Google. Google launched with a simple advertising idea -- if you offer a cheap lunch, place your ad in front of people who search "cheap lunch".

At first though, Google took anyone's money. They let the market dictate the price. If a person bought Cheap Lunch to sell boats, then who's to stop them? Google? If the guy is willing to pay $6 for a click, they are willing to sell a boat guy "Cheap Lunch".

Except, Google is also a tool. And people use it because it offers good (read relevant) results. Google realized this and incorporated a Quality Score. It's a confusing thing that essentially measures relevance of ad with landing page and keyword. The more relevant the ad, the cheaper and higher it is. Thus, google rewards relevance because it has to. If things stayed irrelevant, we'd start to use Ask (or Bing).

Now, take location based ads. Unlike the mailbox (it can't filter out content, it's just a thing), the handheld is battling other handhelds for your 2-year contract. If they over spam, that's a reason to leave.

So, fear not, I think.

Re: Why We Need Marketing General Contractors

mrhames — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:30:28 -0000

I see two options:

1. To use your metaphor, why can't it fall upon the home builder to manage the players? In this instance, the AOR will need to manage the players, rein them in, and ensure that everything stands together.

Okay. I'm not naive enough to think this is simply going to happen, egos being egos and whatnot.

However, and this brings me to #2, I think that the silos are actually the problem. They create the need of a general contractor, so instead of adding a function, why not eliminate silos?

If the plumber and the carpenter are on the home builders staff, then all the 500K goes to them anyway.

So a full service agency consolidated at the bottom line would forgo the need for a General Contractor.

And I just happen to know one of them, which is why I love where I'm at. :)

Re: Born Digital

mrhames — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 08:40:27 -0000

I did a presentation on this topic once. My argument was that marketing before the web used to be geographical based (it was geo-targeted). Web 1.0 promised to change it, but didn't because we're still geographically centered people. My best friends growing up lived on my street, went to my school, or lived in my town. I lost touch with them, but thanks to Facebook, reconnected with the ones I wanted to (and some I didn't).

But my daughter could easily be best friends with someone in Australia. Or Toronto. With Skype, Twitter, and the things we can only imagine, she will never really have the option of losing touch with people. Their lifetime gmail or yahoo mail account will be in her address book along with their Facebook Vanity, LinkedIn url, etc.

And while I use the names of things we all know, Facebook, Linkedin, etc, it's more likely that she'll connect to people on a tool that hasn't been invented. Wave 3.0.

And these people will think differently about physical space, and geographical space. I'm not sure what that will mean, but it will be cool.

Re: Field of Dreams Redux

mrhames — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:22:32 -0000

I think social media is a good test of the brand's historical advertising. Good advertising history = instant fans and success. (We saw that with one of our clients. We got a whole bunch of fans doing all the work for us, and next thing you know, the next AE wants a Facebook page for their [insert something like toilet paper to make point].

A strong brand is really just an affinity for the product. to use your metaphor, the pre-prom voting. Awareness advertising thus creates the arena for social media. It doesn't create awareness, at its best, it gives those with awareness a place to hang.

Re: Do You Have to DO Social Media to Work IN Social Media?

mrhames — Tue, 26 May 2009 15:18:52 -0000

I think the guy who ran Obama's campaign had little experience in social media. I think it's about marketing, plain and simple. The NYtimes is a strong brand that needs to harness the reguklar readers and commentators and turn them into more newspapers or eyeballs, or login only places that have a Flickr-like fee. You don't need to be a Twitter user to see that.

Re: Walking The Fine Line Of The Personal Brand

mrhames — Tue, 26 May 2009 10:40:23 -0000

Does your agency have a social media policy? We're an ad agency trying to encourage the use of social media to understand it better. but we're crafting a policy so people know where the company stands. Almost like a dress code, but not.

More like a don't be stupid code. And in an time where 30-something people can put food up their bum and allegedly pretend to serve it to customers, anything goes, right? Especially since they thought it would be funny to film it, and add it to YouTube.

Re: Enterprise 2.0 Needs a FriendFeed

mrhames — Wed, 20 May 2009 09:36:01 -0000

There's a chance that this solution is a hacked version of e-mail. Right now, I work in an agency with 7 different offices in the US. We're connected via phone (four digit dialing to any office), e-mail, and Microsoft messenger. We also have sharepoint, that has the build in blog, wiki, and pages for work groups, clients, etc (we're somewhat paperless).

If chat were built into mail (like Google and Yahoo have done), then we could, in theory, lose messenger, which already synchs with e-mail. Further, the updating of content on Sharepoint can be tracked into a lifestream of sorts that people could subscribe to.

Re: Twindling Users?

mrhames — Wed, 06 May 2009 09:24:28 -0000

I think they are missing a tool like Tweetdeck, Twirl, etc. The web-only Twitter experience is somewhat lame. These people joined, followed Oprah and their favorite celeb, and realized it's only navel gazing that one has to hit refresh to do.

Boring.

Re: From Email Culture To Stream Culture: Out Of The Inbox

mrhames — Wed, 06 May 2009 09:20:58 -0000

I just did a blog post about how social networks needed e-mail grow. Early on, we got e-mails when we got Twitter DM's, or Facebook mail (which is also private), but now that we're used to looking for things like this, we don't need e-mail to nudge us anymore. So e-mail needs to rethink it's connection to an open world of streams. I think gmail and yahoo mail are trying, and since they have huge numbers of people in their potential communities, I'm interested to see where it goes.

Re: I Like Search

mrhames — Mon, 04 May 2009 13:08:32 -0000

always remember that google is first and foremost a tool for people. We say "google it" because google works.

They got away from that a little in the early SEM days when they would sell irrelevance for money. But marketers just need to remember to look at google and help it deliver the best answers. We're getting to a place where "cheap lunch" should return a map. Google needs businesses to optimize around what they are.

Re: A Platform Like Any Other

mrhames — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:35:55 -0000

There's this band that I used to love. The best part about them was I could watch them in a small place, and i felt close to them. The problem was, they signed this deal to a record label, and then everyone heard about them. Now they play arenas. I miss my experience with them. Why did they have to get popular?

Re: The Ten Commandments of Content Marketing

mrhames — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:23:29 -0000

Damn, Disqus just ate my post.

Alas, my point was in reply to Beth. Agencies can offer scripts to help in the transparent management of a social media initiative. Take Twitter. Nameatclient could get a script of things to post to start conversations and build buzz. Responses are easier. Responding is infinitely easier than starting a conversation.

Content. It's what we agency peeps can do to add value.

Re: Too many agencies spoil the brand

mrhames — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:02:27 -0000

I've sat in the room when a client invites all agency partners to solve the digital conundrum. BTW, I agree with the notion that the 'above the line' agencies are better at the execution. They care about the tone, the voice, etc.

But I disagree about the 'big idea'. I think the client that tries a lot of little ideas will do better in this world. I'm not saying that the big idea is dead, I just think the process is due for an update.

Re: Experts

mrhames — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 21:03:07 -0000

I sat and talked to a local soc media expert. He has thousands of Twitter followers, and a large brand hired him to be a soc media consultant.

He didn't have the first clue about marketing. To him, it was all conversations, etc. Which is all well and good, but brands aren't in it for conversations, unless one can tell them why a conversation will earn them money (and as you suggest, many people don't want conversations).

So you get these supposed Twitter experts, and/or bloggers, who don't consider how paid media works with earned media (btw, some do. Many do, but there are ones who don't, and they preach 'new ways')

And where does that leave us? Another potential silo for clients that already have 5 agency partners in the room competing for the money.

I think I need a vacation.

Re: Skittles New “Website” Leaves a Bad Taste for Some | Social Media Explorer

mrhames — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:28:36 -0000

Why would Skittles need a website? Or SEO? Do people who are looking for a snack really type "what should I snack?" into google and expect the website Skittles to deliver the answer?

Impulse purchases need to think of different ways to get attention online. Websites aren't it. For a long time, we did websites because we had to. A marketing tool one has to do? Crazy.

As people test the idea of a digital presence, they should look at individuals for inspiration. Think about the digital presence of a Jason Falls. Can a brand replicate that? I think so, with some obvious differences.

I've been trying to get one of my clients to incorporate a digital presence, and kill their website. it wasn't going to be executed like this, but in essence, it will be this.

Re: Does Creativity Still Matter?

mrhames — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:05:21 -0000

Good products never needed advertising. good products that do go mass (Starbucks), run into the problem of letting the consumer define them. Is starbucks hurting now because you and I have a different vision of the brand (since we were allowed to craft our own vision?) I could talk for years about the iPod (a truly revolutionary product) was the real thing that took Apple from accepting money from Microsoft to making ads busting their chops.

I read the manifesto this weekend, and planned to write about it. My thinking all along is that we have to cut direct marking thinking from online. Even though your customer is a click away, the click should not be the thing that the effort is judged on. Metrics matter, but clicks shouldn't be the only one.

I'm glad this conversation is going. Thanks for writing about it.

Matt.

Re: TV On My Browser

mrhames — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:07:36 -0000

Like I said, I've been thinking about watching TV online for more than a year. And two weeks after writing the post below, I was asked to do a "POD" on ABC.com. Seriously.

This is my take on why watching TV online is different from offline.
http://tinyurl.com/dx5jc3

This is most of the posts tagged abc.com.
http://tinyurl.com/dxwv26

I think the network dot coms were hampered by the writer's strike for a while. As in, doing things to make more money online was contrary to the stance they took in the strike. But the strike is well over, and to me, it's time for networks to help advertisers.

Re: TV On My Browser

mrhames — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:27:37 -0000

As an avid consumer of TV Online (it's DVR that offers 1 hour shows in 40 mins) at ABC.com, NBC.com, and CBS.com, I've written about this a lot.

At our agency, we've even done some pods on ABC.com. I still can't believe that the people at Network dot coms aren't doing more here (you don't even need to login!).

Because what they simply do is take a 30 second spot, and re-purpose it in a place that doesn't need to be set up for a 30 second spot! Why not one big movie Trailer like spot at the start? Why not no spots (if the brand attribute is saving time, wouldn't that fit it even better? This last idea was presented to ABC because our brand had that attribute. We wanted to pay, but not run ads throughout and they said no!).

Online TV is different. It's consumed different. And it should have a different marketing tactic. Like I said, I write about this a lot.

Re: Suing over negative Yelp reviews (and a better response)

mrhames — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 15:35:48 -0000

Thanks for taking a look at my post.

Re: The Great Unleveling

mrhames — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:14:55 -0000

I really do think that this is the great leveler. The initial promise of the Internet was that Joe'sPizza.com could compete with PizzaHut.com. In reality, they couldn't.

However, Joe's Pizza can use local fans to amplify their brand through Yelp, Facebook groups, Twitter accounts (where they follow local people only), etc. They can create online, local communities and turn the world wide wed into a local groundswell of chatter.

It's sort of an unleveling. Because any brand can participate in the groundswell at a local level. Just find out what the community wants, and deliver.

Re: The Great Unleveling

mrhames — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:19:19 -0000

I've been listening on behalf of some of our agency's brands for a few years now, and I've stopped being shocked when I find people talking about "insurance, plastics, rubber bands or prune juice".

I was looking into the things people were saying about Electric Razors recently, and I found a committed community of people who started a sort of Electric Razor Hall of Fame. It had old TV spots, old models, stories about learning to shave with Dad. It wasn't brand specific, but it was the kind of starting point a brand could use to engage.

Alternatively, we have a client that makes painting tape. Are people talking about their 'painting tape' online? Nope. But they are showing off pictures of their before/after rooms. These are things that are the result of painting tape. Painting tape could amplify that method of sharing and engage this community.

i could go on. It's not the size of the community, but the passion. And the passion could help grow the community, especially when a brand comes in and says, we like what you've done here, here's how we'd like to help.

And yes, this is all about finding communities in the corners of the huge web. This is different than doing a Facebook app: a Facebook app is mass media dressed up to look like social media. Brands enter Facebook, and compete with all the other things inside Facebook. A facebook app is the Television equivalent of your ad being on while all other ads are on as well.

I would advise that brands take their 50-100K they were going to spend on the Facebook app and invest in the smaller community out there. Because there's a good chance that the client's brand has fans somewhere talking it up.

Re: Ford's CEO Takes to Twitter

mrhames — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:58:56 -0000

I watched it real time as well. Excellent use. Forwarded this post to some people I work with.

Re: The New York Times Launches The Counter-Revolution

mrhames — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:25:53 -0000

Salon.com has used "Editor's Choice" letters for a long time. to be honest, I've thought a lot about filters (editors, producers) and how most of the content I consume is filter/editor/producer free).

This impacts the advertising model, which used to depend on filtered content that appealed to the masses.

But the big thing I wanted to say was that the day the editor's at salon picked my letter as an editors choice was a great day. :)

Re: Tagline for the American Health Care System

mrhames — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:13:10 -0000

I don't work in healthcare. I'm a US citizen, but I was born in Canada (where they have a single-payer system, not socialized medicine), so I guess I think about this a little different.

Again, I would respect the opinion of people who advocate for a free market system if they were consistent. If people think healthcare should be left to a free market, then why not firecare?

What's the difference, really? The firehouse would still put out the fire, in the same manner that people without insurance can go to an ER if their life is threatened. Same with police. A free market system wouldn't mean police don't save you if you're being mugged, you just need insurance to pay.

So, that's my retort to people who advocate for a free market. Get your employee sponsored fire and police insurance as well.

I know that's not your argument, but it irks me when I read people talk about "free market" and healthcare. It's crap.

Re: Tagline for the American Health Care System

mrhames — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:00:15 -0000

The language is wrong. We don't call the system of Firefighters and policemen socialism, if we had to call it something, we would call it a single payer system of fire and security protection.

It's strange that we live in a country whereby if someone deliberately sets my house on fire, the fire department will put it out for free, the police will investigate it for free, but the ambulance and doctors will charge me boatloads of money to fix me.

And for some reason, we're afraid of the last one, while we accept the first two. So I say this: be consistent: if you want to call single payer health care socialism, then call the firefighters and police socialism as well.