Archive for the ‘Marketing’ Category

Is The Deal Finally Done?

Monday, January 23rd, 2012

One short year ago, the hype around daily deals was electric.  In the analyst community, you could barely get through a day without hearing something about players like Groupon, which happened to be growing at a meteoric pace.  In fact, by the time of its initial public offering in 2011, Groupon was stating that it had reached full year 2010 revenue of $713.4 million, while only a year earlier, the company’s revenue was $30.47 million – a year over year growth rate of 2,241%.  You read that correctly…over two thousand percent growth in one year!

Image courtesy of ViralBlog

There was also significant debate about whether these deal sites were salvation or suicide for small business, who for years had battled large retailers with deeper pockets.  Many felt daily deals could be the playing field leveller, that allowed the little guy to achieve marketing reach on a budget.

However, while consumers appeared to be prepared to jump on deals, many wondered what the actual redemption rates on deals were at retail.  More importantly, statistics began to show that deals as a long-term customer acquisition tool were weak, with many consumers admitting to cherry picking deals and never returning to the store again.  There were even a few horror stories of merchants being driven out of business by deals that went viral and exceeded all capacity to fulfill demand.

My take at the time was regarded as somewhat contrarian.   I felt that “deals” were not and never would become, a self-sustaining business but rather that, deals, discounts and promotions were and always had been mere marketing tactics. I felt that players like Groupon and Living Social, to name just a couple, had not invented a new business model but simply digitized an old tactic – the price cut –  that had existed since the beginning of time.

If there was anything impressive about deal sites, it was perhaps the massive uptake they could achieve with their offers.  When Gap ran a $50.00 gift card offer for $25.00,  they sold half a million of them.   It was like the difference between putting coupons on car windshield and dropping them from an airplane.  But the degree to which an offer like this actually paid off for the GAP is still unknown.  Groupons were notoriously difficult to measure at point of sale.   Some argue that the offer did further damage to the already waning GAP brand.

As consumers, we tend to be wowed by digitization.  Digitizing things tends to make old things look new and cool again but the shine wears off fast.  If there’s nothing fundamentally new or game-changing about the concept, we lose interest quickly and move on. And it would appear that many of us have gotten over daily deals.  Because underneath the shiny exterior, these were just coupons and does the world really need another coupon?

Last week Techcrunch reported that in the last half of 2011 alone, an unbelievable 798 daily deal sites folded.  By the end of 2011, Groupon’s share price had slipped below its IPO level, as the company was plagued with accounting scandals and reported retailer acquisition troubles. Some even began referring to Groupon as nothing more than a thinly veiled “ponzi scheme.”

What lies ahead for daily deal sites is unknown.  More may be born and almost certainly, more will die.  A few might innovate and create real value propositions.  My guess however is that eventually the surviving deal sites will simply be swallowed up into larger online entities.  Every major player including Amazon, Google and Facebook will have a daily deal arrow in its quiver but they will be reduced to being nothing more than one of many marketing tactics available – not businesses unto themselves.

UPDATE:  Following the posting of this article, I participated in a discussion with Natasha Mitchell, Host of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Life Matters, on the future of daily deal sites.

Here’s the audio of that program.

 

The One and Only Question Facing Sears

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012

By Doug Stephens

Amid the sounds of tearing gift wrap and popping champagne corks, ailing giant Sears Holdings Corp. announced over the holidays its intent to close as many as 120 stores.  This of course, came as little surprise to the industry that has witnessed the slow motion train wreck that Sears has become over the last several years.  The company has desperately been throwing a variety of ideas against the wall in the hope that something sticks.  So, far nothing has.

Yesterday Bloomberg news quoted Sears Chief Executive Officer Lou D’Ambrosio as saying that a combination of more technology and physical store improvements would help to put the retailer back on track and that Sears has to get better at delivering what its customers want across multiple platforms.  Mr. D’Ambrosio by the way, came to Sear’s by way of companies like Avaya and IBM, so he’s clearly no lightweight in discussions around technology.

Few would argue with the idea that Sears lags technologically or that its stores are dingy and dilapidated.   Even fewer would dispute the truth that Sears has to execute across multiple channels to be successful – that’s just table-stakes in today’s industry.

When tactics are mistaken for strategy

The problem I have with Lou D’Ambrosio’s thinking is that I believe Sears real problems are far more fundamental and critical.  In fact, I would argue that both the lagging technology and shoddy store conditions at Sears stores are symptoms of a far more deadly syndrome and one that goes to the very root of the company.  In my opinion what’s killing Sears is a complete and utter lack of clear and forward-looking vision.  No one has created a cogently articulated picture of what the Sears of the future looks like.  No one has made a promise to consumers about delivering something remarkable or uniquely valuable.

It’s a classic example of a business mistaking tactics for strategy.  Last year the “strategy” was licensing store space to Sear’s vendors.  This year it’s renovations and technology.  Who knows what will it be next week, month or year.   Certainly not the store staffer responsible for representing the brand to the consumer.  And therein lies the problem.  Sears has lost all sense of brand essence and purpose.

The one and only question

Frankly, there’s  only one question that the leadership at Sears needs to answer.  “What can Sears offer the world that the world can’t get somewhere else?”  The answer to that one question becomes the cornerstone for the entire strategy going forward. It becomes the prime occupation of every Sears employee – from Mr. D’Ambrosio down.  The answer to that question is all that matters.

If the answer is “nothing”, then there’s no technology or store renovation plan on earth that will save Sears.

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I Don’t Use It But I Totally Get It”

Wednesday, December 7th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

One thing I hear very often from C-level leaders of companies when I’m presenting on the topic of social business is “I don’t use it, but I totally get it”.   They claim to understand the relevance of social networks and social media but simply choose not to use them.   They frequently cite a lack of time as their reason for not taking part personally, yet also claim to have a clear sense of how social media can be usefully deployed by their companies to engage consumers.  They don’t use it but they totally get it!

Of course only half of the statement is true.

Look at it this way; would your company hire a CMO who had never watched a television program? If your CFO had never constructed a budget, reviewed a P&L or read a balance sheet, would you have faith in them to manage the company’s finances?  Chances are we’d find this lack of core understanding simply unacceptable. Yet we somehow accept corporate leaders taking a pass on social business.  Why is that?

And what precisely is it that is diverting C-level attention away from what is arguably the most significant communication revolution since the printing press?  What level of email or voicemail proliferation is depriving them of the 5 minutes it takes to set up a Twitter profile, just to see what all the fuss is about?  Aren’t they even a little interested to see what their customers have to say about them on Facebook?  Shouldn’t they be?

The truth is the choice to opt out of social is just that — a choice.  And moreover, if it were any other aspect of the business that was being so openly ignored, we’d consider it negligent but because we call this “social” it’s somehow considered extra-curricular and optional.  It’s not considered an essential tool like finance, operations or human resources are.

Social business is not something that you read a book on and understand.  You have to make it a discipline.  You have to witness for yourself how connections are made, relationships are built and value is exchanged.  In order to get it, you have to do it.

The C-level leader of the future won’t be excused from social business.  At very least, a solid functional capability and understanding of social networks will be expected – no different than acumen in finance, marketing and supply chain management.  The use of social and professional networks both internally and externally will be as common as email is today.

The bottom line is that any corporate leader who claims that social business, media and networking “isn’t for them” is either coasting to retirement or running from their responsibilities.

How Google Street View Might Open the E-Com Door for Small Retail

Monday, November 7th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

If you use Google maps, then you’re probably familiar with Street View.  As the name suggests, Street View allows users to literally fly down to street level and have a 360-degree look around.

In April of this year Google began expanding the concept to include 360-degree photography of interior business spaces within Street View functionality.  Now the program is officially rolling out in Australia, Japan, the U.S., and New Zealand and is focusing exclusively on small businesses including restaurants, bars and retail stores. Businesses who want to have their location photographed by a “Google-trusted” photographer have to apply.

This is about more than pretty pictures

According to Google, the idea behind shooting interiors is to provide potential customers with immersive imagery that would simply make them more comfortable with deciding to visit businesses.  While that is undoubtedly one outcome, I think there’s either more to this than Google is admitting to at the moment.  Or it could be that they are missing out on a much larger opportunity.  Given Google’s savvy, I tend to think it’s the former.

The opportunity lies in the astounding fact that almost half of all small retailers in North America do not have a website of any kind.  Those that do often have something that looks like a glorified yellow pages ad –static and outdated.  It’s a segment of the market that is woefully lacking in offering consumers any degree of web-based experience.

What Street View Interiors offers is the core of web experience that begins to make a business’ Google Place page feel a lot more like a decent website.  My bet would be that that’s exactly what Google wants business owners to begin to regard their Places page as – their website.  A fully baked Places page now can contain reviews, maps, directions and telephone numbers, offers and an immersive 360-degree tour of the location and surrounding area.  Add in applications like Google Checkout, and you have a fully functioning website with e-commerce capability – a quantum leap for the average small retailer.

I’m Seen Therefore I am

Small retailers have never really excelled at e-commerce.  The reason in most cases is quite simple. Many buyers feel that there’s a risk in ordering something from some hole in the wall store they’ve never heard of. Without a well-known store brand name to rely on, most consumers aren’t willing to chance it.  It’s been a perennial problem for small retailers.

Through Street View’s interior shots, would-be consumers can at least confirm that the store in fact exists, lending a significant sense of pre-buy confidence.  If the store also happens to be well kept, stocked and merchandised (at least at the time it was photographed), it might just seal the deal.

In what has become the ultimate game of online chess, my guess is that Google is thinking at least a few moves ahead.  In this case, the strategy as I see it is for Google Places to become the de facto home page and ecommerce portal for millions of small businesses worldwide – a massive opportunity, if they can tap it.

Social Media Doesn’t Suck (But Your Marketing Might)

Monday, October 24th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

Hardly a day goes by that I don’t read at least one article that debates the inherent value of social media.  The marketing community continues to hunt for the illusive equation that will neatly equate a brand fan or follower to sales.  One article I saw recently actually suggested we go to extent of sub-segmenting Facebook fans with psychometric precision to understand their underlying motivation for “liking” us in the first place.  Is this even possible? And if it is, how do we execute on the information?

Let’s consider this whole issue differently for a moment.  Let’s look at it from the Follower’s point of view but first, let’s clarify what a like or a follow really is and more importantly, what it is not.

In and of themselves, likes, follows, YouTube views etc. are not exchanges. They don’t imply a commitment to buy or to maintain a long-term relationship with you.  There is no promise of patronage or fidelity.  All that fans and followers are granting is their “permission” to communicate with them.  When they choose to like or follow they are simply telling you they’re willing to listen.  Ultimately, if your brand’s message is good enough, they may even be prepared to start a relationship with you – if you earn it.

So, what have you got to say?

Let’s start with that.  Now that you’ve been given permission to exchange, what does your brand actually have to say to its followers? How will you enlighten, enthuse, entertain or give value to them?  Will you design remarkable and creative messaging that they actually talk about or will you bore them with banal coupons, offers and other nonsense that goes largely unnoticed?  Will you respond to their Facebook fan posts in real time, with a consistent and trustworthy brand voice, or will you allow posts to go unanswered, as 95% of wall posts currently do?  Will you actively follow up on their complaints about your brand on Twitter or will you ignore them like 79% of all complaints on Twitter are ignored?  What will you do or say, that is worth their attention?  What value will YOU deliver?

The R.O.I on boring your followers isn’t great

Every day, most of us are exposed to up a staggering 5,000 marketing messages.  How many even prompt a second look?  How many are remarkable enough for us to tell someone else about?   If we’re being honest, the answer is probably, not many.

In the end, how can we expect people who gave us a chance to wow them, to stick around after we bore and disappoint them?  If the majority of the marketing that brands offer is of low value, how can we possibly expect social media to pay us back with high value? Frankly, social media owes us nothing.  Instead of asking what the value of a fan or follower is, we’d be wiser to ask what value we offer to those who follow us.  Isn’t that where the value has to begin?

Why Facebook’s New “Timeline” Could Change Retail Forever

Thursday, September 22nd, 2011

By Doug Stephens

At today’s F8 Conference in San Francisco, Facebook announced a complete overhaul to the user profile page with the advent of what it’s calling “timeline”.  Fast Company’s E.B Boyd characterized timeline as “a scrapbook on steroids” of the user’s life. Events, relationships, photos and video will populate an individual’s timeline, creating a living memory of their entire life.

Moreover, within timelines, users will be able to find, share and even purchase digital content such as music, books and movies.   So, for example, if a friend of yours likes a movie, the functionality will exist for you to purchase and download that same movie instantly from an Apple-esque app store that will reside within Facebook.

Although Mark Zuckerberg refrained from commenting on the revenue model of this service, it doesn’t take advanced math to calculate the profit potential, especially when each calculation begins with 700,000,000+ users!

This leads to the broader question of “If I can buy a song via my timeline or a friends timeline, why not a vacation, a TV or a gym membership?” – “If I can buy digital content, why not products and services, like house cleaning or landscaping?”  And all from the convenience of my profile page.  In other words, rather than looking for the things I want, could the things I want find me?

I, for one, believe the simple answer to all all of this is “yes”.  The only remaining question is when? And while the timing may be up for debate, what is certain is that the foundation for a functional, real-time and socially powered marketplace was laid today.  And for all those retailers who have been questioning the value of Facebook to revenue, you may be about to get your answer.

Spend Shift and the new era of consumerism

Thursday, September 8th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

The economic recovery in North America has been anything but easy but according to best selling author, John Gerzema, the end result may not be entirely bad.  

I talked with John about his latest book, Spend Shift: How the Post-Crisis Values Revolution is Changing the Way We Buy, Sell and Live. It chronicles the collapse of a 30 year era of unprecedented and often mindless consumption and the subsequent emergence of a  decidedly different, values-driven and empowered consumer.

This new consumer, he suggests, is one that all companies, regardless of what they sell, must intimately understand,  if they’re to survive the return to more thoughtful consumption.

John is a two-time Wall Street Journal best selling author, Executive Chairman at BrandAsset Consulting and oversees strategy for the Young & Rubicam group of companies. He is also an acclaimed TED speaker. I spoke with John from his offices in New York City.

Full podcast here


Has Augmented Reality (Finally) Come of Age

Saturday, August 6th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

It’s been almost a year ago that I spoke with Maarten Lens-Fitzgerald, one of the co-founders of Layar and a pioneer in the development of augmented reality or “A/R” applications.  At that time we were discussing the potential for a battle between brands over virtual real estate as companies awaken to the opportunity to create augmented reality stores in high traffic public places, such as Nike’s installation in New York.

Maarten’s passion and excitement about A/R was palpable and we had a great conversation about its future.  Like many others, I saw tremendous possibilities for the technology to manifest itself in cutting edge consumer experiences.  This melding of the physical and the virtual seemed to me to be a marketer’s dream.

A/R had a long way to go…

I was also not alone however, in the belief that A/R had a long way to go.  While companies like Nike and Lego were clearly experimenting with the technology, there simply weren’t enough public A/R installations or applications out there to generate consumer awareness of the technology or where to find it – much less how to use it.  Even the marketing community was generally unaware of what augmented reality was.  Furthermore, the technology itself was a little rough around the edges.  Graphics and animation tended not to be extremely clear or crisp making for an often-disappointing overall experience.  Above all, the big question about A/R was one of utility.  Sure, it was cool but was it useful especially compared to other, more developed and trusted mediums such as QR (quick response) codes?

A giant step towards mainstream

This week Layar (and augmented reality in general) took a quantum step forward in satisfying skeptics with an innovation called Layar Vision.  Essentially, Layar Vision is a new system protocol that enables recognition of everyday objects, , overlaying them with digital content-  similar to Google Goggles. It also works much like QR code technology does but in this case, the object itself acts as the code.  Just scan the object using the Layar app and you’ll immediately be able to see the digital content attached to it.

Magazines, books, food packages, cars or any other object can be recognizable to the program and instantly overlay it with digital information which the user can then interact with.  The conceivable applications for it are limitless.

I think you’ll agree after watching the video below that with this single innovation, it’s my feeling that we’ve seen A/R go from being a novelty to something many marketers could find practical applications for.  It certainly takes A/R off the marketing fringe and puts it in a similar arena with QR and NFC technology.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsD0DuPT1GI&feature=player_embedded#at=25[/youtube]

What Duane Reade’s New Store Concept Says About the Future

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

By Doug Stephens

Retail concepts in Manhattan don’t always make the best examples for emulation elsewhere but there may at least be some strong directional cues to be taken from Duane Reade’s new flagship store, opening tomorrow in New York.

According to Convenience Store News, the 22,000-square-foot flagship store, located at 40 Wall St. will operate 24 hours a day and take a decidedly more upmarket position than previous concepts.  While maintaining a strong focus on health and beauty, the store will also offer a “sushi station, featuring a chef and full menu; a juice market, offering smoothies; a Starbucks coffee and fresh bakery counter; one of Coca-Cola’s new Freestyle machines dispensing 130 varieties of Coca-Cola; and an expanded natural and organic section containing fresh fruits, vegetables, wraps, sandwiches and salads.” There will also be a doctor on the premises.

What seems clear with the concept, is that Duane Reade is building a model for a store that is not simply a place to visit but rather the place to be.  It speaks to the certainty of the drugstore becoming an increasingly central aspect of life for the approximately 1 in 4 Americans heading into senior citizenship.  It clearly positions the store as the place to accomplish many of the day’s medical, shopping and leisure tasks in one, easy to shop destination.

Another and perhaps more subtle undertone of the story touches on what many see as a growing polarization of wealth in America, where the traditional, middle of the road drugstore can no longer serve an increasingly economically disparate population.  Instead, such mid-tier stores will likely be replaced with either high-end wellness stores like this one or bare-bones dispensaries for those with less financial means.  The local drugstore as we knew it, may be nearing it’s end.

So, while you might not find a sushi bar in the Walgreen’s in Keokuk Iowa anytime soon, what seems certain is that drugstores in America will increasingly expand beyond their health and beauty roots, into a myriad of other product and service categories.  For those who can afford the experience, such stores will not simply be places we go when we’re sick but rather places we go to be well – a hub of our daily lives.

Avoiding Your Napster Moment

Wednesday, June 29th, 2011

In a previous post I talked about how companies are often blind-sided by what I call Napster moments.  Napster moments are radical, game-changing innovations that can throw businesses and even entire industries, into oblivion.

I also promised a list of things, that from my experience and research, companies should do to reduce the odds of falling victim to these Napster moments.  Observe most highly successful contemporary companies and chances are you’ll spot some, if not all, of these behaviors.

Here they are, in no particular order:

1. Think radically

Successful companies unlock opportunities by questioning their industries’ most sacred paradigms and throwing conventional wisdom out the window. Apple stores for example, were engineered on the premise that store employees would not try to sell anything.  Rather, their goal was simply to help customers solve problems and relieve their computing pain.  The outcome of this non-selling approach was enormous trust on the part of customers who, in the process, felt more comfortable spending their money (and lots of it) with Apple.  In other words, while other retailers were pushing discounts, staff incentives and tired old selling-skills training, Apple was breaking the first cardinal rule of retail and encouraging their staff not to sell.   Apple’s radical approach to retail resulted in some of the highest sales per square foot statistics in retail history.

2. Innovate in a non-linear way

What made Napster so disruptive to the music industry was its non-linear nature.  It wasn’t simply an incremental and predictable improvement on the industry’s sales and distribution model.   It was a complete rethinking of the way music was packaged, sold and consumed.  Napster didn’t merely improve on current technology – it eradicated it completely.  Non-linear innovation often combines seemingly unrelated things to bring entirely new product and service alternatives to market.  They are more difficult to develop but can create enormous competitive distance if successful.  Vibram, for example, took a non-linear approach to innovation with their “five fingers” shoe design.  While other running shoe makers were focusing on incremental improvements in cushioning, support and design, Vibram conceived a shoe that instead fits like a glove, allowing for a unique barefoot running experience.This is not to imply that incremental improvement has no place in your plans.  What I am suggesting is that if you focus solely on linear product modifications and extensions, you will not last long.

3. Get your head out of your association

Most industry associations have a mandate to make their members stronger and smarter but often fall short because they’re inherently risk averse.  Ideally, they should be trolling the dark waters for the horrible, disruptive things their members might not like, but really need to confront.  However, in many cases they tend not to, for fear of upsetting their membership and losing revenue.  So, while they should be champions of breaking down the status quo, they often do just the opposite, because it’s the status quo that pays the dues. It’s vital that companies not rely on their industry associations as their sole source of perspective and insight.  Instead, create out-of-industry alliances to exchange ideas and attend unique non-industry conferences.  Do whatever is necessary to find out what’s happening beyond the walls of your own industry.

4. Stop listening to your customers

If you build only what your customers ask for, your products and services are certain to be mediocre and cheap.  As Henry Ford said, “If I’d asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said “a faster horse”.”  Don’t focus effort on building what your customers say they want –they don’t have a clue.  Build what they need but don’t know yet that they need it.  This means confronting the real issues with your product, service or industry and then hiring really smart people to create brilliant and often unconventional solutions.  If you must, hold focus groups to see what consumers think of your new products – not to find out what they think your new products should be.

5. Aggressively pursue your own obsolescence

I know it sounds like suicide but bear with me for a minute.  All business models have a lifespan yet very few businesses actually plan for their demise – for the day when what they sell or do is no longer necessary.  Fewer still actually attempt to disrupt their own model.  But here’s the thing… If you control the obsolescence of your own product or service model, you are by definition the one best positioned to own the new model – at least for a while.   Blockbuster Video, for example, had a chance to eradicate the brick and mortar video distribution model on which the rental industry stood and in doing so, control the subscription model.  But even after being approached by Netflix to explore a potential partnership in 2000, Blockbuster chose instead to defend its dying model of distribution.  Like Blockbuster, the rest is history.

To avoid Napster moments, become Napster

In essence, what it comes down to is that the only sure way to avoid Napster moments is to be the player in your industry causing them to happen.  If you don’t define the terms of change in your industry, someone else will.  History shows that the choice is pretty simple  – disrupt or be disrupted.