bNet
By Geoffrey James | July 18, 2011
While the blog of LeNoble’s Media Sales Insights is directed to media management and sales and marketing professionals within its framework.. I believe our readers will enjoy this special edition which will be broken into 6 different articles. Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D. Publisher: LeNoble's Media Sales Insights and CEO Executive Decision Systems, Inc. Littleton, CO.
RULE #1: Trick Closes Don’t Work
The sales world is full of lore about how to close. Most of it is pure nonsense. Specifically, the following trick closes keep popping up, sometimes in major sales seminars. Here the are:
• The assumptive close. Ask the customer to make a meaningless decision that assumes a decision has been made. Example: “Do you want that in the hunter green or the hunter orange?”
• The flyfish close. Promise something valuable then take it away if a decision isn’t made now. Example: “We have a special offer – a 15 percent discount – but only if you decide to buy now.”
• The puppy-dog close. Let the customer try the product for free in the hopes the customer will fall in love with it. Example: “We’ll give you the product free for your evaluation and only charge you if you don’t return it.
• The reverse close. Ask a customer who’s saying “no” a question intended to elicit a “no” that actually means “yes.” Example: “Is there any reason that you wouldn’t do business with our company?”
These “trick closes” are stupid and ineffective. Any buyer with an ounce of sophistication will see a trick close coming a mile away — and is likely to think you’re a fool for trying it.
Of course, saying something is ineffective isn’t the same thing as saying it doesn’t work. A trick close can definitely generate a sale, especially if the buyer isn’t too bright. Even so, trick closes are insulting to the customer and destructive to the long-term customer relationship. Here’s why:
If a customer has already decided to buy, then a trick close (by definition) isn’t necessary. The only reason to use a trick close is if the customer has not yet decided to buy, hence the need to trick the customer into making a decision. With the trick close, you’ve forced the customer to buy something that he doesn’t yet want.
Now, it’s perfectly true that the customer may really need your offering and after delivery be satisfied (even delighted) with what it does for him, but at some level or another he will always know that you tricked him into buying before he was ready.
But that’s the best case scenario. If the customer doesn’t really need your offering, and only bought because you tricked him (and he didn’t know how to gracefully get out of the deal), that’s going to create massive resentment.
And you’ll end up losing in the long run. So if you’re serious about really learning how to close, forget the tricks and learn the other five rules. (More to come tomorrow)
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Turn Prospects into Customers with E-mail
Bloomberg Businessweek
Posted by: Today's Tip Contributor on July 15, 2011
Ryan Allis, Chief Executive Officer; IContact, Morrisville, N.C.
E-mail marketing is an essential part of any marketing mix for businesses looking to further connect customers with their brand. When done effectively, e-mail drives a site’s return visitors and repeat customers, while also turning prospects into lifelong evangelists.
Here are some tips to help your business make the most out of your e-mail campaigns:
1. Make it permission-based. Only send e-mails to individuals who have opted-in to receive e-mails from your organization on the topic you are addressing.
2. Get to the in-box. Using an e-mail service provider that has white-list relationships with Internet service providers will allow your e-mail to get to the in-box of your recipients, instead of their spam folder.
3. Set up a schedule. Decide how often you will be sending your newsletter and commit to it. We see that a weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly newsletter is usually best.
4. Make it worthwhile. In your e-mail—above the fold, and ideally in the subject line—address what the reader will get out of your e-mail. You usually have about five seconds to grab the reader’s attention. Include only valuable and relevant content and perhaps a coupon or special offer.
5. Include lots of links. The more links you include in your message, the higher click-through rate you will have.
6. Use a compelling subject line. Average open rates are 12 percent to 14 percent. Test different subject lines and send content that is most relevant to your subscribers. If you can get an open rate above 15 percent, consider yourself a winner.
7. Get social. Social media does not replace your e-mails. It allows you to increase the exposure of your e-mail content to a broader audience and to engage more deeply with your best customers.
Posted by: Today's Tip Contributor on July 15, 2011
Ryan Allis, Chief Executive Officer; IContact, Morrisville, N.C.
E-mail marketing is an essential part of any marketing mix for businesses looking to further connect customers with their brand. When done effectively, e-mail drives a site’s return visitors and repeat customers, while also turning prospects into lifelong evangelists.
Here are some tips to help your business make the most out of your e-mail campaigns:
1. Make it permission-based. Only send e-mails to individuals who have opted-in to receive e-mails from your organization on the topic you are addressing.
2. Get to the in-box. Using an e-mail service provider that has white-list relationships with Internet service providers will allow your e-mail to get to the in-box of your recipients, instead of their spam folder.
3. Set up a schedule. Decide how often you will be sending your newsletter and commit to it. We see that a weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly newsletter is usually best.
4. Make it worthwhile. In your e-mail—above the fold, and ideally in the subject line—address what the reader will get out of your e-mail. You usually have about five seconds to grab the reader’s attention. Include only valuable and relevant content and perhaps a coupon or special offer.
5. Include lots of links. The more links you include in your message, the higher click-through rate you will have.
6. Use a compelling subject line. Average open rates are 12 percent to 14 percent. Test different subject lines and send content that is most relevant to your subscribers. If you can get an open rate above 15 percent, consider yourself a winner.
7. Get social. Social media does not replace your e-mails. It allows you to increase the exposure of your e-mail content to a broader audience and to engage more deeply with your best customers.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Media Buyers To Wall St.: We're More Cautious, Focused On ROI
MediaDailyNews
by Joe Mandese, 6 hours ago
The outlook for the U.S. ad economy has grown "incrementally cautious," according to an informal survey of some big media buyers released this morning by the equity research team at Deutsche Bank. The survey of more than a dozen buyers representing over $5 billion in U.S. advertising budgets, mirrors the sentiment of some recent downgrades in the major agency holding companies' advertising outlooks, and is attributed mainly to the uncertainty surrounding the macro economy, as well as some micro factors such as media price inflation, and the trend toward so-called "ROI" media, such as search, and online display advertising.
"Status quo. Everyone is looking for ROI and proven effectiveness," readers the verbatim response of one buyer in the Deutsche Bank report. "Recovering slowly. There is more confidence in advertising as an investment that produces a positive ROI," reads another.
One buyer even described the current advertising climate as "schizophrenic," noting that initial expectations coming into 2011 haven't "held up," and that much of the optimism heading into 2012 is due to "artificially inflated" factors such as incremental spending due to the 2012 Summer Olympic Games in London and the U.S. elections.
Overall, the Deutsche Bank survey reflects the trends shown in the big agency outlooks, with greater optimism for national media - especially TV and digital - and a more tepid view for local media, particularly radio and newspapers. National magazines are also under pressure as marketers and agencies put increased emphasis on media that can demonstrate an immediate ROI - or return on investment.
Not surprisingly, digital media -- especially online search, display, video, mobile and social media - have stronger expectations among the media buyers surveyed.
"If the ad market hits a soft patch, this trend will likely become more apparent as buyers will likely increase their investment in higher ROI media, at the expense of print and radio," the securities analysts wrote in their report, which projects that online media will continue to lead U.S. advertising growth for the foreseeable future.
"We remain bullish on the fundamentals of Internet media, and continue to believe that ad dollars will follow consumers as they migrate to new platforms, resulting in another year of robust growth in 2011 once again," the analysts wrote, noting that much of digital media's gains will be coming from ad budget share gains from print media, and adding that a "strong e-commerce market continues to drive investment in online advertising."
The consensus of the media buyers surveyed is that "online/digital" ad budgets will rise 7.0% in the U.S. in 2011, a more modest view than Deutsche Bank's own prediction of 18% growth for digital media spending this year, but still the healthiest of the major media, according to the buyers. TV (+5.1%) and outdoor (+2.5%) are the only other major media expected to reap gains, yielding an overall gain of 3.2% among the major U.S. media for 2011. That is in line with recent outlook revisions issued by Interpublic, WPP, Publicis and Aegis.
While online and digital media remain the catalysts for overall growth, a recent survey of advertisers and media buyers released by Advertiser Perceptions Inc. indicates the relative optimism of digital media may be losing some steam too. While API's Spring 2011 Advertiser Optimism report the highest level of optimism - the difference between those indicating plans to increase or decrease advertising budgets - since the global economic crisis hit, the relative contribution of digital media appears to be ebbing, though it remains considerably higher than analogue media.
The digital media average dropped 11 optimism points from API's Fall 2010 survey to a 48, and mobile fell five points to a 61.
Between search and display, API found slightly greater erosion in the optimism for display ad spending, which eroded 13 points to a 46, while search declined 11 points to a 47.
Even the vaunted social media category, as reflected by advertiser optimism to spend on Facebook, has declined on a relative basis, dropping 12 points to a 58 from last Fall to this Spring.
On a positive note, elements of the online display marketplace - especially ad networks/exchanges (+6 points to 26), demand-side platforms (+4 points to 16), and portals (+6 points to 11) - are showing gains in optimism. Though agency trading desks, low to begin with, have dropped two points to an optimism index of only two points.
by Joe Mandese, 6 hours ago
The outlook for the U.S. ad economy has grown "incrementally cautious," according to an informal survey of some big media buyers released this morning by the equity research team at Deutsche Bank. The survey of more than a dozen buyers representing over $5 billion in U.S. advertising budgets, mirrors the sentiment of some recent downgrades in the major agency holding companies' advertising outlooks, and is attributed mainly to the uncertainty surrounding the macro economy, as well as some micro factors such as media price inflation, and the trend toward so-called "ROI" media, such as search, and online display advertising.
"Status quo. Everyone is looking for ROI and proven effectiveness," readers the verbatim response of one buyer in the Deutsche Bank report. "Recovering slowly. There is more confidence in advertising as an investment that produces a positive ROI," reads another.
One buyer even described the current advertising climate as "schizophrenic," noting that initial expectations coming into 2011 haven't "held up," and that much of the optimism heading into 2012 is due to "artificially inflated" factors such as incremental spending due to the 2012 Summer Olympic Games in London and the U.S. elections.
Overall, the Deutsche Bank survey reflects the trends shown in the big agency outlooks, with greater optimism for national media - especially TV and digital - and a more tepid view for local media, particularly radio and newspapers. National magazines are also under pressure as marketers and agencies put increased emphasis on media that can demonstrate an immediate ROI - or return on investment.
Not surprisingly, digital media -- especially online search, display, video, mobile and social media - have stronger expectations among the media buyers surveyed.
"If the ad market hits a soft patch, this trend will likely become more apparent as buyers will likely increase their investment in higher ROI media, at the expense of print and radio," the securities analysts wrote in their report, which projects that online media will continue to lead U.S. advertising growth for the foreseeable future.
"We remain bullish on the fundamentals of Internet media, and continue to believe that ad dollars will follow consumers as they migrate to new platforms, resulting in another year of robust growth in 2011 once again," the analysts wrote, noting that much of digital media's gains will be coming from ad budget share gains from print media, and adding that a "strong e-commerce market continues to drive investment in online advertising."
The consensus of the media buyers surveyed is that "online/digital" ad budgets will rise 7.0% in the U.S. in 2011, a more modest view than Deutsche Bank's own prediction of 18% growth for digital media spending this year, but still the healthiest of the major media, according to the buyers. TV (+5.1%) and outdoor (+2.5%) are the only other major media expected to reap gains, yielding an overall gain of 3.2% among the major U.S. media for 2011. That is in line with recent outlook revisions issued by Interpublic, WPP, Publicis and Aegis.
While online and digital media remain the catalysts for overall growth, a recent survey of advertisers and media buyers released by Advertiser Perceptions Inc. indicates the relative optimism of digital media may be losing some steam too. While API's Spring 2011 Advertiser Optimism report the highest level of optimism - the difference between those indicating plans to increase or decrease advertising budgets - since the global economic crisis hit, the relative contribution of digital media appears to be ebbing, though it remains considerably higher than analogue media.
The digital media average dropped 11 optimism points from API's Fall 2010 survey to a 48, and mobile fell five points to a 61.
Between search and display, API found slightly greater erosion in the optimism for display ad spending, which eroded 13 points to a 46, while search declined 11 points to a 47.
Even the vaunted social media category, as reflected by advertiser optimism to spend on Facebook, has declined on a relative basis, dropping 12 points to a 58 from last Fall to this Spring.
On a positive note, elements of the online display marketplace - especially ad networks/exchanges (+6 points to 26), demand-side platforms (+4 points to 16), and portals (+6 points to 11) - are showing gains in optimism. Though agency trading desks, low to begin with, have dropped two points to an optimism index of only two points.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The Horrible Boss Screening Test
bNet
By Jessica Stillman | July 11, 2011
Thanks to Hollywood, horrible bosses have filled the media lately. Psycho supervisors might make great material for comedians, but in real life, of course, you want to avoid them like the plague. So when you’re hunting for a gig, how can you screen out all the different sorts of crazy you might encounter in a manager and avoid a real life version of the new film?
Stanford management professor and author Bob Sutton has an unusual and very topical specialty — what he politely refers to as “bossholes” — so he’s been fielding a lot of questions similar to this lately. To help out everyone inspired by fiction to make sure they avoid real life lunatics in the corner office, he’s taken to his blog to offer a list of 10 types of horrible bosses, as well as screening questions to identify them.
The post is, as usual, entertaining and well worth a read in full, but just to give you a taste, here are some questions Sutton suggests asking other direct reports of your potential new boss before you accept any position:
“How does the prospective boss respond to feedback from people higher in rank and lower in rank?” “Can you provide examples from experience?”
“Does the prospective boss accept criticism or blame when the going gets tough?”
“In what situations have you seen the prospective boss lose his temper?”
“Which style best describes the prospective boss: gives out gratuitous credit, assigns credit where credit is due, or believes everyone should be their own champion?”
“What do past collaborators say about working with the prospective boss?”
“What kind of email sender is the prospective boss?”
“What types of people find it difficult to work with the prospective boss? What type of people seem to work very well with the prospective boss?” Pay attention to responses that suggest “strong-willed” or “self-motivated” people tend to work best with the prospective boss because assholes tend to leave people around them feeling de-energized and deflated.
“Does the prospective boss share information for everyone’s benefit?”
“Would people pick the prospective boss for their team?”
By Jessica Stillman | July 11, 2011
Thanks to Hollywood, horrible bosses have filled the media lately. Psycho supervisors might make great material for comedians, but in real life, of course, you want to avoid them like the plague. So when you’re hunting for a gig, how can you screen out all the different sorts of crazy you might encounter in a manager and avoid a real life version of the new film?
Stanford management professor and author Bob Sutton has an unusual and very topical specialty — what he politely refers to as “bossholes” — so he’s been fielding a lot of questions similar to this lately. To help out everyone inspired by fiction to make sure they avoid real life lunatics in the corner office, he’s taken to his blog to offer a list of 10 types of horrible bosses, as well as screening questions to identify them.
The post is, as usual, entertaining and well worth a read in full, but just to give you a taste, here are some questions Sutton suggests asking other direct reports of your potential new boss before you accept any position:
“How does the prospective boss respond to feedback from people higher in rank and lower in rank?” “Can you provide examples from experience?”
“Does the prospective boss accept criticism or blame when the going gets tough?”
“In what situations have you seen the prospective boss lose his temper?”
“Which style best describes the prospective boss: gives out gratuitous credit, assigns credit where credit is due, or believes everyone should be their own champion?”
“What do past collaborators say about working with the prospective boss?”
“What kind of email sender is the prospective boss?”
“What types of people find it difficult to work with the prospective boss? What type of people seem to work very well with the prospective boss?” Pay attention to responses that suggest “strong-willed” or “self-motivated” people tend to work best with the prospective boss because assholes tend to leave people around them feeling de-energized and deflated.
“Does the prospective boss share information for everyone’s benefit?”
“Would people pick the prospective boss for their team?”
The Most Powerful Channel For Media Data? It Might Be TV
MediaPostBlogs:OnlineMetricsInsider
by Bill Wise, Tuesday, July 12, 2011, 1:45 PM
Over the past few weeks, I've been pretty tough on TV metrics, arguing that GRP is outdated and that TV metrics aren't evolving quickly enough for a digital world. But don't think I'm bearish on TV.
Quite the opposite. Digital media may be winning the buzz war, but TV continues to impress. And I'm not just talking about the enormous viewership TV continues to pull, even for watching programs at the moment they air. I'm talking about TV as an extraordinarily powerful platform for leveraging data.
I could cite a lot of examples of how TV continues to pull ahead on the data front. But I'll point to just three: the immense boon that DVRs can be for TV ads; the value of social graph data for media planning; and the new face of ROI metrics for television.
DVRs make TV ads more valuable. Yes, that's a surprising approach for an advertising industry insider to take-but the fact is, DVRs are one of the greatest potential sources of data in the advertising landscape today. Every DVR usage leaves a trail of information that tells both buyers and creatives what ads are skipped through, what ads are viewed, what points in the ad gained the best engagement, and even which ads viewers chose to watch multiple times. When you think about it, there's a reason TiVo has sidelined into the analytics business.
Social graph data is TV planning data. My thoughts last week notwithstanding, there's a ton of opportunity to link social data to TV planning. After all, social networks are the place we discuss the things that are the most top of mind -- and for many of us, that means talking about the TV shows we love. eMarketer sums up the research on the topic nicely, noting that "43% of online adults have gone online or used social media to engage with TV programming in some way" -- and the numbers are higher for the coveted 18-34 demographic. Mew technology is making the TV/ social connections tighter: Comcast's latest version of Xfinity TV, for instance, helps customers use Facebook to let friends' favorite TV shows guide them in their own viewing.
That's a ton of social graph data telling you what demographic engages most deeply with which shows. For a TV planner, that's a gold mine.
TV data is now ROI data. With the notable exception of low-quality DR spots, we've been trained to understand TV as almost exclusively a reach play -- offering a lot less information linking ads to performance than other channels do. But TV is becoming more direct, and more metrics-rich, than ever before. Enterprises like TRA marry TV ads with actual purchase activity, while ventures including Canoe bring direct response to the set-top-box, allowing TV viewers to download coupons and catalogs directly through their TV screens. Then there's the new mobile / TV connections-which set the stage for new levels of individualized data that can tie TV ads with mobile conversion and targeting information. One example: Mobile music service Shazam has raised $32 million to forge deeper into TV-triggered mobile coupons and mobile brand engagement, with advertisers like Old Navy, Paramount, and Procter & Gamble signing on to the program.
Has TV reached the point of being as addressable and accountable as online marketing? Not as of today. But combine the new data-rich TV technologies with the digital sources of planning data, and mix them with the enormous pool of viewers who still engage with TV enough to make a nice side career -- and I wouldn't change the channel on TV metrics just yet.
Sure, there's no limit to the data that digital media can provide. But for the most powerful marketing platform available now, I'll still flip on the old tube.
by Bill Wise, Tuesday, July 12, 2011, 1:45 PM
Over the past few weeks, I've been pretty tough on TV metrics, arguing that GRP is outdated and that TV metrics aren't evolving quickly enough for a digital world. But don't think I'm bearish on TV.
Quite the opposite. Digital media may be winning the buzz war, but TV continues to impress. And I'm not just talking about the enormous viewership TV continues to pull, even for watching programs at the moment they air. I'm talking about TV as an extraordinarily powerful platform for leveraging data.
I could cite a lot of examples of how TV continues to pull ahead on the data front. But I'll point to just three: the immense boon that DVRs can be for TV ads; the value of social graph data for media planning; and the new face of ROI metrics for television.
DVRs make TV ads more valuable. Yes, that's a surprising approach for an advertising industry insider to take-but the fact is, DVRs are one of the greatest potential sources of data in the advertising landscape today. Every DVR usage leaves a trail of information that tells both buyers and creatives what ads are skipped through, what ads are viewed, what points in the ad gained the best engagement, and even which ads viewers chose to watch multiple times. When you think about it, there's a reason TiVo has sidelined into the analytics business.
Social graph data is TV planning data. My thoughts last week notwithstanding, there's a ton of opportunity to link social data to TV planning. After all, social networks are the place we discuss the things that are the most top of mind -- and for many of us, that means talking about the TV shows we love. eMarketer sums up the research on the topic nicely, noting that "43% of online adults have gone online or used social media to engage with TV programming in some way" -- and the numbers are higher for the coveted 18-34 demographic. Mew technology is making the TV/ social connections tighter: Comcast's latest version of Xfinity TV, for instance, helps customers use Facebook to let friends' favorite TV shows guide them in their own viewing.
That's a ton of social graph data telling you what demographic engages most deeply with which shows. For a TV planner, that's a gold mine.
TV data is now ROI data. With the notable exception of low-quality DR spots, we've been trained to understand TV as almost exclusively a reach play -- offering a lot less information linking ads to performance than other channels do. But TV is becoming more direct, and more metrics-rich, than ever before. Enterprises like TRA marry TV ads with actual purchase activity, while ventures including Canoe bring direct response to the set-top-box, allowing TV viewers to download coupons and catalogs directly through their TV screens. Then there's the new mobile / TV connections-which set the stage for new levels of individualized data that can tie TV ads with mobile conversion and targeting information. One example: Mobile music service Shazam has raised $32 million to forge deeper into TV-triggered mobile coupons and mobile brand engagement, with advertisers like Old Navy, Paramount, and Procter & Gamble signing on to the program.
Has TV reached the point of being as addressable and accountable as online marketing? Not as of today. But combine the new data-rich TV technologies with the digital sources of planning data, and mix them with the enormous pool of viewers who still engage with TV enough to make a nice side career -- and I wouldn't change the channel on TV metrics just yet.
Sure, there's no limit to the data that digital media can provide. But for the most powerful marketing platform available now, I'll still flip on the old tube.
U.S. Mobile Advertising To Hit $1.2 Billion In 2011
MediaPostPublications: OnlineMediaDaily
by Mark Walsh, Thursday, July 14, 2011, 4:49 PM
A new J.P. Morgan report predicts U.S. mobile ad spending will roughly double to $1.2 billion this year, fueled by growing mobile usage.
That forecast is in line with an eMarketer projection that U.S. mobile advertising will reach $1.1 billion in 2011. The Internet Advertising Bureau estimates that mobile ad dollars totaled in the range of $550 million to $650 million last year.
In an analysis focusing on top Internet companies, JP Morgan analyst Douglas Anmuth says the firm expects mobile to be the single biggest factor accelerating Web growth for the next several years. He points out that mobile data traffic is already three times the level of the wired Internet globally in 2000. In addition, the build-out of next-generation networks will increase connection speeds tenfold by 2015.
The J.P. Morgan report estimates mobile ad revenue in 2011 comes to $7 or $8 per user -- well below the $35 per Internet user during the post-bubble days of Web advertising in 2002. (The roughly $600 million in mobile advertising last year was equal to only a fraction of the $26 billion in Internet spending.) The smaller real estate of phone screens and limitations on ad creative also present obstacles to higher spending.
Driving demand for faster mobile data delivery is the spread of smartphones.
Despite rapid growth, the report points out that global penetration will only approach 30% this year, indicating that there is still plenty of room for expansion. (A Pew study released this week estimated U.S. smartphone penetration at 35%.) Worldwide, IDC predicts smartphone share will reach 45% in 2015.
Even so, Anmuth argues that advertising on smartphones and tablets will ramp up much faster than on the PC-based Web, especially given the established online ad market. And based on the growth of mobile users and location-based services, mobile advertising could ultimately become larger than Web-based advertising.
When it comes to major Internet companies, Google has been among the most aggressive in pushing into mobile through Android, search and mobile payment initiatives like Google Wallet. Mobile likely accounts for 5% of the company's gross revenue in 2011, according to the J.P. Morgan report. Google earlier this year said revenue from mobile operations had reached $1 billion on an annualized basis.
Anmuth noted that Yahoo has a stronger mobile presence overseas through a host of carrier deals, including with operators such as Vodafone. But mobile texting represents a threat to Yahoo's traditional strength in email, which represents about half of its page views. Likewise, the rollout of mobile app versions of key properties like Yahoo Finance and Fantasy Football could undermine the portal model the company is built on.
In the online retail sector, eBay is viewed as well-positioned for mobile. The company is on track to generate $4 billion in mobile transactions this year, while payments unit PayPal will do $3 billion in mobile. eBay this month also acquired mobile payments provider Zong for $240 million to add carrier-based billing to its payments arsenal.
Amazon has a variety of apps including Amazon Mobile, Deals, Kindle, and Price Check, but is still at an early stage in m-commerce. Amazon a year ago said customers had spent more than $1 billion on mobile devices (including via the Kindle) in the prior 12 months. If the company introduces its own tablet in the next few mon
by Mark Walsh, Thursday, July 14, 2011, 4:49 PM
A new J.P. Morgan report predicts U.S. mobile ad spending will roughly double to $1.2 billion this year, fueled by growing mobile usage.
That forecast is in line with an eMarketer projection that U.S. mobile advertising will reach $1.1 billion in 2011. The Internet Advertising Bureau estimates that mobile ad dollars totaled in the range of $550 million to $650 million last year.
In an analysis focusing on top Internet companies, JP Morgan analyst Douglas Anmuth says the firm expects mobile to be the single biggest factor accelerating Web growth for the next several years. He points out that mobile data traffic is already three times the level of the wired Internet globally in 2000. In addition, the build-out of next-generation networks will increase connection speeds tenfold by 2015.
The J.P. Morgan report estimates mobile ad revenue in 2011 comes to $7 or $8 per user -- well below the $35 per Internet user during the post-bubble days of Web advertising in 2002. (The roughly $600 million in mobile advertising last year was equal to only a fraction of the $26 billion in Internet spending.) The smaller real estate of phone screens and limitations on ad creative also present obstacles to higher spending.
Driving demand for faster mobile data delivery is the spread of smartphones.
Despite rapid growth, the report points out that global penetration will only approach 30% this year, indicating that there is still plenty of room for expansion. (A Pew study released this week estimated U.S. smartphone penetration at 35%.) Worldwide, IDC predicts smartphone share will reach 45% in 2015.
Even so, Anmuth argues that advertising on smartphones and tablets will ramp up much faster than on the PC-based Web, especially given the established online ad market. And based on the growth of mobile users and location-based services, mobile advertising could ultimately become larger than Web-based advertising.
When it comes to major Internet companies, Google has been among the most aggressive in pushing into mobile through Android, search and mobile payment initiatives like Google Wallet. Mobile likely accounts for 5% of the company's gross revenue in 2011, according to the J.P. Morgan report. Google earlier this year said revenue from mobile operations had reached $1 billion on an annualized basis.
Anmuth noted that Yahoo has a stronger mobile presence overseas through a host of carrier deals, including with operators such as Vodafone. But mobile texting represents a threat to Yahoo's traditional strength in email, which represents about half of its page views. Likewise, the rollout of mobile app versions of key properties like Yahoo Finance and Fantasy Football could undermine the portal model the company is built on.
In the online retail sector, eBay is viewed as well-positioned for mobile. The company is on track to generate $4 billion in mobile transactions this year, while payments unit PayPal will do $3 billion in mobile. eBay this month also acquired mobile payments provider Zong for $240 million to add carrier-based billing to its payments arsenal.
Amazon has a variety of apps including Amazon Mobile, Deals, Kindle, and Price Check, but is still at an early stage in m-commerce. Amazon a year ago said customers had spent more than $1 billion on mobile devices (including via the Kindle) in the prior 12 months. If the company introduces its own tablet in the next few mon
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Local Radio and TV Are Significant Contributors To The Gross National Product
MediaPostlogs Research Brief
by Jack Loechner, Yesterday, 8:15 AM
Local television and radio broadcasting contributes 7% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, or $1.17 trillion annually, as well as 2.52 million jobs attributable to the industry every year, according to an NAB-commissioned study conducted by Woods & Poole Economics, with support from BIA/Kelsey. Total 2010 GDP Impact of Local Television and Radio Broadcasting
Contributor
Dollars and Jobs
GDP annually
$1.17 trillion
From television
$716.43 billion
From radio
$453.88 billion
Jobs on an annual basis
2.52 million
In television
1.54 million
In radio
0.98 million
Source: Newspaper Association of America, June 2011
The study calculated that the local broadcast industry employs over 300,000 people directly and in support industries, creating $49.32 billion in GDP annually. Television accounts for almost 187,000 of these jobs, as well as over $30 billion in GDP, while radio employs 118,000 people and contributes a little over $18 billion to the GDP. Through the consumption of goods and services by industry employees, local commercial broadcasting generates almost $135 billion in additional GDP and more than 833,000 jobs nationwide.
The economic impact of the commercial local broadcast industry, terrestrial television and radio stations, has three major components.
First, the direct impact of the industry is the result of its significant size: 1,370 commercial television stations and more than 11,700 commercial radio stations sustaining more than 300 thousand jobs and more than $49 billion in output.
(It is important to note, says the report, that only commercial local broadcast television and radio is included in this analysis. If noncommercial local broadcast television and radio were included the impact on the United States economy would be greater.)
The direct impact of local television and radio broadcasting on the United States economy is estimated at 305 thousand jobs and $49 billion in economic output. Local television broadcast stations generate 187 thousand jobs and $30 billion in economic output, while local radio broadcast stations generate another 118 thousand jobs and $19 billion in economic output.
The core direct impact of local television and radio broadcasting includes the number of jobs directly in local television and radio as well as the number of jobs in advertising and programming. It is estimated that local television and radio broadcasting and advertising and programming alone account for 195 thousand jobs.
Other industries are impacted by local television and radio broadcasting as well. When measured with a technical input-output analysis an additional 110 thousand jobs are supported in other industries because of the goods and services requirements of local television and radio broadcast stations.
Direct Impact of Local Television and Radio
• $49.32 billion in GDP annually
•$30.19 billion from television
•$19.13 billion from radio
•305.23 thousand jobs on an annual basis
•186.85 thousand in television
•118.38 thousand in radio
Second, workers in the commercial local broadcast television and radio industry consume goods and services in all other sectors of the economy supporting more jobs and creating more income and output. This ripple effect is estimated to result in 833 thousand jobs and $135 billion in output.
The income from local television and radio broadcast jobs flows through the economy creating additional jobs. A job in local television and radio broadcast stations multiplies itself by helping create jobs in construction, farming, mining, state and local government and all other economic sectors.
The workers in the industries supplying goods and services to local television and radio broadcast workers in turn consume goods and services. It is estimated that the cascading effect of jobs and income emanating in local television and radio broadcasting results in $135 billion in additional GDP and 833 thousand jobs nationwide.
Effect of Local Television and Radio on Other Industries
•$134.64 billion in GDP annually
•$82.42 billion from television
• $52.22 billion from radio
•833.27 thousand jobs on an annual basis
•510.10 thousand in television
•323.16 thousand in radio
Third, the output of commercial local broadcast television and radio industry stimulates economic activity by providing a forum for advertising that is free to consumers. An estimated $986 billion in United States output and 1.38 million jobs are attributable to the stimulative effects of advertising on local television and radio.
Local television and radio advertising serves an important role for both consumers and businesses in providing economic information on product prices and features, resulting in greater demand for well made and well priced goods and services. The additional demand contributes to aggregate economic growth.
An unintended consequence of paid advertising by business is that competitors learn of product features, innovations and price structures, encouraging businesses to adapt and offer better products at lower prices benefiting consumers and creating real economic growth and increases in wealth.
The primary impact of broadcast television and radio is reducing the cost of product information through advertising. In this way, broadcast television and radio stations have their most significant impact on economic growth, although the entertainment value of local broadcast television and radio is often emphasized in discussions on their impact on society.
Stimulative Effect of Local Television and Radio on the Economy
•$986.35 billion in GDP annually
•$603.82 billion from television
•$382.54 billion from radio
•1.38 million jobs on an annual basis
•846.56 thousand in television
•536.32 thousand in radio
According to the report, and data collected within the study, the outlook for growth in the commercial local broadcast industry, terrestrial television and radio stations, is strong. Research suggests that both television and radio local broadcast revenues will grow through the year 2015. The unique forum and low cost of providing entertainment and product information to consumers ensure that revenues will increase in coming years. The economic impact previously described in the study will show parallel growth.
by Jack Loechner, Yesterday, 8:15 AM
Local television and radio broadcasting contributes 7% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, or $1.17 trillion annually, as well as 2.52 million jobs attributable to the industry every year, according to an NAB-commissioned study conducted by Woods & Poole Economics, with support from BIA/Kelsey. Total 2010 GDP Impact of Local Television and Radio Broadcasting
Contributor
Dollars and Jobs
GDP annually
$1.17 trillion
From television
$716.43 billion
From radio
$453.88 billion
Jobs on an annual basis
2.52 million
In television
1.54 million
In radio
0.98 million
Source: Newspaper Association of America, June 2011
The study calculated that the local broadcast industry employs over 300,000 people directly and in support industries, creating $49.32 billion in GDP annually. Television accounts for almost 187,000 of these jobs, as well as over $30 billion in GDP, while radio employs 118,000 people and contributes a little over $18 billion to the GDP. Through the consumption of goods and services by industry employees, local commercial broadcasting generates almost $135 billion in additional GDP and more than 833,000 jobs nationwide.
The economic impact of the commercial local broadcast industry, terrestrial television and radio stations, has three major components.
First, the direct impact of the industry is the result of its significant size: 1,370 commercial television stations and more than 11,700 commercial radio stations sustaining more than 300 thousand jobs and more than $49 billion in output.
(It is important to note, says the report, that only commercial local broadcast television and radio is included in this analysis. If noncommercial local broadcast television and radio were included the impact on the United States economy would be greater.)
The direct impact of local television and radio broadcasting on the United States economy is estimated at 305 thousand jobs and $49 billion in economic output. Local television broadcast stations generate 187 thousand jobs and $30 billion in economic output, while local radio broadcast stations generate another 118 thousand jobs and $19 billion in economic output.
The core direct impact of local television and radio broadcasting includes the number of jobs directly in local television and radio as well as the number of jobs in advertising and programming. It is estimated that local television and radio broadcasting and advertising and programming alone account for 195 thousand jobs.
Other industries are impacted by local television and radio broadcasting as well. When measured with a technical input-output analysis an additional 110 thousand jobs are supported in other industries because of the goods and services requirements of local television and radio broadcast stations.
Direct Impact of Local Television and Radio
• $49.32 billion in GDP annually
•$30.19 billion from television
•$19.13 billion from radio
•305.23 thousand jobs on an annual basis
•186.85 thousand in television
•118.38 thousand in radio
Second, workers in the commercial local broadcast television and radio industry consume goods and services in all other sectors of the economy supporting more jobs and creating more income and output. This ripple effect is estimated to result in 833 thousand jobs and $135 billion in output.
The income from local television and radio broadcast jobs flows through the economy creating additional jobs. A job in local television and radio broadcast stations multiplies itself by helping create jobs in construction, farming, mining, state and local government and all other economic sectors.
The workers in the industries supplying goods and services to local television and radio broadcast workers in turn consume goods and services. It is estimated that the cascading effect of jobs and income emanating in local television and radio broadcasting results in $135 billion in additional GDP and 833 thousand jobs nationwide.
Effect of Local Television and Radio on Other Industries
•$134.64 billion in GDP annually
•$82.42 billion from television
• $52.22 billion from radio
•833.27 thousand jobs on an annual basis
•510.10 thousand in television
•323.16 thousand in radio
Third, the output of commercial local broadcast television and radio industry stimulates economic activity by providing a forum for advertising that is free to consumers. An estimated $986 billion in United States output and 1.38 million jobs are attributable to the stimulative effects of advertising on local television and radio.
Local television and radio advertising serves an important role for both consumers and businesses in providing economic information on product prices and features, resulting in greater demand for well made and well priced goods and services. The additional demand contributes to aggregate economic growth.
An unintended consequence of paid advertising by business is that competitors learn of product features, innovations and price structures, encouraging businesses to adapt and offer better products at lower prices benefiting consumers and creating real economic growth and increases in wealth.
The primary impact of broadcast television and radio is reducing the cost of product information through advertising. In this way, broadcast television and radio stations have their most significant impact on economic growth, although the entertainment value of local broadcast television and radio is often emphasized in discussions on their impact on society.
Stimulative Effect of Local Television and Radio on the Economy
•$986.35 billion in GDP annually
•$603.82 billion from television
•$382.54 billion from radio
•1.38 million jobs on an annual basis
•846.56 thousand in television
•536.32 thousand in radio
According to the report, and data collected within the study, the outlook for growth in the commercial local broadcast industry, terrestrial television and radio stations, is strong. Research suggests that both television and radio local broadcast revenues will grow through the year 2015. The unique forum and low cost of providing entertainment and product information to consumers ensure that revenues will increase in coming years. The economic impact previously described in the study will show parallel growth.
How to Manage Gen X & Y
Dealerscope Exclusive
By Elly Valas 2011
I’d like to send early congratulations to the 40-under-40 group of industry leaders who will be recognized in the June issue of Dealerscope (and at Dealerscope.com, so stay tuned). They have worked hard and are certainly making their mark in the industry. As good as they may be, though, they provide unique challenges to their supervisors. The younger generation is bright, tech savvy and enthusiastic, but they don’t always respond positively to traditional management styles.
For the first time in history we now have four generations in the workplace. Generation Y, or The Millennials, were born between the late 1970s and early 1990s.Generation X represents the children of the Baby Boomers. As the economy has contracted many Baby Boomers and some senior veterans have stayed on their jobs as well. Each generation has distinct attitudes, behaviors, expectations, habits and hot buttons.
Remember when older workers were the bosses and younger workers did what was asked of them, no questions asked? There were definite rules as to how the boss was treated and how younger workers treated older workers. Today, roles are changing and new rules are being written every day.
Gen X and Y need very different leadership than the Boomers and Veterans ahead of them. They prefer to self manage and want their managers to mentor and coach them. Give them a job and let them figure out how best to get it done. Give them honest feedback.
They want to have ongoing opportunities to learn and grow. They need to grow personally and professionally. Let them design and present new product demos for each other. Encourage them to enroll in classes, Toastmasters and networking groups.
They’re a fun-loving bunch and they expect work to be fun. The old model of punching in for eight hours of drudgery in order to earn some after-work playtime doesn’t fly with Gen X and Gen Y. They expect to enjoy their work and become friends with their associates, frequently socializing after hours. As a manager, you have to make the workplace welcoming and fun, encouraging play and camaraderie. Come to your sales meetings in your pajamas or have a scavenger hunt to find clues to new product features.
Younger workers need to be challenged. Instead of seeking their comfort zones, they look to change up routine and have lots of different things to do. Move them around between departments. Ask them to help deploy new technologies or maintain your Facebook and Twitter pages. They may seem loyal but they are masterful at reinvention. Boredom will drive them away quickly.
By Elly Valas 2011
I’d like to send early congratulations to the 40-under-40 group of industry leaders who will be recognized in the June issue of Dealerscope (and at Dealerscope.com, so stay tuned). They have worked hard and are certainly making their mark in the industry. As good as they may be, though, they provide unique challenges to their supervisors. The younger generation is bright, tech savvy and enthusiastic, but they don’t always respond positively to traditional management styles.
For the first time in history we now have four generations in the workplace. Generation Y, or The Millennials, were born between the late 1970s and early 1990s.Generation X represents the children of the Baby Boomers. As the economy has contracted many Baby Boomers and some senior veterans have stayed on their jobs as well. Each generation has distinct attitudes, behaviors, expectations, habits and hot buttons.
Remember when older workers were the bosses and younger workers did what was asked of them, no questions asked? There were definite rules as to how the boss was treated and how younger workers treated older workers. Today, roles are changing and new rules are being written every day.
Gen X and Y need very different leadership than the Boomers and Veterans ahead of them. They prefer to self manage and want their managers to mentor and coach them. Give them a job and let them figure out how best to get it done. Give them honest feedback.
They want to have ongoing opportunities to learn and grow. They need to grow personally and professionally. Let them design and present new product demos for each other. Encourage them to enroll in classes, Toastmasters and networking groups.
They’re a fun-loving bunch and they expect work to be fun. The old model of punching in for eight hours of drudgery in order to earn some after-work playtime doesn’t fly with Gen X and Gen Y. They expect to enjoy their work and become friends with their associates, frequently socializing after hours. As a manager, you have to make the workplace welcoming and fun, encouraging play and camaraderie. Come to your sales meetings in your pajamas or have a scavenger hunt to find clues to new product features.
Younger workers need to be challenged. Instead of seeking their comfort zones, they look to change up routine and have lots of different things to do. Move them around between departments. Ask them to help deploy new technologies or maintain your Facebook and Twitter pages. They may seem loyal but they are masterful at reinvention. Boredom will drive them away quickly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)