Ramblings of a media CEO

Windows 7 - last chance for Microsoft??

2009-10-06T09:53:00.000-07:00

As a small business owner there are always periods of time when investments in infrastructure become a blinding necessity. Just recently we embarked upon a re-branding and website overhaul which we trust will be completed by the end of this month - that’s a significant investment in time, energy and cash. But the rewards are tangible and satisfying. Next on the agenda is the question of materials upgrades...

With this in mind I came across the following article on Bmighty.com about the value of smb's upgrading to Windows 7. It reminded me of the fact that I had already blogged about XP verses Vista back in 2007 . Back then we made a decision to not support Vista. We deliberately purchased a half dozen machines with XP that were put on ice and rotated into our renewal program as other machines slowed or new staff joined. That policy ensures a consistent operating platform and contented employees for two more years. Given all we know about Vista it was a wise move.

Now maybe different. While XP still feels perfectly adequate for most day to day business applications the tech world is radically different now than it was back in 2001 when XP first showed up (yes THAT long ago). I'm dealing with a generation of iphone app users now and frankly the expectations they have as consumers absolutely impacts the expectations they have for business tools.

So the big question for this new generation of Microsoft Windows software is whether it really does offer enough bells and whistles to justify early adoption. Already I hear that there are issues. Initial versions will downgrade to XP to facilitate transition but reportedly after a relatively short period it will only downgrade to Vista (OMG!!!).

Microsoft need to be very careful – there are other valid alternatives solutions available to smb’s now like the ability to pull apps from the cloud (back in 2001 we had a server in house running Lotus Notes for email, database and collaboration tools – now everything is piped in via the web) or even a move towards Apple technology which can more easily be integrated into the existing systems as several of our team have done.

So I will watch with interest the reaction to Windows 7. I’ll read the reviews and listen to the discussions on the web amongst early users and see just what this has to offer and then we will decide in which direction to move…if I’m a representative sample of a typical smb then Microsoft better get it right this time or it could be game over for them.

B2B research - brand verses demand gen

2009-09-24T12:17:00.000-07:00

I was extremely interested to see some coverage of a research piece between Ziff Davis Enterprise, Forbes and B2B agency Stein Rogan and Partners. The article link on B2B magazine can be found here.

Firstly the findings that a majority of B2B marketers (64%) are giving equal weight to branding and demand gen is reassuring. Over the last 2 years we have found the tech market has shifted heavily towards lead generation, many times at the expense of more identifiable branding initiatives. This is also compounded by a shift to more digitally based, response focused media, often as we know at the expense of traditional media formats like print.

Now don't get me wrong - it's my personal opinion that lead gen and branding are entirely compatible, indeed the assets used to generate leads are often the "deliverable proof" of some higher brand promise (proving a technology leadership position, innovation in the field, improved servicing of a market segment, better customer service, etc).

However there's a mind set question here. In many companies lead or demand gen is operated separately from corporate or brand communications. For marketers to realize the joint goals they set forth in the research, it's going to be critical to see more integration of these two components.

As a second side note the views on mix of media used for branding is fascinating. OOH at 72% and social media at 69% ahead of broadcast and print 68% and 64% respectively bodes well for the OOH industry but really throws up another key point.

Social media is, by it's nature unpredictable. My opinions here could in theory attract negative views from the market and may impact on my company brand. With social being a much more dynamic environment and less controllable, are marketers taking a huge risk by giving it such a huge role in brand development? It absolutely has a role to play. Giving it the right weight in the mix is where the questions lies.

These are interesting and highly dynamic times. B2B marketing departments and service companies as well as publishers are indeed set for exciting changes. The real winners will be those that get the media mix right and successfully integrate all the components. That change will need to start internally, with bigger broader campaign initiatives, real vision and use of appropriate metrics.

Going Green - coming of age?

2009-09-17T11:45:00.000-07:00

You cannot expect us to be based in Berkeley, California and not have an interest in the green space. It's part of the DNA of the region and infused within the local culture.

With this in mind it was nice to attend this weeks Going Green 2009 event and get an update on how this sector of the market is developing. The Going Green event is predominately an opportunity for green tech companies to network with potential investors and for industry experts to discuss the issues driving new innovation and change.

Two sessions were particularly interesting to me - "Terrawatts of Solar" and "Urban Development". The solar experts discussed the issues around industrial scale delivery of solar for grid electricity and highlighted the issues blocking this. Incredibly second to financing and ROI (which is a huge obstacle) the next one they noted was "environmentalists". Ironic I thought that legal protests from those protecting habitats would delay a technology that could save the planet!

The "urban" panel drew attention to the difficulties of executing on major renovation/modernization projects like Boston's "Big Dig", Seattle's tunnel project and London's Cross Link Railway. Most noted that going underground was in most cases the only option left without massive disruption to existing infrastructure, while again the cost and political will was always a challenge especially for publicly funded and managed projects. In many cases providing an infrastructure upgrade necessary to facilitate the "greening" of a city (less traffic, more pedestrian areas, more mass transit, bike lanes, etc) simply are never going to get the financial support. Money it seems is the stumbling block to so many green initiatives.

Finally a very important theme came through about who controls the future of green tech success.

The US is simply a terrible industrial environment to realize the change needed to help green tech succeed. Let me qualify that - in terms of innovation it's all happening here and to an extent in Europe too. But and it's a big BUT - the commitment required to actually realize the technology and bring it to market only exists in one market - China. The economy and commitment in that market is geared towards the long term. We all know green innovations and change pay off long term but US culture now thinks short term, quarter to quarter and so to thrive, green tech must utilize China's phenomenal industrial might. The downside of this...an ever faster leaching of intellectual value from the US to China and even greater reliance on one economy to provide long term global solutions.

Bottom line - the world needs a strong US/China relationship, perhaps more now than ever before. Only then will green tech really come of age.

NOTE - Just Media have handled media campaigns for Solar City - targeting residential customers and encouraging installation of solar systems for the home; Applied Materials - running a global campaign promoting Applied's solar manufacturing equipment and San Francisco Environmental - promoting recycling habits amongst city residents and business.

Wow what a ride!

2009-09-10T10:35:00.000-07:00

I was staggered to see that my last blog post was back in May. In some ways that reflects the internal shift in focus required by all during what was some massive upheavals within both the media industry and our own company. It's nice to finally come up for air.

I guess everyone who works in this industry has felt the effects. Layoffs have been abundant in media companies and across the board we have witnessed adjusted business models, pricing structures, staff skill sets and services. Ultimately organizations have been forced to reflect upon their own best practices. Change has been the most common theme over the last 6 months.

Just Media was no different. We lost two key staff members - long term employees who we miss greatly. But when client spends drop - in some cases by 90%, any organization needs to adjust to survive. Thankfully we are now back hiring again and able to take advantage of some great talent to boost our teams expertise. Adding new blood is a fantastic way to re-energize - new ideas, different experiences and fresh thinking - challenging the conventional thinking and creating new angles to attack and deliver upon existing client goals.

Client wise it's also been a roller coaster ride. Early signs in 2009 showed big budget cuts and the inevitable shift of dollars to ROI and lead gen - almost to the exclusion of all other media activity. That's tough for all. Small budgets as we all know don't take less time to manage. I lost count of projects that got planned only to get cut at the last minute when quarterly figures didn't match expectations. That frustrates everyone - clients and agency - everyone feels like they are stuck in the mud with wheels spinning.

However in the last few months things have changed. We have picked up some major wins - Hitachi Data Systems, Trinet HR services, Juniper Networks, Webroot and Stephens Bank - and whats interesting is that ALL are asking for assistance to develop strategies, plan and run branding and awareness campaigns. A return to true marketing perhaps?

So as analysts predict an end to the recession, companies appear now to be rushing to claim market and mind share from competitors. All realize the window for this is short and anyone who is sleeping now will miss one of those rare post recession openings to win and win big....

Maybe the real ride is only just beginning - buckle up....

Now this is funny - every client should watch this.

2009-05-27T16:15:00.000-07:00

The following video was sent to me and like most agency folks right now it's nicely summarizing the types of conversations that are happening in the real world. I guess we may even be accused of doing the same thing with our publishing partners as we squeeze them for more value.

Thankfully since we don't do creative work we are probably not being hit as badly as some agencies as regards the very final comments - they are priceless though and very apt right now.

Hats off to the creative team that did this work. The very fact they did it and it resonates with so many in the industry is somewhat telling I think.

BTW has anyone esle noticed there seems to be more black humor around at the moment. Idle hands are obviously still finding things to do (and yes I know this is my second blog of the day)

Why some tech CMO's succeed and others don't

2009-05-27T10:01:00.000-07:00

There is an interesting article just been posted on the Forbes site once again noting that the most dangerous C suite title to carry is that of CMO. The article notes that the average tenure for a CMO is just 28 months compared with 38 months for CIO's and at least four years for other C titles.

This got me thinking. Since we have dealt with literally hundreds of tech companies over the years, is the situation any different in our space and what might be effecting that.

Well we are different in some ways. Tech companies are always looking at innovation as a core business driver and culturally this infuses the marketing department with a feeling that they must always operate on the cutting edge of what is available as a communications vehicle. The hasty move away from print and the current obsession with social media are two classic examples of tech marketing trying to force the issue. But there's more to it than that.

The more I consider this, the more I realize there are basically two forms of tech company marketing department. Stable and dysfunctional.

We have some incredibly good clients with staff who have been present for a considerable time and who one might even suggest are "stable". This stability though exists in two completely different forms.

Firstly there is the version where marketing is a culturally defined function of sales support and where the marcom professionals place is to provide assistance to a sales program through somewhat monotonous but consistent marketing activities such as events management, collateral production, lead generation and product related marketing support which may sometimes include the odd media campaign. Stability is delivered by the simple fact that no one has time to think long term and indeed there is little compunction or will to do so. Budget management is only done by quarter and no sooner is one activity completed than the next is underway. The relentless treadmill turns and the marketing team, in order to be successful, must function as a well oiled machine.

In the second type of stable tech marcoms set up, the client usually operates within a relatively strict set of brand guidelines, creating campaigns within defined parameters and with a longer term corporate communications goal in mind. This works well, forcing the alignment of the different marketing components together and allows for more consistently integrated campaigns. Sure it has drawbacks - mostly in the stifling of the more radical creative ideas but even here, with some leeway and the right "adult supervision" things can still get interesting.

Both types of stability have drawbacks. The first tends to be staff burnout. Only certain types of marketing professionals accept relentless grind and one might argue that the real talent will tend to move on to organizations presenting more of a challenge and greater opportunity. This is perhaps unfair - some CMO's simply enjoy building extremely functional departments and should be applauded for doing so.

In the second scenario the real problem is maintaining the consistency, especially in the short term. It typically requires other C level functions - mainly the CEO - to be very supportive of the brand vision and not feel inclined to tinker with it. If they buy in, then they will often move on to focus on other aspects of the business and allow the CMO the leeway to run with the vision and mould it over time. They must also accept, that while marketing should be measured, not all of marketing's objectives can be simplified into a spread sheet. Carrying a brand vision into the market is as much about tone, feel and emotion as CPC and CPL's.

So what makes a CMO bound to fail? Sadly dysfunctional tech marketing departments abound. In many cases the CMO is responsible themselves. They come in and immediately engage in radical overhaul without necessarily taking the time to leverage the good that exists. They "throw the baby out with the bathwater" and can actually inflict more harm than good - especially if they don't stick around long enough to complete the task. This approach can be due to a radical difference in their vision as to what marketing goals should be or simply a wish to stamp their creative/message vision on the company at the expense of any historic work done. Again a CEO is probably behind much of this as they look for marketing to "reinvent itself" to help a struggling company position or diminishing bottom line.

However the most common problem I observe is often an organizational infrastructure that's just designed to kill any CMO's good intentions. Field marketing, corporate marketing, lead generation, events marketing, product marketing, web team, regional marketing, PR, etc, etc. Any company with this many departments, often with private agendas and rarely coordinated, is a disaster waiting to happen. If I meet any CMO who tells me "oh that's not something I control" I know they are doing the job with both hands tied behind their back. It's simply impossible to rally the troops if some think they are Indians and others think they are the cavalry. It never ceases to amaze me how often one marcoms function appears to be taking pleasure in screwing up the actions of another.

Oh the stories I could tell.......

Google gets a dose of media reality

2009-05-12T10:54:00.000-07:00

I sometimes joke with the Just Media team that media planning could be done by a bunch of trained monkeys. It's one of the reasons clients are always trying to pay us peanuts for our services!

Indeed in this modern economy of cost cutting and service justification it's often the impression that agencies like ours that only do media planning and buying (no creative work) are a luxury item that can be replaced, in many cases by clients doing the work themselves. Well for once I have to send my thanks to Google for proving to all that it's simply not possible to replace hard working media professionals with automated systems and algorithms.

The news Google has pulled out of trying to sell traditional media like print and radio was somewhat of a surprise to me I have to say. I was quietly concerned that potential cost savings offered by media bidding models would attract significant attention and dollars out of the hands of professional buyers, like us. I thought, foolishly it seems, that human input into this process was so devalued by many that a new "agency" model was being created - indeed that was the stated goal.

However the reality is it's actually getting harder than ever to be in this business. The knowledge required is so much greater than just 15 years ago when I started on the agency side (where I moved for ad sales). Obviously the web has lead to much of that - it's a media vehicle with almost unlimited options and the ability to combine pretty much every other media type within it (print, radio, TV, events, face to face meeting, out of home - all is replicated in the digital world). However as we have seen even radio, a media format that offers so many similarities with online as regards buying (small standardized ad units, solid audience demographics, calculated values of spot rate based on target reached) it's really not that simple. Especially complex is the evaluation of the performance metrics so beloved by Google algorithms and also the "human effect" of bias ingrained in most radio advertisers who like to speculate on what times and stations their target is listening rather than using simple mathematics to calculate a reach/impression/value matrix that builds a plan based on desired response.

So thank you Google - for once you have helped prove we still do have a place in this world and that my team is not in any immediate danger of being replaced by chimps and gibbons.

We know what you think!

2009-05-04T09:10:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine sent me a link to an interesting company who have recently won a marketing innovation award, called Neurofocus.

This technology of scanning brain patterns is not new and I recall hearing about it several years ago, based on the interesting results of studying subliminal messages as part of an academic study.

For obvious reasons this is both fascinating and completely scary. Being able to predict what messages will be most effective in creating reactions and response offers huge potential to the advertising, branding and marketing communities (not to say sales). It's especially intriguing to think about reactions to messages that are not necessarily driven by logical thought patterns but our emotional ones (the ones we have so much trouble controlling that is).

Like all new advances there are two sides to this. In adults one feels this is perhaps somewhat less contentious - we are all free thinking and emotionally stable right? But what about other groups like kids. Groups that are driven far more by emotional reactions and who are less able to adjust for those subtle nuances being produced by brain induced research? Should this technology be banned in it's application to those groups and who's going to police it (I should state here and now that I am not a fan of deliberate advertising and targeting to anyone under the age of 16).I have absolutely no faith in our industry to self regulate.

Like I say fascinating stuff and without doubt open to producing some spectacular results when applied correctly to the industry in which we operate. However just as the original research showed, use of subliminal content and brain reactions need to be carefully managed before things get out of hand.

Ad spends to drop in 2009 but should yours?

2009-03-26T10:27:00.001-07:00

The parent company of Just Media's London office, Aegis Media, have just announced their 2009 media ad spend predication's. Global decline was predicted as being down by 5.8% while in the US this figure was predicted to fall by 9.8%.

For an industry that creaks and groans as soon as it is not experiencing year on year increases or 2-3% this data may appear to be a disaster but lets look at this more realistically.

Media rates have softened and it's entirely possible that much of this decline can be absorbed by cost reductions in strongly negotiated media buys. So any company who actually does slash a budget by 10% is probably going to net out with almost as much media as before.

Also a 10% decline in budgets means that for every marketer who is slashing their budget significantly (you perhaps?) there are others who are seeing the opportunity to grab market share of voice and actually increase activity. Also historically we know that those that do slash hard, also tend to be the most conservative and the slowest to come back.

Within the tech sector and indeed our own client base we have seen this pattern emerge. Some clients have reacted to market pressures by slashing back on spend and consolidating all activity into lead gen programs - completely abandoning significant outbound awareness marketing programs. Others are seizing the opportunity afforded by softer rates to buy stronger integrated campaigns which include a balanced mix of above the line components such as print ads, advertorials and targeted banner creative with direct contact strategies or lead development through content syndication, small personal events programs and virtual and web events.

While I fully understand the natural reaction within executives is to look at instant cost reduction (I am a CEO after all) I can only hope that marketing professionals in tech companies are not bowing to pressures and making decisions that will in the long term prove to be counter intuitive.

This is not the first recession we have seen and it's won't be the last. Ever noticed the pattern that those who emerge the strongest each time are the companies who didn't disappear off the face of the planet and stop talking to their customers?

Fascinating results of radio's new measuring techniques

2009-03-06T17:06:00.000-08:00

Although we buy radio advertising on behalf of some clients and are actually quite strong proponents of this media platform for certain types of campaigns (for example retail promotions) I certainly don't claim to be an expert.

This week we were visited by Victoria Mann a lovely sales rep from SF station KFOG. She took us through us through some of the recent changes in radio listenership methodology and the impact that has had on station demographics...fascinating stuff.

Historically radio audience figures were drawn up by using selected panels recording their listening patterns in a diary format. This has now been replaced by an electronic surveillance device which actually picks up stations unique ID codes when people are really listening (as opposed to what they remembered listening to).

When analyzed by age groups what pops out are the following interesting facts (note this is for SF/Bay area stations only):

With the exception of some urban and dance stations the 18-24 age group is not really listening to the radio. Of those groups that are, it's reasonable to suspect that most are concentrated in minority demographic groups given the skew to musical style (hip hop, urban and Latino stations score much higher than rock, indie and country styles)

The 6-17 year old age group is listening to many of the same stations as those with 25-44 age skew - effectively showing the data is collected for the kids at the same time as the parents. This raises the question as to whether kids are actually "listening" or are they just "exposed" to mum or dads radio choice - that I know is true for my kids.

That conservative talk radio stations are fundamentally now an "oldies" select with almost 70% of listeners over the age of 55.

That progressive talk radio is more solidly in the 35 - 54 age range so technically a more attractive demo for most advertisers despite lower listening figures than their political rivals.

That sports radio tends to skew male and over 35 (OK no shock there then)

That listening really is spread throughout the day part and is not limited to just the "drive" hours.

This new data really goes a long way to enabling media buyers to more accurately read between the lines and build even stronger radio buys.

The question to be raised here just like for print media - if our new generation is not consuming this media platform now, how will this effect radio in the long term. On the reverse side the data shows that radio is certainly a very valid media option and does still deserve it's place at the table.

2009-02-27T12:51:00.000-08:00

United Business Media announced Thursday that four issues of Information Week this year will be available solely as downloadable interactive PDFs.

The publication is calling these four PDFs “InformationWeek Green Issues.” and said it will plant a tree for each of the first 5,000 downloads of each of the four issues in conjunction with American Forests.

Whilst I applaud the efforts to reforest the planet, I'd personally like to see a more significant move coming from publishers who would like us to take digital magazine more seriously - get us genuine performance data!

Over the years, publishers have dodged major questions about digital versions of magazines, almost never giving details of download numbers, open numbers, pages consumed, advertisements clicked or unsubscribe rates. Many have hidden behind the "well when we send out a print magazine we can't tell you how many people actually read them either" line, which whilst true hardly is comparable. Digital versions are, by there nature, able to provide stats. I know this by having had "private" discussions with publishers, so it's obvious to me that if data is not forthcoming it's probably because it's not that impressive.

Result - As a rule the agency does not encourage support of this format. We are strong advocates for print (our own research proves that magazines DO still get read) and obviously we do a boat load of web advertising.

Personally I'm frustrated - I really do want to support digital formats and think the industry as a whole would benefit enormously if we have data to help us understand them and evaluate sensibly. Perhaps these special issues will provide us with more data...I will keep you posted.

A master class in using social media for a business

2009-02-25T10:09:00.000-08:00

In these times of high stress and depression it's always nice to find a story that brightens the day. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did:

We all know the business world has become obsessed with finding ways to use social media to promote their brand. It's a delicate balance and most companies struggle with developing an appropriate approach - mainly because the marketing department is incorrectly set up to handle and exploit this new media environment (but that's for another blog). In this instance, Irish airline company Ryanair has illustrated they do at least have a clear strategy of dealing with bloggers.

Fantastic !

:-)

Does the industry have the courage to say no?

2009-02-23T10:35:00.000-08:00

If the report in the recent Advertising Age is true then the media and advertising industry needs to take a good hard look at itself. And frankly it's going to need to get itself a set of "chicken nuggets" large enough to avoid being held to ransom.

In case you have not heard, some of the biggest advertisers in the market including GM and Budweiser owners Anheuser-Busch are insisting they be given 70 or even 120 days to pay bills related to advertising activities.

In an industry that is already reeling from reduced spending levels, such an attitude is effectively blackmailing any supplier who might be in the unfortunate position to have to rely on this business to survive. It's a shifting of credit from banks (who know better than to subsidize these giants) to the small companies across the industry. It's classic corporate bullying of the very worst kind.

This will result in only one thing - faster and more complete destruction of the industry. No agency can survive on 70 days credit - especially since that's almost never the reality and payments almost always arrive later than the stipulated time. Even large media owners will suffer severe cash flow issues if enough giant advertisers pull the same stunt.

Obviously there are ways to reduce exposure to this. Firstly it is a refusal to accept these terms. If you have succeeded in being viewed as more than just another commodity, then many client contacts will fight tooth and nail to get you supported, as we oursleves have seen in many contract negotiations. Secondly it is possible to insist that the advertiser takes responsibility for paying media invoices directly (thus enabling the media owners to say no to the business or accept floating the campaign themselves). Thirdly it is to walk away from the business and look for more sustainable accounts elsewhere.

As someone who runs a small business and strives everyday to be honest with suppliers and staff, there's something inherently despicable about companies that advertize brand attributes about positive behaviour, play on the heart strings of the American spirit and portray themselves as bringing positive influence into peoples lives when behind the scenes they are prepared to screw an entire segment of small companies. Survival at the expense of others should not be acceptable and they should be called on it (well done to Ad Age for publicizing this).

As you can see I'm not buying it...

What price content?

2009-02-16T22:26:00.001-08:00

I was listening to a very interesting debate from the Charlie Rose program about the future of newspapers with Walter Isaacson of "Time," Robert Thomson of "Wall Street Journal" and Mort Zuckerman of "The New York Daily News".

A couple of items caught my attention. Firstly the comment that Google devalues everything - the argument being that through Google, advertisers can target ads anywhere on the web regardless and without thought towards the content quality against which the ads run. That's true, although as someone who focuses on audiences, I also have to note that audience quality is also a highly questionable sales item that I have rarely observed to have been delivered or proven in reality (no site I ever worked with could give me any reasonable guarantee my ad was being seen by anyone I was actually trying to target).

The second item I picked up on was the comment that publishers are in danger of loosing the relationship with readers in order to chase revenue from the advertiser. Now that has often been put forward as the case in many B2B fields where magazines shamelessly would jump on the next "hot" topic in order to generate ad revenue. Is this any different now on the web?

I would argue that it is. The problem is that now site designers are looking at all the ways they can integrate ad messages into sites - leading advertising to become so intertwined with content - that in many cases users are getting even less original content and more "ad created content" than ever before.

So at what point does this turn full circle. Does the subscription model ensure freedom from this advertising/content bond? If so can publishers who have so far offered content for free ever realistically charge for it and move away from advertising. With so much out there do readers even value content quality as much as they used to especially the "web generation" who have probably little loyalty to brands especially when getting news from Google news feeds.

What price content indeed.

Business predictions for 2009 and a look back...

2009-01-05T09:53:00.000-08:00

As we start this new year, it's appropriate to look forward to 2009 predictions and also interesting to look back at 2008.

I was amazed and slightly perplexed to read my introduction notes to my 2008 predictions. At that time I was already noting tough times ahead for the economy and likely recession - interesting given that the actual arrival of this was really delayed in most peoples minds until the stock crash in October. This was confirmed in our own business figures. Up until October 2008 we had consistently been out performing 2007 and were up in both revenue and income. A very good year in fact with even more growth than I had thought possible.

Well as we enter 2009 I think everyone is now on the same recessionary page. Indeed the reactions appear to have swung almost into panic mode with concerns about the global economy the main subject of every holiday dinner conversation. People are worried and in ways which I cannot say I have experienced before.

The issue this time is the global scale of this recession and the fact that no-one really knows exactly how we will get out of it. Root to this confusion and concern is the nature of the problem. World financial markets have run riot and since they are global in nature they outreach the power of individual national political establishments to control them. Everyone has thrown money at the problem but I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that will actually work or who even thinks that solution is fair.

Bottom line is that this year we will see huge reaction to the worry with companies hunkering down - eliminating excess spends, jobs and scaling back to consolidate on core activities. It's CFO's perfect storm and they will become the single most important corporate player in 2009.

Probably the worst place to be in a recession is at the end of the marketing chain. Marcoms budgets are the easiest to cut and like many companies in the segment we can see 2009 budgets
being slashed back by almost every client as they prepare for the tight year ahead. We see the results already - WPP the global media/ad agency behemoth predicts scaling back it's operation in both US and Europe, this comes after similiar stories about rival Omnicom.

So what for Just Media in 2009. Well like 2008 I predict we will need to consolidate with our existing clients, expand the client base to make up for individual budget shortfalls and we will see even greater movement to performance based, lead gen activity. Goals for us this year will also include expanding some service offerings whether through partnerships or additions to the team. More on that laterin the month.

It's going to be a tough year of that I'm certain. However opportunities will continue to open up as businesses shift around agency relationships (especially those downsizing from big brand shops) and the need for specialist skills grows in value. We are well placed to capitalize on this and with hopes for a rebound later in 2009 it will be another crazy 12 months.

Safety belts will be obligatory....

Soft media rates in 2009...I'm not so sure

2008-11-11T21:06:00.000-08:00

Over the last few weeks I have heard numerous clients talk about an expectation of softening of the media rates into next year as the economy gets squeezed. But is this a reasonable assumption?

I would argue that it's not and that unlike many previous recessionary periods which have seen media owners slash rates, we may not necessarily see the same trends this time, especially in our two prime media platforms -print and online...why you ask?

We lets start with print media.

In a previous life I used to be a magazine publisher, constantly watching the magazine balance sheet. It was generally tied to one key metric - page yields. High page yields invariably meant higher profit margins but also drove advertisers away when their perception of the magazine's value was not matched by the rates they were offered. As a publisher you could chose to lower yields to chase higher page volumes, knowing that adding pages was relatively cheap and easy and could ultimately drive higher income and total profits even if margin was lowered. It also was critical when in a competitive market to gain market share as a show of strength.

Well in 2008 I think most publishers have established page yields that they feel they must maintain typically calculated to deliver a certain basic issue size. We all know it's no longer about having a big issue size and they are happy to publish the minimum pages needed each week or month to service readers and a core of advertisers. Volume pressures have gone.

Also since publishers now see significantly less income generated from print media compared to other services like events, online and lead gen, magazines are much more easily closed without damaging the overall income model they have established. I know of even profitable magazines that have been closed because they no longer fitted a long term strategy, so advertisers should not expect any loyalty from publishers to their magazines if they themselves do not spend dollars on the ads.

So bottom line is I don't think publishers will feel any inclination to give pages away just to stay afloat. Cutting issue size and closing magazines is more likely in most cases this time around especially where online extensions have been fully established.

Now online.

Well like many I expect rates to hold up. Demand is rising as dollars shift out of traditional media and a recession will only accelerate the trend to spending more on measurable media. It's the safest option for marketing manager. Sites can still sell primary inventory at a decent margin knowing the spare inventory will be snapped up by ad networks desperate for a competitive edge especially in the B2B space. Sure consumer, high volume buys may see a squeeze with networks especially pushing to get onto more media buys, but it's also the case that those media buys are much more 'spray and prey' than most in our space could ever be. Frankly for B2B most networks fall sadly flat.

So while there are certain to be a few deals out there it's unlikely to be the shark frenzy we have seen in years gone by. Expect more consolidation and media closures than a rash of cheap ads. Expect your preferred online sites to be telling you they have sold out of all the good inventory rather than bucket shop deals. And expect your media agency to measure your expectations so that they can still buy the media they feel is effective rather than chase cheap deals.

As always it's just my humble opinion.

Lead fatigue

2008-09-18T09:51:00.000-07:00

Last week I had one of those great media lunch meetings where a publishing representative lets rip about the market and offers up insights and views that confirm some of my long held suspicions. Obviously I'll not divulge names but needless to say it was a significant player in the IT space and the discussion was centred around lead generation programs.

The bottom line is lead gen programs are getting harder to fulfill. Good assets from big brands will always do well, but older assets and those items which are badly thought out or simply way too product centric (a client favourite especially from product marketing and therefore an obvious attempt to sell and not educate) are not getting picked up like they used to. It's putting pressure on publishers and creating distrust in the market from users. Opt outs are increasing and more "mickey mouses" are appearing in lead lists. Quality is suffering.

As I have long suspected IT professionals are becoming increasingly jaded at vendor and publisher practices. Traditionally they were subject to online advertising campaigns well before any other B2B segment in the market. This is now being replicated with lead generation programs where users are offered up all manner of enticing white papers, articles, web events and podcasts and simply have to leave a few tit bits of personal information. Bang - next thing they know a random sales person is calling chasing them for meeting and hard selling them a product. This is fine if they are in late stage buying cycle but in so many cases this is simply not the case and the user is left confused and abused. Bad brand experience or what.

However they are not the only ones. Internal vendor sales staff are now biting back. Sales people hate chasing cold or low quality leads. The answer "er I don't remember downloading anything from you" is scarily typical.

So who's to blame. Marketing? Well no. Marketing has simply been instructed to make sure that all investment efforts now deliver leads. In many cases performance bonuses are based on driving ever lower cpl (cost per lead) metrics. This is crazy.

Frankly the system is reaching breaking point and until vendor executives go back to marketing 101 and recall exactly what marketing's entire role should be then it's not going to get better. Just in case anyone is listening lets review:

Firstly marketing should be the brand stewards. That is: to ensure the brand awareness is maintained or improved and most importantly developed in line with current and future business growth plans. It should always be ahead of where the company wants to go not reacting to it.

Secondly marketing needs to provide a range of messages and collateral to help move prospects down the sales cycle. Someone doing high level investigation into a particular subject probably won't react too favourably to a hard sales call. They will likely respond well to a follow up email that offers some more information related to the original download they made.

Thirdly marketing should support sales efforts by facilitating the dialogue with customers and yes creating high value sales leads.

It should not be hard for a vendor to create an asset map with different items available to support both different job functions and buying stage requirements. CIO's need very different information than IT project managers or even technology experts - yet all are vital to the sales process. Vendors should offer up a maximum amount of generic literature for free. They should think about who their sales teams typically engage with most successfully. They should also think about the functions that create barriers to the sale.

Example - a CEO in a major company is unlikely to get involved in the vendor review process but may stop a sale if he's unfamiliar with a vendor. Getting information to him is key but do you really think he's going to register to get it? Same can often be said with more senior IT functions.

Bottom line is this - vendors need to remember that assets should be considered very much part of the brand communication strategy. If the vendor makes a big brand promise, the assets are the proof that the claim is substantiated. They should be provided in a way that reflects the vendors business practice. More subtle communications is what customers expect from vendors offering sophisticated business solutions. Offering a suite of assets reflects an understanding of the customers needs throughout the buying process. Campaigns need to be planned accordingly and in many cases success should not be judged by cpl metrics but by just how many assets got distributed out there into the market.

With economic constraints likely to push more vendors into lead generation obsession, I fear this is only going to get worse before it gets better.

Olympic experience

2008-08-24T21:26:00.000-07:00

Before anyone imagines that I made it out to China, sadly that was not the case but it was still a quite excellent experience and worthy of some comment.

As we all know NBC paid a massive amount of money for the event and they sure did well out of it. However I feel we must recognize they also did a very good job. This was probably the first major sporting event where having HD really paid off big time. Every sport just looked better and was more compelling in HD. The swimming especially stood out for me although the real gain was the ability to see the fine details in terms of the athletic effort exerted by so many of the competitors. These details have been lacking in TV coverage to date. HD makes that possible and is so much more compelling when it's sport after sport after sport (rather than a single ball game or Superbowl).

Tivo (or DVR) service was of course a must to watch the coverage properly. NBC had to make back the dollars and advertising breaks plagued the content and disrupted the flow. Having said that I must applaud the advertisers and agencies who generally did a good job of making ads that fitted in well and were generally of superior quality. Visa particularly did a nice job with the "Phelps" ads - contextually working with their sponsorship of the event.

As regards advertising at the actual event...it really passed me by which either means it was very subtle, or I suspect, somewhat limited visually at the events. Again that's good. The Olympics only come around every four years and it should rightly be about the athletes who put such huge efforts in and not the advertisers.

Being a British, I missed many of the GB medals as obviously the coverage here in the US was skewed but such was the thrilling nature of many of the US efforts that it really did not matter. Human endeavour is what the real Olympic spirit is an as usual there was plenty of that no matter what colour jersey was being worn.

And congratulations to China. No doubting they managed to make the event feel enormous with the scale of both venues and extravaganzas matching the exploits of the sportsmen and women. I don't know what it was like there but they appeared to really deliver on the primary objective required which is to enable everyone to enjoy the experience whether there in person or not.

So next to London. It will be very tough for the UK to match these organizational exploits and given our history of incompetence with major public endeavours (wobbly millennium bridge, London Eye that opened late, Wembley Stadium debacle being just some examples) it's a worry that we will be ready in time. However I expect the Brits to out do the Chinese in one area - that is consistently fill the stadium. Too often the efforts on the ground were not matched by the attendance in the venue. Here's where the real efforts should be made if London is really to respond to the high level set here.

LinkedIn grows up.

2008-08-13T21:49:00.000-07:00

Had a great meeting with the folks from LinkedIn today and for the first time I'm actually excited by the prospect of discussing social media with a client with some actual real solutions that are both realistic to execute upon but leverage the social aspect of the network.

For those not familiar, LinkedIn ,unlike the consumer social networks Facebook and MySpace, is a white collar, B2B social network which allows people to establish contacts and a network with business associates. The key aspect is that users almost entirely avoid out of work contacts (family and friends) and therefor the usage is almost entirely devoted to ones business life with profiles devoid of pictures of kids, partners and strange animals. How refreshing!

From the advertisers perspective this audience is a goldmine. The information is constantly updated by the individuals in question and targeting is possible by all manner of demographics - job, company, industry, etc. The problem has always been how to use this appropriately.

Like most agencies our early clumsy attempts of using traditional ads produced results comparable to running ads on content sites - proving context and general functional targeting are about even in efficiency. However now LinkedIn is providing solutions that really enable to advertiser to get up close and personal and frankly I can't wait to start playing with this.

New items include polls, question and answer programs and highly targeted personalized edm. New group capabilities will be added soon and the site also announced plans to open itself to some very carefully vetted apps (hopefully applying lessons learnt by Facebook).

Finally we may see B2B social networking growing into a youthful child - still innocent and unspoilt but open to fresh ideas and inspiring those around it. Lets hope it remains this way for a while before old advertising hacks like me turn it into a troubled teenage - all frustration, anger and bitterness.

Social media and linear metrics

2008-06-11T16:53:00.000-07:00

I read with interest this article on the problems marketers are struggling with in relation to the use of social media at the recent DMA conference.

This highlights well the existing problem faced by social media and indeed online media in general as we move into 2008. The "Google effect" means that marketers are now expected to provide clear performance reports showing that dollars invested can track directly to specific actions - ultimately sales - for every online campaign.

But as we all know, advertising and marketing does not always line up in this way. Social media especially is not set up to work in this way. Even a strong interest from users may not result in any direct measurable sales and in many cases the campaigns are about users enjoying some kind of brand experience rather than a straight 'click, review, buy' model.

So finally online marketers are being asked the same questions that traditional media has suffered from for years...prove this is working !!

It's interesting the article makes reference to seeking out the help of academics. I have no doubt the future for social media campaigns, online brand campaigns and traditional media in general will be measured by clever statistical analytics of: Y% change in brand preference = x% increase in sales. Until this is done no CEO/CFO is going to get the answers they now want. They are also unlikely to back 'brand campaigns' the way they used to without a second thought.

Hey online media community...this problem is only going to get worse before it gets better. As you start pulling higher percentages of media dollars away from traditional media you better start getting ready to answer these types of questions more frequently. Online can no longer hide behind click rates and cpc's. The questions will now get more demanding and we as an industry have set ourselves up to fail by relying on linear numbers to set expectations.

Thanks goes to Google for helping educate executives just enough to become a right royal pain in the backside!!

"linear ROI" - defined (by me) as the directly measurable link between ad and action, typically through a click on an advertisement and subsequent activity on the client website.

"Non linear ROI" - defined (by me again) as the indirect action or responding to an advert - such as hear radio ad...go to store and buy product or engage in online social media activity and three weeks later buy product via online store.

"Google effect" - defined (by guess who) as the expectation by executives that all online media activities will be able to demonstrate a tangible linear ROI metric or clearly defined performance based metric. This effect has resulted from the original pay per click search model, so strongly championed by Google, which has set unrealistic expectations as to what web based marketing campaigns should always be delivering.

Barmy Ballmer ?? part 2

2008-06-08T22:54:00.000-07:00

Following on from my anti Steve Ballmer rant a couple of days ago (see previous post), I got to thinking more about just what will be some of the changes in media delivery in 10 years.

Lets assume for a minute that several things have happened to facilitate IP delivery. Firstly penetration of broadband is now standard for everyone and "super broadband" (with spends suitable for interactive TV viewing) are also spreading fast across the more affluent population centres.

TV's are now linked directly to our IP system which also includes on demand films from NetFlix and a huge DVR hard drive capable of recording multiple channels simultaneously. All TV is fully interactive but most users receive limited advertising because the latest Tivo devices actually record and scrub the ads out. meshing the content into one continuous stream. In an attempt to bypass this consumer exclusion of ads, product placements have become so standard that many programs are simply sponsored by big brands to the exclusion of any major segment competitor.

What TV advertising does exist, tends to target lower and working class consumer demographics, since these are the only audiences who's technology lag means they still have to sit through the standard advertising packages. The TV ad industry is decimated however millions flow in those sponsorship and content deals since without this support great TV content simply does not get produced.

Since most consumer groups, especially middle and higher income consumers now get all digital content via their IP device (here I am on board with Steve), the balance of power has shifted completely towards the audience. The new Google powered computers come with personalized advertising interfaces which allow the consumer to chose which types of advertising they will accept. Thankfully for products like toilet paper, fast food companies and insurance services, every consumer must accept 25% random advertising in order to continue to access free content (would anyone willingly chose to get ads from these companies??).

A new industry has also opened up...the "entertaimercial". This hybrid of ad and content allows those lesser brands to still deliver a message, whilst having to be much more focused on providing a positive consumer experience - generally using either humor or interactive gaming component to draw in the audience.

However the biggest issue of all is gaining user attention. Split screen viewing is now common with most users both communicating online and watching content at the same time. Since the introduction of speech recognition software further revolutionized email/IM and texting into one homogeneous platform, everyone watches and talks at the same time. Blogs get posted in the time it takes for someone to loose their temper but there are so many of them almost no one comments anymore except a few friends and loyal followers. Our social networks pulsate with new contacts who drift in and out of our virtual lives since, in most cases, we never met them and never will.

So in many ways I agree with Steve. There is a revolution coming in media and most importantly in the way it's consumed. And in ten years time the industry debate is not about delivery platform anymore, it's about how we even get noticed.

Barmy Ballmer ???

2008-06-06T15:57:00.000-07:00

So Microsoft guru Steve Ballmer has predicted the demise of media as we know it with some pretty bold statements in his recent interview with the Washington Post.

Steve feels that there will be no media that is not delivered via IP (the web) within a 8-15 year range. His particular point being the demise of print media but also revolutions in the delivery of TV as well. It's an interesting opinion but is it realistic?

Whilst I agree that the web does offer significant opportunities for a revolution in content delivery especially a media like TV, to predict that all print will go is simply crazy. It's a view I think he expresses for two reasons:

1/ Microsoft has a vested interested in trying to kill off non-web based media. They have invested massively in MSN and webmedia in general and have everything to gain by scaring the advertising market into shifting budget out of traditional media platforms.

2/ Steve's views are probably skewed since the print media Microsoft has used - IT, business and newspapers, have been the hardest hit by changes in advertising spend patterns.

Also it's simply not true that readers don't want to read print media anymore.

Talk to any publisher and they will confirm that while there is increases in web traffic, especially covering items like news, sports and social chit chat, the decreases in print magazine circulations and issue sizes is more to do with simple business economics than the readers massively changing consumption habits. It's declining ad spend that kills magazines and page counts not the readers (did you ever call a publication you liked and tell them to print less content?)

Look outside IT and newspaper segments and print appears to be doing pretty well. I recently reviewed magazines in the high household income, luxury lifestyle segment. There are magazines with circulations of less than 40,000 with folio sizes of over 250 pages. IT pubs rarely get above 60! Plenty of advertisers means plenty of pages.

Will IP based devices really replace print. Even today's coolest devices are hardly great platforms for reading long in depth articles, especially when the content is complemented by high quality glossy photography. There's also a generational aspect. Anyone over the age of 30 is still happy to read magazines. Even my younger staff sit down over lunch with trashy celeb magazines rather than continuing to stare a screen. It's just human nature.

So whilst not ignoring some definite trends...mostly driven by advertisers and not readers, the future is not so black and white. Just like TV didn't kill radio, a varied media landscape is here to stay.

As a parting shot, if Microsoft is so in tune with consumers desires, why are they now officially incorporating a "downgrade feature" into Vista . Hate to say I told you so....but I did.

Automated media buying...is this the future?

2008-06-04T10:46:00.000-07:00

I just sat down and reviewed the new website from our friends at Techweb which is designed to assist in the media planning process for IT marketing professionals. As I play with the tools and consume some of the content provided I cannot help but think that here are the fledgling components that may revolutionize the way media is bought in the not too distant future.

The site http://createyournextcustomer.com/ is a media resource centre with a twist. In addition to all the usual demographic information and research (always useful), is a small application or widget that allows the user to select his campaign type, target audience and preferred media mix. After microseconds of contemplation out pops a recommended media mix suggestion drawn from the portfolio of Techweb's impressive product list.

My initial reaction was mixed. There's really not much in this tool beyond providing a "quick n dirty" media shopping list. Currently the next step of engagement requires getting in contact with a sales rep - so no change there. The suggestions made are hardly ground breaking either - simply some very obvious product selects which play into the publishers bucketed content approach.

However, for all it's obvious limitations at this point, it's a fun tool that may help the publisher facilitate decisions for the marketer who's pressed for time or lacking in imagination. Most importantly it encourages engagement from buyers, which if achieved, is a significant competitive advantage.

But lets think a little into the future here. Imagine for one minute that after buying the suggested media mix (via the sites secure account feature), I run my campaign and upload the performance metrics back into the sites "campaign management tool". This tool using the newly developed "media marketing algorithm" then optimizes the media suggestions by combining my specific data with that from hundred of similar campaigns. Predictive modelling then churns away in the background and out pops my optimized media suggestions for the next campaign.

Wash, rinse, repeat....

Within three/four campaigns the system has accumulated enough information to effectively be turned to 'auto media' function which simply debits my company account and sends me regular reminders as to which creative needs to be sent in and when my team needs to turn up to host the pre-booked events.

Impossible?

I don't think so. Many campaigns with lead goals are already being managed based on simple linear metric analysis and even awareness campaigns, as we have shown with our campaign research, can be measured for effectiveness using hard statistics. It's not too hard to imagine models being produced for each campaign type by clever mathematicians.

So well done to Techweb for giving us a glimpse into a very interesting future with automated media buying practices and automatically optimized budget management. I'm sure the unemployed sales reps and media planners will enjoy the extra time they can spend at the bar talking about "the good old days"!

Hopefully I'll have retired by then.

Can you trust the web? The story of Spikey Reed

2008-05-19T14:45:00.000-07:00

Last weekend a friendly neighbour offered us the opportunity to adopt a pet - an Australian lizard known as a Bearded Dragon. Of course my two young boys leapt at the chance and immediately named him Spikey. I was equally thrilled until forking out over $250 for a tank, lights, hiding log, sand, and various live critters for Spikey to eat.

Within 48 hours we had a problem...Spikey was off his food and looking stressed and so I searched online for additional information that might help me. Turns out there is a lot - 460,000 results according to Google!

And here lies the biggest problem. Almost all the information was contradictory with various "experts" claiming different solutions to my care problem. Indeed when talking to the local Reptile pet experts they immediately said "don't trust the web there's loads of crap out there".

Now this applies to almost every category of 'product'. Type in a search and thousands of experts will give you opinions, many without any of the real depth required to make truly informed decisions. This is only made worse by blogger sites which typically include the rather disparate views of fans on one side and detractors on the other.

The bottom line is who, in this age of information freedom, do we trust? Who's opinions are valid and how do you know where trusted resources lie? One might argue that's what you get from recognized publishers and trained journalists. Given the corporate responsibility to try to maintain quality controls, one would imagine they should vet more closely the content they provide...but do they?

What has been emphasised is the reality of the web's advice on any subject, especially when that information is provided via social media forums. In the B2B space this is critical and highlights how important the balance of social verses traditional emphasis will remain in the future as regards buying decisions.

Oh and Spikey is currently on holiday at the reptile store being encouraged to feed with a little professional coaching and therapy. The free gift has been one of the most expensive I've ever received but we can't wait to get him home - it already feels empty without him.

Is there room for remnant bid model in B2B print space?

2008-05-05T09:44:00.000-07:00

Most people have heard me bang on about how much I believe in print media for achieving certain campaign goals. However as print budgets gets squeezed and issue sizes drop, I like many, have concerns about readers continuing to find sufficient content to interest them.

Just looking at a few of this weeks IT publications, we see page counts of 64 pages for Information Week, 60 pages for Network World and 64 pages for eWeek. Each publications had approx 28 pages of advertising so they all fell into the range of the classic B2B mix of 60% edit for 40% ads. Only adding ads will allow more content to be included.

How can these numbers be increased? And more importantly how can smaller advertisers (or even some of the larger ones) be encouraged to do more than they do now? Is the time ready for a bid based B2B print ad model?

Currently a vast majority of the advertising comes from an increasingly smaller pool of companies. IBM for one still does large volumes, as does Microsoft. Below this there's obviously brands like Sun, HP, Dell, our client Fujitsu, Juniper, Epson and Canon. There's even a page from Google in one of the magazines (if ever there was proof that print works this must surely be it).

But here's the rub...where are the smaller companies, the guys who would be print advertisings "next generation"? I suspect they are hand strung, unable to get the print budget past the CFO or at least unable to secure sufficient budget to make a sustainable print campaign work...

For these companies a bid model might be the answer. An independent third party could auction off pages on a blind basis across a range of IT publications. There would be a min bid price and any bid higher would immediately get access to higher circulation magazines and better ad positions. It might be somewhat random in nature but it would certainly allow a more adventurous marketing exec or agency account manager to add more pages into a campaign at lower investment levels. It would be easy to do in today's digital production market as ads could quickly be uploaded to publishers a few days in advance of print deadlines. Adding pages, even randomly, increases reach and frequency - both essential for a strong campaign.

What's more it could also open up the PR/advertorial side of things. Imagine being able to quickly post case study intros, white paper summaries or even product announcements on relatively short notice into a few magazine templates at a fraction of the cost of a traditional high profile ad. Smaller vendors would jump at the chance.

Downside for publishers? Well erosion of rates might be one worry although by making the bidding blind, advertisers will always want to ensure they are present in their core magazines. Bidding also gives publishers more price control over positioning issues and in some cases might actually help lift rates when they regularly sell out. More importantly it may just enable them to cultivate a much more integrated approach. Combining this with a similar bid model for excess online inventory and you start to get some very interesting models indeed. Publishers could even have a published open pricing (like the "buy now" on eBay) so advertisers can see min entry costs of a particular issue should they chose to take that option.

Impossible? Don't bet on it happening any time soon, but never say never in the publishing world. There's still enough excess space to make this a possibility and it might just allow the print format to remain viable a little bit longer and draw in a new batch of active advertisers. Marketers simply need to allocate a "print bid budget" something that's now a more comfortable concept in this Google branded world.

2007 spend trends for top 50 tech advertisers

2008-04-23T16:35:00.000-07:00

As part on my budgeting and planning for agency development, I recently reviewed the advertising spend data for the top 50 tech clients across all US media formats. The data I reviewed was supplied by my good friends at CNET via TNS Media Intelligence.

Without being drawn into obvious discussions about spend data accuracy (I know for a fact it's pretty incorrect due to having several clients in the list) it's main interest for me is reviewing the data trends rather than the specific numbers. Here are some highlights.

In 2007 reported ad spend for these companies was over $1.6 billion. This figure is down 9% over 2006 which shows some strains already appearing on budgets ahead of any real economic pressures, which really will not have been a factor over the measured period.

The spend spread by media was as follows:

All TV 30%
All Newspapers 9%
All Magazines 17%
All B2B Press 17%
All Outdoor 4%
All Radio 1%
All Internet 21%

But where did the redistribution of media dollars go compared with 2006?

All TV down 6%
All Newspapers down 31%
All Magazines down 25%
All B2B Press down 16%
All Outdoor up 45%
All Radio down 10%
All Internet up 20%

Since general spend was down 9% overall, that makes TV and radio pretty flat and confirms the expected main trend of dollars shifting out of print media (Mags, Newspapers and trade press) moving online. However let's just remember that print still makes up 43% of total 2007 spend so one can hardly say "print is dead" despite hearing this mantra on an almost daily basis and many of the top companies quoted as being the leading proponents of this thinking.

I was obviously interested in outdoor lift, which whilst still only a relatively small percentage overall, saw significant percentage gains. Having just come out of a presentation about the rise of digital outdoor advertising, one wonders how this is effecting the rebirth of this media outlet....perhaps this shows that old media can be reinvented for the digital age.

What did I learn? Well we have seen our own spends now exceed 50% of agency billings for digital media - almost double what they were just 12 months ago. It means hiring more media professionals who can integrate online media with traditional media. It also means we have to work harder to continue to promote traditional media platforms as the pressure grows to move everything online...which is simply not appropriate in all cases. It means having more research on campaign effectiveness and not just measuring linear ROI. It means adapting our business to the changing media landscape and being even more professional in the advice we give.

Wonder what 2008 will show?

IDC Directions- anything new?

2008-03-15T19:55:00.001-07:00

Last week I attended the IDC Directions event in San Jose to see what the anaylst community are telling technology marketers.

I guess I was hoping as always to learn something ground breaking. Sadly there was not much new, just an emphasis on the more obvious which apparently still challenges the tech market.

First in the list is the blindingly obvious disconnect between Sales and Markting. Rich Vancil reckons that only about 20% of what marketing produces is actually used by sales which sounds about right. It got me thinking. I have to say that in ten years of working on campaigns I have yet to observe a single case where a senior sales person was directly involved in meetings discussing the plans. I have to hope that my regular requests to get feedback from sales have been genuinely transmitted through the organization. I've always believed that Marketing efforts which are not well publicised internally fail the first test - that is to be internal promotions and motivations.

Second on the list was the requirement for tech companies to follow what is said about them in the social media environments. There is still considerable confusion about this and how it can be done. I heard one frustrated marketing professional asking whether it was sensible to respond to a blogger circulating misleading and incorrect information - the concern being that to do so would give that blogger increased credibility. Thankfully the advice given - to have a CTO/CIO respond rather than marketing or PR was spot on. However when I pressed IDC specialist Clare Gillan admitted that only 10% of IT pro's currently use blogs when assessing tech buys.

Otherwise I found the event somewhat quiet compared to previous years. Strange given the possibility of tightening budgets and the likelyhood that marketers will be required to be even more productive in the future.

Ever met the Fuck Up Fairy ?

2008-01-10T21:25:00.001-08:00

There are some days when just about everything one tries to do seems to turn into ever increasing circles of misery, when even the best laid plans come crashing down and when even the most innocent action has disastrous results...it can only mean one thing..the Fuck Up Fairy has come to visit.

In a business sense, we at the agency do everything we can to keep this darling lady away. She rarely comes a'visiting but when she does she seems to persistently hover around one desk. The poor media person concerned can do no right. Campaigns get delayed, stuff gets missed, publishers drop the ball, audience does not respond, numbers don't add up. It's hell.

Typically Ms FUF will also concentrate all her evil deeds on just one campaign. Multiplying the effect to such a degree that as everything spins out of control one demands what more could possibly go wrong. To exasperate to full the poor soul who's being tormented, all around them is a sea of tranquility. Campaigns perform, clients ooze love, and CEO's like me purr with satisfaction. However when your in the storm it's a blaze of hate and recrimination.

I think about her today not because she's actually come calling (well perhaps my accounts department might disagree) but more because someone asked me exactly what she looked like. "Tinkerbell with horns" I replied.

So next time you have a situation where everything turns to goo, remember it's just the Fuck Up Fairy come to play and soon she will go away !!!

Below is an image I found that looks a lot like her...whoever produced it top marks :-)

Business predictions for 2008

2008-01-03T10:34:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year to all.

So in keeping with a well tried and tested media protocol, it seems appropriate to try and make some predictions for business in 2008 both in general and most importantly as far as Just Media is concerned.

Firstly the general business climate. Well on the face of it the economic signs coming into 2008 could not be more worrying. Low rate for the dollar, record high oil prices, poor end of year consumer purchasing trends, housing market facing collapse and unhearalded crisis of confidence in the global banking community certainly don't make this feel like a great start to the year. It's looking highly likely that the global economy is set for a rocky ride....

However is it also possible that what we will see in 2008 and 2009 is an acceleration of a shift in global market power. Certainly China is experiencing huge growth, matched by other developing markets which are now in accelerated "catch up and pass mode". High oil prices also benefit certain markets like Russia and Middle East and global turmoil can also be a catalyst for economic prosperity within corporate land (see Naomi Kleins new book) with resulting positive trickle down effects sustaining economies despite other downward pressures.

From a US perspective the greatest question will be the political landscape and the resulting impact on the confidence within the market. Already the presidential primary process is becoming too close to call and frankly most of the candidates are still squarely in the "unknown" category in terms of their ability to provide genuine long term economic policy insights that the markets can trust. With Bush in lame duck territory that's less than ideal in the short term.

so I predict 2008 will be a rough year but with plenty of opportunity for success. A recession will hit but with many still making plenty of money. A global catastorophy but with many markets doing "just fine thank you"...a mixed bag with just as many winners as losers. brace yourselves it's going to be a roller coaster ride !!

So where does that leave us...Just Media. Well to be honest it's just as hard to call. Going into 2008 it's looking good. Practically 100% renewal rate with current clients means we have a very solid base upon which to grow. New business opportunities continue to be strong and spend predictions are right now quite solid. However I feel it will be important to diversify even more this year. Extending the client base will be critical to minimizing any effects felt by individual clients who might take a conservative route with marketing dollars.

As an agency we have also adjusted our business. Now more than 50% of all media we buy is online. Much of that is lead generation. Toughening marketing conditions tend to drive customers to focus even more on these skills. It enables us to show value even more. What's more, as budgets tighten the pressures on results and genuine market knowldge increases - both play to our strengths.

I predict a tight but exciting year. Consolidation of existing business and expansion into new areas will be the path to success. Continuing to provide genuine value ahead of vague promises will be key.

For us 2007 was the year of change and growth. With most of the pieces in place, we are ready for 2008.

Let the fun commence !!

advertising overload ?

2007-12-16T16:51:00.000-08:00

First blog of December with the delay due in part to my vacation trip to the UK.

Well now I'm sitting in a rental flat in London, jet lagged and ready to rant. So what's got me bent out of shap this time....advertising overload !!

Now for a media guy to critisize too much advertising is of course sadly ironic. Just last week members of the Just Media team where brainstorming what disruptive additional advertising could we inflict on airport passengers as part of a campaign to reach busy travellers.

However today as I sat inside one of the new fleet of London buses, now equiped with on board TV screen showing ads for Typhoo Tea and various other unfortunate products I realized it's not always a positive thing...why you ask?

Well as I tried in vain to point out interesting landmarks, my two kids could hardly be convinced to take their eye's off the damn screen. As I looked around the bus, about half the passengers looked passively into the moving pictures...great for the advertisers but a little sad none the less (the content was not exactly award winning)

I had similiar feelings a few weeks earlier when I attended one of the Oakland Raiders games. OK so perhaps I should have been grateful for stops in the action, but honestly it's hard to be kept captivated in an experience when play is stopped or delayed for nothing more than a promotion from Budweiser, Burger King or Coke.

I guess my point here is that in these cases, whilst the advertising is obviously achieving some of it's goals, at what point as an industry do we decide we are killing the hand that feeds us. Consumers deserve fewer but better advertising, placed around media that adds to an experience rather than just hijacks it. I don't mind ads around sports but please don't let it start reducing the experience I've come to enjoy. At that point my view of those brands is not exactly positive...

and I never did get my cup of tea :-(

Recognizing great work

2007-11-29T20:51:00.000-08:00

So like many I'm a sucker for a good campaign and as a professional of the industry (and frustrated creative director since here at Just Media we do, well, 'just media') I do recognize excellence when I see it.

Today I'm congratulating the folks behind the new Guinness campaign. I came across this as an in-banner video on the Newsnow football (soccer) feed. Obviously well targeted to male sports fans (high likelihood of drinking beer in pubs) it immediately caught my attention.

The ad shows a classic build on the old Domino tumbling game that most guys are sure to have played when they were kids (probably girls as well but I have not checked this fact). In this version the 'domino's' consisted of books, cars, fridges, wardrobes and other assorted items. Apparently shooting this ad, which also featured as a TV spot was the most expensive in Guinness history.

Once I clicked on the ad it took me to a game where I was offered the chance to win a sold gold domino if I solved 11 clues. OK so I've only had time to solve four so far but I'm already hooked.

Here's the really clever stuff. These clues include a search feature which drives you to Google results. The agency has bought keyword ads which are the path to the results. In one case it links to You Tube where the clue is hidden in another video.

It's rare to find a creative so well leveraged across different media types, much less for the team behind the game to spend the time to build out a complex solution encompassing the latest web technologies both in terms of ad creative, and integration into the campaign. The landing page also features great flash creative work.

In a word this brilliant campaign shows just how sophisticated marketing programs are now becoming and also show why both media and creative agencies are working harder now than ever before to create truly unique and multi layered programs.

Hats off to the media and creative teams working on Guinness. I for one salute your endeavours...

Oh by the way did I mention the viral aspect of this ?????

Mixing media and politics

2007-11-26T22:19:00.000-08:00

This is a subject I could probably write about all day. I have often been told that here in the US it's high risk to talk about religion or politics - but what's a good blog without some controversy !!

So here's the scene. I'm talking campaign tactics with one of our many creative partners who have a target of senior business decision makers and wanted to consider a variety of media formats. As the conversation turned to TV, I naturally named some stations I'd suggest we consider....

"CNN, MSNBC, Fox News "...

"Oh no" countered my creative friend "I don't want to support them"

"me neither but they do offer up a strong profile"

And so here's the dilema for media folks. Sometimes we are faced with using media vehicles we ourselves don't subscribe to or even support. This is true whatever political side this takes. And it's a tough call. In most cases there are viable alternatives which means we could justify the choices we make even though we know the real reason is our feeling of discomfort with the content rather than the audience. And yes supporting media with advertising dollars does support the message they promote so I don't subscribe to the "it should only be about the audience" argument.

But who's call is it and also are we always consistent? In my own case I'm not. Just a few months ago we recemmended a radio buy using right wing talk radio because the target audience was exactly who we needed to reach (concerned older consumers who would look at an online security product to protect their online banking proceedures). In this case the campaign success required me to "suck it up".

At the same time we planned another campaign targeting consumers who might install solar panels and it was great pleasure that I could place media buys into public radio and liberal radio stations. Even up the score so to speak.

OK so you probably summize that I'm a bit of a lefty (part of that famous left wing media bias eh !). Actually I'm not really, but then in a country with only two parties it's hard to not fall into one camp or the other...

And that my friends is really my biggest problem with media and politics....where's the hghly analytical middle ground that I can support ??? Where's the good old fashioned "unbiased anti political establishment media" that questions all our leaders and really holds them accountable. Don't see to much of that these days and we are all the worse off for it.

IT Magazines - marketers it's use them or lose them !

2007-11-25T21:06:00.000-08:00

On 13th November I received an innocuous looking email from one of my good friends at IDG announcing the closure of a couple of magazines in Finland including the IT magazine Itviikko. The email went on to explain that the market now supported only one remaining print magazine targeting IT pro's.

On the face of it this news is somewhat mundane..or is it.

Earlier in the year I was also told about some important changes in France. Groupe Tests, the leading IT publisher in the market was also consolidating it's business. Several magazine closures would be taking place. The result- only one major magazine now servicing IT pro's in France (IDG does have a small CIO title.

Now putting into context that France is the 7th biggest economy in the world then it starts to sink in just how significant the shift away from print advertising is impacting the choices available to marketers and agencies.

Should anyone care ?

Well at Just Media we have categorically proved to numerous clients the value of print as part of the marketing mix. Our research on campaign performance (which we label under the term ROMO or return on marketing objective) shows that print is significantly more effective at shifting awareness and brand attributes than any online campaign including rich media and video. Sadly we seem to be amongst the few pushing these facts into the market.

One thing is clear though...publishers are in the business of making money and if marketers fail to use print magazines then the option will simply not exists in the future.

Here in the US 2007 has seen some major closures including Info World, Intelligent Enterprise, Optimize and Network Computing. Most other magazines have adjusted circulations, reduced size or trimmed page counts. The changes are numerous and obvious...options are being compromised.

The worry is that no one will realize what they have lost until it's too late.

Use them or lose them folks !!!

Technorati blog claim

2007-11-23T17:34:00.000-08:00

Just a basic post to claim rights to this blog by linking with Technorati.

Technorati Profile

Let's see if it works !

Old habits and XP die hard

2007-11-19T09:43:00.001-08:00

So I've been wanting to help my parents get back into 'life with a PC' for the last few months, coaxing them gently towards the internet, online photo exchange (so they can see the grandkids) and perhaps even Sunday morning IP video calls.

First step on this journey is getting them a PC and after several weeks of looking I finally settled on a AMD powered Dell which was on special offer for less than $500 or 250 of my fairest British pounds - remarkable !

But why bore you with such details? Here's the rub..the reason I spent so much time trying to find a laptop was because I didn't want to get one with Vista. Call me old fashioned but I'm quite comfortable with XP. I know how it works, I know it's limitations (which are pretty few) but mostly I'm just not convinced my parents need anything more. I've plenty of software lying around they can use and it's always been pretty rock solid for running all the aps I've ever needed.

Apparently I'm not alone. Apple have already started poking fun in their latest ads and whilst I was searching for machines at my local Fry's one sales person described Vista as a "train wreck" whilst another told me an amusing story about a shipment of Lenovo machines which came in loaded with XP and had been sold in a matter of days.

But is Vista really that bad or are we also experiencing a realization amongst users that if the technology ain't broke, don't fix it. Like I say there's nothing right now compelling me to buy Vista. I'm not suffering productivity losses, my web experiences are just fine, I can edit and manipulate video, speak to family members in a variety of global locations, manage my database of songs and run all manner of cool games...I'm a happy camper. There's no way my parents will have higher demands than me, however I will be able to offer them "knowledgeable son tech support" with XP and set up the machine before they even get it...

It will be interesting to see how Vista adoption changes over time. As more software and products are configured for Vista then it will undoubtedly seep into our lives. I think it's just interesting to note that even as technology advances, our productivity comfort zone and habitual usage patterns may mean we resist this constant market push for change.

Managing bandwidths

2007-11-16T16:22:00.000-08:00

One of the joys of being CEO is looking into the proverbial crystal ball and planning staffing levels on accounts with limited information on future activity.

One thing we do know is that our business - now over 50% dedicated to managing online and lead gen programs - has shifted dramatically in terms of man hours required to run succesful campaigns. This change from even two years ago, when over 70% of our business was managing traditional print, out of home or radio campaigns, has led to very different work flow patterns. Whereas traditional media buying was front loaded, pre-buy, in terms of planning, execution and time investment - online media is weighted more heavily in terms of optimization, reporting, campaign management and analytics - mostly post-buy services.

The big problem for the CEO is gauging staffing levels on accounts where spends are migrating. One client this year shifted from 80/20 print to online to 35/75 towards online. Not only does this shift change the staffing needs it also requires different skill sets.

Another consideration is the nature of the buys. Many online campaigns are short and sharp. Briefs come in and plans go live in days rather than weeks. They stop just a quickly. The teams need to be agile but can be quiet for weeks and then slammed - especially at the end of each quarter when last minute budgets flow in from all sides.

Over the last 12 months we have added several new staff members all concentrating on online services but it's still a nightmare trying to juggle staff bandwidths to match workflow. It's not going to get any easier in 2008...

Do I get any sympathy?....as one of my team told me just last week - "that's why you get paid the big bucks...."

bugger - no sympathy there then !

Online mind games

2007-11-10T20:08:00.001-08:00

I spend hours every day on the web. Like most people I enjoy the many facets of this new media delivery platform...and as a result my mind is engaged in a whole variety of ways. Think about it for one second:

Am I really in the same frame of mind when I'm writing email to my friends via my hotmail account as I am when I'm reading political stories in my online newspaper The Guardian . How about when I'm reading about my favourite English football team on blogs, or checking out the weather, or buying a book or, heaven forbid, doing some research for work. Add in the fact that I can now listen to the radio, watch a video or move into creative mode - well like now - and it's literallly almost limitless the way this media can work different areas on my brain.

All very well..but what about the advertising. In most places I see the same old banners running, advertising low rate mortgages, anti spam solutions and any number of holiday destinations I'd be lucky to get home alive from.

In my business we try to reach people in certain frames of mind (normally just before they decide to buy something they didn't know they wanted or needed) however on the web the delivery of the message is often designed to run homogeonously across multiple sites. Also we judge performance across the range of sites without adding in any factor as to how well we have succeeded in embedding the message into the targets mind. Something just does not feel right with that.

Recent research we have done shows online is less effective at leaving awareness signals in the targets brain than say traditional print media (by far a more one dimensional media vehicle). One wonders though to what extent is this a function of media or of the mind.

Mind you when it comes to the web do we really mind at all ?

Day 1

2007-11-09T22:33:00.000-08:00

I have often been told I have opinions and that I should, rather than rant at the odd poor client or salesperson, do something more and write them down. Well now thanks to some prompting by my buddy Dan Ortega (VP Marcoms at Astoria Software) I'm plunging into the wild world of online blogging. It's kinda ironic that I have chosen Google's blogging service, given that I am at some point bound to fling dirt at them, however I've always been happy being my own biggest hypocrit so might as well start how I mean to continue.

So let's see just where this goes. Even money says this dies a fast death as work, wife and kids eat my time. Low odds that this might just allow me a venue to spout off about media issues and my thoughts and views and a huge longshot that anyone ever reads it apart from me.

Hell, I guess as a media CEO I can always make it a point of order for my team to read anything I write up here so at least I get some traffic and continue to inflate my already monsterous ego....!!!

Let the fun begin

Dick