I was reading Marketing’s fourth annual survey into the top loved and hated brands and noticed the fickle nature of the public in their views on brands, and undoubtedly linked, their advertising campaigns.  What struck me from the survey, more than the strange appearance of AOL at number 2 in the top 50 hated brands even though their UK profile doesn’t warrant such a high profile spot, was the number of brands named highly in both the most hated, and most loved lists.  In the main list you actually only have two brands appearing in the top 20 of both, these are The Sun and Nokia (via ngage in the most hated), but if you get down into the different tables for the individual markets it is much more apparent.  I suppose you could just argue that the more you drill down by market, the less brands their are and so the more chance of a brand appearing in both lists but if you take such a broad market as “fashion” you would imagine there are enough brands out there to limit duplication.  But yet in this particular category 3 brands appear in the top 5 for both hated and loved!  Topshop is number one hated and number 5 loved, Levi’s is number two loved and number 4 hated, and Next is number one loved and number 3 hated.  How can brands be perceived in such a different way?  Is it simply that such well known and high profile brands are more likely to stir an extreme emotion in users where as slightly lesser brands stay under the radar a little more?  Your guess is as good as mine.  I have listed some of the other occurences of this below, focussing on the digital areas of the survey (as that is the topic of the blog after all!):

Microsoft have announced today that they will be launching a cash back system for purchases made using its Live search engine.  Utilising partnerships with ebay, paypal and jellyfish they will offer remuneration to users who find a product using live search and then make a purchase.  This is an amazing step from Microsoft into a market traditionally held by the affiliate world and heralded by the networks as the big growth area for affiliate marketing.  My own experiences of cash back sites are limited due to the way it opens the advertiser up for fraudulent enquiries/sales by incentivising the individual.  that doesn’t mean to say it cant work in the right situation and the entrance of Microsoft into this world not only says they have identified it as a growth area but also could have major implications for the cashback industry as a whole.  On the one hand it could bring the service to the mass market and mean the user base for such size grows exponentially over the next year or so.  On the other Microsoft may decide they want to dominate this industry and use it as a USP for Live search and decide to crush the independent sites in the way only they can.  Id certainly be getting a bit twitchy if I was a cashback publisher at the moment.  full article below

May 20, 2008

Microsoft to Launch “Live Search Cash Back” Tomorrow

The major Microsoft Live Search announcement scheduled for tomorrow will be the official launch of a new product: Microsoft Live Search Cash Back.

The program in partnership with eBay and its PayPal unit will offer cash back to consumers who search on Microsoft Live and make a purchase. The announcement will be made in conjunction with a taped message from eBay CEO John Donahoe. The technology is based on the acquisition of Jellyfish by Microsoft in September, 2007.

The announcement is expected to be made by Satya Nadella, SVP Search, portal & Advertising Platform Group, Microsoft, prior to Bill Gates’ presentation on “Connecting the Future.” The goal is to differentiate Microsoft’s vertical search experience for users while leveraging improvements in the core search algorithm.

Microsoft believes the Live Search Cash Back program will align the interests of consumers and the search engine, putting Microsoft “on the same side as the consumer.”

The job of Live Search will be to match the most relevant products with the most relevant consumers.

Microsoft will likely offer advertisers a CPA (Cost-Per-Acquisition) model rather than a traditional search engine Cost-Per-Click (CPC) auction.

Tony Hsieh, CEO of Zappos, said in a taped interview that the program would help overcome the barriers of first-time buyers of shoes online.

A Barnes & Noble executive stated that clickthrough rates and purchases had increased through the use of the Jellyfish pilot program.

The following message is posted on the Jellyfish.com Web site:

“As part of our pledge to save you money on the products you buy, our Cash Back rewards service is currently offline to perform necessary service upgrades and enhancements. Jellyfish Account holders will receive an e-mail notification when our Cash Back service is up and running again. Thanks for your patience.Using Jellyfish, consumers could compare prices of products from a number of online stores. Retailers paid Jellyfish fees to feature products. A portion of that fee was refunded to consumers who bought through the Jellyfish site.

Jellyfish also offered “Smack Auctions.” During each Smack show, Jellyfish would auction off new products in a unique price dropping format. Every second that ticks off the clock, Jellyfish would drop the price of the product, until the deal sold out.

Jellyfish founder Brian Wiegand is agroup manager at Microsoft. Last year, ye stated, Microsoft is “investing heavily in shopping and e-commerce.”

Microsoft closed the deal on Sept. 27, 2007 but didn’t announce it until Oct. 2, 2007.

This isn’t the first foray of Microsoft into the world of search engine incentives.

Microsoft Live Club is an ongoing experiment with incentivizing searchers but never on the Live Search Cash Back scale. For example, Microsoft Live Search Club lets users play games. A completed gives earns tickets toward prizes, such as Zune accessories, song downloads and ringtones.

Microsoft’s official statement on the announcement:

On Wednesday, we will be announcing a major new initiative that our search teams have been driving. We are getting better and better with our core algorithmic search, and at the same time, we are investing to differentiate in vertical experiences and to disrupt the current model. You’ll hear more about our plans Wednesday.

Strongbow are launching a mobile marketing campaign involving promoting a shortcode for users to text in to in order to receive a promotional text entitling them to a free pint in their local.  The offer will be promoting “Bowtime” which will run from 5pm-7pm on Tuesdays for a four week period.  This is imaginative use of mobile and I applaud strongbow for this.  Too many companies discount mobile as not fitting their industry or product but in coming up with this plan Strongbow have found a way of overcoming this.  They are obviously also attempting to try and generate a social/viral element by coming up with Bowtime in the hope people adopt this moving forward.  Also the chances of one pint becoming two, three, four are pretty high (I know from experience!) so they will still make their money on the resulting session.  The Strongbow statement claimed they were “seeking to engage with Strongbow customers in a relevant and long term way”.  I doubt this is the actual aim, I am guessing it is in response to the boom in the last two years of other cider brands (magners and bulmers in particular) as a way of reclaiming some ground.  I can also imagine the people texting in the shortcode will then be the target of further offers to keep promoting Bowtime and continue its impact beyond the four week period.  Ill certainly be tempted by a swift pint if I can get hold of the shortcode but am a little unconvinced Bowtime will become  a regular in my weekly calendar.  Full article here

So after all the hoopla about Google removing the trademark protection from its Adwords system (of which I only got chance to write about once as I was too busy doing something about it at work!) what was the outcome?  The removal happened on Monday (bank holiday, coincidence? I think not) while most of us were enjoying the good weather or a badly played round of golf in my case.  You can be damn sure there were no affiliates out on the golf course as they were all in-doors getting on as many brand terms as possible to make the most of the changes.

The net affect from what I have seen is the obvious rise in brand ownerships CPCs (about 30-60p increase on average) which is a big deal if you are somebody who relies no their brand sales to bring down the overall cost of the medium.   Affiliates and clued up competitors are having a field day at the moment with not many people following Tesco’s moral stance of not bidding on competitors terms.  I personally think it will all begin to die down as people realise the inflated CPCs they are going to have to pay to bid on competitors terms due to their lack of quality score will see a lot of them decide it is not worth the bother.  But many companies are going to have to review their affiliate strategy and make sure they have clear guidelines on what is allowed and what isn’t otherwise they will end up paying out a small fortune to affiliates who are doing nothing more than brand bidding.

Is microsoft about to revive the rumours and constant wondering about Facebook buyouts?  After every billionaire tycoon and his dog were linked with buying the social media phenomenon it has all been quiet for a while.  Now apparently it has come out that Microsoft has put the feelers out about a purchase of the social network.  Full article from search engine watch below:

About Face(book): Microsoft Feels Out Social Network Acquisition

Though Bill Gates was out there telling people Microsoft is not interested in making non-Yahoo acquisitions right now (at least in the search/social world), word comes that Microsoft bankers have sent “feelers” to Facebook about a full acquisition.

Here’s why this is a solid move:

1. Microsoft already owns 1.6% stake in Facebook, worth $240 million
2. Microsoft formed a data portability partnership with Facebook and 4 other networks
3. At least two Google execs have jumped ship to Facebook in recent months

While Facebook has yet to “overtake” MySpace in the social media market, it is a viable competitor. And I’m sure Ballmer would love for Microsoft to own a social network that even Apple has used as a marketing ploy as of late. Recent commercials for the iPhone entice potential customers through the ability to access Facebook on the popular mobile device.

Additionally, internet users are turning to their social networks during their search process. Consumers want answers and reviews and social networks help them get opinions from trusted sources.

The Facebook move would likely be seen by many as a better fit than Yahoo. But expect just as many to see it as a negotiating ploy in their bid for Yahoo. Though Microsoft has officially withdrawn its bid for Yahoo, many analysts expect Ballmer and the team to return to the table for another stab at a grab for the search engine.