marketingonvenusclub asked: followed u and we we are the bridge from era industry to era of information, we are a retailer community :)
Thank you for following.
marketingonvenusclub asked: followed u and we we are the bridge from era industry to era of information, we are a retailer community :)
Thank you for following.
Some retailers aren’t sold on the concept of digital channels being the primary driver of future growth, at the expense of stores. But most do see the value of digital channels in driving traffic to stores – and they have some thoughts on which work best once the consumer is actually in the store. Results from RSR Research’s “The Relevant Store in the Digital Age” reveal that nearly all retailers see their e-commerce sites as having a lot (58%) or some (38%) value in driving traffic to stores. And while there’s some angst about showrooming, 87% recognize that smartphones have a lot (50%) or some (37%) value in driving store traffic.
Other digital channels that retailers see as valuable in driving foot traffic are their mobile applications or websites (88%) and their email communications (91%). While retailers are a bit less confident about the ability of their social networking efforts to bring in consumers, 84% still see a lot (33%) or some (51%) value to their social media presence.
When it comes to actually delivering sales in-store, though, retailers are less convinced about their e-commerce sites’ value, ranking it behind their mobile applications and websites and consumers’ smartphones. Specifically, mobile apps or web are rated by 35% as having a lot of value in driving in-store sales, and smartphones by 33%, while only one-quarter see e-commerce sites as delivering a lot of value in that regard. (Social networking presence and email communications are even less highly rated.) That seems to reflect an understanding that consumers are more likely to engage with a mobile app or website in-store than a social networking page or email.
According to new data from Google, consumers using their smartphones for research in-store are most likely to turn to search engines first, and prefer store and brand websites to apps.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
About the Data: The data is derived from a survey conducted by RSR online from March-April 2013, which received answers from 131 qualified retail respondents. 40% of respondents come from retailers with at least $1 billion in 2011 revenue, and about half are headquartered in the US.
In the pre-digital days there really wasn’t a need for brands to produce more than the ads that went on traditional media. Now we have entered a new era. No longer is it good business practice to only produce the print ads for the brand. Retailers and manufacturers need to produce an almost constant stream of fresh content to keep up with digital channels and social media and mobile capability. For most companies it’s a pretty big order because making content is a completely different business from what most manufacturers and retailers know. It gets even harder when so much of the content that they now need is video.
Tony Quin in imediaconnection.com attacked this issue in a recent article. “Since inexpensive bandwidth has made high-quality video so easy to get, people want more and more of it. Projections have video representing over 85% of all Internet traffic in a couple of years. So brands need to make lots of videos. The problem, of course, is not just the quantity, but how does a brand make videos that are good enough to stand out? While cameras and equipment are cheap and easy to get, creativity and know-how are still in short supply. Of course, what makes a video good is in the eye of the beholder, but most of us know bad video when we see it, and the last thing any brand needs is to be spreading bad videos.
The challenge is for companies to put in place the capability to produce lots of “good” videos, consistently over time. The problem is that because the budgets are much smaller, it’s not like producing TV commercials, which brands have a lot of experience with. According to the 4A’s, the average cost to make a TV spot is over $300,000 — but for video content, that may be your entire budget for the year.
Question is — do you try and do it in-house or hire pros? For most brands the answer is to hire pros. The advantage, of course, is the wide range of talent and capabilities you can access. The problem is how to keep the costs down. Most agencies focus on developing the creative, and produce a quality product. Thus companies and agencies that specialize in video content for digital channels is ideal.”
But you must have digital content strategy. A company that can do all of that…and that is set up to produce a lot of video content over time, cost-effectively…is the perfect solution. Of course, the videos still have to be good in the eye of the beholder, which to start with would be you.
It’s a new time and a new era in business thinking. Video, whether you like it or not, is THE most important tool you have to communicate with your target audience today. It is time for the entire home furnishings industry to make the move into video now.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
Potential customers cybernate.
Today, you have a moment to gain the confidence of the prospective customer. If they don’t like what they see; if they don’t like the pricing; if they don’t like the way you speak to them, they will go somewhere else. In that ‘golden moment’ you have the one opportunity to convince them that the ‘customer is king’.
With mobile in hand, they can check out what your sales people are saying and verify the facts. They usually have done some background checking and have investigated what they are looking for. This is the age of ‘showrooming’.
QR code scanning, once the domain of the younger crowd, is becoming more evenly distributed across various age groups, according to data released by ScanBuy. The company, which says it processed a new high of 6.7 million scans via ScanLife in March, reveals that 57% of mobile barcode scanners were aged 35 and older in Q1, up from just 41% a year earlier. In particular, the 45-54 (18% share, from 12%) and 55 and older (14%, from 9%) groups represent rapidly growing proportions of scanners.
During that yearlong period, the biggest drop came from the 25-34 crowd. In Q1 2013, that age bracket constituted 35% of mobile barcode scanners, but that’s now down to 25%.
While QR code scanners seem to be getting older on average, their gender split hasn’t changed that significantly. In Q1, 65% of scanners were male, which is slightly (but not drastically) down from 68% in Q1 2012. In terms of operating systems, Android remains the leader at 57% share, up from 53% a year earlier, while iOS’ share has dipped 2% points to 41%.
The study also shows that QR code scanning tends to be popular throughout the week, with 14% share of scans occurring each day from Tuesday through Friday during Q1. Scanning volume did go up slightly on the weekend (16% on Saturday; 15% on Sunday) before dipping on Monday (13% share). Scanning volume also tended to rise after lunchtime and see sustained levels of activity until the primetime hours.
Among other findings, the most scanned QR code campaigns in Q1 connected users to product information, social media, and mobile commerce. The top industries, in terms of scanning activity, were retail, food and beverage, and wireless.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
It Takes Two Or More Years To Forget
Bad customer service experiences are more likely to be shared than good ones, according to results from a ZenDesk-sponsored survey conducted by Dimensional Research. Separate results from the survey indicate that not only are bad service experiences shared often, they’re also likely to have a long-term impact on customers. Respondents were asked to think about experiences with mid-sized B2B or B2C companies whose good or bad customer service impacted their behavior. Fully 39% of respondents who had a bad experience said their behavior was impacted for at least 2 years after the negative experience.
Asked to recall the bad experience that impacted their behavior, 39% said it occurred 2 or more years ago, while another 14% said it occurred one year ago. By comparison, 24% of respondent who reported changing their buying behavior based on a good experience said it happened 2 or more years ago.
The survey also shows that certain segments of the population were more likely to report having held onto the bad experience for at least 2 years. Women (45%), B2B customers (51%), those with annual household income of $100,000-150,000 (52%) and more than $150,000 (79%), as well as Gen Xers (36-50; 54%) all had an above-average likelihood of holding onto their bad experiences. B2B, Gen X, and $150,000+ respondents were also more likely to share their bad customer service experiences.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
About the Data: Dimensional Research surveyed 1046 individuals online in early 2013. All survey participants lived in the US and had recent experience with the customer service of a mid-sized company either as a consumer (B2C) or in a business context (B2B). For the survey, “mid-sized” was defined as any company that was not a large, well-known company or a small local or online company. 56% of respondents are female. 27% are Millennials, 35% Gen Xers and 38% Boomers (over 50). 14% had annual household income of more than $150,000.
Forty-Nine (49%) percent of U.S. consumers believe the best thing that retailers can do to improve their shopping experience is to better integrate in-store, online and mobile shopping channels, details a survey conducted by Accenture. That notion is shared by forty-eight (48%) of consumers in the UK, Germany, France, Sweden and Brazil and thirty-eight (38%)in China and Japan. The results point to a desire for an increasingly seamless cross-channel experience, where personalized experiences are provided across every engagement channel.
For example, fifty-three (53%) of consumers want to receive unique pricing, automatic discounts, free returns, or pre-sales based on their loyalty/purchase history…across all channels. Similarly, fifty-three (53%) percent want to be able to earn and use their loyalty rewards in-store, online or on a mobile device.
Consumers also expect integration of product, promotion, and pricing across channels: fifty-one (51%) expect product assortment to be the same across the channels, while forty-nine (49%) share that view of promotions and sixty-three (63%) percent of pricing.
Nevertheless, there seems to be higher expectations placed on the online channel: eighty-one (81%) percent expect product assortment to be the same or less in-store, while eighty-three (83%) percent expect price (including tax and delivery) to be the same or more in-store.
Eighty-nine (89%) percent of US respondents said it is important for retailers to let them shop for products in the way that is most convenient for them, no matter which sales channel they choose.
Ninety-four (94%) of US consumers find in-store shopping easy, compared to seventy-four (74%) percent for online shopping and twenty-six (26%) for mobile shopping.
Seventy-three (73%) of US respondents reported showrooming at least once in a 6 months prior to the survey, a figure that rises to seventy-seven (77%) percent among respondents in the European markets and Brazil, and eight-five (85%) percent among those in China and Japan.
Other findings show that same day delivery is not very important. Only twenty-four (24%) percent of US consumers think same day delivery is very important, aligning with research from Boson Consulting Group showing similar apathy to same-day delivery.
About the data; The data is based on a survey of 6,000 consumers across 8 countries, conducted in November 2012. There were 750 respondents in the US.
We live in a new DNAge. ThinkMOBILEFirst.
Most customers say they need at least a 20% price difference to abandon the store
Two-thirds of mobile device owners say they check their device while shopping in a store to see if there is a cheaper price elsewhere, according to survey results from Linkable Networks. But what is the minimum price difference that would drive mobile owners to leave a store and purchase online instead?
The study results suggest that only 5% would leave if the online retailer offered the item for at least 5% less, while a plurality 23% would leave for a discount of at least 20%.
Not all mobile owners would leave the store they were shopping in because they found a better deal online via their mobile device, though. Among the two-thirds of respondents who check prices while in-store, only 1 in 5 report having left the store many times because they found a better deal, while an additional 26% said they would maybe do so if it were an expensive item, and another 41% if the price differential were high. 14% simply responded that they wouldn’t leave the store.
The study results paint a picture of a more committed store buyer than previous research. Late last year, a study by GroupM found that 45% of customers would leave a store and buy a product online if they found it at a 2.5% discount while comparison shopping using their mobile device. At a discount of 5%, 60% of customers said they would leave, while at a 20% discount, 87% of shoppers would be moved to abandon the store.
About the Data: The data is gleaned from an online survey of 803 Americans conducted on behalf of Linkable Networks from January 7 – 12, 2013. To qualify, all respondents had to identify being 18 years of age or older. Weights were applied to ensure the sample was demographically balanced to reflect the US adult population.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
Smartphone penetration is exploding.
Research showing consumer addiction to mobile phones continues to filter in. Here’s another stat to add to the arsenal: according to a new study from Arbitron and Edison Research, 52% of mobile phone owners always keep their device within arm’s reach, and another 30% do so most of the time. And more Americans aged 12 and up use a cell phone (30%) than a dedicated alarm clock (22%) or clock radio (15%) to wake up in the morning.
That rises to 59% among Americans aged 18-34.
The study reveals that smartphone penetration continues to steadily rise, up from 44% of Americans aged 12 and up last year to 53% this year. (Recent comScore estimates indicate that 55% of mobile phone subscribers owned a smartphone during the 3-month average ending in January 2013, up from 42.7% the previous year.)
Over the past year, smartphone penetration has grown most quickly among older groups, according to the Edison Research and Arbitron study, with these demos tending to have the most “catching up” to do. But, penetration is up across all age groups, including:
. 11% growth among 12-17-year-olds (60% vs. 54%);
. 14% growth among 18-24-year-olds (75% vs. 66%);
. 16% growth among 25-34-year-olds (74% vs. 64%);
. 28% growth among 35-44-year-olds (69% vs. 54%);
. 24% growth among 44-54-year-olds (51% vs. 41%);
. 26% growth among 55-64-year-olds (34% vs. 27%); and
. 55% growth among the 65+ group (17% vs. 11%).
The most popular activities on smartphones, per the report, are making or receiving calls (97%), sending or receiving text messages (94%), taking pictures (90%), browsing the internet (83%) and using social networking sites (63%), with QR code scanning (21%) on the other end of the spectrum of identified activities.
Sorting by daily usage, the top 2 activities remain the same, but browsing the internet (61%) and using social networking sites (46%) leapfrog taking pictures (39%).
About the Data: In January/February 2013, Arbitron and Edison Research conducted a national telephone survey offered in both English and Spanish language (landline and cell phone) of 2,021 people aged 12 and older. Data were weighted to national 12+ population figures.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
More Business Owners Say they Find LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube Effective But Could Be Doing More
Small business owners are increasingly finding social media platforms other than Facebook to be effective marketing vehicles for their organizations, per results from a new Constant Contact survey. Among the 8 in 10 respondents surveyed in December 2012 using social media for marketing (a notably higher proportion than other surveys such as this one have found), 29% found LinkedIn to be effective, up from 10% in the May 2012 survey, while one-quarter saw Twitter as effective, up from 7% in the earlier survey.
Not to be outdone, YouTube (15% vs. 3%), Pinterest (9% vs 1%), Yelp (6% vs 2%) and Google+ (5% vs 1%) are also gaining more interest from small business owners as effective social media marketing platforms. Still, none of those hold a candle to Facebook, which 82% find effective, up from 75% in the May 2012 survey.
The results appear to be in direct contrast to earlier survey findings from the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and Vistage International, in which LinkedIn emerged as not only the most commonly used social media tool by small businesses, but also the most positively perceived.
Both studies found evidence that small businesses could be doing more with their social media marketing. The WSJ survey turned up fairly low rates of regular usage of social media, and the Constant Contact study finds that just one-quarter of respondents post to Facebook daily, with that figure falling to 13% on Twitter and less than 5% for the other platforms identified. The numbers are not much better when expanding to weekly postings: 32% report posting with that regularity on Facebook, 18% on Twitter, and no more than 10% on any other platform. While many small business owners are using these platforms, they’re not terribly active on them.
A little help might spur them on, though. Asked which marketing activities they need help with, a majority cited social media marketing, the most of any activity identified. Next up, email marketing, following by websites, online advertising, and online listings.
About the Data: This Constant Contact-sponsored survey was administered in December 2012 to 1,100 participants in the Constant Contact Small Biz Council, a research panel of US small businesses and nonprofits recruited from the Constant Contact customer base. This is the third installment of an ongoing study about the state of small businesses and the ways they connect with and grow their audiences. Results include responses from respondents across a range of business-to-business and business-to-consumer industries.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
A majority of American adults believe that it is important to “buy American” across a variety of product types, according to results from a Harris Interactive survey, even if the definition of what constitutes an “American” product is not universally shared by respondents. Interestingly, while there were few gaps in the importance placed on “buying American” among Republicans and Democrats responding to the survey, women were more likely than men to feel it more important for each product category identified. Women are the key.
For example, women were:
10% more likely to consider it important for furniture purchases (78% vs. 71%);
11% more likely to consider “buying American” important when purchasing major appliances (79% vs. 71%);
15% more likely to place importance on this factor when buying clothing (77% vs. 67%);
14% more likely to find it important for car purchases (74% vs. 65%); and
20% more likely to consider it important when buying home electronics (72% vs. 60%).
On each count, 18-35-year-olds were significantly less likely than any other generation to believe that “buying American” is important to them.
The survey finds that the definition of what constitutes “buying American” isn’t universally agreed upon. Three-quarters agree that a product needs to be manufactured within the US for them to consider it “American,” while a slight majority believe that it needs to be made by an American company for them to consider it “American.” Close behind, 47% agree that a product needs to be made from parts produced in the US for them to consider it “American.”
As the researchers note, the company perceived by respondents to be the most “American” – Ford – increasingly has cars that include parts produced abroad. Other companies showing up in the most “American” list – such as GE and Levi Strauss – also outsource some of their operations overseas.
Regardless of the extent to which these companies’ products meet consumer definitions, “Made in America” packaging can influence consumers. A study released last year by Perception Research Services found that about 8 in 10 shoppers notice “Made in the USA” claims in packaging, and about three-quarters of those believe that such claims make them more likely to buy the product.
According to the Harris survey results, the most commonly-cited important reasons for “buying American” are to keep jobs in America (90%), to support American companies (87%), and due to quality (83%) and safety (82%) concerns with products assembled outside of the US.
About the Data: The Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between December 12 and 18, 2012 among 2,176 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.
Data for the “What company do you consider to be most ‘American’” question was conducted online within the United States between January 2 and 4, 2012 among 2,126 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.
We live in a new DNAge. Think MOBILEFirst.
