It is very simple. You only need to do a search for the main keywords of your category and note the ads that appear. Then you start breaking the info down in segments to simplify the data intake:
a. Promise, answers the question “why should i click and come to your site”. For example such promises could be “free”, “low price”, “top quality”, “top variety”, etc.
b. Support for the promise, aims to provide credibility to the claimed promise. For example, “lowest price guarantee” could be a support for”lowest prices” or “30,000 designs to choose from” could be a support for a ‘variety’ claim. It is surprising that most ads fail to provide any sort of support for their claim.
So after noting down search ads for your industry’s main keywords, you now have:
-who are your competitors
-what is their USP (promise)
-what is their USP support
At this point, it could be helpful to plot what you got. You need to come up with two axes. Ideally one axis should be functional, e.g. price, and the other more sentimental, e.g. ‘trust’ or ‘leadership’. Maybe you should keep both axis more functional, eg price vs. variety or speed. These decisions could be guided by your findings via the competition mapping process on the Google result page. Once you have the axis, you plot all the players on the graph and look for openings. This will highlight opportunities in the market.
Next step is to come up with different concepts that could eventually be turned into brand positioning. These concepts could be ‘original thoughts on what you think matters in your industry or even ‘stolen’ from competitor’s. All concepts should somehow answer the question “why should people buy products such as the ones you are selling”. Say you are selling sports shoes, do people buy shoes based on features, design, price, specialization, brand etc.? If you think all of the above could apply, you write two texts ads for each one trying each time to make it as focused on that concept as possible. You should do two ads because copywriting plays a role. Some ads are more effective than others because they are better written. So you write two ads and look at their combined performance when comparing the concepts between them. The concept whose ads exhibit the highest CTR is the winning concept. This is the concept that engages consumers most when it comes to searching and buying your products.
Note that you need to let the ads run until you get enough data to give you statistical confidence. This could take weeks depending on your Adwords budget and the search traffic your keywords get. But in my view it is worth the wait as the USP is something to keep for a long long time.
Second note, test the concepts for as many different AdWords campaigns as possible. By AdWords campaigns i mean set of keywords, i.e. consumer’s states of mind. When a consumer searches for a competitor brand, then this means that the user is already in an advanced state where he knows about the particular brand and has probably also has decided that this is his favorite. Different case when a user has searched for your brand. Or totally different case when a user searches for a generic keyword such as “sports shoes” vs. something much more precise such as “running shoes for hard terrain”.
If a concept proves to be the big winner then that’s great. If this particular concept is over-populated with competitors claiming to capture it, for example this is common for the “cheap prices” concept or “best taste” concept for food & beverage industries, then you can do a 2nd phase of testing where you combine each concept with the winning, i.e. cheap & convenient, cheap & choice, cheap & fast, etc.
A final 3rd phase could be to test which is the best support for the winning concept. You could go about it the same way. List down different alternatives for supporting your claim, eg cheapest because we have the biggest volume, cheapest because we have the widest choice, low price guarantee, etc., prepare ads for each and so on.
So now you know who your competitors are, what is each one’s promise, how the competition environment is mapped out and what consumers respond most too. Now you are in a good position to take an educated decision on what your brand’s USP should be.
Final note is that you should not necessarily choose the winning concept. It should depend also on the openings demonstrated on the competition mapping graph and of course your brand’s own DNA. For example, if you offer the most expensive product in the market, then selecting the “low price” concept just because it proved to be the best performing won’t work.
- Weekly digest: if you participate in our program, you could enter a draw for a BMW
- Dear [username], you have been shortlisted to the VIP draw for a BMW
how often users use your product, i.e. if they are high, medium or low users. For example, you can email/ call/ SMS your high users much more often and expect to get higher returns and lower optout vs. if you did the same thing to your low users.
why they are using your product. This is even true for the simplest of products. For example, consider Coca-Cola, as mass and as simple as products come. Still, Coca-Cola consumption patterns can vary greatly. For example consider two different consumption patterns: Coca-Cola with food vs. Coca-Cola as a mixer, e.g. Vodka with Coke. One can expect that a promotion “pizza + coke = -20%” will perform differently between consumers of each of the two consumption patterns.
Harold Camping (pictured in December 2002), predicted doomsday to arrive on the following day, May 21, 2011 (http://goo.gl/QVVqW)
See below a screenshot from my mobile inbox. Stats say that mobile inbox is already the nr1 medium for reviewing emails. Most emails get deleted on mobile devices than anywhere else. Hence it makes sense to take a few minutes and review how your emails appear on mobile devices. For the sake of the exercise I am using the most popular single handset: the iPhone. The email senders are chosen at random and include:
- Saks – the world famous retailer
- Netrobe – a fashion iOS app that I am currently getting involved with as an advisor
- Kotsovolos – Greek subsidiary of Dixons
- MelinaMay – leading online stock outlet for the Greek market.
Saks: apparel retailer
(-) There are actually two emails from Saks in my inbox. That is too much given that I have never ever purchased anything from Saks. Saks should have segmented me as an inactive user, tested multiple messages on that group and then send the best performing one to all inactive users in hope that the maximum of inactive users will convert to paying customers. Two emails on one day is a sure sign that Saks has not thoroughly tested those messages and also, as a recipient, I realize that these messages are not anything special that deserve my attention more than any of the previous messages I have been ignoring.
(+) Sender: varied sender helps as it differentiates the two messages and makes recipients think that the message actually is sent from two different sources – reduces the feeling of getting spammed.
(+) Positive marks also on correct targeting, serving me messages for males while indeed I am a male.
(+) Top message has a fairly effective title kicking off with a most impressive 70% discount. Also makes clear that it refers to male products. Not so keen on the Must-Haves descriptor which is too vague and hence conveys no real info.
(-) Negative marks for the descriptor below the title especially for the top email, which repeats the Sender and then reads like random text without any coherency. The bottom email reads a bit more logically but still it feels like an AdWord campaign unsuitable for a personalized message to an already subscriber.
NETROBE: a cool iOS app to help fashionistas organize their wardrobe
(-) Not cool though that it repeats its brand name in the sender and title – waste of character real estate really
(-) Also not cool that the title conveys no information – the real information, i.e. the topic of the email, is replaced by “…” as it lies beyond iPhone’s character limit
(+) The descriptor is ok as it reads as a logical text and provides brief product descriptors and brands that could engage recipients.
Kotsovolos Dixons: electronics retailer
(+) Good use of title and title effectively communicating who sends the email and what it refers to
(-) Negative marks for the topic of the email being only a CSR message (= look at us how great we are) offering no real incentive to read it. The correct implementation should include an invitation/ CTA on how the recipient can help or maybe what the Kotsovolos Dixons customers have already done to contribute to this good deed.
(-) Big time negative marks for having left a generic text as a descriptor – Kotsovolos Dixons must have never paid any attention to the mobile inbox.
MelinaMay Fashion: apparel discount retailer
(+) Positive marks on using favicons in the title and especially in the start of the title. A sure way to boost engagement. Also it matches well with the title’s copy which is always a plus.
(+) Good use of character real estate informing recipients that new items have arrived. Important incentive for the bargain hunter to read the email and find out what type of products came in.
(-) Missed opportunity to use the descriptor below the title to outline some of the product types, brands etc. that just came in.
Got any other comments on the emails showing in the photo or disagree with any of the points, feel free to say so in the comments section.
If you search for 1 to 1 marketing you will get results such as personalization, CRM technologies, userbase segmentation and so on. Before you go there and invest in a software or recruit an agency, first identify the principle behind all of those buzzwords and try applying it in your email marketing.
The juice: make the recipient feel like this message is intended to him personally rather than give him the i-am-bulking-everyone-i-have-access-to impression. The more relevant the message, the higher the probability that the recipient will become engaged upon receiving it. That’s the juice.
How do you get recipients to get this feeling? Here a few examples:
-make the content of the message as relevant to the recipient as possible. One way to achieve this is through userbase segmentation. For example, segment in a list users that purchased a specific product and prepare a custom message for them only. Or make a list of customers that spent more than 100 Euros the past 15 days.
-be explicit in what you are doing. If you did segment your users and you are now addressing a specific segment of those, tell them so. And do so as early in the message a possible (see benefits of cutting to the chase). For example, “You have spent more than 100 Euros the past 15 days and that places you in our Golden Club and eligible for a unique offer…”.
-make copy personalized. The trick here is to make all copy seem as if it is written for this recipient only. This does not mean you need to change your brand’s tone of voice, no just imitate how a company representative would address a customer. To go a step further, you can make the message more personalized by addressing the recipient by his or her name (most email marketing software allow this functionality), explicitly explain why the message is relevant to the recipient, or even better make evident how this message is exclusive for the particular recipient.
-be polite. In 1-to-1 relationships manners matter more. Some examples: don’t try to trick them, don’t make unsubscribing difficult, don’t enroll them in the mailing list without their consent, don’t lie, etc.
-do not treat all customers equal. When I walk in a store and I am a regular, I expect to be treated as one. Similarly if I am not a regular, too much intimacy might be annoying. How would that translate in email marketing world? Segment your users in terms of worth, say gold, silver and bronze, and then treat each group differently. What could differ? The contact frequency first of all, the tone of voice, the quality of the offers, anything that signifies preferential treatment in your business
I believe the main pillars on how to make recipients feel special are here. Do all of the above and you will get 90% of the benefits a 5,000 Euro/ month CRM system could offer you. Have you found another trick in order to make recipients feel special? Please write a comment about it.
Gus Hansen is maybe the nr1 poker player in the world. But it should not take Gus Hansen to know the first rule of poker: don’t give away the cards you are holding. Keep people guessing instead. Hence the expression poker face. Even better, mislead your opponents to think that you are holding something other to force a wrong decision from their part. This could read like a business book tip. Trick your competition and so on. But when it comes to eBusiness then this is exactly the opposite of what you should be doing. Better lay all your cards on the table and pray for someone to have a look and share an opinion.
To prove my point, let’s take the case of start-ups. Say that it is the year 2005, Facebook does not yet exist and you find yourself in a coffee place and your friend mentions that he is thinking of building a site where visitors could subscribe to create their personal page displaying their picture and a very brief bio. Would you realize they would be talking about the biggest internet phenomenon to date? Would you even grant it as a good idea to start with? Would you feel envy that you did not think of it first? Would you wish he would get you involved? Would you actually expect that person to go ahead and build it in the end? Say there is also another person following the conversation. Would you expect, following this discussion, that few months later there would be two competing Facebook-like sites in the market, your friend’s and the third person’s listening in? What if your friend would go around town and mention that idea to everyone he met? Would you then expect to get a number of Facebook-like sites emerging triggered by your friend pitching idea left and right?
Hell no. One thing is certain to happen, your friend would get great feedback and build on his idea listening to comments and criticism. For example, some person might mention that it would be cool to allow for users to invite friends and get alerts for whenever their friend does anything to his profile. This idea would be gold. Even if 200 Facebook-like sites launched that year, this insight would set it apart. Another person might propose to allow users to upload pictures. Would people really be willing to upload pictures of their personal moments to the wide public? Can you know the answer to this? How could you unless you asked around and got feedback. If all humans had my taste in cuisine, there would only be Italian restaurants and chocolate ice-cream. Tough to predict what people will like and do. Some feedack will be gold, some will be crap, some will just need to be processed. For example, the comment about privacy is valid and could lead you to coming up with limiting access to profiles based on whether they are friends or not. If you don’t do this, you will most certainly get the product wrong and leave room for the next person with a similar idea to capture it. And be certain out of the international online population, that person won’t be too long.
You might be thinking that all this argumentation stands for start-ups and new ideas. How does it apply to running businesses that are already out there? You will be amazed at how much eBusinessmen prefer to keep in the shadows. How many eCommerce businesses share mistakes they have done with social media? Or best practices? How many of them still don’t know how much is right when it comes to investing in Facebook? Quora? Are they even aware of this opportunity? What about mCommerce? Are they correct to not have invested in this or did they waste their money developing a mobile friendly website? Are they really as SE optimized as they should? Are they leveraging email marketing as they should? Are they even segmenting their userbase or is everyone receiving the same email? Still that same message are they doing A-B testing? Is it worth it? Whoever does it won’t admit to it. The rest are to find out about this whole thing on their own.
In the past, a store would open in the high street and would compete with the rest. Now the high street has expanded to include the whole world. The best practice would be for businessmen to group in teams, share all their cards and try to beat the enemies at the gate to make sure they are ahead in the global game as much as possible.
The reason I am making this point is because I am tired of reading articles or going to presentations where businessmen get on stage with the sole intent to sell their company and its products. They don’t aim in sharing the knowledge, letting you in in any secret. This is bad practice that will drag the whole ecosystem behind. Some other group of businesses will outgrow you and you will be left behind. The other alternative is that your ecosystem will outgrow the rest and gradually expand its borders. This is something to aim for.
So you have an idea, you have a good practice or a bad practice to share. Then just share it. Discuss it. Be open about it. It will only benefit everyone around you in the long term. Yourself included.