Category Archives: Reality checks

GIGO

The Memorial Day weekend gave me a little time to get caught up on some reading. Some of what I was reading were analytics reports (I know – get a life) and while I very much appreciate the cycle of continual improvement Google fosters within their analytics product, that cycle yields a continuously growing amount of data. The problem that I have isn’t so much understanding what I’m reading but trying to figure out why any of it matters to my clients. I also spend time figuring out which of the numbers are lying to me. 

It’s no secret that there are an awful lot of bad actors in the digital world. Once it becomes clear how fraud is detected those bad actors move on to another form. If viewability is important, they create sites where there is 100% viewability but no content of any value. I had a client get all excited about an increase in referral traffic until I pointed out that most of that traffic was coming as a result of referrer spam. When we filtered it out, traffic was flat. Another prospect got excited by the large “stickiness” – time on site and pages viewed – that her site has. They were impressive until you filtered out the IP addresses of her employees, who spent hours a day on the site.

Silly things, I know, but it points to a common problem. An IDG study of a couple of years ago pointed out that nearly half of marketers said they struggle to make sense of the vast amount of data they get. The other half thinks they know what the numbers mean, yet many of their plans are built to achieve unrealistic metrics. The problem is compounded by what the paper identifies as the accuracy problem I mentioned above:

Why is data accuracy still such a big issue? One possible reason is a lack of investment in a defined data management process that includes ongoing, consistent data migration, data maintenance, quality control and governance. Too often data is held and managed in multiple organizational silos. This results in inconsistency, duplication, gaps and errors.

So while “garbage in, garbage out” isn’t a particular revelation, it does serve as an excellent reminder to take out the trash as best you can while compiling all of that data.  You with me?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, Reality checks, Thinking Aloud

The Buying Opportunity

A large investor sold a big block of Apple shares this morning and that was a big enough deal that it made my news stream. He feels that the stock is overvalued and that Apple is having some product issues as well as being too dependent on China. It’s on the heels of Carl Ichan dumping his huge stake in the company a couple of weeks ago. That could be although it’s not really our topic this morning. Instead, think about how the stock market works. You can’t sell a stock unless someone wishes to purchase it from you (or the company decides to buy back its own shares). The real question at that point is price, although there are other factors at play as well.

When I got out of college I was fortunate enough to have an older friend who was a very smart investor. He told me to read the Graham and Dodd classic book called Security Analysis and to live by what the book said when it came to investing. As it turns out, Warren Buffett was giving out the same advice (he’s done pretty well by its principles, wouldn’t you say?). I have this on my mind because I spend a lot of time consulting with start-up companies, most of whom are out trying to raise investment. Graham differentiated between investment and speculation, the former “promises safety of principal and an adequate return. Operations not meeting these requirements are speculative.” Part of what I work on with these companies is helping them become the former – good investments – and not speculative, although it’s fair to say that most start-ups contain some elements of speculation since they don’t really have long track records.

Back to Apple.  No one would consider Apple a speculative investment and yet someone who is supposed to be sophisticated in the ways of the market has determined that it no longer meets his valuation and that this was the time to sell before the value declined further. Another investor decided that the price is low enough to purchase shares worth over a $1 billion. That’s our point today.  First, whatever we do in business must be able to be seen through the lens of value.  Second, we shouldn’t allow one person’s assessment of the value – expressed as what they’re willing to pay for your product or service – be thought of as gospel.  For every seller – every person who thinks you’re overpriced – there is probably a buyer – someone who sees the value in what you’re doing as well as the upside at the same price.  That applies not just to buying a stake in your company but in purchasing your products or services  as well.  Make sense?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, Reality checks, Thinking Aloud

Girl Talk

As our girls were growing up, I tried very hard not to speak in gender-specific terms. There were no “firemen” or “policemen” or even “postmen.” In part, I guess I wanted to send a subtle message that anyone can do anything – boys or girls, men or women. The other part was just a feeling that taking on a tone of talking to girls in a language more specific to girls (which I have no clue about) was silly.

English: Gender neutral toilet sign at departm...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I bring this up because I was reminded both of that and of David Ogilvy‘s famous quote this morning as I read about some research from the Fluent people. Ogilvy is known for reminding us that “The customer is not a moron. She is your wife.” You can get the full report here, but the Fluent research talks about how many of us are speaking to our female target audiences and how they want us to do so:

Women overwhelmingly prefer gender-neutral ads. 73% of women say they sometimes receive marketing messages directed specifically to women…74% say they prefer marketing messages to be gender-neutral.

Fluent surveyed 1,443 US female internet users ages 18 and older to come up with that number and the study was designed to better understand the impact of online and offline marketing channels on their purchasing decisions and how engagement varies across different age groups.  So while only 26% of respondents said they preferred marketing messages directed specifically to women, almost three-quarters of female internet users said they prefer marketing messages to be gender neutral. A little out of touch, no?

Smart marketing these days isn’t about selling anything.  We need to understand our customers and the problem they have which our product or service solves.  Explaining that you’re there to help with that – being a resource – is like talking to your friends and not to a mark. Speaking in clear, gender-neutral language is generally how I speak with my friends.  You?

Leave a comment

Filed under Huh?, Reality checks