Tag Archives: Research

The Price-Value Experience Thing

Yet another edition of “Interesting Research That Proves What Common Sense Told You.”

Image representing Forrester Research as depic...

Image via CrunchBase

In this case, however, the results are actually surprising in that they do confirm one’s own thinking.  The study comes from Forrester, who tested the relationship between customers’ perceptions of their experience, their perceptions of price-value, and their loyalty. This report shows how customer experience trumps price-value perception as a loyalty driver.  In other words, we don’t mind paying a couple of dollars more for a better customer experience.

Media Post summed it up this way:

New research from Forrester finds that when it comes to building loyalty, people respond more to the experience they have with the retailer than with their perception of price.

They went on to quote Maxie Schmidt-Subramanian, the analyst who wrote the report:

In order to move the needle, she says, stores need to focus on the core components of positive experiences, including:

* Meet customer needs. “If the product or service is wrong, price becomes irrelevant,” she writes.

* Make it easy. That can include anything from keeping store aisles clear to making it possible to start shopping online, and then still find the items in your cart when you switch to mobile. “Amazon’s two-day shipping and one-click ordering continue to make a strong impact on shoppers,” she says.

* Make it enjoyable. “That comes down to basics, like making sure dressing rooms aren’t messy and that it’s not a hassle to use your coupons.” And stores like Trader Joe’s, QuikTrip, and Costco may be low-cost, she says, but the amount they spend training their employees to be more knowledgeable makes the experience more pleasurable.

Well, yeah!  Businesses often spend way too much time trying to shave costs while persevering margins.  Intuitively, getting customers to pay a bit more can more than amortize the costs of excellent service, particularly when that service doesn’t involve any more staff, but better training and higher responsiveness.

Maybe this isn’t learning something new today but I think it’s always good when we get reminded of things we probably already felt.  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Reality checks

The Business And The Binge

The folks at Harris Interactive released some new information about TV consumption and it doesn’t bode well for the traditional business models – not even for the dual revenue model that empowered cable and which traditional broadcast is mimicking these days.  While I think any of us who pay attention to viewing research both via the boob tube and via other platforms are aware that things have changed, these numbers show that they’ve done so to a far greater extent than one might think.  Let’s see if you agree.

Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You can read the data from Harris here but in brief what it shows is that younger people stream more stuff and set their own viewing times.  They also tend to “binge” view – they’ll watch all the episodes from a season of a show straight through over several hours.  If you’re over 55, there’s a 2 out of 3 chance you’re being your own program scheduler.  If you’re under 40, that becomes a 9 out of 10 chance.  Most of the way that on-demand viewing is done is NOT via a system controlled by the cable operators among younger demos.  While the older audience tends to use the services the operators make available via their set-top box or DVR, younger people have wandered well off the ranch.

As Harris points out:

Self-scheduled and binge television viewing trends suggest implications for the television industry at large, potentially impacting both advertisers and content producers.  For advertisers, the clearest impact is that some of these viewers will be taking in contact on platforms beyond their reach, such as Netflix and Amazon’s VOD services.

Content producers, meanwhile, have both positive and negative implications to explore. On the upside, the ability to quickly catch up on past seasons of existing shows, particularly ones with complex storylines, could give more viewers the opportunity to jump into new episodes without confusion. On the downside, viewers watching when they choose, not when it airs, can play havoc with ratings.

Taking that to next the step, when the traditional currency of TV – ratings – suffers through a huge deflation, the basic underpinning of the business will follow.  Yikes!

I don’t know that the above research is huge news – look at how your own media habits have changed.  What is surprising is the extent to which these changes are now a way of life.  Let’s see how the business follows the audience – nothing like “interesting” times!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, What's Going On

Is Streaming Hurting Traditional TV?

Once in a while a piece of research shows up that’s just confusing and such was the case the other day.  GfK Research has been doing annual surveys of network TV viewing for the past six years and the seventh iteration has produced some data that I can’t quite figure out.  Maybe you can help me.

Diagram of Streaming Multicast

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Over the last seven years:

the proportion of those who say they “expect to be able to watch my favorite shows on a device of my choice” has nearly doubled, from 19% in 2006 to 34% now. But those who watch network programs via streaming options are now more likely to say that this erodes their “traditional” viewing of the same shows. One in three (33%) report that they watch less “regular” TV as a result of streaming viewing, compared to one in four (24%) who say they watch more — a net differential of -9 percentage points.

In other words, viewers expect the networks to hand them the weapon with which the viewers murder the nets’ business.  After all, if they’re watching less, there are fewer eyeballs to sell.  It’s the old “trading analog dollars for digital dimes” argument.  But let’s turn to the man (Jeff Zucker, then of NBC, now of CNN) who made that argument and gain a bit of insight into the research:

“We believe in ubiquitous distribution, we want our content to be available everywhere,” Zucker said, also noting that “We’re not afraid to try things and stop them.”

He continued: “What we’ve lost in terms of viewers and ad dollars on the traditional analog systems is not being made up for on the digital side. Until we do that, there’s a risk to all our business plans,” said Zucker.

So actually, it seems that what the research is saying is not that interest in what the networks are airing is lessening – quite the contrary.  27% of those who use streaming or downloaded video now say that they “watch a greater number” of shows because of these options — more than double the 2006 figure of 12%. And 21% report that they spend more time watching TV content thanks to digital viewing options.  The problem seems to be with “regular” TV, which I assume means the program stream as offered by the network through your TV at specific times.  Survey results show 33% say they watch less traditional TV with streaming options, while 24% say they watch more.  As recently as 2008, GfK’s research showed that streaming options provided a net benefit to regular TV viewing; that year, the differential was +5 points, with 25% saying they watched more regular TV, while 20% said they watched less.

What all of this seems to mean is overall TV viewing isn’t declining.  The question for TV nets is how to derive as much revenue from streaming as traditional viewing. GfK also found 32% are visiting network sites via a mobile device so let’s put that inventory into the mix as well.  Maybe the research is a cry for sellers to do a better job of getting premium CPM’s for these measurable engaged viewers of the streams?  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under digital media, Thinking Aloud