The front page of New Media Age had a story ‘Media agencies warn of cutback in online spend‘ about how media agencies have been seeing a decline in business from their clients, in line with a re-examination of all marketing spend. This is in sharp contrast to the last recession of 2001 which saw a dip in display advertising spend spend but was the crucible that made Google as a successful business.
Google was successful because it allowed an unprecedented level of measurablity. Things are different now and the most sophisticated marketers will realise that. Thinking back with my conversation with Gi at Techlightenment earlier on this year: businesses now need to get a full picture of what actually happens in their customer interactions. For instance if someone receives a direct mail shot of interest, a print advertisement or a piece of coverage – searches online for the company, checks out the site and then signs up online, Google Analytics will only see half that transaction.
Consumers consume their information online and offline and don’t descriminate on whether the content was delivered in bits or on paper, their marketing shouldn’t either. This example is a very simple engagement model but it throws the current accounting, customer acquisition costs and marketing spend decision-making completely out of whack.
Is the cost of the acquistion of the consumer the price of the Google click, or the print drop /print advert / PR campaign plus the Google click. Which elements are actually effective in this process? Can some be removed, if so which parts?
Techlightenment tries to answer these questions using inferred data: mapping IP addresses to geographic location, timing, existing direct mail address list and prospect contact details.
Transactional marketing has just got post-modern.