This post is not about Wikileaks but it is related to one's ability to publish freely in an on-line setting.
Over the past few weeks, I have observed a disturbing pattern related to censored postings on various Facebook fan pages that I check into on a regular basis. Here's how it unfolds:
Someone who is a fan of the page posts a comment to a conversation thread that has been started. The comment usually reflects an opinion that goes counter to the generally positive, supportive comments of that conversation and sometimes to the fan page in general. The comment is not offensive in any way, it is not spam - it just doesn't tow the 'party line' of the page. Very quickly, the comment disappears - obviously removed by the anonymous administrators of the page who act as judge and jury in relation to the 'appropriateness' of the comment.
The problem is that these anonymous Fan page administrators never actually respond to the comments that they seem to find offensive in some way. They simply make things go away. The truly disturbing part is that individuals cannot be anonymous on these pages (we are all Facebook profiles when we visit these pages). Those of us who publish opinions that are different are ostracized so as not to disturb the perfect world that the page is trying to portray of the brand, celebrity or group for whom the page was created.
To all of the administrators of brand, celebrity, group and other fan pages: Let your fans have a voice and let them express themselves even when you don't like what they have to say. If you don't like someone's opinion, too bad - address it instead of making it simply go away. And do so in a non-anonymous way.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
Disappointment is an unfulfilled expectation
Disappointment is an unfulfilled expectation. And expectations are disappointments waiting to happen.
That was my experience at last night's Montreal International Jazz festival. As I headed to the festival site, I was teaming with anticipation and the high expectations I had set for the Jazz Mafia show I mentioned in yesterday's post. The logic was simple. Take a dozen great players that performed a mind-blowing show on Saturday. Add another 30 or so players of equal quality to the mix. Expand on the original notion of mixing big band, classical string players and rappers into a full fledged hip hop symphony. Stick them all on the biggest stage at the festival. Expected result: an even cooler, out there, hip, fantabulistic show than the night before. Right?
Wrong. The truth is that I did not enjoy the 'big show' nearly as much as the smaller version. Actually, I did not enjoy it much at all. Yes, the players were great. Yes, the music was complex, interesting, even compelling at points. But the performance just came off COLD. The intimacy the group created the evening before was missing. Communication with the audience was next to zero - and I don't mean asking the crowd if they were having a good time. I simply mean getting a feel for the pulse of the audience, where they are at and gauging their response to the performance. That did not happen.
Perhaps it was because everything was just so scripted. Perhaps there was just not enough spontaneity allowed in performing the musical composition itself - it was after all a scored work conducted by the composer. Yes, there was a lot of improvisation but it all happened within a very rigid framework.
Perhaps the front man from Saturday's show who really clicked with the audience and created an almost lounge like atmosphere should have played the same role last night. Unfortunately, he didn't.
Perhaps I should not have had such high expectations. Maybe then, I could have enjoyed the show as it was, for what it was and returned home a happier guy.
That was my experience at last night's Montreal International Jazz festival. As I headed to the festival site, I was teaming with anticipation and the high expectations I had set for the Jazz Mafia show I mentioned in yesterday's post. The logic was simple. Take a dozen great players that performed a mind-blowing show on Saturday. Add another 30 or so players of equal quality to the mix. Expand on the original notion of mixing big band, classical string players and rappers into a full fledged hip hop symphony. Stick them all on the biggest stage at the festival. Expected result: an even cooler, out there, hip, fantabulistic show than the night before. Right?
Wrong. The truth is that I did not enjoy the 'big show' nearly as much as the smaller version. Actually, I did not enjoy it much at all. Yes, the players were great. Yes, the music was complex, interesting, even compelling at points. But the performance just came off COLD. The intimacy the group created the evening before was missing. Communication with the audience was next to zero - and I don't mean asking the crowd if they were having a good time. I simply mean getting a feel for the pulse of the audience, where they are at and gauging their response to the performance. That did not happen.
Perhaps it was because everything was just so scripted. Perhaps there was just not enough spontaneity allowed in performing the musical composition itself - it was after all a scored work conducted by the composer. Yes, there was a lot of improvisation but it all happened within a very rigid framework.
Perhaps the front man from Saturday's show who really clicked with the audience and created an almost lounge like atmosphere should have played the same role last night. Unfortunately, he didn't.
Perhaps I should not have had such high expectations. Maybe then, I could have enjoyed the show as it was, for what it was and returned home a happier guy.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
The Montreal jazz festival continues
Yesterday was day 2 of the Montreal international jazz festival. After a great start on Friday, I wanted to see what unique, original and inspiring performances I might discover on Saturday. It took a while of wandering and listening to a number of initially disappointing performances, but I eventually stumbled upon a couple of gems.
First up was the 9PM Jim Zeller show at the blues stage. Jim Zeller has been a fixture at this festival, this year marking his 22nd year performing at the fest since 1985. I have probably taken in his show for most of these appearances, but for some reason, this year stood out for me. What I liked most about the performance was how genuine, raw and authentic Zeller was. While not everything worked for me, (I can't say that I was a fan of some of the medleys that he is fond of doing), there were a number of songs that really stood out. First there was 'Rikers Island Blues' an autobiographical account of Zeller's experience incarcerated at the infamous prison in the early 1980s. When Zeller sings about what it was like to be in Rikers, you really felt what it was like to be there. Gritty, sad, desperate, despondent - all of this came through in the performance. The best moment of the show however, was a song called Godfather which uses the theme music from the film "The Godfather". Zeller's version was funny, irreverent and infinitely catchy and had 20,000 (?) or so people completely in sync with his 'out there' interpretation. Fun!
My second discovery of the evening was a group from San Francisco called The Shotgun Wedding Quintet. The quintet actually consisted of more than a dozen players including a horn section, string quartet, bass, flute, drums, guitar and vocalist. The amazing thing was that musicians were just 'showing up' and added to the stage as the show progressed. The East Bay Express has described their music as 'a full-size philharmonic jamming with a classic big band during a street-corner rap battle.' The results were amazing, and their musicianship superb. They claim to be the creme de la creme players of the San Francisco music scene and I do not doubt this for a second. The music was complex but completely accessible. It reminded my of the best Frank Zappa bands of the early to mid 1970s. Tonight, they will be performing a 'hip hop' symphony written by trombonist and multi-instrumentalist Adam Theis complete with full orchestra. Don't miss it - it will be mind blowing!
First up was the 9PM Jim Zeller show at the blues stage. Jim Zeller has been a fixture at this festival, this year marking his 22nd year performing at the fest since 1985. I have probably taken in his show for most of these appearances, but for some reason, this year stood out for me. What I liked most about the performance was how genuine, raw and authentic Zeller was. While not everything worked for me, (I can't say that I was a fan of some of the medleys that he is fond of doing), there were a number of songs that really stood out. First there was 'Rikers Island Blues' an autobiographical account of Zeller's experience incarcerated at the infamous prison in the early 1980s. When Zeller sings about what it was like to be in Rikers, you really felt what it was like to be there. Gritty, sad, desperate, despondent - all of this came through in the performance. The best moment of the show however, was a song called Godfather which uses the theme music from the film "The Godfather". Zeller's version was funny, irreverent and infinitely catchy and had 20,000 (?) or so people completely in sync with his 'out there' interpretation. Fun!
My second discovery of the evening was a group from San Francisco called The Shotgun Wedding Quintet. The quintet actually consisted of more than a dozen players including a horn section, string quartet, bass, flute, drums, guitar and vocalist. The amazing thing was that musicians were just 'showing up' and added to the stage as the show progressed. The East Bay Express has described their music as 'a full-size philharmonic jamming with a classic big band during a street-corner rap battle.' The results were amazing, and their musicianship superb. They claim to be the creme de la creme players of the San Francisco music scene and I do not doubt this for a second. The music was complex but completely accessible. It reminded my of the best Frank Zappa bands of the early to mid 1970s. Tonight, they will be performing a 'hip hop' symphony written by trombonist and multi-instrumentalist Adam Theis complete with full orchestra. Don't miss it - it will be mind blowing!
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Summer in Montreal
It's summer in Montreal and as I have done for the past 25 to 30 years, I made my first of many nightly pilgrimages last night to the annual Montreal Jazz Festival. When I first attended the festival I was not really a fan of traditional jazz but over the years my love for the genre has grown to the point where it is my music of choice on my IPod and on my home sound system (yes I still have a 'stereo' system, a CD player, turntable!, and lots of old vinyl).
Whenever I attend the free outdoor shows, I love to explore. I spend a lot of time moving from stage to stage, listening for something original, unusual, spontaneous, inspiring and when I find it, I make a point of spending my time at that particular show to the exclusion of anything else that might be going on at the same time. Last night was opening night of the 2010 version of the festival and it did not disappoint. The 'headliner' show of the evening and the festival opener was a free outdoor show with Brian Setzer and his swing/jump orchestra - you may remember Brian Setzer from the 80s rockabilly band Stray Cats. I loved the Setzer show, but the two gems of the evening for me, I discovered earlier on.
The first gem came in the form of a 'dixieland' (I use the term dixieland loosely) band from St. Petersburg, Russia called Billy's Band. This four piece gem is made up of stand up bass (bass player is also band leader, chief story teller and primary vocalist), accordion, saxophone and electric guitar. I loved these guys because they were completely original - a mix of Tom Waits meets Louisiana funeral march meets 70s guitar heroes. The musicianship was superb, the stories completely irreverent and who could resist the fact that half of their tunes were in Russian. They also covered a number of Tom Waits tunes (his influence very apparent throughout the performance) which in and of itself is a difficult undertaking. But everything felt completely genuine without trying to simply imitate. The hour went by quickly and I wished they could have played longer.
As I wandered around the site after the Billy's Band show, I quite literally, stumbled upon Lorraine Desmarais, sitting at a baby grand piano in a small alcove on the walkway going to Place des Arts where the local jazz radio station had a booth set up. Lorraine was promoting her two solo piano shows that she would be performing during the festival with a quick appearance/interview on the radio and accepted to play a couple of tunes as people walked by. I loved it because it was spontaneous and felt as if I was getting a private concert!
After that, I headed to the Setzer show and went home a happy guy. Let's see what gems I discover tonight.
Whenever I attend the free outdoor shows, I love to explore. I spend a lot of time moving from stage to stage, listening for something original, unusual, spontaneous, inspiring and when I find it, I make a point of spending my time at that particular show to the exclusion of anything else that might be going on at the same time. Last night was opening night of the 2010 version of the festival and it did not disappoint. The 'headliner' show of the evening and the festival opener was a free outdoor show with Brian Setzer and his swing/jump orchestra - you may remember Brian Setzer from the 80s rockabilly band Stray Cats. I loved the Setzer show, but the two gems of the evening for me, I discovered earlier on.
The first gem came in the form of a 'dixieland' (I use the term dixieland loosely) band from St. Petersburg, Russia called Billy's Band. This four piece gem is made up of stand up bass (bass player is also band leader, chief story teller and primary vocalist), accordion, saxophone and electric guitar. I loved these guys because they were completely original - a mix of Tom Waits meets Louisiana funeral march meets 70s guitar heroes. The musicianship was superb, the stories completely irreverent and who could resist the fact that half of their tunes were in Russian. They also covered a number of Tom Waits tunes (his influence very apparent throughout the performance) which in and of itself is a difficult undertaking. But everything felt completely genuine without trying to simply imitate. The hour went by quickly and I wished they could have played longer.
As I wandered around the site after the Billy's Band show, I quite literally, stumbled upon Lorraine Desmarais, sitting at a baby grand piano in a small alcove on the walkway going to Place des Arts where the local jazz radio station had a booth set up. Lorraine was promoting her two solo piano shows that she would be performing during the festival with a quick appearance/interview on the radio and accepted to play a couple of tunes as people walked by. I loved it because it was spontaneous and felt as if I was getting a private concert!
After that, I headed to the Setzer show and went home a happy guy. Let's see what gems I discover tonight.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Optimize your Google Analytics setup
Google Analytics is a great tool to help you understand where to find value within your website and to help you improve what is not working. The first step to unlock this insight requires that you set up Analytics so that the data you are gathering and analyzing serves your business objectives. The old adage 'garbage in, garbage out' is very fitting.
What to look for in a basic Google Analytics setup
There are a few basic steps you need to take so that the data you are gathering is clean and relevant.
1. Make sure to create one Analytics profile that is unfiltered so that you have a complete history of all activity on your site regardless of source.
2. Create a second profile that filters out traffic that creates business 'noise'. Examples of 'noise' traffic include your internal office visitors as well as consultants and agencies who may be working on your site. Basically, anyone who will be accessing your site but whose visitor traffic tells you nothing about how your on-line business is performing should be excluded from the second profile which becomes the 'business master' profile.
3. Tag everything on your site! You can start by simply tagging all of your pages. BUT... tracking pages alone tells a partial story, particularly when there are other interactions which do not generate 'pageviews'. Think about someone downloading a brochure/newsletter/sample in pdf format. Think about a visitor interacting with your Flash movie or embedded YouTube video. These are likely to be interactive events without pageviews and are therefore not tracked even if you are tagging your pages. So, tag your events! Analytics provides great event tracking reporting that can be used to segment your visitors you never thought about. Ask yourself - are the visitors who download my brochure more likely to purchase a product? With event tracking you can begin to answer this question.
4. Tag all the inbound links that you control - the Tweets, Facebook pages and posts, and LinkedIn updates that you create; any paid advertising that comes from sources other than Google Adwords. Anything that links into your site that you control can be tagged and tracked. So start tagging!
5. If you are running Google Adwords, make sure to link Adwords to Analytics and to turn on auto-tagging in Adwords. Otherwise you will likely see all of your paid search as organic traffic. And beware - if you are managing Ad campaigns for different websites from a single Adwords account, then you need to set up filters in your business master profile that removes the campaign data that belongs to these other sites. Otherwise it will appear as if you are attributing all of the Adwords account traffic, costs and conversions to your single site.
6. If you are running an Ecommerce site make sure to add the Google Analytics transaction tracking code to the page that indicates that someone concluded a transaction - like your Thank You page. That way you are able to capture detailed data about each transaction.
7. Last but not least - set up at least one goal in your business master profile. The goal(s) should relate back to your business and site objectives. If you cannot think of a goal, then ask yourself a simple question - what am I trying to achieve with this site - Sell stuff? Answer customer inquiries? Source leads? Then set up your goals .
Happy tagging!
What to look for in a basic Google Analytics setup
There are a few basic steps you need to take so that the data you are gathering is clean and relevant.
1. Make sure to create one Analytics profile that is unfiltered so that you have a complete history of all activity on your site regardless of source.
2. Create a second profile that filters out traffic that creates business 'noise'. Examples of 'noise' traffic include your internal office visitors as well as consultants and agencies who may be working on your site. Basically, anyone who will be accessing your site but whose visitor traffic tells you nothing about how your on-line business is performing should be excluded from the second profile which becomes the 'business master' profile.
3. Tag everything on your site! You can start by simply tagging all of your pages. BUT... tracking pages alone tells a partial story, particularly when there are other interactions which do not generate 'pageviews'. Think about someone downloading a brochure/newsletter/sample in pdf format. Think about a visitor interacting with your Flash movie or embedded YouTube video. These are likely to be interactive events without pageviews and are therefore not tracked even if you are tagging your pages. So, tag your events! Analytics provides great event tracking reporting that can be used to segment your visitors you never thought about. Ask yourself - are the visitors who download my brochure more likely to purchase a product? With event tracking you can begin to answer this question.
4. Tag all the inbound links that you control - the Tweets, Facebook pages and posts, and LinkedIn updates that you create; any paid advertising that comes from sources other than Google Adwords. Anything that links into your site that you control can be tagged and tracked. So start tagging!
5. If you are running Google Adwords, make sure to link Adwords to Analytics and to turn on auto-tagging in Adwords. Otherwise you will likely see all of your paid search as organic traffic. And beware - if you are managing Ad campaigns for different websites from a single Adwords account, then you need to set up filters in your business master profile that removes the campaign data that belongs to these other sites. Otherwise it will appear as if you are attributing all of the Adwords account traffic, costs and conversions to your single site.
6. If you are running an Ecommerce site make sure to add the Google Analytics transaction tracking code to the page that indicates that someone concluded a transaction - like your Thank You page. That way you are able to capture detailed data about each transaction.
7. Last but not least - set up at least one goal in your business master profile. The goal(s) should relate back to your business and site objectives. If you cannot think of a goal, then ask yourself a simple question - what am I trying to achieve with this site - Sell stuff? Answer customer inquiries? Source leads? Then set up your goals .
Happy tagging!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Just tell me how much it's really going to cost
I recently received some mail from my local phone company with whom I have had a relationship for many years. The only service I subscribe to from them is for my local, wireline telephone. (Yes, I am still a dinosaur that way and have not made the switch to only having a wireless device)
Their very perceptive senior vice president of residential services must have been looking through his customer reports and noticed that I hadn't yet subscribed to their internet service or their satellite TV service and thought that he might send me an enticing offer.
Here is the offer as well as the fine print that follows:
A quick perusal of the offer would suggest that I am going to receive this bundle of services for $76.95. This is certainly the most prominent piece of the promotion and obviously the part that they want me to focus on - largest font, bold typeface, all caps.
Great, I think. I am definitely paying more than that for my bundle of services that I source from different companies. I should probably think about the offer. A more detailed scan of the letter, however, reveals that there are numerous 'conditions' attached to this $76.95 price.
Where are the conditions listed? Not on the front of the letter where they would likely scare off a lot of potential customers, but on the back of the letter, at the bottom.
What do the conditions say? After getting out my trusty magnifying glass (funny how the font used in the conditions is significantly smaller and more condensed than the offer text) I discover that the price does NOT include all sorts of additional charges and conditions: monthly regulatory fees, an activation fee, 'additional' unnamed fees, a 2-yr contract, a rate increase after year 1 on certain services. I also discover that the type of internet service offered within the bundle price is not the same type of service I currently subscribe to.
So how much would this wonderful offer REALLY cost me per month? I HAVE NO IDEA!
Will I pursue the offer? Unlikely.
Why not? Because there is nothing clear or transparent in this promotion. While it certainly does not contain any falsehoods (all of the conditions are there on the back should you read them), it is certainly not forthright about the true price to the customer.
I am a believer that marketing should be about transparency. If you have something you want me to buy from you, inform me in a CLEAR, TRANSPARENT way about your product or service, including how much it is going to cost and under what conditions I am purchasing. Don't say one thing to my face (on the front of the letter) and then say something different behind my back (the back of the letter). Mr. Senior Vice-president of residential services, the only thing you have accomplished here is to get me angry. Don't make $76.95 into $176.95 without making the WHY VERY CLEAR. Do you hear that phone company, airline, cable company and anyone else who is not being transparent in your marketing messages?
How unfortunate that the expression 'caveat emptor' - let the buyer beware - is still so relevant today.
Their very perceptive senior vice president of residential services must have been looking through his customer reports and noticed that I hadn't yet subscribed to their internet service or their satellite TV service and thought that he might send me an enticing offer.
Here is the offer as well as the fine print that follows:
A quick perusal of the offer would suggest that I am going to receive this bundle of services for $76.95. This is certainly the most prominent piece of the promotion and obviously the part that they want me to focus on - largest font, bold typeface, all caps.
Great, I think. I am definitely paying more than that for my bundle of services that I source from different companies. I should probably think about the offer. A more detailed scan of the letter, however, reveals that there are numerous 'conditions' attached to this $76.95 price.
Where are the conditions listed? Not on the front of the letter where they would likely scare off a lot of potential customers, but on the back of the letter, at the bottom.
I wonder how many people never get to the back of the letter.
What do the conditions say? After getting out my trusty magnifying glass (funny how the font used in the conditions is significantly smaller and more condensed than the offer text) I discover that the price does NOT include all sorts of additional charges and conditions: monthly regulatory fees, an activation fee, 'additional' unnamed fees, a 2-yr contract, a rate increase after year 1 on certain services. I also discover that the type of internet service offered within the bundle price is not the same type of service I currently subscribe to.
So how much would this wonderful offer REALLY cost me per month? I HAVE NO IDEA!
Will I pursue the offer? Unlikely.
Why not? Because there is nothing clear or transparent in this promotion. While it certainly does not contain any falsehoods (all of the conditions are there on the back should you read them), it is certainly not forthright about the true price to the customer.
I am a believer that marketing should be about transparency. If you have something you want me to buy from you, inform me in a CLEAR, TRANSPARENT way about your product or service, including how much it is going to cost and under what conditions I am purchasing. Don't say one thing to my face (on the front of the letter) and then say something different behind my back (the back of the letter). Mr. Senior Vice-president of residential services, the only thing you have accomplished here is to get me angry. Don't make $76.95 into $176.95 without making the WHY VERY CLEAR. Do you hear that phone company, airline, cable company and anyone else who is not being transparent in your marketing messages?
How unfortunate that the expression 'caveat emptor' - let the buyer beware - is still so relevant today.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Is your on-line advertising delivering more than your site analytics is telling you?
As someone who has been analyzing on-site web data for a number of years, I have observed a phenomenon that for the lack of a better term, I call the 'fuzzy factor'. It refers to the differences observed in conversions reported by the analytics tool (in my case I have been using Google Analytics) from paid advertising and the conversions reported by the advertising platforms (Adwords, Yahoo, Bing, Facebook). Note that when I refer to the term 'conversion' in this context, I am referring specifically to a conversion that is synonymous with a 'purchase' transaction and not to any other conversions that I may be tracking such as a newsletter signup.
My process is as follows:
My analysis has shown a consistent discrepancy as I look at data going back about 2 years. (Caveat: Facebook only began conversion tracking on their ad platform in early Feb 2010 so my Facebook experience dates back to late Feb 2010 when most of the bugs were ironed out).
In the case of my personalized book sites, Alphakid, Printakid and Livrepersonnalise, this discrepancy is about 15%. For these sites, the advertising platforms are attributing 15% more conversions to the ads than Google Analytics is attributing to them and the overstatement percentages are consistent from ad platform to ad platform.
This is actually not surprising since not everyone who makes a purchase on the sites does so during their first visit. It may take a couple of visits with subsequent visits more likely to originate from non-paid sources.
My process is as follows:
- When I create an ad on any third party ad delivery system (like Bing, Yahoo, Facebook) I ensure that the ads are tagged accurately. Since I use Google Analytics I encode the destination URLs using their utm_campaign, utm_medium, utm_source, utm_term and utm_content parameters for every ad that is run. I use Google's autotagging feature so that Google does the work for me for all the Adwords ads.
- I install the conversion tracking code supplied by the ad platform on the conversion page and then let the data flow.
- I then compare the transactions attributed to the various ad platforms by Analytics to the attributions made by the individual ad platforms and measure the differences.
I know there are a number of reasons for the differences, a major one being that Google Analytics uses a 'last' clicked source to attribute the source of the conversion while the ad platforms (including Adwords) begin tracking a cookie from the time the ad is first clicked and attribute a conversion to that click provided the cookie has not expired.
So, if someone comes to a site by clicking on an Adword ad, leaves without making a purchase, returns the following day by virtue of a Google organic search on the brand name and makes a purchase, Google Analytics will attribute the conversion to Google organic search while Adwords will record a conversion that is attributed to the ad that was first clicked. For GA the score is Organic 1 CPC 0 while the score for Adwords is CPC 1 Organic 0.
In the case of my personalized book sites, Alphakid, Printakid and Livrepersonnalise, this discrepancy is about 15%. For these sites, the advertising platforms are attributing 15% more conversions to the ads than Google Analytics is attributing to them and the overstatement percentages are consistent from ad platform to ad platform.
This is actually not surprising since not everyone who makes a purchase on the sites does so during their first visit. It may take a couple of visits with subsequent visits more likely to originate from non-paid sources.
So what does this mean for me? Here are some of the implications:
- Calculating advertising ROI based solely on Analytics conversions will understate the value that the advertising brings to the business.
- The initial ad that drives someone to a site is an important source of value and some of the value is hidden. Since not everyone's first purchase coincides with their first site visit, the purchase may never happen without that initial click on the ad. (I can also confirm this via GA's stats on days to purchase and visits to purchase)
- A more accurate ROI calculation is needed.
For each channel/campaign I determine an Adjusted ad contribution:
Adjusted Ad Contribution ROI = (Adjusted Revenue from Campaign based on Ad Platform * Gross margin - Cost of Advertising) / Cost of Advertising.
I then re-adjust the calculation for lifetime customer value rather than one off purchases. While this adjustment cannot be precise (do you know how many purchases someone is likely to make if your site is new, can you estimate how ad costs might change over time, how your product mix may change thereby affecting average purchase value and your cost of goods) at least it will provide some insight. As a proxy you can use Google's new custom variables to set up visitor based segments for your ad channels and measure lifetime value over a two year period (the 2 years before the cookie expires).
While this might sound a bit complicated, the results are certainly worth the effort, particularly if your web business includes a significant paid ad component.
Has anyone else had similar experiences comparing the data from their ad platforms with the data from their analytics tools?
Happy analyzing!
Adjusted Ad Contribution ROI = (Adjusted Revenue from Campaign based on Ad Platform * Gross margin - Cost of Advertising) / Cost of Advertising.
I then re-adjust the calculation for lifetime customer value rather than one off purchases. While this adjustment cannot be precise (do you know how many purchases someone is likely to make if your site is new, can you estimate how ad costs might change over time, how your product mix may change thereby affecting average purchase value and your cost of goods) at least it will provide some insight. As a proxy you can use Google's new custom variables to set up visitor based segments for your ad channels and measure lifetime value over a two year period (the 2 years before the cookie expires).
While this might sound a bit complicated, the results are certainly worth the effort, particularly if your web business includes a significant paid ad component.
Has anyone else had similar experiences comparing the data from their ad platforms with the data from their analytics tools?
Happy analyzing!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)