RE: UKNM: RE: Conflicting Statistics

[Damian Jennings]

Dear list


Sorry about this.  Got a bit dull and long, hasn't it.  However, I am

sure you understand why I feel the need to correct Ben's incorrect

assumptions. I offered to discuss this matter privately with Ben at the

beginning as I thought most of you wouldn't be interested in Ben and me

having what is rapidly becoming a USENET-stylee flame war. 


I am all for people discussing bepaid.com.  However, when people post

total inaccuracies, I feel the need to correct them.


-----Original Message-----

From:

benbabyhippo [dot] com

 [

benbabyhippo [dot] com (mailto:benbabyhippo [dot] com)

]

Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:56 PM

To:

uk-netmarketingchinwag [dot] com

Subject: RE: UKNM: RE: Conflicting Statistics



[Sam says: long email to follow...]


> > 1) Your method of recruitment is self-selecting. Trouble is the

people

> selecting themselves are those after a couple of pounds here and

there.

> They

> are not the ABC1's most advertisers want.

> >Wrong.  Advertisers can target the ads to whomever they please.

Using

> Prizm and Memphis.

>

 Trouble is I can probably find the people I can advertise to on bepaid

easily (and probably

more cheaply) elsewhere. You may get ABC1's on your site but I doubt

there

will be many and I doubt even more that they will be the ABC1's I want.


>>OK.  So you are making so many assumptions here it is barely worth

answering them.  However, as this is a very important list, I will.  You

have no idea of the costs involved so how can you possibly say that?

You have no idea of the make-up of our UK database.  All you are doing

is guessing.  If you personally are not interested in our

ground-breaking proposition, fair enough.  However, I think it is wrong

of you to offer your incorrect suppositions here.


>>And we can target to *so* much more than ABC1.  What does ABC1 tell

you anyway?  Really?  Not much.  Wouldn't it be more useful to target

people in a certain salary bracket who had expressed an interest in your

service?  What about if you could also target people that weren't

interested in cars?  That's what we can do.


My comment was and is on the quality of the people deciding to use the

service (self-selected time-rich (and to make it very clear here, time

rich

(i.e. with spare time) NOT cash rich) people are not the market most

advertisers are after, they're the easy ones to find).


>>I don't know how I can make this more clear.  You pay per person that

actively agrees to view your ad.  You target that at at exactly who you

choose.  If you don't want people with spare time, that's fine, you can

cross them off the target.  It's quite simple.


> 2) The information you have about the customer is fixed, based on what

> the

> customer told you and may not be accurate.

> >Again, wrong.  Prizm has 75% of the population detailed on it's

> database.

>

OK, so you have postcode/zip  profiles as well the information entered.

Not

much different really.


>>Please have a look at Claritas' website and then you will see how

silly that statement is.  Prizm is *so* much more than a postcode.

Please feel free to pop into the office and we can demonstrate exactly

what it is and how it is suprememly useful.


> 3) By specifying that certain areas may pay more interests (up to $120

> an

> hour) you may actually be encouraging users to select interests based

on

> their perceived guess as to where the top bits of income are going to

be

> and

> not on their actual interests.

> >Wrong.  This information has been off the site for months.

Obviously,

> the more information we have, the more likely it is you will be

> targeted.  End of story.  There isn't a 'more attractive'

> hobby/interest.

>

Well the ten reasons for joining listed on the site said that to me and

I

didn't look at your site months ago the first time I had a look was on

Friday.


>>I misunderstood what you were referring to.  Sorry.


One page says from $20 up to $120 an hour, another gives some high brow

interest options (business alongside low brow options (I'm guessing,

cookery, football...) Now if you are after money which options do you

think

most people will select.



>Well it depends whether you want an ad from iii or nike doesn't it?  If

I was markeing manager for, say, Vans trainers I wouldnt want to pay

businessmen to watch my ad. 


> 4) By not watching where people visit there is no confirmation that

the

> information contained in 2 is accurate. Little or no follow-up

> information

> is going to be available. As such I don't know what proportion of the

> people

> I'm buying to watch my ads are what they say they are (say Company

> directors) and not Burger Flippers at MacDonalds.

> >Wrong.  Claritas' Prizm is about as accurate as you can get.  Map

this

> with TGI and our own database and you get very trustworthy and very

> definable universes.


Yes, but I strongly expect:-


1) That the geographic and demographic information you will be given

will

not be 100% accurate.

>>A full postcode is accurate to within 15 households.  


2) And, that you have no method of checking whether it is right or not.

>>Claritas do.


3) That the universes is not as clearly defined as hoped for. Daddy is a

company director, son a burger flipper. Now who is watching the ads, and

are

you sure of that?

>>Yes, as both Dad and Son have a unique log-on, pw system.  It's

certainly a lot more accurate than any alternative currently out there.


4) You're not going to have members in the right part of the universe.

They

may meet 90% of the criteria but its part of the other 10% I'm after.

Those

that are there are those who want to be not those I would want to

advertise

to.

>>Fine.  Don't advertise with us then.  Alternatively, you could, of

course, tell us your target, we look on Memphis to see how many people

we have that fit that.  If it's 10, you advertise to those 10.  Perfect

targetting, zero wastage.



5) Remember all you are doing is offering Audio / Visual direct mail to

people who wish to receive it. Now exactly how many are going to sign up

for

that.

>>Exactly 1.2 million people so far.  ANd we haven't done any marketing

yet.  So quite a few people think it's a good idea.


Also, as in direct mailshots, it may be reaching the house but is the

intended receipent reading it?


>>Again, yes.  The delivery system is our software (AdVision Control).

To repeat myself from yesterday:  the AdVision Control pops up if you

have the offer of an ad.  You hit the view button or dont.  If you agree

to watch it, the screen changes into a TV screen effect and the can do

nothing else until it has played through once.  Then it loops and the

CLOSE and VISIT buttons become active.  Is it clear now?


>

> 5) Finally for now, you are judging the quality of your results by

> click-thro ratio's. Not a reliable measure at the best of times (it

> doesn't

> relate to any tangible result in the way that an affliate marketing

> scheme

> could). Furthermore, it is possible to encourage people to visit the

> site by

> offering them extra money to do so. Doesn't that somewhat screw the

> value of

> these figures.

> >Well, CTR seems to be a 'standard' in judging the success of the

> campaign.  As someone on the list was discussing 10% as >good, I

wanted

> to let people know that there are better CTRs out there.  Namely ours.

> The first ads we put out will be tests.  We will publish the results

as

> we find them.  We are also in the process of commissioning Millward

> Brown Interactive to do research for us in the effectiveness of

banners

> vs superstitials vs bepaid.  As MBi are quite well known in the field

> after the AIM study, we thought they would be quite reputable.  We

will

> also be looking into the branding that seeing an ad you chose to watch

> can provide.  I'll wager it's more than a banner.

>


CTRs are standard ratios I agree (but hands up anyone at a company that

uses

CTR for anything more than a step in the COA equation) but I truely

dislike

the following:-


1) The Assumption that the CTR on day 1 will be the same as day 50.

2) The Assumption that CTR rates relate to sales (hint they don't, it

depends on the site) and see the comments below.


While I would accept that the CTR may be higher than banners and

superstitals I'd trust ratios from Day 100 far more than from Day -50.

And

anything sold on the basis of the results on day -50 scares me witless.


Am I selling it?  No.  Did I ever make the assumptions you list?  No.

All I did was point out that in one test (which I detailed) we received

a CTR of 76%.  I am sorry if that scares you.  


> As for encouraging people to visit the site by further compensating

them

> being paid, I fail to understand.  How does this differ from a special

> offer or time-limited discount?

<added space for clarity)

> It's exactly the same thing, we're just being a little more direct.


No its not. If I offer a time-limited discount or voucher the person may

well buy something. I will ship it at the lower price and through the

quality of my service gain the following:-


1) A method of future communication

2) A reason for future communication.

3) A customer who may come back and even tell their friends.


Paying money for someone to visit a site is not the same. It merely

says:-


Come have a look around I'll give you a $1.

So I give the person that $1 and they go round 3/4 pages and disappear

never

to be seen again. Worse I've now spent $1.50 to $2, and I don't know

anything about them and I've not even had a chance of proving itself.


>>No no no.  You have chosen your target carefully.  We construct a

Flash ad with a sensational call to action detailing an offer.  You then

offer them further compensation for looking at your 'shop'.  That's all

it is.  With bepaid you receive:


1) A method for talking 1-2-1 with your target audience

2) A really good reason for talking to them - they will get money fpr

letting you talk to them

3) A customer who feels wonderful  about your company and will email the

Flash ad to their friends if it is good enough/funny enough/clever

enough etc.



>

> Thank you for pointing out your thoughts as to how our business is

> massively flawed.  Also thanks for giving me the chance to point out

the

> errors in your assumptions.


NOW, If you had actually answered a single one of my points I might have

changed my mind. As you DID NOT ACTUALLY answer a single one of them I

definitely won't.


>>I answered all of them in detail. The fact that your assumptions are

totally wrong is the problem here.


Sorry, but because this is a list of online marketing people I made an

rash

assumption that everyone (including you) understood the basics of

targeted

advertising (i.e. use all the information you have to hand) and took it

for

read that bepaid used targetted adverts. I really must remember that

there

are times when you need small words and big pictures.


>>I took the time to answer your initial questions because I thought I

may be talking about a new medium to someone that actually does a little

research or thinking before making a purchasing decision.  I was wrong.

I am very sorry the list has had to be party to your incorrect

assumptions.  I am sorry for wasting everyone's time.  However, when you

post factually inacurate personal thoughts about the company I work for,

I feel the need to point out all of your errors.


As you clearly buy on whim rather than rational, I am clearly wasting my

time with you.


If you would like to continue this in private, you have my email

address.  


Damian 

bepaid.com


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 the UK's totally managed affiliate marketing solution.

 ukaffiliates.com >> the net.working

 http://www.ukaffiliates.com /

salesukaffiliates [dot] com (mailto:salesukaffiliates [dot] com)

 telephone: 020 7691 1880 / fax: 020 7691 1881

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com