Re: UKNM: FMCG marketing on the web and how to do it (was money / drain)

[Ray Taylor]

Edd Dumbill <

eddusefulinc [dot] com

>  asks:

>On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 08:26:43AM +0100, Ray Taylor wrote:

>> But the other thing I think clients should be prepared to do (I have argued

>> this point with several, and so far without success) is to create sites, or

>> micro-sites for specific, short-lived brand campaigns, and fronted either by

>> banners or other brand presence on content sites. These would need to be

>> used together with banners and/or other kinds of content site sponsorship.

>

>What sort of objections were raised?


The objection from one client (not FMCG) was something along the lines of

not wanting to take the responsibility for web design away from their

internet/IT people and not wanting to place the site anywhere other than

their own servers. Which is a real shame because the ad agency involved were

very keen on the approach.


In many bigger organisations we find that the marketing people we work with

are often unable and/or unwilling to make inroads into the fiefdoms of the

IT people.


In this one instance the aim of the campaign was chiefly to introduce a new

(online) brand and the method we proposed was to use banners to hook users

into the real branding advertisement which would have been a well-designed

(by the ad agency) walk-through of the client's services. We ended up with a

straightforward banner branding campaign, which worked very well, as it

happens. But as everyone knows the scope for branding within a 486x60

animated gif is limited, hence the proposal to draw the user in from the

banner to a lengthier (as long as the user wanted) and more detailed brand

exposition.


The logical extension of this approach is that corporate web site owners

might consider having different web sites (if such a thing has a meaning

given the structure of the www) for different purposes. For instance, any

organisation of any size ought to have a corporate information web site for

the benefit of press, corporate investors, potential partners, and anyone

who wants to know. This has the benefit of reducing cost as compared with

printing out expensive glossy posters, postage, and staff to service

enquiries. A similar approach could be taken with recruitment. A big bank,

for instance, might send out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of

literature a year to spotty youths looking for a job. A corporate

recruitment site would do a better job of attracting, and even

self-selecting, suitable candidates, as well as posting lists of current

vacancies.


>From the sales and marketing point of view, companies run ad campaigns

usually over fixed periods of time, be it seasonally, to support product

launch, etc. Why not create web (micro) sites purely for these campaigns?

The message you want to get to an investor or journalist might be entirely

different to the sales message you want to get out to your market,

regardless of whether or not you intend selling directly from the site.


If you are presenting a sales/advertising message to a web audience then the

best way, in my book, is to do it in partnership with a high-quality content

site of a kind best exemplified by the likes of Carlton, Associated, or for

that matter Yahoo. By this I mean of course placing banners, buttons, and

other hooks from the content site to the promotional micro site. Like

walking past a restaurant, getting a whiff of garlic, then stopping to take

a look at the menu, decor, waiters, etc.


It's hard to get more than a whiff of a brand message in a banner ad. It can

be done, but wouldn't it be better if, having created a spark of interest,

you could open up a door from the ad to the shop/restaurant/investor

brochure or whatever you are selling? Well bugger me, that's exactly what

you can do with the web. And what happens with 99% of all banner ads? They

point straight to the crummy, generic, home page!


>Are there any examples of this method?


Not that I am aware of. I think this is one of those things that exists only

in Ray's daft ideas box.


>How do you see this as an advantage over delivering the message through

creatives

>actually on a page of a content site?


I don't see it as an advantage, but complementary. Getting a brand message

across on a content site is a great way to build brand, if you know how to

do it (and yes, I know there are ten million examples of banner ad campaigns

that don't). It can be done with well-designed and well placed banners, but

you probably have a budget of no more than 15 words in a banner and a couple

of graphic images. Not much when compared with a 30-second TV slot.


But if you combine the power of the banner/button/sponsorship with the

unlimited creative potential of a good web design agency given a free hand

to create a campaign-specific microsite then I think you ought to have

something that will outsell a parallel campaign on print, poster, or (oh

blasphemy!) TV.


Or could you?


Nah! let's stick to web sites with "about us" "contact us" and "our clients"

buttons. Makes it easier to write the client proposal.


Ray Taylor

Cloud Cuckoo Land

********************

UKNM is sponsored by Excite UK, visit us at http://www.excite.co.uk.

Email Khalil Ibrahimi

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

 to advertise on Excite.

********************

Change your UKNM subscription use http://www.chinwag.com/uknm.html