Ad Sales Blog

For publishers, digital dollars are about data not eyeballs

 Are you swapping analogue dollars for digital dimes? 

If you follow the traditional publishing business model in an ever more the digital world it is inevitable. The traditional magazine business model is based on creating content to attract eyeballs, and then to sell exposure (advertising) to them. This basic plan has kept magazine publishers profitable for over a hundred years. But this model faces harsh challenges in today's digital media world.  The problem is a far more efficient way to deliver eyeballs online, called "search." Every marketer knows that they can get far more eyeballs and clicks per dollar for their website buying “search” instead of digital media from traditional publishers. Why every publisher does not know this is a mystery to me. 
 
To understand the problem let's look a look at a rough example with the math:

Say you publish a magazine that charges $6,000 for a page of print advertising which gets $1,000 for a banner on it's website. What if running either a print or newsletter ad gains exposure to many eyeballs and results in 75 click thoughs to an advertiser’s website. Depending on the expense of appropriate keywords, a click through generated by Google, or another search engine, could cost as little as 20 cents or as much as $5. So, Google would charge between $15 to $375 for the same number of clicks you are asking advertisers to pay $1,000 or $5,000 for. Argue all you want about the quality of your clicks. With this big of a price difference it is going to be hard to make it stick. 
 
If you don’t think the online advertisers in your niche are impressed by this math,

IAB online ad revenue for 2011 shows the continued growth of search

think again. According to Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) almost half of all online ad dollars (46.5%) now go to search. A recent analysis of where Google gets its ad dollars shows penetration into niches traditionally held by publishers.       
 
 
 But there is a better way to compete. The core strength of digital media is not in its ability to deliver exposure to eyeballs, but in its ability to deliver interactive experiences. Why sell one way communication (eyeballs) for what is a fundamentally an interactive medium? With this in mind, a new model for publishers is emerging:
 
Use content to build data on potential customers. Use that data to build sponsorable interactive customer experiences.
 
In this contenxt, a piece of data is either the location of an individual (address, phone number, name, company name, e-mail address, zip code, etc.) or information about the individual that explains his or her behavior (buying intentions, current products owned, income, demographics, sex, ethnicity, political orientation, type of car owned, etc.).   
 
What can you do with this kind of data? Let’s look at a that rough magazine example where they are charging $5,000 for print ads and $1,000 for web banners. With the right data, what else could they  sell?          
 
Create targeted sponsored webinars.
Cost of sponsorship $7,500 to $15,000
 
Create live sponsored events. Cost
of live event sponsorships, $5,000 to $15,000
 
Create market research to sell.
Cost of market research, $2,000 to $15,000
 
Create market consulting opportunities.
$7,000 and up
 
Create highly focused direct
marketing based on opt in lists (e-blasts) $2,000 to $4,000
 
These are not digital dimes.

 

Download my white paper on how publishers can profit in a multi-screen world sponsored by Sheridan Press 

 

Recession clients who most buy webinars, white papers, and social media

When selling media in a recession, results matter. So. sponsorships that generate sales leads can be among the most recession resistant you will sell. A new research report I did for the Customer Collective, “What is Your Recession Sales Strategy.” finds that different kinds of companies buy depending on the kind of company they are. 

According to the survey, which queried a national sample of sales and marketing managers, entrepreneurial companies have dramatically embraced the use of social media for sales prospecting, mid-sized companies and multinationals lead in the use of webinars, while mid-sized companies lead in the use of white papers. Here are the results in detail: 

 

Social media:

According the study, 74.1% of self described entrepreneurial companies report that as a result of the recession they will be using social media for prospecting more often. In addition, 67.3% of small businesses, 49.3% of mid-sized companies, while only 45.9% of multinational corporations will do the same.

 

Webinars:

 Mid-sized companies and multinational corporations lead in the use of webinars sales lead generation.

The study found that 38.8% of mid-sized companies and 36.1% of multinational corporations will use more webinars to generate sales leads because of the recession. Only 28.4% of entrepreneurial companies and 24.5% of small businesses will do the same.

 

White papers:

When it comes to using white papers, mid-sized companies lead the way.

38.8% of mid-sized companies report they will use white papers more often to generate sales leads as a result of a recession while only 24.5% of small businesses, 23.5% of entrepreneurial companies, and 19.7% of multinational corporations plan on doing the same.

 

 

The recession will mean a growth in the use of webinars by multinational corporations and mid-sized companies, growth in the use of social media for prospecting among entrepreneurial companies, and growth in the use of white papers for lead generation among mid-sized companies.

As you look to your own media territories to generate sales leads, factor this in!

More about the Free Customer Collective white paper/survey

Download the study for free 

Will linkinars be your next big money maker?

  Linkinars are the poor cousin to webinars but are quicker and cheaper to put on. As result, linkinars offer the potential to do more online events at a higher profit margin.

According to linkinar.com, "A linkinar is an online presentation illustrated with a sequence of web links. Typically, audience and presenter access a live telephone line together as the presenter directs the audience to click on a series of links to illustrate points being made."

Because there are only two services required to put on a linkinar and both are nearly free for most content publishers it is worth consideration. The first is a group telephone line, the second is access by the audience to a web page where the presenter can post a series of web links.

You promote and monetize a linkinar the same way you would a webinar. You still collect sales leads for sponsors by requiring attendee registration and offer "signage" for sponsors.   

For a one hour linkinar typically between 7-15 links work best. The person directing the linkinar introduces the call and directs people to click on the first link. Everyone one on the call does so. After the some discussion the linkinar leader moves to the second link and so on. In essence, the links illustrate the talk very inexpensively.

On the negative side, linkinars do not have the upscale graphical appeal of webinars, and cannot accommodate video. Linkinars are low tech.     

But you can put together a linkinar with almost no preparation time and cost. You just need an expert who has a subject to cover and knows where to find supporting content on the web.  

The best use of a linkinar comes when you use links to content on your own own website and blog(s). Doing this you can build web traffic as well as revenue.  

More information at www.linkinar.com

On selling webinar sponsorships
 

Fight overly commerical webinars

From time to time I find myself in a conversation with an advertiser who wants to sponsor an overly commercial webinar. Bad idea. Webinars that push product and do not provide useful information usually bomb.

Share this chart with them to explain that attendance in a webinar is voluntary and unless the event is honestly presented and the content has real value attendees will leave their sponsored webinar with a less favorable attitude than when they started.

The key metric that tells you your webinar is failing is the number of attendees who click out of your event before it is over.

This chart from a Marketing Sherpa study measured the reasons attendees give for leaving a webinar before the program is finished.

From the study:

"Lack of honesty about content heads the list, followed closely by less-than-dynamic presenters who need better communication skills.

Key takeaway:
Misleading visitors is often an innocent mistake – marketers write copy about webinars given by internal or external experts, and the true topic gets lost in translation. Sometimes, the marketer manipulates the topic by including what he thinks the audience wants to hear. Presenters should always get a look at and sign off on the main topics being pitched by marketing. Opt to under-sell and over-deliver.

Another key takeaway:
People like presenters who grab their attention, even if they're not funny (although being entertaining doesn't hurt). But they do need to be sufficiently dynamic. Unskilled presenters who read from slides will bore attendees and see head counts drop steadily throughout the session.

Webinar speakers also feel stress, although they are under less pressure than those at live events. Often, in technology sales, talented scientists and programmers don't turn out to be dynamic speakers. What you gain in authority at a webinar, you will lose in boredom. Consider sending such folks to speaker training or use a two-presenter approach. Adding a team member with great communication skills can offset a dry presenter.

Shorter webinars are in vogue now – despite no evidence that says shorter presentations garner more opt-ins or more enthusiastic reviews. At the same time, respondents don't seem too worried about webinars that run a full hour. Let the content dictate length, and leave plenty of time for questions. If you expect certain questions, consider saving some relevant content for Q&A. The change in format can enliven the audience."

Don't let bad webinars happen to your clients.

Read more about the study
http://www.marketingsherpa.com/article.html?id=30705#