We've Moved Down the Street

Please click here to redirect to the new home for Marketing-2020.com :)

The Double Edge of the CTA Sword

My lovely wife Nancy just asked me whether I'd ever gotten through to "that website" after watching the Super Bowl this past weekend. (Turns out that half the Super Bowl watchers say they do so for the interesting commercials).

Levi's had advertised "Free Pants" for their Dockers line -- and we of course responded to their CTA (call-to-action) by going to the web site. Alas, so did millions of other people -- because we could not get the site to come up. And no, I didn't make a note in my busy day to go back...

In the world of technology, just as with business models, the issue of scalability can bite you -- meaning that was an extremely expensive billboard.

A corollary to "You get only one chance to make a first impression" is "Serve the customer when they respond to your CTA." The same lesson applies to advertising with Google AdWords or Bing AdCenter -- if you promise 30% off a particular model, don't just send them to your home page where they'll be lost!

And by all means, don't leave them with "nothing". Later this month, when you work on your next campaign, ask your colleagues these two courageous questions:

1. How do we react if nobody responds?
2. How quickly can we scale if everyone does?

FACTA -- not a derogatory slur!

One of the things I observe is least understood by both American consumers and businesses is legislation enacted in 2005 called FACTA (Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act).

These so-called "Red Flag" rules, enforced by the FTC, have been overhauled too many times -- first scheduled to go into effect in 2008, then 2009, and now June 2010. I predict that the first company prosecuted under FACTA will be the "canary" that wakes society up...

Until then, I thought you might want to know what is coming. The Act requires companies to take safeguards around personal information, principally to reduce the widespread growth of identity theft. (For example, you may remember the laptop stolen from a Starbucks Coffee exec which contained a couple million records of customer data including credit card numbers. Not picking on Starbucks alone, I'm sure someone from Peet's or Au Bon Pain has lost customer info as well!)

Readers take note -- the penalties are tough. Some have called it a "ticking timebomb".

$2,500 penalty per lost customer record, per incident. With potential Billion-dollar penalties for the lost laptop, this will affect business processes! (And no doubt inspire the already-profitable insurance industry to create new business offerings...)

If your business doesn't have "tight" controls in place, it is not alone -- according to this recent study.

While my practice does not center around these concerns, FACTA affects the way I help my clients acquire and retain customers. For those who haven't been able to work with me, you can find articles like this, to start looking at your internal practices -- and liability therefor.

Here's to staying on the right side of the law!

The Silver Lining to the Coming FTC Changes

By now (mid-November) you may have read some of the bubbling commentary about the sweeping new FTC guidelines on endorsements and testimonials which take effect December 1st, 2009.

Much of what I've read is legal counsel, that this will affect all online and offline marketing, since:

1. Fines for violation run up to $11,000 per incident.
2. This is the first update of those regulations since 1980, when "disco" was in vogue -- a year before IBM launched the first PC (with DOS and no hard drive).
3. US law tends to overshadow other western countries.

Paul's summary of these changes could be the most abbreviated you'll ever read :)

• Testimonials may no longer be AMAZING with a your-results-may-vary disclaimer. They must reflect typical results.
• Endorsements from bloggers, sites belonging to network marketers, and links embedded by affiliate marketers (where money is made by the reader clicking) must be labelled as such.

The good news for all consumers is that the new rules raise the bar on transparency, which is a good thing for all of us as consumers. Labelling standards will evolve with case law, making our job as businesses and marketers.

One resource I have found helpful in that regard is Denise Goswell, a lawyer who was recommended strongly to me by a colleague. She has a short video and great assemblage of legalese (note to self, trademark that term!) I feel is quite helpful to anyone offering products or services today!

Watch it by clicking here. [This is an affiliate link, meaning that, like real estate brokers, I'll receive a few bucks "referral" if you buy anything from Denise -- voila, instant transparency!]

So... where's that promised silver lining??

How would a business learn what "typical results" are? Naturally, one must ask customers -- what a great reason to establish deeper channels of communication with clients than ever before!

I hope this opens your eyes to seizing the opportunity, rather than feeling constrained by regulations :)

Test: assets, assets everywhere!

[This Domain For Sale]

In working with a client with some fantastic technology for making products and web pages more findable through search (see AnswerOil) I came across a competitor who reminded me of the carnal sin of recycling old web pages/domains.

Specifically, after going through their second rebrand in 3 years, I found that a competitor of theirs abandoned their 2nd URL, www.Guidester.com.

Someone in the marketing department (perhaps IT department) decided not to point the web address at the new one, which shall go nameless. Get this -- 147,000 references to the name and 5 hardcoded links to the now-defunct URL gone.

Asset utilization tip: make sure you are taking advantage of all the domains you control!

Quick -- what do you get when you cross EQ with IT?

Growing up, you may have heard the expression, "Put yourself in the other person's shoes". The much heralded realm of Emotional Intelligence centers around this very type of empathy (the other half being self understanding).

My point today is that we always have opportunities to do this -- whether speaking to a boss, reviewing an employee, pitching a prospective customer, and on and on.

Sometimes they're "big things" and other times not. The question "are they sandals, boots, clogs, or moccasins" is a mental trigger for me to ask whether I've really imagined how the other person is experiencing our interaction.

Two great example of how this can happen every day, at a very small level, whether we're conscious or not, came to me today in playing tag to schedule a call with another businessperson.

1. He was scheduling with Outlook, and putting notes into the "email portion". I was receiving with Mac Mail, which only shows that text if I drill all the way into the calendar.
   
   Yes, it would be nice to have Apple and Microsoft get their act together -- but I think we might have better luck moving to the South Pacific the island where I live! And it's really bigger than that -- just understanding that all the different systems (Google Mail/Calendar, Blackberry, Palm Pre, iPhone, Android, ....) may or may not do things the same was as our system does.
   
   
2. More significantly, he titled his meeting request as "Updates". Now his memory may be phenomenal so that when he looks at his calendar, he thinks "Paul Travis"! But all that happens for me when I look at my calendar is to wonder, who was I supposed to have updated and how was I to have done that? It feels like an incomplete, and puts me into worry mode -- what was I thinking that I would have made such a note?
   
   My suggestion for this, on both the receiving and initiating end, is to entitle the appointment with both (a) parties involved and (b) responsibility. My standard format is "Travis calls Smith". Yes, a couple more characters than "Updates" but dramatically more helpful for both parties in recalling the discussion.

Bottom line: people are people, online or offline -- so remember to ask yourself what kind of shoes they're wearing the next time you're interacting with another person.

Travis' Second Scoop!

Following up on my hunch about guiding the airlines to the big opportunities they are missing (see July 13, 2009 blog post)...

I see that Mashable is citing a research by Wakefield and the Wi-Fi Alliance, that 76% of frequent fliers would change their airline to have Wi-Fi. 55% would change their flight by a full day to have it. And another 71% of fliers would rather have Wi-Fi access over meal service.

Now who'll validate the other hunch? :)

PS. Inquiring minds will want to know about the First Scoop, earlier this year...