Is timing ‘everything’? I’ve heard such suggestions before, feeling intimidated by the notion of minding yet another factor. Should I go to the grocery store because I’m hungry; and, because it’s dinnertime? Should I wait until the crowd subsides? Should I turn the Flyers game off now while they’re still ahead as not to get disappointed later? Should I approach the girl at the coffeehouse while she’s busy though waiting for the ‘perfect’ moment (which in my mind my never come) could be an error in logic?
Marketers must mind time, especially when it comes to content sharing. Not only do businesspeople have to consider where to share; they must ponder when the best time is to strike the social network chords. Timing definitely warrants premeditation; just don’t think into paralysis like a grown man in a coffee shop.
Consider the following suggestions related timing in marketing:
The “Work” “Day”
I’ll assume most brands share during the traditional workweek, within traditional ‘working’ hours. This seems immediately apropos; but, think about your target market, you know, the people you want reading your stuff.
For instance, WebiMax has a great writer, Ryan Buddenhagen, who writes on ISEO. Ryan has ushered some international looks to the blog. When are those readers ‘working,’ and roving social platforms? They’re on a different time zone. Would it be better for us to think about the best times to engage those international readers, perhaps ‘scheduling’ some ISEO tweets? It could be a benefit.
What about those who don’t use the ‘workday’ to read and engage in social media? I read and write all day, yet the process is conducive to my position and industry. That’s not the case with a lot of professionals. For instance, are you sharing your parenting tips in the middle of the day when parents may be at work, not reading parenting materials? Would such a brand be better off sharing content at night, when a larger pool of its market may be looking for it? It could be a benefit.
Do you want to work this weekend? Ha ha, you don’t have to answer. A lot of brands leverage third-party marketing services. That’s completely understood. Depending on the present state and momentum of a brand, in-house marketing resources just may not be an immediate reality. However, what if the brand offers services and products outside of the B2B sector? Many consumer products/services are warranted during ‘off’ hours, such as on the weekend, you know, when a large portion of target markets ‘have time’ to think about needed goods and services.
Is your brand making marketing motions on the weekend? I know. “But it’s the weekend!” Yes, but it’s not necessarily the weekend regarding your target market’s desires. Actually, the contrary is true in this instance. Why use social media when it’s not being leveraged during one of the ‘hottest’ moments, when consumers’ attentions are piqued?
Use Amigos Wisely
I loved the 80s; I apologize for the references; but, I can’t help it. Remember the comedy, The Three Amigos? It’s a gem of a cinematic piece. Three actors are asked to come to a small, Mexican town to defeat the wicked “El Guapo.” The actors are under the impression they were asked to come to perform, only to realize the wicked nature of El Guapo and clan is quite real. (Get to the point, Anthony.)
In the end, the Amigos defeated the rogue group by dressing villagers like the Amigos, by visually coming at the gang ‘from all sides.’ I like that kind of tactic when it comes to timing and sharing.
I see this dynamic a lot: A writer just gets done a post and boom, hits the publish button. The published post is noticed by internal people who immediately share it. Awesome, the post is in the social pipelines…for that hour or so, then dramatically drops in shares (unless the post makes it to some sort of sharing site: inbound, reddit, and the like).
Would it be more effective to elongate the publishing? Could the post be shared some when first published, then shared again later in the day or week? I’m not discussing content curation per se; I’m talking about the initial sharing of a piece of content. Some brands share as if they are trying to lighten the load of the brand’s ship, as if saying, “All right, we’ve got this one done.; let’s dump it into the social media sea and hope something happens from it.”
This has more to do with ‘who’ more than ‘when,’ but I want to include this; I think it’s something to consider. Identifying personas is a useful marketing tool. It makes sense; people vary; so, consumer behaviors will as well. Are brand workers segmented, meaning is there a social, copy, database team, etc? If so, maybe it’s important to think about ‘who’ is tweeting what content. For instance, I often share content about branding. I’ve built a following that expects that now. It would make sense for me to share that content rather than someone on the database team, who may have followers interested in different material.
How did you find this post? Is WebiMax doing a good job branding? (You knew to come straight to the site). Did you come from one of the search engines? “SEO company” (as well as related derivations) is a WebiMax keyword, meaning we assume you use the term to find our services on the Web. Is that the case? Guess what? We help in multiple ways regarding social media, Web design, public relations, reputation management, etc. Take a look at our services. Do we consider it all marketing? Is it all SEO? Is it all branding? What do YOU think?
Rand Fishkin posted on SEOmoz today, regarding branding SEO and how “we” (on the inside) refer to the industry as well as (your) public perception of search engine optimization. I’m glad he posted because it’s a conversation those “in” the industry can benefit from. What is your perception of the industry?
“Time may change me…” The industry is going through some growing pains. We don’t need Alan Thicke to counsel us through the process; we just need to ease our anxieties regarding how you, those seeking our services, refer to us.
Technology and broadened-business opportunities have changed the ‘landscape’ of the field from the ‘inside’ out.
Two, great observations about the change:
I get it; you’re probably not like me (being outside the industry and within your own respective field). (Maybe) you don’t regularly read industry literature. I do. Guess what? It’s my responsibility to provide YOU with info from the inside; so, service seekers better understand how a range of services can help them.
Just as I typed, it’s our responsibility to educate our target market, our consumers. I invite every business reader to please be diligent in realizing the change. It’s happened; it’s happening; it will continue. Be a good consumer as we endeavor at being good providers; read about old, new, and evolving services. Do you have a question? Please ask someone. Don’t harbor confused, dated, or limited views. You’re doing our industry and your business a huge disservice. We’re here (people in SEO) to help you build your brand; but before that, we must ensure you completely understand who we are and what we do.
I’ve learned to be a humble guy; I’ve been a brat in my time. I often ‘catch’ myself employing assumptions, making an Equus asinus asinus out of myself. I can admit it. You’re all wiser than me; I know B2B consumers are savvy. Your business is important. Your reputation is important. You would not partner with questionable providers or practices, those who harm the industry and YOU as consumers, those who deviate from informing and applying best practices, those who helped engineer SEO ‘folklore’ and misunderstandings.
I’m asking you to help us so we can better help Y.O.U. Please participate.
Too cool! I gained some new Twitter followers due to my sweet tweeting. Should I follow them back? Well, let me see ‘how popular’ they are first; surely, I can’t be seen walking the halls of Twitter, following those who aren’t cool; I wouldn’t be making a good impression. That rationale worked(?) in high school; it can work in the professional world too, right? I don’t think so.
I frequently pass by McDonald’s. I think the brand served enough people to provide every soul on the planet with (at least) three meals per day for a week. I’m impressed (using the marketing meaning of the term only). McDonald’s is kind of a big deal, yet not in my life. I think I was donning my little league baseball uniform the last time I (purposely) headed the brand’s way (1991?)
But who am I to speak upon McDonald’s? The long-standing brand has over 360,000 Twitter followers ( I only have about 250). If you were passing me by on Twitter, you may feel ‘too cool for school’ to follow me. Only 250? Pfft. However, you may be impressed by those with many ‘followers.’ Who provides better value to their community? I think it depends on how a brand wants to ‘impress’ you.
Twitter is a leveraged social media implementation of the online marketing world. I’m an online marketing professional as well as a consumer. Being in the former party helps me make ‘educated’ decisions as a part of the latter group. As an online marketer, I provide my readers insight gained from my experiences. Hopefully, the following information helps you make better sense of Twitter from a consumer and brand perspective.
As an Online Marketing Consumer
As an online-marketing consumer, I encourage readers to employ better diligence when shopping for providers. Don’t be immediately impressed by followers, numbers, press mentions, and advertising. Marketing companies are comprised of marketers, those who make a living making impressions (both varieties). I referenced Dr. Pete’s work (under ‘being new’ column) in a former copywriting post. He draws reader attention to the difference between search-engine visibility and conversions. Impressions don’t guarantee impressed (the better kind) visitors and consumers. Make sure brands garnering cosmetic results (a lot of Twitter followers, search-engine rankings, Facebook friends) are delivering services worthy of the ‘impressions.’ I assure you; the two are not one in the same. Many online marketing shoppers make mistakes because of it.
As a Brand Using Twitter
A few months ago, statistics were released regarding how consumers approach social media. Some local businesses may have been surprised to find a high number of consumers were merely interested in coupons and upcoming deals rather than brand engagement. Perhaps your brand only wants to use Twitter for impressions (the marketing kind). That’s for your brand to decide. I would suggest doing more with it for branding and reputation management purposes; but, take my advice with a grain of salt; I only have 250 followers.
I ask all readers to understand the difference between initiating online impressions and making a genuine impression on your target market. As a consumer, you just don’t want to notice a brand’s impressions; you want to know if a brand beholds the services to truly impress you. As a brand, do you just want to be noticed? You want your brand to build a community who values your brand, right?
Thanks for reading our SEO blog. What do you think about the topic?
Good morning or afternoon (depending on SEO hemisphere). A lot of good posts and discussion took place recently. Let’s tear into last week’s can of online marketing posts. You know you can’t read just one.
Our regular bloggers are at it on a daily-weekly basis, providing beginner insight on a number of SEO topics.
Ryan gives great insight, often from an international search engine optimization perspective. Ryan penned an insightful, three-part piece last week, addressing the changing landscape of search (and associated technology and implementations) and how a business can prepare
Jason writes from our SEOservices community on a range of online topics. He enjoys discussing SMO topics and platforms and tech trends.
Anthony aka Content Muse enjoys writing about content, branding, and reputation management, as well as about himself in third person.
Now, let’s branch out; we’re all in a larger community.
Of course, there was tons of great content not listed above. What would you like to bring to the community’s attention? Please contribute – enjoy the rest of your day.
Offline is mimicking online fervor. All the ‘kids’ are doing it. Multiple facets of business are better discovered, engaged, and shared on the Web. We do and will see ongoing shifts. Consider Danny Sullivan’s observations of the WSJ. How about WSJ’s coverage of Verizon’s spectrum deal?
Online is the place to be. Like printed-news counterparts, magazines are making online transitions as well. A NY Times article showcases a unique off-to-online transition. How does getting ‘fit’ online sound? No, Self magazine isn’t teaming with Nintendo Wii (though the digital world is creating strange ‘partnerships’). Today, the mag has plans to introduce an online game, hosting the name of an offline, ‘Self Workout in the Park’ event.
The online event is brand new. The offline event has been taking place for 19 years in New York and other locations. Women are primarily the target market; online games involve health and wellness implements as well as elements of beauty and fashion. The goal is to closely emulate the offline version while implementing online avatars, puzzles, opportunities to win goods, and get (your avatar?) in shape.
Though Self Magazine’s iteration of online play is new, the online gaming notion is not. We know ‘social games.’ Think Farmville and Badgeville.
Self is reported to invest a mid-six-figure amount toward the marketing effort. That’s a lot of magazine sales. In addition, marketers (BlackBerry, 7 for All Mankind) aligned with the Self game, have invested several hundred thousand dollars for sponsors.
Why? I think New York Times author, Stuart Elliott hits the nail on the head:
The Self effort is part of a growing trend that reflects how profoundly legacy media like magazines are rethinking how they seek revenue from advertisers and consumers.
Okay, brands with similar ideas, perhaps you’re inspired; however, as a marketer with intense interest in branding and reputation management, I naturally take notice to genuine intentions and how implementations ultimately…play out. Consider this article by another Times’ reporter. Who’s playing who regarding ‘gamification’? I wrote about gamification on my personal blog a few weeks ago.
My advice is to engage in gamification for the right reasons, such as to build an online community and strengthen connections with your brand’s users. In addition, don’t assume participants are in it for genuine reasons as well. Do they want prizes or do they really champion your brand?
I know some online marketing tactics seem intriguing and really innovative; but, will they specifically work for your brand? At this point in your brand’s history? Is the process the right fit for your brand and users?
In his post, Elliott directs attention toward the odd dynamic of a fitness brand endeavoring at intriguing its brand users to ‘get fit online.’
It may seem odd that a magazine dedicated to encouraging its readers to improve themselves — whether through its editions in print, online and on mobile devices, its mobile apps, a mobile texting diet and events like Workout in the Park — would offer them an opportunity to stay sedentary and play a game in which their avatars, rather than their physical selves, try to shed pounds and buff up.
If you neglect your ‘self’ in offline life, your body shows it. If you neglect your online ‘Self’ avatar, it shows too, shadowing ‘reality.’ Will Self’s community be interested in staying fit and intrigued offline and on too? Self needs to ask itself that question and so does your brand before online game engagement.
Thanks for reading. Please comment to make my post better.
As I discussed in my last post, Twitter is quickly becoming an essential tool in SEO marketing campaigns. A new service, Chirpify, only serves to validate that, and takes the advertising – and selling – of a business’s products or services to the next level.
Previously titled Sell Simp.ly, Chirpify is a service that facilitates commerce between businesses and customers via Twitter. It is not simply a way by which businesses can advertise their products, and gain visibility for them. With Chirpify, a business tweets about a product or service for sale or donation, and a customer who is interested in the product simply tweets “buy”, “pay”, or “donate” back to the business’s Twitter account – and a transaction is made.
So how exactly does Chirpify work? The service actually links to a user’s Paypal account to carry out the transactions. This further ensures the safety, efficiency, and viability of it. In effect, buying a product from a business is as easy as a single Tweet. This action has a high appeal for both consumers and businesses, and Chirpify is already garnering a great deal of attention by being featured on TechCrunch and Mashable, among other tech news websites.
When it comes to your own company’s SEO campaign, would you consider using Chirpify? You might want to wait a bit to see how effective this service turns out to be for other businesses, before you try it for your own. As with any service offered by a startup, there are likely to be some initial kinks that will need to be sorted out, and which can only happen through the actual use of it.
However, Chirpify has the potential to contain a great deal of SEO value. Just consider this scenario: you send a carefully-crafted, SEO-enhanced Tweet selling a product to your followers, but which ends up attracting anyone on Twitter who is searching for that particular product. Suddenly, you have many new additions to your customer base on Twitter. When you think about it, it’s incredible to even say that you have a customer base on Twitter….Chirpify can make this a reality for your business.
As already mentioned, it’s best to take some time to truly evaluate this service before allowing your business to jump on the Chirpify train. But it’s quite likely that Chirpify could be the newest great addition to your SEO campaign.