As an interactive agency we pay close attention to trends and statistics that relate to web usage and user experience. It is important for us to know that the sites we design and the user experiences we plan for our campaigns will be in step with the technological capabilities of the target market we are communicating with. A good example of this is the vexing browser compatibility issues that can cause websites to display differently on different computers. The biggest problem in this arena is with Internet Explorer version 6 and older. Inevitably, there will be some report of a customer or client that has some wonky issue when they look at a certain page on the site. This sends the account team into a panic and the developers to the medicine cabinet.

The proper question here has to do with frequency. If you are taking advantage of newer technologies that allow your sites to look and behave the way you want, you may have some old timers that run into issues. So how much time and money do you spend on finding the “fix”? The answer is a value judgment you need to make while looking at your web analytics.

Because we have a concentration of accounts in the metalworking industry we have fantastic data related to the web usage of this market. One of our clients is the Practical Machinist www.practicalmachinist.com – it is a manufacturing forum that is probably the largest and most heavily trafficked social media site specific to the metalworking industry. Within the first few months of 2010 we have had more than 685,000 absolute unique visitors to the site. This provides a clear snapshot of certain statistics that we need to develop sites targeted to that industry. Here are some we can share:

These are top-line statistics that represent just the tip of the iceberg. The web world is constantly evolving, which provides an incredible opportunity to bring you closer to your customers. Making your company findable, friendly, and informative requires a lot of focus and commitment. But if you develop this capability and build a new set of skills, you can learn how to understand your market better than ever before.

LoSasso Advertising is Chicago interactive marketing agency that combines competencies in advertising, direct marketing, branding, online marketing, and public relations to build integrated programs that drive measurable response.  For more information, contact LoSasso Advertising at 773-271-2100.

For years Apple has been seen as hip, cool, and friendly, but has that happy reputation begun to sour?  In recent months Apple, had cops raid the house of a blogger who wrote about the unreleased iPhone he got his hands on, made Ellen DeGeneres apologize on national television for dissing the iPhone, taken what seems to be a pretty personal jab at Adobe and their Flash brand (Apple says the move is purely business), and banned an app created by Pulitzer Prize winner Mark Fiore because it “contains content that ridicules public figures…”.  This once friendly tech-giant seems to be turning in to a grumpy version of its former self.

On top of that, a battle has been brewing between Apple and Google, two industry giants with rival technologies, for the top spot in the future of mobile phones.  Since its release in 2007, the iPhone has changed the way the world interacts with their phones, but Google’s Android devices are poised to give Apple a run for their money.  Why?  It’s simple – Android phones have something iPhones do not – more freedom.  Freedom to choose your mobile carrier; Android phones are widely available on multiple carriers, while iPhones are exclusively on AT&T (at least for the time being).  Freedom to design what and how you want to; Android phones are considered to be open source (app developers can create what they want, how they want) and iPhones are not (app developers have to play by Apple’s rules).

Another big difference is Androids are in the works with Adobe to become Flash enabled, while iPhones are not; iPhones support HTML5, the newest version of HTML.  HTML5 allows audio and video to be handled by the browsers, meaning plug-ins (like Adobe’s Flash) are no longer required.  So why the battle between Flash and HTML5 – and why does it matter if Apple uses HTML5?  The problem is that most of the Web is currently using Flash.  The change to HTML5 will force sites to redo their coding from Flash to HTML5, a long and costly process.  In the meantime, iPod, iPhone, and iPad users will not be able to view Flash content on their devices, limiting the sites they can fully surf.

So what is a marketer to do to ensure that their ads won’t get lost in the battle?  The safest bet is not to put all your eggs in one basket – banking on one technology or device can lead to disaster if customer sentiment suddenly changes or there is a glitch in technology that sends users running straight for the next-best-thing.  While it is important to adapt to changes in technology it is also important to be realistic and understand that changes don’t always occur over night.  Do what is right for your company and your audience; don’t get caught up in any back-and-forth between feuding corporations.  Keep your focus on your customer and you will come out on the other side of this tech war unscathed.

Apple recently introduced iAd, a software system that puts ads into the applications available at the App Store. Over the years Apple has gained the reputation that its products are pricey, but they are also innovative, cutting edge, and just plain cool – and usually worth the extra money. Will iAd prove the same? No definitive word on that yet, but one thing is clear, the price tag is certainly keeping with the Apple tradition. With ad space reportedly at a whopping $1 million and even more to get in at the launch, an Apple spokeswoman said the company will sell and serve the ads, while app developers will receive 60 percent of the revenue and Apple gets the other 40 percent. Currently, similar mobile deals are costing marketers between $100,000 and $200,000. Essentially, Apple is charging $10 per-thousand impressions (CPM), as well as an additional $2 every time a user clicks through the ad (CPC) – most mobile ad systems generally charge for one or the other, but Apple has taken it to a whole new level by charging for both.

Furthermore, even though companies are paying big bucks for the space, they will be forced to hand over creative control to Apple (at least for the time-being). According to the Wall Street Journal, “The ads will go through an approval process, and Apple will build the ads itself during the first couple of months to make sure they work well and attain a certain aesthetic and functionality. Eventually, Apple plans to create a developer kit so that agencies will be able to design and create the ads themselves.”

While it is understandable that Apple wants to make sure everything is perfect, not everyone is totally comfortable with the arrangement, “…as a creative director, I don’t feel completely comfortable letting Apple do the creative,” says Lars Bastholm, chief digital creative officer at WPP’s Ogilvy. Aside from questions about the cost and creative control of iAd, marketers are excited about the new outlet. Advertisers will be able to reach a very large audience (According to Apple, it has sold 85 million iPhones and iPod Touches so far and says consumers spend approximately 30 minutes using applications per day) and will be able to target users based on things like download preferences and general location.

IAd is expected to launch on the iPhone and iPod Touch in June and on the iPad later in the year.

The Brunswick Wii-a-Day Giveaway has seen strong initial results from a push in social media sites like Facebook.

In a recent effort for our client Brunswick, LoSasso kicked off the Wii-a-Day Giveaway in September. This effort was primarily supported by the launch of a new social media presence for Brunswick on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, developed by LoSasso’s interactive division. While the giveaway continues, the response has been so strong, we couldn’t resist sharing a few key results to-date.

Our primary strategy for the giveaway has been online promotion, but point-of-sale materials in the bowling centers has worked alongside online efforts to boost participation as well.  Pre-registration promotion was sent through Brunswick’s Bonus Zone email marketing database. Communications promoted the coming contest and new social media pages, encouraging “fanning” and “following” to be in the know about contest details, winners and general happenings.

Since launching the program three weeks ago, Brunswick has amassed more than 11,000 active Facebook fans and over 100,000 entries into the giveaway. The program has also generated several thousand new opt-ins to Brunswick’s e-mail couponing program the Bonus Zone, more than 3,000 direct coupon downloads for immediate discounts on bowling and over 4,000 requests for more information on Brunswick’s new Wii Bowling Clubs – a core objective of the initiative.

The giveaway continues through the end of October, but so far results indicate that Brunswick’s first venture into social media has found a highly receptive audience.  If you are interested in learning more, here are a few links to check out – and while you’re at it, why not enter to win!

Brunswick Home Page
Brunswick Facebook Page
Wii-a-Day Registration Page
Brunswick Twitter Page

User Centric, Inc conducted an eye-tracking study that established Bing’s platform is more effective for ads than Google’s.

The study tracked the eye movements of 21 participants as they conducted search tasks in each engine. Roughly 42% of the participants look at Bing ads after each search, compared to only 25% of participants at a Google search results page.

Below is a full description of the results from User Centric, Inc’s press release:

Distribution of attention on Google vs. Bing:
• Google and Bing did not differ in terms of the amount of attention on the organic search results. In each search, all participants looked at the organic search results, spending an average of 7 seconds in that area.

• Attention on the sponsored links located above the organic results was similarly high for both Bing and Google. Over 90% of participants looked in that area during each search. As expected, during transactional searches, participants would spend more time looking at the sponsored results on top (~2.5 seconds) than they did on informational searches (~1.5 seconds).

• However, sponsored links on the right attracted more attention on Bing (~42% of participants per search) than they did on Google (~25% of participants per search). The participants who fixated on these links spent approximately 2.5 seconds looking at the area during transactional searches and 2 seconds during informational searches. These times were similar for the two search engines.

• Another difference between Bing and Google involved related searches. On Bing, related searches are shown on the left, right below the categories, while on Google, related searches are below the organic search results, towards the bottom of the page. Bing’s related searches had a much higher visibility than Google’s, attracting the attention of 31% of participants per search. Google’s related searches attracted the attention of only 5% of participants per search.

User Centric also investigated three additional features that differentiate Bing from Google: Flyouts that appear when users hover over individual search results, a category list displayed on the left, and sponsored links at the bottom of the search results page.

• Most participants (67%) triggered a flyout at least once during the study, which shows that they are easily activated. Nearly all of these activations were categorized as accidental because participant’s attention was away from the mouse pointer which triggered the flyout. Usually, the sudden appearance of an element in the visual field attracts attention but this was not the case in this study. Only 14% of participants (a quarter of those who activated at least one flyout) looked at the flyouts. Users’ tendency to ignore the flyouts was likely a result of the learned strategy to devalue motion as a source of information on the Web. This behavior may be compared to “banner blindness.

• Bing’s categories displayed on the left attracted much more attention than the flyouts. Half of the participants discovered the categories and three participants even selected a category to refine their search. Each of these three participants chose to use the categories on subsequent searches, which suggests potential value.

• The sponsored links at the bottom of the search results page did not generate any attention. None of the 21 participants looked at the bottom links on any of the four searches. This does not mean that users never look at the bottom sponsored links. Rather, the incidence rate of this behavior may be too low to detect with our sample size.

This study represents preliminary research on the user experience associated with the Bing search engine. User Centric plans to further investigate the discoverability of flyouts and their value proposition in users’ search behaviors, as well as other sections of Bing, such as Images, Videos, and News.

This month the Intaractive Advertisng Bureau (IAB) released a set of best practices for advertising on social media sites. These practices attempt to establish a code of ethics for corporations to effectively and successfully advertise through social media. These practices are intended to help marketers utilize social media, while still protecting consumer privacy and ensuring a level of transparency on social media sites.

Social media presents many new and exciting opportunities to marketers. Through the use of profile data and social interactions within the ad, marketers can target and engage consumers in a whole new way. With this opportunity, comes a responsibility to operate within guidelines that ensure consumer protection. To read the best practices, check out the IAB website.

The IAB is made up of more than 375 media and technology companies. Together, they are responsible for selling 86 percent of online advertising in the USA. According to their website the IAB “educates marketers, agencies, media companies and the wider business community about the value of interactive advertising. Working with its member companies, the IAB evaluates and recommends standards and practices and fields critical research on interactive advertising.”

Think Outside the Box

Times are tight for everyone. Marketing and advertising budgets are being cut every month, which leaves little room for creative campaigns… Or does it? This economy requires marketers to think outside the box. Marketers must spend smartly. In order for your business to grow, you cannot plant your marketing seeds on barren soil. You should spread to new areas—think of new ideas, use original approaches—anything to ensure that your marketing attempts aren’t wasted on uninterested consumers. Below are some ways for marketers to do this:

Cross-promotion

It’s not right for every situation, but it is an excellent way to maximize reach while minimizing cost. This benefits your business in two ways. First, it helps you to reach an audience you might not automatically reach. Secondly, it will reduce advertising costs by splitting the cost between multiple businesses. Powers by Design, LLC detailed an excellent 5-step cross-promotion process for their blog. Their suggestions went as follows:

1. Think about what you do. Take time to examine all the particular services you offer clients.
2. Find businesses that are compatible to yours. For example, perhaps you’re a pre-owned car dealership. See if a local oil change company wants to promote too with a free oil change for car purchasers.
3. Approach businesses with the ideas for cross-promotion. Point out the benefits that a company can expect when they cross-promote a business. In the case of the oil change company, giving away one oil change for free creates the opportunity for greater business for years to come.
4. Decide ‘who pays what.’ That also means deciding how long a promotion will last, who handles the initial cost and what the terms will be.
5. Advertise. Since you’re the one that’s suggested this cross-promotion, it’s only right that you handle the details that include graphic design for a promotion and finding advertising venues. If the other owner wants to help, that’s fine, but don’t assume they’ll do the work for you.

Cross-promotion is an excellent way to break out of your traditional market reach without breaking your budget. After analyzing your situation, if you think it would work for your business—go after it! Find another business with comparable services, and work together to promote your brands.

SEM Techniques

Search Engine Marketing is a great way to target your marketing campaign in a way that is both cost-effective and efficient. Pay-per-click and organic search optimization are two SEM techniques that are very useful for companies with limited marketing budgets. Pay-per-click is a way to directly target interested buyers. To avoid wasting budget on low quality clicks, employ savvy marketers who can devise highly optimized placement matrices and ad testing strategies that will generate high quality clicks that convert to sales. Similarly, organic search optimization ensures that customers find you when they are looking. It takes an ongoing effort, but in the end it pays off by reaching interested customers.

Social Media

Social Media sites like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are excellent ways to market your brand online. Most, if not all, social media sites are free for users, so the only expense for your company is the time it takes to manage your various sites.

That being said, the effort it takes to run a social media campaign will pay off in the end. Each “tweet,” “post” and “status” update has the potential to reach thousands of potential customers. Right now, whether you are involved in the conversation or not, your customers are using social media to discuss your brand. The only question is how will you influence the conversation?

For more advice on how to effectively run social media campaigns check out these useful sites: Mashable, DMNews and Marketing Guerrilla. Or follow LoSasso on Twitter to see how we manage some of our social media.

The good-ole days of audience members sitting around the living room captivated by TV programming are gone. Current viewers surf the net, talk on their cell and send text messages while watching their favorite programs on TV. This is especially true for viewers of the CW’s “Gossip Girl.”

Ad Age reports that the CW will air a new breed of ads next week that target this media hungry audience. The “cwingers” ads stimulate the viewers to move from TV to the web and then back to TV.

Unilever’s Dove is the pioneer brand utilizing this targeted approach to market Go Fresh Burst Body Wash to 20-something women who actively partake in multi-media participation such as this.

The campaign will consist of video vignettes about four real 20-something women whose lives once resembled the characters on “Gossip Girl.” The first part of the campaign will air during the program itself, and the audience will be directed to watch the rest of it online.

According to a recent study of media-consumption cited in the Ad Age article, consumers between the ages of 18 and 34 consume more online media than their baby boomer counterparts between the ages of 45 and 54. With fans relying more on web, video-streaming sites and mobile devices to view their favorite programming, marketers must find a way to zip between mediums without skipping a beat.

As media patterns continue to shift, campaigns like this one will continue to pop up with increasing frequency. As a result, marketers will undoubtedly continue to experiment with campaigns linking TV and web-based programming. The key to a successful campaign will be generating enough interest in the 90-second commercial to draw consumers to the website and then back to TV. This is a tall order for an audience being bombarded by content from numerous media sources simultaneously, but if this campaign is successful it will be interesting to see how other brands will try to duplicate their success.

As reported by Ad Age in a recent online article, Chicago’s most iconic structure, the Sears Tower, will here-after be referred to as Willis Tower. Willis Group Holdings(WGH) will be paying a mere $14.50-per-square-foot rent and receive naming rights for free.

Sears Tower

A mere three years ago this bargain would have been inconceivable. Back in 2004, after the building was sold, some experts speculated that the naming rights could fetch around $10 million dollars. This unbelievable deal is no doubt a result of the recent economic downturn and continued fallout from the September 11th terrorist attacks in 2001, which has left skyscrapers like the Sears Tower struggling to fill office space.

While there are doubts about whether or not the name will be embraced by Chicagoans, this deal will undoubtedly bring WGH a lot of press and consumer attention. With the market down and most companies cutting back, opportunities like this one will undoubtedly continue to pop up.

According to a recent article written by Brandweek’s Robert Klara, municipalities across the United States are selling ad space on everything they own.

A school located near Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport is considering plans to sell ad space on its roof, parking lot and stadium. Even the bottom of the school’s swimming pool is a potential money-making spot.

To some this may sound absurd, but advertising initiatives are rampant.

Chicago is taking RFPs to allow companies to name stations on the transit line.

New York has already wrapped an entire subway train (inside and out) in ads, and also sells ad space on station floors.

Brooklyn officials have proposed selling ad space on city trashcans and construction scaffolding.

And several cities are already allowing advertising on the sides of school buses, also known as “busvertising.”

Many applaud the new techniques and see only a win-win situation. Brands get to advertise in highly affective and innovative ways, while cities get revenue without raising taxes.

On the other hand, opponents argue that taxpayer-supported civic properties are inappropriate locations for ad space.

How do you feel about these new ad spots?