It’s taken a while, but we’ve finally launched our new website and are now hosting our blogs at www.sweeneypr.com.
Sometimes the best way to learn from others is learning what not to do. I received the following email below in my inbox today.
This is exactly the type of emails you don’t want to receive as a consumer or send as a marketer. Here’s why:
1. I intentionally removed the sender’s name from the email because I didn’t want to call him out personally. However, the email said it was from “Gevalia Stainless Steel Bundle Pkg” and then it listed a person’s email address. The “FROM” line of a consumer email should always be the company, in this case “Gevalia Coffee” and should not list an individual’s name (unless your the Geico Gecko).
2. The subject line is not enticing at all. Plus, I’m not a coffee drinker. The only reason I opened this email is because I was curious as a consumer marketer.
3. The copy does not encourage me to click the link. It simply falls flat. Plus there is no visual in this email at all. Why not create an HTML email with the offer right there for me to see.
4. What is with that URL? The URL should be a link to the company “Gevalia Coffee”. Not a link that looks suspicious and I have no idea where it will lead me.
5. Who is “Gevalia Coffee”? There is no information in this email to tell me about the company and why I would want to buy their coffee.
6. “Write to us”? Huh… why would I want to write to you? Plus, how do I even know who I’m sending a letter to if you only provide a PO Box?
As you can clearly see, there are many issues with this email and it is highly likely it didn’t produce any positive results. You better believe I don’t want to be receiving email again from this company. Did I mention I’m not a coffee drinker?!
I consider myself a practical person. I try to be realistic purchasing things my family needs and doesn’t need. Although, my husband is completely the opposite and is always trying to get me to buy products/services I don’t think we need. It’s a constant struggle between us and one that I usually get the “cheapo” nickname for.
One recent example is the iPad, which I received from my husband for Christmas. I waited about 2 weeks before opening the box. I was struggling with the fact that we already both have iPhones, a desktop and a laptop computer at home. Why would we need a bigger glorified iPhone?
I finally threw caution to the wind and set up the iPad last night. I only had a chance to download a few apps, but I was completely and utterly sold within minutes. I had made the right choice. The apps on the iPad were so much cooler than on the iPhone and I immediately started thinking of ways we can make good use of the iPad.
My experience with the iPad really got me thinking about how amazing Apple’s products and marketing truly are to get us to purchase things we don’t really need. And look at Starbucks… do we really need a $5 coffee when we can get it for $1 at MacDonald’s?
The list of examples never ends. We basically live in a world of products and services that we don’t really need. But after all, I guess that is why they call us “consumers”.
Apple has a very strategic product development/launch schedule. Take the iPhone for example. Every year around June a new and more exciting version is launched. This is not by accident of course. Apple wants its customers to continue to come back each year to purchase the upgraded version.
Not only that, but Apple does not intend to support its older generation iPhones. I have the iPhone 3 and every time there is an upgrade in software it seems my phone is running slower and slower. However, I don’t think I would get to the point that I toss my iPhone because it is running too slowly. I would be more likely to toss the perfectly fine (but maybe a tad slow) iPhone 3 for the latest and greatest version. For this reason, I’m probably considered Apple’s ideal customer.
My husband wants to upgrade our iPhones, but I have been considering the best time to do so. It doesn’t make sense to purchase the iPhone 4 now, but rather wait until the 5th generation is available this summer. If there is something super cool that is part of the iPhone 5, I don’t want to be stuck with the iPhone 4 .
Apparently I’m not alone in my thinking. There was a story on NPR this week about tablet computers being the next “big” thing. The expert they interviewed for the story just sold his Apple iPad last week.
The reason the tech expert sold his iPad is because this is the maximum resale time. The iPad is still in demand and the next generation will not be available for another few months. What a great way to still get the latest and greatest Apple products, not get stuck with the older generation and still have some of your original dollars to invest in the next generation.
I feel strongly that manufacturers and consumer should be doing their part to protect the environment. It shouldn’t even be a consideration for a manufacturer to say “we need a green product.” Rather all products should be as green as possible, basically ending the green marketing movement.
However, it will take time for us to successfully get there. And after reading the Wall Street Journal article “The Hidden Cost of Going Green”, I’m beginning to think we are only at the starting line.
The Wall Street Journal article provided a few examples of how going green has backfired. For example, one woman purchased a hybrid car to save money on gas and reduce her carbon footprint. Something went wrong with the battery and her car was in the shop for three months. Her final bill was $1,300; so much for saving money.
I saw another article about water saving washing machines and how stains are not being removed, which requires consumers to wash their clothes multiple times. This completely defeats the purpose of a water saving washing machine. However, the washing machine manufacturer said this shouldn’t be an issue and blamed the consumer for improper use.
Consider highly concentrated laundry detergents, which are designed to reduce the amount of plastic going into our landfills. But how often do we use more detergent than necessary because we feel that small capful isn’t going to clean our clothes? I’m certainly guilty of this. The result is we end up buying more detergent than necessary, still putting more plastic into our landfills.
Certainly we need to start somewhere and in the case of the laundry detergent, it is going to take consumers changing their behavior. It is also going to require manufacturers to educate the marketplace about the correct way to achieve the desired “green” results.
In fact, I headed to Cleveland in early November for a short visit right when Great Lakes began selling its Christmas Ale at the retail level. On the plane to Cleveland, I sat next to a guy from Massachusetts who I proceeded to tell about the Great Lakes Christmas Ale and people around us started chiming in telling him it was a must do while in Cleveland.
And every year it seems that Great Lakes has shortages of Christmas Ale. Even in early November, I had to wait a few days for retailers to get in another shipment because they had sold out. My cousin couldn’t find it anywhere around Thanksgiving and was threatening to steal my stash at my Mom’s house. The local news was even reporting on the shortage this year.
Closer to the end of December, when the company is getting very short on supply, you will see Great Lakes Brewery’s Facebook page light up with what bars and retailers you can buy Christmas Ale. You can literally hear the chatter on the streets about where to get it at your local watering hole.
How did Great Lakes Christmas Ale get so popular considering Thirsty Dog’s 12 Dogs of Christmas (another Northeast Ohio brewery) is very close in taste, and some even claim it is better? The Great Lakes Christmas Ale phenomenon was not created by a genius marketing or advertising campaign, rather it is the simple law of supply and demand coupled with word-of-mouth marketing.
Whatever the reason Clevelanders don’t care and just want their Christmas Ale. ‘Tis the season for Christmas Ale. Cheers!
The FTC is recommending a universal “Do Not Track” option online that would give consumers the ability to opt-out of third-party online tracking for advertising purposes. As marketers we certainly understand the value of customer and prospect behavior, but when do we draw that line on privacy as consumers?
After I heard the news about the FTC’s “Do Not Track” recommendation, I wanted to find out just how much information these third-party companies are tracking about me. I found a good article on NPR, “Tracking the Companies that Track You Online”.
NPR selected a 26-year-old female, and with the help of the Wall Street Journal and third-party tracking companies determined that third-party tracking companies knew about her favorite movies, age, hometown, that she liked quizzes and entertainment news.
Another article I found on Wall Street Journal stated over time, these third-party companies will start to predict other information about you based on your interests, including your marital status and creditworthiness.
Certainly I realize that Google knows my hometown because I can tell that when I conduct Google searches. Or on Facebook, I’m not surprised when I see boating ads because I listed boating as a hobby in my profile. But for these third-party companies to know my likes and dislikes and start making predictions about me is a bit invasive and I do think some industry regulation is necessary to protect consumers.
To take this a step further, these third-party tracking companies are also tracking our youngsters, who are heavily influenced by advertising.
So what do you think? Where should online tracking stop? Is the industry doing a good job of self-regulating? Or does the government need to step in?