Search results matching tag 'Amazon'

Amazon opens up affiliate marketing on Twitter

1713999 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:04:00 GMT

So it may only seem like five minutes ago but all the way back in July I commented on Amazon's policy of rejecting affiliate commissions for sales generated through social media, specifically Twitter, in part due to a clause that requires sales to be generated from the domain listed in the Associate account the affiliate holds with Amazon.

Well this week Amazon appears to have, if not made a u-turn, then at least gone back on that position somewhat. Based on what I have seen they have not publicly acknowledged any change of policy but earlier this week they communicated a new feature that enables their affiliates to click a button from within Amazon to create a tweet promoting the page they were on at the time. Interestingly, despite evidence to suggest Amazon would use their own short-url service, these affiliate links use the popular Bit.ly service instead.

It seems a sensible move. We all know that online communication is increasingly moving away from a one-way broadcast model and therefore the volumes to be got through links placed on specific affiliate sites may well be on the decrease. What's more, Twitter's popularity seems to be in no way declining with news stories today suggesting that Twitter is achieving growth through increasing adoption from a youth audience. It is worth noting this contradicts some of the expert research Morgan Stanley released earlier this year that suggested Twitter didn't appeal to teens (excuse me whilst I remove my tongue from my cheek).

It will be interesting to see where this goes next. Given Amazon's policy on Affiliates only promoting their products on their own site it is not currently clear whether the links generated through this new method would still work if posted elsewhere (Facebook for example) but the evidence suggest they will, and that Amazon are no longer actively enforcing this policy. There is also still a lot of concern regarding the use of monetized links on Twitter (and social media generally) and what's more, given the current FTC review going on in the US, the use of such links without clear labelling could soon be illegal.

What do people think? Is it smart of Amazon to get in there and allow users to make money out of their social network now (before someone else gets in there) or is Twitter somewhere that should really stay 'ad' free?

Woolworths, Dixons – can big brands really live on in ‘Internet heaven’?

2347496 — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

Should dying brands simply be left to expire in peace? Is it prolonging the agony to keep them on ‘life support’ in some vapid online guise? Obviously Dixons has pulled off a comeback with their controversial John Lewis baiting camaign and Woollies have got a new one in the offing. But can the brand still have the same significance in people’s lives – without a high street presence and a living, breathing sales force? Or is it just a rather sad exercise in ‘retro’. Surely it’s all too easy to buy up the name of a once great brand, stick it at the top of an Amazon imitator and expect the masses to come flocking? There’s probably a short-term novelty value of a famous face coming back from the dead, but is it sustainable into the future? My guess is that there’s going to have to be some serious brand re-engineering if it’s going to mean anything to anyone.

Amazon grab

1803648 — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:10:00 GMT

Amazon scored well in most categories and came out on top.

Amazon logo

1803648 — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:06:00 GMT

Webcredible compared the websites of Amazon and Play.com.

Can Amazon learn to stop worrying and love the twitterbomb?

1713999 — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:54:00 GMT

So, Amazon won't pay commission to affiliates who use links within Twitter to drive traffic. Is this fair? Is their policy right?

There are many different ways of looking at this problem. Let's take a look at Amazon's position. They are paying commission to affiliates who drive new customers through to their site. As part of this process, they ask affiliates to agree to their terms & conditions of use and these, at least from a legal perspective state that the traffic is related to "Your Site", referring to where the traffic comes from.

So from a legal standpoint, they would appear to be operating as per these terms but how long ago were these written? Were social media and the likes of Twitter such a big issue when they were last updated? When you consider recent stories about Dell generating $1M of revenue through Twitter alerts, you can certainly see that the medium has grown up but perhaps not everyone has been in tune with this change.

The problem with the wording is that any smart affiliate could simply start redirecting traffic from Twitter (or other community sites) through their own short URL tool, sitting on their site and as such would be sending this traffic to Amazon. From a legal standpoint this would appear to meet their requirements but it still leaves an open question. Is Amazon happy about that type of traffic?

Affiliate marketers are often the folks that are able to spot an opportunity and take advantage of it much quicker than most brands. See a gap, code it, get it live at 2am. If someone on Twitter likes talking about rock music and inserts links to Amazon for the albums they are tweeting about, is that so dissimilar to if they had a blog and these comments were posted there? They seem pretty close to me.

From a brands perspective, they need to ensure that consumers aren't being spammed and that they only pay affiliates for genuine activity rather than having a cookie pool covering everyone in the country. But this is where working with your affiliates is key. Understand what they are doing and you'll be a little less nervous when something new appears.

Lawyers, time to update your affiliate terms and conditions to help your affiliates know exactly what you are happy paying for and what you aren't. Be upfront about it and they'll be a happier bunch, working on your behalf and ultimately driving revenue.

Digital Britain Report Will Make PR Sector Think More Digital

2292853 — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:53:00 GMT

With the release of the government's Digital Britain report this week, it comes at a timely juncture in the industry of public relations, where new technology tools are increasingly being used for communications campaigns, far more than in past years. While the main highlights of the report address infrastructure needs, improving digital access for all and controversial funding decisions for media resources such as the BBC and Channel 4, the ensuing discussions of the report have put digital on the intellectual radar for all, including those crafting PR strategy in what is more and more a fractured, niche-driven digital media landscape.

Previously, and still today, traditional PR professionals, and clients, have been reluctant to include digital media in their outreach strategy, among some excuses being:

Our clients don't care about blogs, they only want to be in the Financial Times.
We don't have the budget or time to manage online outreach, as well as traditional media outreach.
Why should we care about what someone says in a forum or a tweet about our brand?

Now, partly by force as a result of high profile cases such as Amazon experienced with bloggers and Twitter, or Domino's experienced with employees posting inappropriate YouTube videos, partly because of recessionary budget restraints on PR budgets, and partly because it seems that the tipping point of mainstream involvement in social networking has been reached (Oprah Winfrey is on Twitter!), it seems digital has snowballed into a force that must be reckoned with -- like it or not.

The government's Digital Britain report addresses many issues, and its recommendations are controversially being debated among many industries, but one of the key things it does is further force digital into the forefront of public attention and gives it a new level of credibility among businesses who may have previously scoffed at the online world.

For many years now I've been an advocate of using digital media for communications outreach and have advised many clients in how to incorporate new technology tools into campaigns, often being met with a mix of disbelief as to if it would be a worthwhile investment, and general befuddled ness as to what I've been talking about. It seems the whole wide world is now turning new attention to using digital media, and this, I think, is exciting and positive both for people and bussinesses.

While many of us who can be classified as early adopters of the digital age are already well established or have even moved onto the next new thing with tools like Audioboo for the iPhone, FriendFeed, Su.PR and the coming soon Google Wave, we've all got to remember that there are millions of newbies from all walks of business and humanity that are just testing out the tools of the online world, with a bit of intimidation and fear.

It is is up to us, who are deeply online, to welcome, to teach and to help newocmers navigate this territory. It may be your family members, your co-workers or even your boss, who have basic questions, and if the government is going to see any success from its Digital Britain report, it is up to everyone who is already active online to be friendly mentors and teachers in helping the rest of the world catch-up with digital life. Yesterday, after reading over the report, it seemed to be a 200+ page document stating a lot of the obvious. However, these last few weeks, I've got more and more people both professionally and personally asking me questions about the basics of how to use Twitter, how to write a blog, how to manage the weird professional/personal world of Facebook, and what might seem obvious to some, just isn't to most.

Recently I've also joined the ranks of being a trainer with Pinnacle PR, a company providing all levels of communications training. My role is instructing a course in PR 2.0, providing a comprehensive look at the many multimedia digital media tools available online, and giving real-life workshops in how to construct campaigns with the tools. With the release of Digital Britain this week, I'm seeing more of the increasing importance digital is playing for business, and, based on training and conversations with people, understanding more that it is still, in fact "new" media for most people.

If you are in PR, and would like to increase your skills of PR 2.0, or other offerings from Pinnacle PR (including traditional courses of media training, media relations, crisis communications, strategic campaign planning and more) sign up for a course, and get a 10% discount up until the end of July. Pinnacle PR has offices in London, Brussels, Dubai and a newly opened training centre in Bahrain, where experienced instructors both from the media and public relations sectors provide junior up through senior level executive courses and instruction.

Training for the digital future,

-Lisa

The new Kindle is bigger but not better

255762 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:57:00 GMT

If e-readers are going to be the future for newspapers (as some hope) then there's plenty of work left to do as the latest version of the Amazon Kindle e-reader doesn't score well.

The Amazon Kindle DX is bigger, heavier and more expensive than the Kindle 2. The original Kindle is aimed at book readers (as are products like the Sony e-Reader), but the new Kindle DX is primarily aimed not at readers of books, but newspapers, magazines and textbooks. For that it comes with a hefty $489 price tag ($359 for the smaller Kindle).

Like the earlier model it allows users to do all the same stuff as before: shop, wirelessly download Amazon e-books (there are 275,000 titles out there now) and uses the same easy to read screen technology only with improved resolution.

However, in a blog post on the Wall Street Journal's All Things Digital blog by Walt Mossberg, it doesn't score well. You would imagine for reading newspaper and magazines that portability and ease of use would be paramount. Apparently not.

"I’ve been testing the Kindle DX and I didn’t like it nearly as much as the Kindle 2, which I own and enjoy using daily. While it performs its promised tasks adequately, I found that its size and weight made it awkward and tiring to hold for long periods of reading. It’s still fairly thin and light, but it’s 85% larger and heavier than the standard Kindle.

"In addition, Amazon has degraded the user interface. To prevent the device from being even larger, the company had to remove the left-side page-turning buttons, confining all the controls to a vertical strip on the right. The keyboard at the bottom is also more vertically cramped."

Mossberg lists other design problems particularly for lefties (that's left handers not reds) and issues relating to reading in landscape mode. His tip? The Kindle DX would have been a better product with on-screen touch controls that could instantly adapt to its size and orientation.

As for newspaper use specifically, he said they looked about the same on the DX as they do on the smaller Kindle device.

"Despite the larger screen, they don't use traditional print or Web layouts, but a special Kindle layout that some users like a lot, but which I find annoying because it makes it harder to quickly scan multiple headlines."

Although he does say that textbooks – where portability is less of an issue – might be the killer app.

Follow me on Twitter

Understanding what works is the best investment in a downturn

2184893 — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:25:00 GMT

Amazon.com’s decision to end commission payments to affiliates who drive traffic directly through paid search is a good example of what brands should be doing during the recession. Analysing all channels in depth, even those which are traditionally accepted as the most efficient and strongest performing and understanding what’s really driving incremental sales is one of the most valuable exercises any advertiser can perform. It will go further than any other activity to ensure the business emerges leaner, fitter and stronger than the competition when those fabled green shoots of recovery inevitably appear.

In Amazon’s case it’s about understanding whether their affiliates are symbiotic and therefore driving incremental sales against the companies own direct PPC campaign or whether they’re parasitic and simply an unnecessary middle man in the process. This should be the yardstick for any affiliate program. Does it add incremental sales and is it a positive experience from a brand and a user’s point of view?

Understanding this question requires accurate tracking and de-duplication of sales across all digital channels, combined with the resource to analyse this data so it can be used to inform the strategy going forward. This all sounds pretty obvious doesn’t it? But it’s amazing how many advertisers with very large digital budgets don’t have such a process in place.

Forty percent of companies surveyed in a recent industry wide poll by a tracking company said between 11% and 20% of commissions paid to affiliates were duplicate payments. Almost 20% said that between 21% and 30% were duplicated. Bearing in mind companies tend to play down the extent of these issues we can assume it’s regularly higher than this. Of course it’s not just an affiliate issue. There is overlap between all digital channels but especially between all ‘search sourced’ media – PPC, SEO, affiliate and aggregators. Many online marketing managers I speak to are aware that this is an issue but rely on the ad serving based tracking solutions from their media agency to do a job they’re not designed to do. But there is a lack of technical understanding as to what exactly is missing and how easy it can be to resolve.

In the exciting and fast moving world of digital marketing it’s easy to overlook the fundamentals. There’s always something new to consider as part of the digital strategy, whether that’s mobile, video or social media. But in these challenging times, investing in understanding what really works, before doing anything else, is the strategy which will deliver the greatest return, especially as we move into a world where brands with the most effective data driven strategy will be the outright winners.

Amazon is playing to the gallery by blocking Phorm

2123210 — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:08:00 GMT

At last. Some common sense about the so-called enfant terribles of behavioural targeting, Phorm, and from the mouth of a client to give it added credibility.

John Lewis Direct's head of web selling told an Institute of Direct Marketing event last night that Phorm's model is "good" and that the retailer's website user database has a 60% match with that of Phorm's.

It's oh-so-easy to blame Phorm for the PR predicament that behavioural targeting finds itself in. Phorm's tests with British Telecom last year whipped up the privacy storm that even a new code from the Internet Advertising Bureau hasn't managed to calm.

Now the European Commission (no less) is investigating the UK (no less) for its attitude to the privacy issues around Phorm's technology. Client body ISBA has asked the EC not to proceed.

The words of John Lewis Direct's David Walmsley came in the same week that Amazon wrote to a customer to tell them it was blocking Phorm's technology from tracking its website users.

It's Amazon's prerogative to do so of course. But I suspect it is playing to the gallery. It could have deployed a privacy notice that allowed customers to opt in to Phorm tracking.

Amazon's own targeting will start to look "rudimentary," Walmsley said, as behavioural targeting technology advances in sophistication.

How long before Amazon feels compelled to join John Lewis Direct and other brands and publishers have all deployed behavioural tracking technology) in realising that behavioural targeting is a game-changer for online advertisers?

* The Guardian, Sky, Timesonline etc

Instant Brand Damage for Amazon.com #amazonfail

2292853 — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:14:00 GMT

Brands that have been opting out of the social networking craze should take notice of the situation Amazon.com found itself in over the Easter holiday weekend, when authors of gay and erotic literature took to Twitter to instantly raise awareness that the online bookseller had dropped titles with "adult" content from the website's best selling lists.

Angry that their books became de-ranked, with classics like The Well of Loneliness, Tipping the Velvet, Brokeback Mountain and Lady Chatterly's Lover disappearing, poular writers began alerting thousands of their Twitter follwers of the situation. A campaign to start a Googlebomb was initiated, an online petition gaining more than 15,000 signatures started, and bloggers took up the issue quickly, raising attention even further. The topic is being tagged on Twitter as #amazonfail

Zoe Margolis (@girlonetrack) the author of "Girl With A One Track Mind" began broadcasting her views about Amazon.com Sunday, saying to her Twitter followers that:

"This is a serious f****** issue and anyone that cares about censorship and sexual repression should be boycotting Amazon."

Within 24 hours the issue had reached mainstream news headlines and Amazon.com responded to the media calling the situation "a glitch in our system." The well-connected Margolis won her follwers attention, including media and celebrities such as Jonathan Ross who rallied to her cause, and she quickly became a spokesperson for the topic, appearing on Channel 4 news and offered commentary in The Guardian.

"You know what's great? A few hashtags and tweets result in something far better than a boycott: bad publicity - it always works," she Twittered.

If there was ever an example of why brands should heed the power of social networking sites, this could be the tipping point. The case shows how consumers can rally quickly to an issue and strongly express their views before a brand may even have a clue what is going on. It proves that brands that don't pay attention to the new power people have, are open to experiencing instant damage inflicted on reputation if they don't monitor conversations, and respond quickly.

While Amazon.com offered a short statement to the mainstream media, they have not responded directly to the thousands of people who expressed views on Twitter, with many saying they will boycott the bookseller. The online retailer has several Twitter identities, including @amazon, but has not used this communication tool to date. Many are saying they want more direct attention from the brand, and that the brief statement does not cut it.

"I think the 'glitch' was in human judgement and the right thing to do would be step up and apologize," commented the Twitter user @yuricon. "What we want: Acknowledge a mistake in policy and in judgement, apologize, then allow us to make our own decisions."

Watching this story unfold,

-Lisa