2. Have
you
no*ced
this
ad
for
…

3. …or
did
you
arrive
at
this
search-­‐page
without
having
ever
seen
the
ad?

4. A
few
clicks
later
you
have
arrived
here
to
choose
what
to
buy,
where
and
at
what
price.

5. But
the
day
a@er
you
are
surprised
by
a
similar
newspaper-­‐ad
of
another
brand.
How
confusing.

6. But
confused
consumers
…
compare.
(Aren’t
we
all
confused
consumers?)

7. Brands
themselves
confuse
consumers.
Deliberately.
http://bit.ly/ZBFHFK

8. That’s
how
they
do
it.

9. Eventually
you
ask
some
car
lover-­‐friends
which
used
car
you
should
buy.
Aston
Mar*n
or
BMW.

10. That’s
the
social
consumer:
he/she
buys
a
lot
-­‐
not
only
cars
-­‐
based
on
recommenda*ons.

11. What’s
the
problem
with
adver*sing?
“Why
now?
You
interrupt
my
ac4vi4es”
“Not
for
me.
I
just
bought
my
stuff”
“Too
many
ads.
I
avoid
them”
“So
stupid”.
“Nice
ad,
but
so
what?
Not
relevant
for
me.”
“Haven’t
even
seen
it.”
“I
don’t
care.
Will
search
when
I
need
something.”
“Don’t
trust
it.
Nothing
but
lies.
I’ll
ask
my
friends
or
colleagues”

12. Ad agency
Ads
Media
you you
you
Brand

13. “We
are
not
the
customers
of
Facebook,
we
are
the
product.
Facebook
is
selling
us
to
adver*sers.”
Douglas Rushkoff
Your data

15. Reviews
do
the
job!

16. Yelp
(2008-­‐2012)
s*ll
loses
money.

17. About
70%
of
Yelp’s
revenue
is
from
ads
(!!!)
by
local
businesses
listed
on
its
site.

18. Prof.
Dr.
Gerard
Tellis
1980-­‐1990:Adver,sing
+10%
=
+2.2%
marketshare
2008:Adver,sing
+20%
=
+2.2%
marketshare
“
….
the
authors
conduct
a
meta-­‐analysis
of
751
short-­‐term
and
402
long-­‐term
direct-­‐to-­‐consumer
brand
adver4sing
elas4ci4es
es4mated
in
56
studies
published
between
1960
and
2008.
the
study
finds
several
new
empirical
generaliza4ons
about
adver4sing
elas4city.
the
most
important
are
as
follows:
the
average
short-­‐term
adver4sing
elas4city
is
.12,
which
is
substan4ally
lower
than
the
prior
meta-­‐analy4c
mean
of
.22;
there
has
been
a
decline
in
the
adver4sing
elas4city
over
4me.”
Gerard
Tellis,
PhD
Michigan,
is
Professor
of
Marke,ng,
Management,
and
Organiza,on,
Neely
Chair
of
American
Enterprise,
and
Director
of
the
Center
for
Global
Innova,on,
at
the
USC
Marshall
School
of
Business.
He
is
Dis,nguished
Visitor
of
Marke,ng
Research,
Erasmus
University,
RoUerdam
and
has
been
Visi,ng
Chair
of
Marke,ng,
Strategy,
and
Innova,on
at
the
Judge
Business
School,
Cambridge
University,
UK.
Tellis
specializes
in
the
areas
of
innova,on,
adver,sing,
global
strategy,
market
entry,
new
product
growth,
promo,on,
and
pricing.

19. One
of
many
brands’
issues:
“Adver*sing
is
too
expensive.
Grows
faster
than
the
economy!”
YOY-growth +7% +3,8% +3,8% +4,6% +5,2%

20. Recommenders
directly
influence
20-­‐50%
of
all
purchase
decisions.

21. Offline!
Thé
method
of
recommenda*on.

22. The
mo*ves
of
recommenders?

23. Why
do
you
recommend?
And
why
not?

24. The
difference
between
a
“recommended”
beer
and
a
marke*ng
beer.
http://www.ratebeer.com/

25. The
difference
in
family
fortune
between
a
“recommended”
beer
and
a
marke*ng
beer.
$11 billion
€ 270 million

26. “Friends
&
family”
-­‐
recommenda*ons
lead.

27. “Friends
&
family”
are
the
trusted
source.
Adver*sing
…?

28. Some
buy
a
lot
online
and
tell
it
to
a
lot
of
people
online
too.

29. Who’s
influencing?
Is
all
that
buzzing
trustworthy?
“…
while
consumer
electronics
buyers
pay
more
aZen4on
to
other
consumers’
reviews
than
to
editorial
reviews
–
by
a
margin
of
more
than
three
to
one
(77
percent
vs.
23
percent)
–
a
majority
are
concerned
about
the
authen4city
of
consumer
reviews
(80
percent),
leading
them
to
conduct
considerable
analysis
before
making
their
decision.”

32. POE:
Paid.
Owned.
Earned.

33. Recommenda*on
measurement
started
with
Reichheld
in
2003

37. Not
only
we
ask
clients
whether
they
will/will
not
recommend
a
brand…
8
8
8
NPS

38. We
ask
non-­‐clients
too.
They
too
judge,
talk
and
influence.
That’s
why
we
ask
them.
NPS

39. The
actual
Holaba
B2B-­‐dashboard
in
China
Net Promoter Score= % promoters (9-10) minus % detractors (0-6)among clients.
Holaba Score = % promoters (9-10) minus % detractors (0-6) among recommenders

40. From
RFM
to
RRFM
to
decide
about
what
to
Recency,
frequency,
monetary
value
(RFM)
of
invest
where.
clients
are
decisive
for
investment
in
RFM
-­‐
axis
marke,ng
communica,on.
Therefore
lots
of
money
spent
(wasted)
in
this
group
of
heavy
and
recent
buyers
Light
and
non
frequent
buyers
are
o_en
“neglected”

41. The
recommenda*on
power
of
clients
becomes
the
decisive
tool
to
decide
on
marcom-­‐investments
RFM
-­‐
axis
Does
not
mean
they
all
give
posi4ve
+RFM
&
-­‐
REC
+RFM
&
+
REC
recommenda4ons
Recommenda7on
axis
Frequency
and
intensity
of
recommenda*on.
-­‐
RFM
&
+
REC
-­‐
RFM
&
-­‐
REC

42. To
influence
these
influencers,
iden*fy
them.
Con*nuously.
Everywhere.

43. Jan
Van
den
Bergh
杨⽂文博
jevedebe@gmail.com
hFps://www.facebook.com/jevedebe
hFps://www.facebook.com/holaba
TwiFer:@holaba
Skype:jevedebechina
+86
136
2179
9450
(CH)
+32
475
427
882
(BEL)
A
:
上海市新闸路831号丽都新贵13层F室,
200041
13－F,
No
831
Xin
Zha
Road,
Shanghai,
200041