vig•gle (vig gŭll), v. 1. to "check in" during a TV show for rewards. 2. VERY COOL!

You can always count on the Super Bowl to bring out the coolest and most innovative marketing campaigns.  This year is no exception.

Function(x), a new start up from Robert F. X. Silerman, has announced the launch of a mobile app called Viggle. According to BizReport and the Function(x) website, Viggle is "a loyalty program for television which encourages viewers to 'check in' while they're watching their favorite shows."  Check-ins are rewarded with points redeemable for products and services from program sponsors.  Users can also check-in during commercials, take quizzes, polls, and even make charitable contributions with the points they earn.

The app works with live, recorded and online TV content, and is what I call a fully integrated, TV engagement technology.

Scheduled to launch around the Super Bowl, Viggle could revolutionize how people watch TV and change the manner in which advertisers use traditional video based media.  The viewer receives rewards for watching TV shows s/he was probably going to watch anyway.  It's also a great way for networks to incentivize viewing during sweeps.  While Viggle rewards both sampling and brand loyalty, eventually we may begin to see charities running PSAs asking viewers to make a donation by trading in their points.  Afterall, it won't cost the donor anything other than time already spent sitting in front of the TV.

For parents however, Viggle has an obvious downside:  It rewards inactivity.  I have a hard enough time getting my son to remain active during Spongebob Squarepants.  I certainly don't need the added challenge of fighting with him over the rewards points he'll miss if he isn't planted in front of the TV 24/7.

Smart content providers will develop a way to integrate childhood learning and activity into the rewards program.  If successful, they'll begin to convert moms and dads into Viggle advocates.  If not, Viggle will only invite parental wrath.

However, Viggle has huge potential and I'll be paying very close attention.

Recent Study Shows Brand Heavily Outweighs Price on the Value Scale!

In a recent BizReport article, Helen Leggatt writes about how brand now heavily outweighs price on the value scale.



Where do you fall on the value scale?



The findings of a Millward Brown's Value-D study show that only 7% of respondents made purchases based on price (down from 20 percent ten years ago), while 81% made purchasing decisions based on the brand.

According to Peter Walshe, Global BrandZ Director for Millward Brown, "Too many brands fail to fully optimize their power and instead overemphasize price and downplay desire. The consumer usually desires a brand first and then considers the price to determine whether to purchase or not."

The article goes on to list the Global Top 10 Value-D brands:

1. Amazon
2. Colgate
3. Nokia
4. Pampers
5. Visa
6. Coca-Cola
7. Microsoft
8. McDonald's
9. Nescafé
10. Lidl

To see the Top 100 Global Brands or top geographic rankings, view the BrandZ report.

While brand has always played a big part in the value equation, I'm surprised that it so heavily outweighs other purchase drivers such as price, location, convenience and habit, especially during the recent and sustained economic downturn.  Though during tough times consumers often tend to take fewer risks, which means they are perhaps more likely to rely on brands they trust. 

Do your purchasing habits match the Value-D study?  Is the brand more important to you than the price?  I'm going to have to do a little self-analysis to see where I tend to lean on the value scale.

I didn't realize that audience targeting was such a new strategy for marketers. Did you?

According to an August 2nd article on bizreport.com by Kristina Knight, large numbers of marketers have begun targeting audiences online using what I've always thought to be pretty traditional methods - demographic, geographic and lifestyle segmentation.

The article states, "According to the AudienceScience report 80% of marketers are now using behavioral targeting techniques, 76% target by geographic location and 75% use demographic information to target. Most marketers believe behavioral and demographic targeting are their best options, but what is most interesting is that publishers are now seemingly in agreement with advertisers. More than 70% of publishers surveyed for the report said they were using some form of audience targeting to better engage consumers, to sell ad inventory at higher rates and to deliver better campaign performance."

I'm actually quite surprised that this appears to be news.  Any marketer who isn't already properly segmenting and targeting their audiences, probably shouldn't be in the marketing field.  Most good marketers and product development teams have been doing this for years.  Granted, online marketing is still a relatively young channel and new systems of identifying and segmenting audiences are being developed every day; but I would have been surprised if the percentage of marketers using methods to target audiences online were any lower than 75%-80%.  I would love to know who the 20%-25% of marketers are who are not yet doing this, so that I can give their supervisors the names of some good marketers I know who are looking for work.

The article goes on to state, "One thing both advertisers and publishers agreed upon? That there needs to be more transparency and measurability within targeting moving forward."  On this I wholeheartedly agree.

We recently ran some ads on Facebook for a new retail store opening.  They were very well targeted based on a comprehensive segmentation strategy.  The metrics we viewed indicated a very high number of impressions, and a strong click through rate.  However, the metrics neither indicated that those who actually viewed the ads matched the profile we had created, nor provided any verification on the accuracy of the figures.  Traffic has been excellent, and empirical data indicates that the ads, at least in part, reached the right audience, but one can't rely solely on observed data to calculate ROI. 

However, I will continue using digital marketing techniques, as I have become a true believer in their capabilities, even if measurement and transparency still need a little work.  After all, digital media measurement is still far better than traditional media measurement.