Disqus - Latest Comments for RobinGrant

Re: Social Influence Marketing Guidelines

RobinGrant — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:47:55 -0000

Hey Shiv - thanks for sharing these - much appreciated

Re: The BIMA Awards shortlist

RobinGrant — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:26:00 -0000

Oscar, Chris - thank you. We appreciate it!

Re: Got an internship. Yeah I did.

RobinGrant — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:07:05 -0000

Hey Tom

Looking forward to you starting tomorrow - and to everyone else at We Are Social getting to know you. It's going to be a fun month!

:)

Re: Seven Social Technology Firms I Admire

RobinGrant — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 17:49:01 -0000

Hey Gaurav - great list!

Although you seemed to have missed We Are Social (although, of course I would say that).

Re: We are very social

RobinGrant — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:36:57 -0000

Hey Isabell - never! We just haven't been invited over yet... (cue the world's smallest violin)

Re: The purchase funnel is no more

Rowan Schaaf — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:25:36 -0000

We've run research specifically in the automotive sector for one of our clients that completely backed that up. We're a lot more complicated than the funnel presumes; and that by the way, has to be a good thing!

Re: Stop campaigning and start committing

RobinGrant — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:54:19 -0000

Thanks Scott - it's good to know it's going noticed outside of Europe!

:)

Re: The purchase funnel is no more

RobinGrant — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:59:17 -0000

Hey Mark

I don't know. It seemed useful to me yesterday (obviously partially for selfish reasons). It still seems useful today.

None of the advice they give is revolutionary, but it is sound, it is backed by their research and it is from McKinsey.

Re: The purchase funnel is no more

RobinGrant — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:21:27 -0000

bah humbug!

I didn't say 'revolutionary' - I said:

a viable alternative model, along with the science to back it up

Re: The Socialisation of Media

RobinGrant — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:52:03 -0000

No worries Neil - you deserve it!

Re: The purchase funnel is no more

RobinGrant — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:48:30 -0000

Nathan - have you actually looked at the presentation or at least read the bits I highlighted? How about this bit:

once the consumer decides they are going to buy a product, they move into a stage that we call active evaluation. It is here that the number of brands they are considering increases. Which is exactly the opposite of the premise of the funnel

To me, it not only seems pretty new, but it also has a proper grounding:

a study examining the purchase decisions of almost 20,000 consumers across five industries and three continents

Re: The Socialisation of Media

RobinGrant — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:40:14 -0000

Hey Lars - indeed it was. However, I wasn't trying to imply otherwise - what I'm highlighting here is Neil's fresh thinking on the subject - i.e. the text above, not the presentation...

Re: Who owns social media?

RobinGrant — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 07:05:30 -0000

Hey Paul - I'd hope so, as the report costs a hefty $749. However, unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to get hold of a copy, so I couldn't tell you for sure...

Re: Twitter’s rise and the decline of blogs

RobinGrant — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:22:28 -0000

Hey Richard - sorry - I wasn't trying to imply you were. My venom was aimed at the authors of the Harvard study, not you...

Re: Twitter’s rise and the decline of blogs

Richard — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:18:54 -0000

i'm not trying to argue against it, i know about the short tail, participation inequality, etc, etc, as mentioned, it just means educating clients to multi-pronged approaches when it comes to building relationships, each community is important for its own reasons.

Re: Twitter’s rise and the decline of blogs

RobinGrant — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:38:52 -0000

Si/Richard - The Harvard study is interesting, but it doesn't tell us anything surprising and the conclusions are wrong. Participation Inequality is nothing new and applies fairly uniformly across social media:

In most online communities, 90% of users are lurkers who never contribute, 9% of users contribute a little, and 1% of users account for almost all the action.

It has was always been thus, but that doesn't stop it being social...

Re: Hong Kong CID

charlesfrith — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:30:22 -0000

Briliant. Thanks Robin.

Re: Hong Kong CID

RobinGrant — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:54:56 -0000

Hey Charles - sounds like a nightmare - heading over to Sam's post now to see how I can help!

Re: Newspapers must look beyond SEO

RobinGrant — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:40:54 -0000

Hey Ciaran - I really wasn't trying to imply that newspapers (or anyone else) shouldn't take SEO very very seriously (not enough companies do!), or to intentionally create linkbait (however serendipdous that would have been).

However SEO, like paid search, doesn't create demand, it just forfils it. So they are going to have to do more than this...

Re: European social network usage

RobinGrant — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:25:27 -0000

Hey John - obviously Forrester's data is from last year so that would account for some of the discrepancy, but the two different data sources do seem to disagree with each other by a wide margin. Unfortuantely, this is not unusual!

However, the overall trends are clear - social media usage is extremly high, and growing on a daily basis...

Re: Brands and Twitter

RobinGrant — Sat, 02 May 2009 09:56:07 -0000

and also his Confessions of a corporate tweeter article on Econsultancy

Re: Who owns social media?

RobinGrant — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:08:54 -0000

@Jonathan, @Nigel and @James - I've added an update to the post to make things clearer...

Re: SXSW Interactive

RobinGrant — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:07:28 -0000

Grrrr...

Re: Brands and Twitter

RobinGrant — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 19:07:40 -0000

And for anyone wanting to see Guy in action, have a read of Anjali Ramachandran's post about her experiences with Carphone Wharehouse....

Re: Brands and Twitter

RobinGrant — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:30:20 -0000

Hey Amelia

I’m feeling guilty now – I obviously took a deliberately confrontational approach (as a tactic to be interesting, but clearly not nice) above, and it was only after I wrote my post that I saw your quote in NMA’s article about Brands and Twitter (behind a pay wall, but typed below):

Twitter is a conversation, but the conversation must be worth having. People are looking for rules, but while there are different ways a brand can use Twitter, there’s no right or wrong way

Anyway - I'm glad you found the post and comments worthwhile...