Comments on: Is Social Networking the Future of Word-of-Mouth Marketing?

By: Dinu2008D

Dinu2008D — Sun, 18 May 2008 03:42:46 +0000

I think that Affiliate marketing automation is when you got most of the marketing and business steps set up in a way that you don’t need to touch anything for it to work.
……………….
Dinu
http://fasttrackitc.com/sp/

By: Dinu2008D

Dinu2008D — Fri, 02 May 2008 08:17:15 +0000

I think Gretchen raises an important point about the very definition of “friends” from an online social networking’s perspective. The Dunbar rule states that:
………………..
Dinu
Wow, check out this site called “>http://www.fluc.com%3c/a>
Free SMS and free mobile ads!! Its fantastic

By: buy valium online

buy valium online — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:53:18 +0000

buy valium online

By: mahe

mahe — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:14:28 +0000

So, face-to-face WOM isn’t always feasible. Perhaps, as Web 2.0 grows, that 92% of offline WOM will decrease.Maybe it is because I am not swept in by what I read as much as what i hear from friends telling me face-to-face
=================
jack
Put The Message Where It Matters! WideCircles aka Wide Circles represents relevant, distributed, highly targeted and efficient internet word of mouth marketing using entertaining or informative messages that are designed to be passed along in an exponential fashion using social network mediums such as blogs, forums, wikis and so on.
http://widecircles.com

By: Sam Milby

Sam Milby — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 12:53:42 +0000

That is great! That is very helpful.
————–
Sam Milby
Did anyone out there give a try to Wide Circles or WideCircles. They are new word of mouth advertising platform, apparently they can push massive amount of messages through social network mediums like forums,blogs,wiki’s and so on. They say that they only bill for posts active for minimum of 5 days and price seems pretty affordable. I am going to give Wide Circles aka WideCircles a try since I am tired of PPC fraud. http://widecircles.com

By: kumarithennakoo

kumarithennakoo — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 05:07:35 +0000

Has anyone out there heard about WideCircles.com. It seems like a way better service then wasting money on PPC. Apparently they are using refering websites ( forums, blogs, wiki, etc. ) and have a viral word of mouth distributed approach to it. My friend told me he got around 100 visits from single post which cost him $0.40c. I am going to give them a try today . In case you are intrested here is it. http://widecircles.com?s=imt1

By: Dinu2008D

Dinu2008D — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:34:27 +0000

The new distributed viral forum/blog/wiki/classified/etc viral advertising engine is here. Spread the word about your product or service in short amount of time to millions of people. Get residual traffic and increase search engine visibility by using long lasting backlinks. Low cost, no pay per click fraud issues and great ROI. http://widecircles.com?imt=3

By: purnima

purnima — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 03:18:24 +0000

I was reviewing a few viral marketing service and came accross something pretty intresting called WideCircles. They seem to work by sending viral messages to various websites like forums, blogs, wiki's and so on. My friend signed up for the account the other day after running a small but successful campaign ( targeting very specific niche ) and told me about it. It seems like a nice idea to gather highly relevant traffic and help with the SEO process at the same time while paying very small amount of money compared to pay per click. In any case, I am going to give them a try today. In case you are intrested here is the site. http://widecircles.com?imt=3

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:31:32 +0000

I think Gretchen raises an important point about the very definition of “friends” from an online social networking’s perspective. The Dunbar rule states that:
“Dunbar’s number, which is 150, represents a theoretical maximum number of individuals with whom a set of people can maintain a social relationship, the kind of relationship that goes with knowing who each person is and how each person relates socially to every other person.[1] Group sizes larger than this generally require more restricted rules, laws, and enforced policies and regulations to maintain a stable cohesion. Dunbar’s number is a significant value in sociology and anthropology.” (Source: Wikipedia)
By that count, anyone w/ more than 150 (give or take) is actually adding more “friends” than friends to their network I think there are varying levels of influence within a social network, which definitely affects word of mouth. So, in summation, word of mouth definitely has been given a boost to the growth of social networks, but it’ll be interesting to see human behavior evolve accordingly.

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:28:09 +0000

Steve,
“For many businesses, however, and circles of influence, the social media outlet just isn’t the same and it won’t have the same powerful results as in-person, one-at-a-time WOM messages.”
In that case, I’d recommend professional networks (Disclosure: I work for LinkedIn) since these are crafted with the sole purpose of including your colleagues (past & present), business school friends, etc… Any connection who’ll help you be a better professional and whom you’ve had the chance to work or study with in the past.
Ryan,
“I disagree that never before have tools or means existed to the degree available at present to accomplish what you’ve asserted, and that there’s no better means of accomplishing what you’ve posited than through “social networks” given the purpose you’ve laid out.”
Although, I may have overstated the case due to my enthusiasm for the subject, I still wonder what other tool have we been presented with that has furthered the cause of organic networking (social or professional) in the past? Feel free to share.

By: Maurice Stewart

Maurice Stewart — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:28:06 +0000

Other social networking online communities (MySpace, YouTud FaceBook) will make you lots of friends.
DirectMatches will make you lots of FRIENDS AND LOTS OF MONEY? aN INCOME POTENTIAL CAPPED AT $48,000
MAURICE STEWART
http://www.MyDirectMatches online.com
Go :www.MyCanadianDirectMatches.com

By: diversity production network

diversity production network — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 20:45:13 +0000

There was an article about plogging which focuses on WOM, for more info check out
http://blog.davidparrish.com/tshirts_and_suits/2007/04/let_your_custom.html
I found it helpful and amusing now I can plogging, to blogging and vlogging. I agree with the previous comments about the validity and the reach WOM can have online over word or click of mouse marketing strategies.
Yours,
diversity production network

By: Gretchen Anthony

Gretchen Anthony — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:41:56 +0000

Just take a look at this series of comments. Let’s not overlook the social network that we’ve each engaged in, just on this topic alone.
Mario’s original question, who we consider “friends,” is at the crux of this social networking debate. As much as I’d love to have a conversation over a glass of wine with many marketingprof.com regulars, that won’t happen. But I do read, consider and often follow the advise of those who I have not met, but for many reasons consider peers.
Networks, regardless of form or forum, serve countless purposes. And influence can be felt in all of them.

By: Ryan Turner

Ryan Turner — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 19:46:31 +0000

Feels like I’ve heard this conversation on another channel, but I understand what you’re asking now.
I disagree that never before have tools or means existed to the degree available at present to accomplish what you’ve asserted, and that there’s no better means of accomplishing what you’ve posited than through “social networks” given the purpose you’ve laid out.
There’s this idea of “social networking” as mirroring real-world activity that is true, but to say it filters out the “true believers” from the “schemers” is a false distinctions. At any time, it’s hard to determine what moves a person to form a connection, or what needs anyone has after a connection is made. You never know the value of your ties until they’re tested in the real-world, why should it be different online?
There’s also more incentive to commoditize– through sheer volume or frequency– the activity within social networks to the point that content takes a back seat. It would matter less that I say something “true” so long as I am “active”, “connected” and “participating” in one or more networks. This transforms the nature of an organic activity into something more transactional, requiring more thought, more engagement, and selectivity in choosing where, when, and with whom to engage my words of mouth.
Yes, the tools and systems increase the speed, reach, and efficiency regarding all of this. But ever since there has been communication and groups, I would never say “never”…

By: Steve Hoffacker

Steve Hoffacker — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:40:15 +0000

Mario,
The whole concept of WOM is that it is personal and relational. If your social network is made up entirely of your personal network – the people that you normally would see face-to-face and interact with – then social media outlets can be a tool for getting WOM viewpoints and opinions out faster. For many businesses, however, and circles of influence, the social media outlet just isn’t the same and it won’t have the same powerful results as in-person, one-at-a-time WOM messages. In many cases, only a virtual relationship exits in the social media realm. There is no history, no actual shared experience where the WOM opinions could be valued and acted upon. In my opinion, and for the types of businesses that I work with, social media does not have much of a role. Personal contact and retationships – that’s the key.
Steve

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 20:59:50 +0000

@Majd,
Exactly. WOM is always auto-generated by communities. The role of marketers is simply to:
“Listen-Be Aware-Measure-Participate”, much the same approach towards social media in general. Social networks greatly help with that.
@Jennifer,
WOMM is definitely powerful offline but where social networks step in is in maximizing this potential online due to ease-of-use.

By: Mario Vellandi

Mario Vellandi — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 01:22:46 +0000

Mario,
What I mean by the ease of publishing/subscribing perhaps diluting great WOM is this.
How many people can be talking about what they like, don’t like, are doing, etc…before the it becomes too much? Too many people in the room adds clutter. And with clutter, there is a lack of concentration.
I’m not downplaying the influential factor; I just wanted to show the flip side of the coin.
I’ll add this though. I find recommendation engines like those from Amazon and IMDB still very relevant and important indicators of product/service quality because of the large number of votes, and the readiness they can be called upon for a quick analysis when I’m interested to know.

By: Dan Neely

Dan Neely — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 14:28:47 +0000

I think the WOMM is interesting unto itself, but is it not more interesting to develop a platform by which these conversations and recommendations can be heard by companies on a mass scale, where by the conversations are the ingredients for real time insights.
Combining Community/web 2.0 tools with the consumer facing website, will create a platform by which consumers can interact with each other around something they already have in common (the company), the shift from 92% offline to WOM online will happen more rapidly because a pseudo relationship and commonality that already exists.
The advantage for a company of providing their customers with a place for them to interact is they will learn in real-time about the WOM conversations their customers are having and use those insights to understand how the relationships between customers are as important as the transactional data about what they buy.

By: Majd Awary

Majd Awary — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:16:01 +0000

Mario, using social media to boast the WOMM is taking a lot of interest from marketers those days and I think your post is an opportunity to discuss and examine the real potential.
If we try to examine recent products which the WOM had a big role in increasing awareness and demand (e.g. the iPhone, Harry Potter book and movie –) the WOM was backed up with so many factors (a genuine product, a huge marketing campaign –) and the buss was basically created by users themselves.
Don’t you agree with me that the role of marketers in generating the buss is near to zero? Just like the traditional WOM. It is generated and adopted by the community itself.
From a marketer’s prospective, online social networks help to consolidate all channels of thought about an industry or a product. Moreover, web 2.0 tools used in conjunction with a corporate web site tremendously spur the communication between the customer and the producer.

By: jennifer jones

jennifer jones — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 06:26:34 +0000

Mario, interesting post. The Bear Stearns report intrigues me as well. I do think that
WOM is more powerful offline. I know I still listen harder offline than online despite the growth of social media. Maybe it is because I am not swept in by what I read as much as what i hear from friends telling me face-to-face.

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 06:09:27 +0000

@Ben,
From the point-of-view of marketers, I agree that social networks provide a great way to study trends and buzz, similar to what groups, discussion forums and blogs do, but much more effectively since this is all related to your immediate circle of friends/professionals as the case may be.
@Tim,
Hope you’d a chance to read my Bourne Ultimatum review. Great movie!
I agree that social networks are currently not YET mainstream, but a recent Bear Stearns report suggested that social networks could be future portals given their phenomenal growth over the past few months. Just food for thought.

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 06:02:22 +0000

@Dave and @Lewis:
I presume IF you’d your entire circle of friends (even the close friends) whose WOM you trust in, on your social network, then wouldn’t you agree that it makes it much easier to spread when you see their latest raves/rants whenever you log into your network as opposed to when you actually meet them in person?

By: Mario Sundar

Mario Sundar — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 05:59:20 +0000

Wow, a lot of great responses.
Spike,
92% of WOM may currently happen offline, but more and more we’re going to find the ease with which WOM can work within social networking quite effective.
For e.g. I’ve been raving about movies all along to my close circle of friends whenever I watch one, but right now, I’ve the possibility to broadcast the same to a larger social group, culled from my college, high school about these movies. What was possible from “one to ten” has now just expanded to “one to two hundred” or many more. All I’m saying is that social networks makes it easier to spread word of mouth.
It’s this same ease that Vellandi says, dilutes great WOM. I somehow don’t see how?

By: Tim Jackson

Tim Jackson — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 05:04:57 +0000

Mario,
I think I might fall somewhere in the middle of this crowd. I totally relate to your point about the ad for Superbad- I’m just gonna skip right past it. But, if the same movie gets a mention by one of my peers/ friends or even one of me connections on Facebook or LinkedIn, I’m far more likely to either just go see the movie or simply click on the trailer link.
The WOM experience is changing dramatically. But it depends on who you are talking to. Folks like many of us here- online and connected- might have a different perspective than those folks who are not online as much or as comfortable with the Social Network phenomenon.
In the end, I think that the big 92% that Spike mentions is going to become much smaller. But that might still be a long time from now.
I’ll be looking for your movie review, by the way.

By: J Perez

J Perez — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 04:39:58 +0000

Mario,
Check this great Entrepreneur Social Networking Site!
http://www.biztoo.com

By: Ben McConnell

Ben McConnell — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 00:24:57 +0000

I suggest we dismiss the idea of a “gesture bank.” It sounds like a Frankenstein measure, like “most valuable brands.”
A fundamental value of social networks for marketers is that it consolidates listening.
When marketers listen, they can amplify what’s being said via pointers on their own sites or their own social networks. That seems like a better idea than going overboard with anything else, lest you create an appearance of astroturfing.

By: Vikram Rajan

Vikram Rajan — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 21:29:06 +0000

social media, web 2.0, etc. helps us showcase our word-of-mouth networks. I don’t believe the traditional (off-line) world of w-o-m marketing will die in our generation… but our friend-based on-line networks has helped to capitalize and automate our networks.
~ Vikram
PersonalBrandMarketing.com

By: Dave Brown

Dave Brown — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:37:11 +0000

I agree to the notion that effective Social Media Marketing adds value to your social media experience. You noted that you would be more apt to listen to a movie review from a friend than an advertisement for the same movie. This is a perfect example of effective social media marketing.
I think that SSM is more effective than traditional WOM in many instances. Effective WOM comes from friends or people you trust to some extent. If I get a MySpace message from one of my real life friends suggesting a product, I’m already online making it easy for me to research the product further or purchase it. When I hear about a product from a friend at the gym I’m nowhere near a computer to buy it on. I often forget the conversation. Also. Social media marketing can be done on a much larger scale and in a shorter amount of time.

By: Lewis Green

Lewis Green — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:52:49 +0000

Mario,
Good food for thought. I still think the majority of us get our word of mouth over coffee or a glass of wine.
Although I am linked to lots of people in my social networking, I can’t remember being impacted by WOM except for music recommendations. And, I’m unlikely to purchase an item over $100 (an arbitrary number) based on information from someone who I know based only on their profile.

By: Elaine Fogel

Elaine Fogel — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:44:09 +0000

Isn’t the whole point of branding to organically create brand evangelists for your product/service? If that’s the case, then people will spread the word in their communication channels of choice. Some may choose face-to-face and others through social networks.
The value of social networks is that they can help friends stay connected even though many miles/kilometers separate them. So, face-to-face WOM isn’t always feasible. Perhaps, as Web 2.0 grows, that 92% of offline WOM will decrease.