answered question
0
Votes
Votes
15
Answers
Answers
M$5.00
Who has had the most success doing self-promotion or PR on Twitter?
I kind of secretly suspect that Twitter's value as a marketing tool is being vastly overstated. I'd like to hear who you think has actually had direct, practical success at developing and establishing a brand or company using the service.
|
Report
answers (14)
The question was: Who has had the most success doing self-promotion or PR on Twitter?
So far, everyone has talked mostly about companies and there's a general debate on who made the most money because of twitter and whether or not more or less profits should be given to the company's twitter success.
I also agree that Chris Brogan, Jason Calcanis and Robert Scoble are great success stories but how much do we attribute to there tweets? How about @garyvee who basically launched a tshirt search site through twitter? What about @ijustine when she first started to tweet?
For me, twitter is another tool to assist with brandbuilding. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sure some marketing/numbers crunching/formula designing/guru has a way to calculate profits attributed to twitter efforts, but in my opinion, it's junk. @comcastcares doesn't offer a terrific service. He can only answer "X" number of questions a day. Some are gonna get left unanswered and that is poor customer service. What is provided is good press for the effort put forth. Brandbuilding.
My winner for most success, @marsphoenix. Talk about putting NASA on the map in the coolest way ever. How many articles were written? How many of you actually went to the linked NASA site and looked at pics of Mars because of the tweets? Kudos to them for finding a really happy medium of self-promotion, fun and innovation.... and it's a government agency. Who would have thought.
lbrown
twitter.com/notoriouslb3
So far, everyone has talked mostly about companies and there's a general debate on who made the most money because of twitter and whether or not more or less profits should be given to the company's twitter success.
I also agree that Chris Brogan, Jason Calcanis and Robert Scoble are great success stories but how much do we attribute to there tweets? How about @garyvee who basically launched a tshirt search site through twitter? What about @ijustine when she first started to tweet?
For me, twitter is another tool to assist with brandbuilding. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sure some marketing/numbers crunching/formula designing/guru has a way to calculate profits attributed to twitter efforts, but in my opinion, it's junk. @comcastcares doesn't offer a terrific service. He can only answer "X" number of questions a day. Some are gonna get left unanswered and that is poor customer service. What is provided is good press for the effort put forth. Brandbuilding.
My winner for most success, @marsphoenix. Talk about putting NASA on the map in the coolest way ever. How many articles were written? How many of you actually went to the linked NASA site and looked at pics of Mars because of the tweets? Kudos to them for finding a really happy medium of self-promotion, fun and innovation.... and it's a government agency. Who would have thought.
lbrown
twitter.com/notoriouslb3
| Asker's rating: |
I agree with every point you make, and to be honest, I had forgotten about how much fun the @marsphoenix feed was. Great answer.
Zappos.com, he is a Twitter fanatic!
They even have their own website for Twitter
http://twitter.zappos.com
Here is Zappos Twitter account
http://twitter.com/zappos
List of Zappos employees on Twitter
http://twitter.zappos.com/employees
Is a Twitter account required by all Zappos employees? Tony says, "Not yet, but we are getting there." He has over 400 employees who use Twitter.
T-Shirt is for sale at $50,000 on Zappos, was promoted on Twitter!
http://zeta.zappos.com/product/7545058
Watch the videos:
Tweet Myself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtETpKhNLd0
Zappos CEO at Zappos Twitter Party
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDjqRKnxlUM
Web 2.0 Summit 08: Tony Hsieh (Zappos.com)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ2DmNk3YjQ
Oh, and if I would say an individual, I would add Jason Calacanis or Robert Scoble.
Jason Calacanis
http://twitter.com/JasonCalacanis
Robert Scoble
http://twitter.com/Scobleizer
They even have their own website for Twitter
http://twitter.zappos.com
Here is Zappos Twitter account
http://twitter.com/zappos
List of Zappos employees on Twitter
http://twitter.zappos.com/employees
Is a Twitter account required by all Zappos employees? Tony says, "Not yet, but we are getting there." He has over 400 employees who use Twitter.
T-Shirt is for sale at $50,000 on Zappos, was promoted on Twitter!
http://zeta.zappos.com/product/7545058
Watch the videos:
Tweet Myself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtETpKhNLd0
Zappos CEO at Zappos Twitter Party
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDjqRKnxlUM
Web 2.0 Summit 08: Tony Hsieh (Zappos.com)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ2DmNk3YjQ
Oh, and if I would say an individual, I would add Jason Calacanis or Robert Scoble.
Jason Calacanis
http://twitter.com/JasonCalacanis
Robert Scoble
http://twitter.com/Scobleizer
I don't really agree or disagree with your answer; however, I think you did an insanely good job presenting your argument. If there were style points you would get them in my book.
Lots of interesting links...It's clear Zappos.com is USING Twitter as a promotional, marketing and communication tool...
But how would we gauge whether or not it's successful? This seems to be where these conversations break down. Is it helping them to win over more customers? To keep the customers they have happy?
Wasn't Zappos.com already a pretty well-established service pre-Twitter? This CNN article about their road to success doesn't even mention Twitter:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2006/12/01/8394993/index.htm
Again, not saying you're wrong. Just seeking to take the discussion a little deeper than "who has a large Twitter presence?"
But how would we gauge whether or not it's successful? This seems to be where these conversations break down. Is it helping them to win over more customers? To keep the customers they have happy?
Wasn't Zappos.com already a pretty well-established service pre-Twitter? This CNN article about their road to success doesn't even mention Twitter:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2006/12/01/8394993/index.htm
Again, not saying you're wrong. Just seeking to take the discussion a little deeper than "who has a large Twitter presence?"
Zappos.com did over a $1 billion in sales. You've got to attribute some of this to marketing on Twitter.
The questions wasn't which companies use twitter, it was who is the most successful. That means make comparisons between people with some kind of argument to back it up. You didn't answer the question, easye.
In evaluating the success of using Twitter as a promotional or PR tool, you need to distinguish between individuals and businesses, because they might have different goals.
Zappos has created an excellent model of how to promote business on Twitter, while Comcast has effectively used Twitter to manage customer issues. Dell recently announced that they had made $1 million in revenue in a year and a half of promoting sales on Twitter. Businessweek's article offers insight into how various Fortune 500 companies are using Twitter to monitor and manage their brands.
In terms of individuals, you could argue that Barack Obama's win of the presidency should get him the title of most successful Twitter. But there are others, such as Mahalo's own Jason Calcanis who have tens of thousands of followers to whom they can promote their messages. Lists of top followed Twitterers are compiled via the API on Twitterholic, but there are other measures, as shown on Twitterrank. Top ranked user Chris Brogan has recently started his own social media agency, built largely on his blog that he avidly promotes through Twitter.
Zappos has created an excellent model of how to promote business on Twitter, while Comcast has effectively used Twitter to manage customer issues. Dell recently announced that they had made $1 million in revenue in a year and a half of promoting sales on Twitter. Businessweek's article offers insight into how various Fortune 500 companies are using Twitter to monitor and manage their brands.
In terms of individuals, you could argue that Barack Obama's win of the presidency should get him the title of most successful Twitter. But there are others, such as Mahalo's own Jason Calcanis who have tens of thousands of followers to whom they can promote their messages. Lists of top followed Twitterers are compiled via the API on Twitterholic, but there are other measures, as shown on Twitterrank. Top ranked user Chris Brogan has recently started his own social media agency, built largely on his blog that he avidly promotes through Twitter.
source(s):
http://venturebeat.com/2008/12/15/twitter-has-made-dell-1-million-in-revenu...
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2008/tc2008095_320491.htm
http://twitterholic.com/
http://twitterank.com/?t=top50
http://venturebeat.com/2008/12/15/twitter-has-made-dell-1-million-in-revenu...
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2008/tc2008095_320491.htm
http://twitterholic.com/
http://twitterank.com/?t=top50
It's my belief Barack Obama would have won even if there was not a Twitter. I would not attribute his success to Twitter.
I agree with all your points and think this is a very cogent response. You say:
"But there are others, such as Mahalo's own Jason Calcanis [sic] who have tens of thousands of followers to whom they can promote their messages."
I'd like to get some opinions on what this really means. Is just having a lot of followers enough to make a marketing effort successful? Twitter, to me, seems like a place where everyone is struggling to be heard and few people are listening...Many of these followers just want Jason's attention, rather than wanting to buy whatever he might be selling. Or am I wrong?
"But there are others, such as Mahalo's own Jason Calcanis [sic] who have tens of thousands of followers to whom they can promote their messages."
I'd like to get some opinions on what this really means. Is just having a lot of followers enough to make a marketing effort successful? Twitter, to me, seems like a place where everyone is struggling to be heard and few people are listening...Many of these followers just want Jason's attention, rather than wanting to buy whatever he might be selling. Or am I wrong?
I believe Twitter is a "feel good" site, which means you feel good by using it, not necessarily do people listen to everything that people tweet post, or act upon it, yet some companies have been able to turn tweet posts into profits. With 29,274+ followers, Zappos.com has made an impact.
I think Barack Obama for sure. He became very popular on twitter REALLY fast and, well, he won! :)
The second one would be Leo Laporte (the guy that runs This Week In Tech).
The second one would be Leo Laporte (the guy that runs This Week In Tech).
It's my belief Barack Obama would have won even if there was not a Twitter. I would not attribute his success to Twitter.
Yet you provide no more evidence than that for your Zappo's example. Also, quit abusing the "refute fact" option.
Oh come on it's obviously it's Jason Calacanis. He provides both valuable links but also links that point back to many of his own properties. He may not have the huge number of followers but in general it's a much more influential group. That group push along the information out in a domino type effect.
<brown_nose_mode>
http://twitter.com/JasonCalacanis of course!
</brown_nose_mode>
http://twitter.com/JasonCalacanis of course!
</brown_nose_mode>
I think your question is a bit earlier than its time. The reason why twitter has all the hype it carries is because of the physical eyes watching it. Conventional wisdom (which seems to have worked for quite a while now) says that one of the criterion to make a product successful is to get as many eyeballs watching it as you can. So, Twitter seems like a good candidate. Whether it has succeeded in achieving financial gains or not, is a question that will be answered over next half a decade or so.
As far as non-financial gain goes, there is some success you can look at. on twitter, @comcastcares has been quite helpful in getting good PR/press for its customer service. The effort was talked about in Washington Post, Digg, NYT, CNN, etc. (as an example of good customer service, of course). There are couple other examples (not many though).
So, I'd say wait for a few more years before making your decision whether to swear by twitter or to ditch it or to stay somewhere inbetwee :) But as far as traditional marketing thinking goes, Twitter has a potential. The keyword there is "potential". "Potentially" a company/person can get ALL of twitter users to look at his/her/its content at no cost! That's unheard of. Remeber, before this whole Web 2.0 thing, ANY marketing with that many eyeballs at no cost... unheard of.
For now, I'd suggest think of Twitter as a possible tool. Whether it is worth hiring a person to twitter full-time for you/your company is a matter of personal judgment. You have to evaluate whether the people using Twitter are your audience; and if they are, would their clicking on a link of your product etc. or listening to your conference-talk generate enough value for you.
As far as non-financial gain goes, there is some success you can look at. on twitter, @comcastcares has been quite helpful in getting good PR/press for its customer service. The effort was talked about in Washington Post, Digg, NYT, CNN, etc. (as an example of good customer service, of course). There are couple other examples (not many though).
So, I'd say wait for a few more years before making your decision whether to swear by twitter or to ditch it or to stay somewhere inbetwee :) But as far as traditional marketing thinking goes, Twitter has a potential. The keyword there is "potential". "Potentially" a company/person can get ALL of twitter users to look at his/her/its content at no cost! That's unheard of. Remeber, before this whole Web 2.0 thing, ANY marketing with that many eyeballs at no cost... unheard of.
For now, I'd suggest think of Twitter as a possible tool. Whether it is worth hiring a person to twitter full-time for you/your company is a matter of personal judgment. You have to evaluate whether the people using Twitter are your audience; and if they are, would their clicking on a link of your product etc. or listening to your conference-talk generate enough value for you.
Marketers talk to marketers, and marketers listen to marketers. Everyone else generally ignores their self-promotion, because not only is it possible to get your message out for no cost, but it's easy for people to ignore you. There's no popup ads to deal with, there's no commercials to sit through, there's no captive audience. You genuinely have to say interesting things, and each person gets to choose their own tolerance to self-promotion. That's why only marketers listen to marketers via web 2.0, because they're the only ones with the tolerance for it.
Yes, you are right about marketers talking to marketers and having no captive audience. And that is why I was saying that it is hard to decide whether Twitter really is a "game-changing" tool.
At the same time, I would say that marketing self/product on twitter must cut through all the BS. It is easy to see a tweet that says "I just launched www.bestproductonplanet.com go check it out and buy something" and just ignore it. But if that "bestproductonplanet" actually solves some issue that has been bugging a group of (let's say 5-10) twitterers, the marketing guy/gal can shout out saying "those of you having blah issues, bestproductonplanet is worth checking out".
So, I think the whole subtle marketing may have some future. I am not a marketing guy myself, so this is just my best guess. I am a bioinformatics programmer, and that's where things pretty much end. (Except Indian/Bollywood music. I consume that A LOT! haha)
At the same time, I would say that marketing self/product on twitter must cut through all the BS. It is easy to see a tweet that says "I just launched www.bestproductonplanet.com go check it out and buy something" and just ignore it. But if that "bestproductonplanet" actually solves some issue that has been bugging a group of (let's say 5-10) twitterers, the marketing guy/gal can shout out saying "those of you having blah issues, bestproductonplanet is worth checking out".
So, I think the whole subtle marketing may have some future. I am not a marketing guy myself, so this is just my best guess. I am a bioinformatics programmer, and that's where things pretty much end. (Except Indian/Bollywood music. I consume that A LOT! haha)
There are many good points here but not too many have directly addressed the meat of the question.
Who has had success...or even "IS Twitter successful as a marketing tool?"
I am a marketing manager for a moderately large online retailer and am defining "success" as "driving revenue" for this answer.
The short answer is it is somewhat early to tell. Twitter has the capacity to drive the viral response that forums, blogs and other social media occasionally spawn. But viral responses are more icing than cake: you can't forecast or create marketing plans around viral-generated revenue or it ceases to become "viral" by definition.
Zappos is probably the most ACTIVE on Twitter but I have not seen them release any reports of revenue attributed to Twitter as a marketing channel. Their CEO twittering definitely increases branding and gives the company a much more personal feel. I don't think that fact can be refuted. However, how do you calculate the incremental lift from this?
Dell.com has reported $1MM in direct revenue over 1.5 years from posting products on Twitter, a measurable gain. This sounds like a large sum but when you're a company as large as Dell, making $1MM over 1.5 years is borderline waste of time.
Twitter itself has not leveraged Twitter. They have tons of traffic and an impressive user base but they haven't monetized pages at all (nor do many users even SEE pages anyway). The entire service (last I read) was still existing on their investment capital. The most consistent value I've seen it provide is to bloggers who use twitter as a glorified RSS feed for their blog content.
So, while nobody has admitted making a killing on Twitter (including Twitter), it has a lot of traffic and it's a "new" concept (that's debatable since Twitter is blogging's little brother). This means that with a little innovation you could be the first one to score big. But plenty of people are trying: Google "monetizing twitter" or attend any online marketing conference and I guarantee that there will be at least one session on this subject!
Who has had success...or even "IS Twitter successful as a marketing tool?"
I am a marketing manager for a moderately large online retailer and am defining "success" as "driving revenue" for this answer.
The short answer is it is somewhat early to tell. Twitter has the capacity to drive the viral response that forums, blogs and other social media occasionally spawn. But viral responses are more icing than cake: you can't forecast or create marketing plans around viral-generated revenue or it ceases to become "viral" by definition.
Zappos is probably the most ACTIVE on Twitter but I have not seen them release any reports of revenue attributed to Twitter as a marketing channel. Their CEO twittering definitely increases branding and gives the company a much more personal feel. I don't think that fact can be refuted. However, how do you calculate the incremental lift from this?
Dell.com has reported $1MM in direct revenue over 1.5 years from posting products on Twitter, a measurable gain. This sounds like a large sum but when you're a company as large as Dell, making $1MM over 1.5 years is borderline waste of time.
Twitter itself has not leveraged Twitter. They have tons of traffic and an impressive user base but they haven't monetized pages at all (nor do many users even SEE pages anyway). The entire service (last I read) was still existing on their investment capital. The most consistent value I've seen it provide is to bloggers who use twitter as a glorified RSS feed for their blog content.
So, while nobody has admitted making a killing on Twitter (including Twitter), it has a lot of traffic and it's a "new" concept (that's debatable since Twitter is blogging's little brother). This means that with a little innovation you could be the first one to score big. But plenty of people are trying: Google "monetizing twitter" or attend any online marketing conference and I guarantee that there will be at least one session on this subject!
The problem with the question is that it doesn't define how "success" is measured.
Revenue is one metric. Other possible metrics include brand awareness (which might be a good yardstick for Zappos), and customer satisfaction (which might be useful in measuring Comcast's success.)
So if (for example) "success using Twitter" for Comcast means that customers are more satisfied with the Comcast's support for their products and services as a direct result of their engagement on Twitter, we'd have to rely on Comcast to reveal how customer satisfaction levels have risen since they began their Twitter initiative, and what percentage of that change was directly attributed to interactions on Twitter by the customers surveyed.
Revenue is one metric. Other possible metrics include brand awareness (which might be a good yardstick for Zappos), and customer satisfaction (which might be useful in measuring Comcast's success.)
So if (for example) "success using Twitter" for Comcast means that customers are more satisfied with the Comcast's support for their products and services as a direct result of their engagement on Twitter, we'd have to rely on Comcast to reveal how customer satisfaction levels have risen since they began their Twitter initiative, and what percentage of that change was directly attributed to interactions on Twitter by the customers surveyed.
You are correct, Waderocket, that the challenge here is to first define "success." I did not do it in the question because I wanted to see how people would approach the topic. I have my own definition of success on Twitter, but I'm open to being persuaded.
Some answers have simply skipped over this crucial distinction and just discussed who has used Twitter; the best ones have first provided their definition and then used some examples.
Some answers have simply skipped over this crucial distinction and just discussed who has used Twitter; the best ones have first provided their definition and then used some examples.
Guy Kawasaki will tell you that Twitter was a fundamental element in creating his website Alltop.
“I think Twitter is, arguably, the most powerful branding mechanism since television.” - Guy Kawasaki
“I think Twitter is, arguably, the most powerful branding mechanism since television.” - Guy Kawasaki
ComcastCares - Comcast's way of entering the new technology scene.
source(s):
dvorak.org/blog
dvorak.org/blog
Brian Solis asked Frank Eliason, Digital Care Manager at Comast, about the benefits of interacting on Twitter. Eliason said that by using Twitter they are able to proactively troubleshoot issues that never get submitted as formal complaints, and that they have used feedback gained from Twitter to improve processes. http://www.briansolis.com/2008/07/comcast-cares-and-why-your-business.html
We at Magpie (http://be-a-magpie.com) had quite a success story in building a follower base of over 1.4 M in a bit more than two months. Plus, a lot of our customers have their own success stories since they use Magpie for targeted advertising on Twitter.
Thanks for bringing up the topic!
Jan Schulz-Hofen
CEO Magpie & Friends Ltd.
Thanks for bringing up the topic!
Jan Schulz-Hofen
CEO Magpie & Friends Ltd.
In a word: @garyvee
In a paragraph: Gary Vaynerchuk has leveraged Twitter better than anyone else I can think of. He had a successful business _before_ twitter, but he has used the service to build brand equity, connect directly with his customers and fans, and spawn new ideas and ventures. His hustle is what sets him apart from the rest of the crowd. He isn't simply self-linking to self-promote, he is self-linking to improve the business-sense and social-sense of those that follow him, both through his Wine Library daily webshow and through his personal GaryVaynerchuk.com videos. Those videos provide free advice from a proven winner in business and social media. Why go anywhere else when you can learn from the best?
His response to the hacking of one of his sites (Corkd) was immediate and effective. I've linked to the TechCrunch article about that incident. This is a man who is leveraging complete strangers to do important work on his businesses, in trade for money, promotion, services, consulting, or whatever they may want. I'd say that's as close to pure success as you'll find on Twitter.
In a paragraph: Gary Vaynerchuk has leveraged Twitter better than anyone else I can think of. He had a successful business _before_ twitter, but he has used the service to build brand equity, connect directly with his customers and fans, and spawn new ideas and ventures. His hustle is what sets him apart from the rest of the crowd. He isn't simply self-linking to self-promote, he is self-linking to improve the business-sense and social-sense of those that follow him, both through his Wine Library daily webshow and through his personal GaryVaynerchuk.com videos. Those videos provide free advice from a proven winner in business and social media. Why go anywhere else when you can learn from the best?
His response to the hacking of one of his sites (Corkd) was immediate and effective. I've linked to the TechCrunch article about that incident. This is a man who is leveraging complete strangers to do important work on his businesses, in trade for money, promotion, services, consulting, or whatever they may want. I'd say that's as close to pure success as you'll find on Twitter.
source(s):
http://www.twitter.com/garyvee
http://www.winelibrary.tv
http://www.garyvaynerchuk.comhttp://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/07/did-corkd...
http://www.mahalo.com/Gary_Vaynerchuk
http://www.twitter.com/garyvee
http://www.winelibrary.tv
http://www.garyvaynerchuk.comhttp://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/07/did-corkd...
http://www.mahalo.com/Gary_Vaynerchuk
Has anyone mentioned dell? they made almost a million dollars that they directly attribute to the promotion through their "sale alert" twitter account.
http://venturebeat.com/2008/12/15/twitter-has-made-dell-1-million-in-revenue/
(sorry if this point has been made.)
http://venturebeat.com/2008/12/15/twitter-has-made-dell-1-million-in-revenue/
(sorry if this point has been made.)
What about the guy who created the CNN bot? Seems like he really found a way to feed the fishing for breaking news updates. I don't think CNN owns it.
Related questions
140 characters left
ask any question
