Pages

Friday, April 27, 2012

YouTube Becomes The Number One Source in Mobile Data Traffic

Google-owned YouTube has reached another milestone in its meteoric rise to mobile supremacy. On Thursday, Sandvine – a provider of intelligent broadband network solutions – published its latest Internet traffic trends report, entitled “Global Internet Phenomena Report 1H2012.” The information presented is based on data from a selection of Sandvine’s 200-plus customers spanning North America, Europe, Middle East and Africa, Caribbean and Latin America and Asia-Pacific.



What report says:

  • YouTube is the largest source of mobile video traffic in every region examined, accounting for as much as 25% of network data and no less than 12%.
  • In North America, video and audio streaming make up more than half of mobile data traffic, led by YouTube, Pandora and Netflix.
  • Mobile device usage on fixed networks: Home roaming accounts for 9% of total fixed traffic on North America’s household networks.

  • Audio and video streaming will exceed 60% of North America’s mobile data by late 2014.

  • Click-to-cloud smartphone photo back-up and synchronization will emerge as a significant source of traffic worldwide: the phenomena of the continuous cloud/client connection.
“Aggregate reports like our Global Internet Phenomena shed light on the Internet as a whole and inform operators on trends relevant to their business,” said Dave Caputo. “However, the real value for our customers is to take an internal census of data and trends on their own networks. Armed with detailed network data we work with our customers to develop tailored service offerings, traffic policies and usage plans.”

Facebook Test Button: Promote Content Directly from their Pages

Facebook will test a new “promote” button that makes it easier for pages to create Sponsored Stories directly from their posts, a company spokesperson tells us. The button will appear from the page publisher — the box from which page owners create posts — and on posts that have already gone live. The feature is aimed at small- to mid-sized businesses that are using Facebook for marketing, but don’t necessarily have the resources to work with a Facebook ad rep or third-party partner. The social network’s ad dashboard has become increasingly complicated with nontraditional ad types like Sponsored Stories and page post ads, but the promote button could make ad creation much simpler.

The promote button will let page owners pay to give their content additional exposure to their fans. If fans interact with the content, their friends might see that activity as a Sponsored Story, but there is not currently a way for page owners to create an ad targeting non-fans using the promote button. They will have to use the self-serve ad dashboard or the Ads API to do that. “Right now this is a very small test but we will continue to iterate on the feature based on feedback,” a spokesperson says.

Facebook has been gradually encouraging page owners to pay for distribution of their content, even among fans they formerly thought they could reach for free. As it turns out, the average page post only reaches 16 percent of fans, the company revealed in February. This is the result of users connecting to more people and pages, all of whom are generating more stories than ever before. Most people wouldn’t enjoy seeing every bit of their connections’ activity in News Feed, so Facebook uses EdgeRank to filter some stories out and highlight the ones that seem most relevant to each user. Last year the social network introduced a new type of ad that turned page posts into Sponsored Stories. That was the first time the company began to encourage businesses to spend money on engaging existing fans, in addition to running campaigns to acquire new ones. Then at the Facebook Marketing Conference earlier this year, the company revealed Reach Generator, a premium advertising solution to help large brands reach their fans through Sponsored Stories within the mobile and desktop feeds, as well as through sidebar ads. The promote button is a simple way to foster the same strategy among smaller businesses.

Monday, September 5, 2011

Google’s +1 button is the new PageRank?

Let me start off by being very clear. Google is not getting rid of PageRank in favor of the +1 button. Google is, however, looking at the data from the +1 button as a signal of content quality, and +1s will no doubt continue to be largely coveted by webmasters and content creators web-wide.

It’s been pretty clear since Google first announced the +1 button (even before they announced Google+) that the feature was designed to send Google signals for quality content. It was essentially billed as a way for web users to tell Google when a piece of content is good enough to be considered a good search result.

Wired is running a story now saying that Google has confirmed its plans of turning the button into “a crowdsourcing tool that helps re-order search results and fight web spam”.

“Google will study the clicks on +1 buttons as a signal that influences the ranking and appearance of websites in search results,” a Google spokesperson is quoted as saying. “The purpose of any ranking signal is to improve overall search quality. For +1’s and other social ranking signals, as with any new ranking signal, we’ll be starting carefully and learning how those signals are related to quality.”

Of course it is unwise to place too much emphasis on just a single ranking signal. At least that’s what Google would have webmasters believe. They’re tossing around very similar language with regard to the +1 button ranking as they historically have when people worry about PageRank too much: “There are more than 200 signals that we use to determine the rank of a website, and last year we made more than 500 improvements to the algorithm.”

Just as you’ve seen plenty trying to boost their PageRank through black hat tactics, it does not seem unreasonable to assume that these same people will try to exploit the +1 button. A major weapon against this that Google has is its strict Google+ account name policy, which has been a bit controversial thus far.

It became clear in recent days that Google+ is all about identity as far as Google is concerned. Eric Schmidt drove this point home, as discussed here. While this makes sense for a variety of reasons (including the potential integration of Google+ with products like Google Wallet), it also makes a great deal of sense in that it shows Google exactly who is +1ing what, which should in turn help them enforce any policy (current or future) concerning abuse of the button for gaming search.

In terms of white hat tactics, you may do well to consider things like this research comScore just shared. +1′s now mean more sharing of content to the actual Google+ network – people’s circles, which should (in theory) translate to increased traffic from Google+ itself. So, it may help to know about the kinds of people who are using Google+, as opposed to Facebook, for example. comScore’s data looks at those searches containing the Google+ and Facebook brands. It’s probably not exact, but many of those searching for Google+ content are likely going to be users of the service.

“The most striking differences between Google+ searchers and Facebook searchers are in Age and Income level,” says Eli Goodman, who leads the business development team at comScore. “Google+ searchers overwhelmingly skew towards 18-34 year olds. Clearly Google+ is a popular brand with the younger segments, and good knowledge for Google to have as they develop their acquisition strategy and evolve their user base. Since Facebook is a much more mature brand in the social networking space, their search audience falls closely in line with the search population at large.”

“The income skews are even more distinct, essentially polar opposites of each other,” he adds. “More than 32% of Google+ searchers have a household income of $100K or greater, compared to 23% of Facebook searchers. Google+ is definitely off to a fast start in reaching the most desirable income segments, which may make it more attractive to advertisers.”

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Why social networking alone won't make the sale

These days we all use some form of social networking. How delightful to go onto LinkedIn and find colleagues from Europe who might have interest in a program with me for when I travel across the pond – colleagues that know me well enough through my various online profiles to be eager to dialogue with me, discover ways to partner, or just chat about places to stay. And the use and quality of Skype has made it all as simple and cheap as calling a friend in a different city.

With automatic trust built in -- we're sort of family once we are connected -- our conversations seem to flow smoothly: We've used Facebook, the net, and Twitter to discover who the other is, have determined whether and how we want to connect, what we can offer each other, and how to prepare. An off-handed comment about the person's upcoming wedding, or a congratulatory mention of the person's new business venture compounds the trust.

Gone are the days of cold calling, running around the country to network, and speaking at events for free just to collect business cards. I bet some folks out there don't even remember when those were the only ways to get leads, other than the phone book.

So why aren't we closing more?

Not only are we not closing more, but we're closing less.

What is going on?

What's going on is that our relationships, communication, trust, and friendliness are not helping others reach the sorts of decisions necessary to close a deal.

Change, systems, and buy-in
Before we look at what's happening, let's change the discussion for a moment to look at what needs to happen for any purchase to occur.

In order for someone to buy something other than a small personal item, there are several steps that must take place to get the necessary buy-in to move forward. The appropriate buy-in must be acquired from the right people and groups; the rules must be changed to allow for a new set of givens -- vendors and business partners must agree, and job descriptions must match up with the new jobs.

We tend to forget that all purchases are change management problems. And, because a problem is not an isolated event and has been maintained by the people, policies, rules, and politics of the existent environment, there are systemic things that touch the solution that would be affected if a new solution were to enter.

So a new piece of software would seriously affect users, techies, internal consultants, and trainers; training for one group would affect all of the people who touch that group.

And systems prefer to maintain the status quo, even if it means maintaining failure. After all, it has been good enough until now, and everything has bought-in to maintaining it as it is. In fact, our buyers would rather maintain their status quo regardless of what it is costing them, and regardless of the efficacy of our solution; no matter how much they will save with a new solution, it costs more overall to bring in something new.

Remember: If the buyers felt pain, or were ready to change, they would have done so already.

So until -- or unless -- the status quo will accept the addition of something new, and has the capability to manage in such a way that an addition will not create too much unregulated disruption, it will do nothing.

What it takes to close a deal
Currently, our relationships through social networking haven't included the agenda to help the other recognize and manage the different sorts of buy-in necessary to change. But that doesn't mean we can't include that.

I was at a client site recently listening in on a sales call with a prospect who my client had been chatting with for months. It was a lovely call. Laughter, in-jokes, obvious rapport. They were introduced on LinkedIn and tweeted each other daily. Yet, nothing was going anywhere. I wrote a note in front of him, which he repeated:

"We've been chatting for a while now. And the more I get to know you, the more I see the possibility of our working together somehow. What would you need to know about my solution to know if it would fit, and if your colleagues would be willing to consider adding something new to what they are already doing so well?"

The conversation shifted. The man was happy to answer:

"We're starting to go through the process of an M&A, and won't be able to take on anything new for about a year. Can we revisit this in 6 months? At that time there will be new people on board (I might even be gone!), and I don't know what the hierarchy will be, but we can discuss it."

There could be no buy in, no decision team, and most likely no purchase. Does that make you want to continue being "friends" or end the "friendship"? Do you want to ask for a referral? How much time do you want to spend being friendly vs. closing a sale? And how will you know when/if it's time to pull the plug, or ask the hard questions?

We're in a new era. There are no rules -- we're making them up as we go along. So ask yourself:

What do you want to get out of social media?
How will you know that one person over another is a prospect?
At what point is connecting enough, or do you want to connect only with potential prospects or partners?

The capability is in front of us. The choice is ours as to what we want to do with it. We just have to remember that being friendly, evoking trusting relationships, and having hundreds or thousands of friends doesn't make you a better seller.

What would you need to learn differently to add a new skill set to what you're doing online, to help you help your "friends" make their best decisions?

News Source: iMediaConnection

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Updated Google Alphabets

Dear friend's

recently i saw updates in Google Alphabets so i thought why not i create a post on the update. I hope this list remind you last Google Alphabets -

A - www.amazon.com [Amazon]
B - www.bankofamerica.com [Bank of America]
C - www.craigslist.com [Craigslist]
D - dictionary.reference.com [Dictionary]
E - www.ebay.com [Ebay]
F - www.facebook.com [Facebook]
G - www.google.com [Google]
H - www.hulu.com [Hulu]
I - www.irs.gov [Iru]
J - www.jetblue.com [Jet Blue]
K - www.kohls.com [Kohls]
L - www.lowes.com [Lowes]
M - www.mapquest.com [Mapquest]
N - www.netflix.com [Netflix]
O - www.orbitz.com [Orbitz]
P - www.pandora.com [Pandora]
Q - www.brainyquote.com [Quotes]
R - www.huffingtonpost.com [Ryan Dunn Dead]
S - www.southwest.com [Southwest]
T - www.target.com [Target]
U - www.usps.com [Usps]
V - www.verizonwireless.com [Verizon]
W - www.weather.com [Weather]
X - www.xbox.com [Xbox]
Y - www.youtube.com [Youtube]
Z - www.zillow.com [Zillow]

Pass your input because it's valuable for me.