Twitter has become so omnipresent in conversations involving marketing execs that it is now quite refreshing to hear when people foresee the problems its use can cause.
Such is the pace in which the 'microblogging' phenomenon has grown and the way people have used it that problems are already beginning to surface - remember, this is just months after many introduced it the mainstream as a brand new and innovative marketing channel.
[Indeed, with remarkable timing, Troy on the Travel 2.0 Blog posts today: "How the travel industry should use Twitter"]
No-one can doubt that as a one-way distribution channel it works. Followers make a conscious decision to see what you're saying - simple.
[Though one seriously doubts whether the "I'm having a bagel" or "I'm on the bus"-type tweets will stand the test of time, unless you're Stephen Fry, of course]
As a two-way distribution channel it gets slightly trickier for travel companies, but the conversational element of Twitter still remains one of its finest attributes.
Consumers are able to ask questions of travel firms in a quick and easy way, sometimes getting assistance quicker than they would via email (but probably not by Old School telephone methods).
Twitter, regardless of what the refuseniks say, should be explored simply because it is the social network of the moment...
However, some elements of Twitter are showing similar signs to email, which went quickly from the great new disruptor to simply being a vehicle for uninspired and lazy marketers.
Speaking at the EyeForTravel conference in London yesterday, the always fantastically honest Viator boss Rod Cuthbert explained how his people were using Twitter in an interesting way.
It goes something like this:
Random Twitter User X posts the following update: "Heading to Paris with the girlfriend. Anyone know what we can for a dreamy evening out?"
Using Twitter Search to track mentions of cities in which it operates tours and excursions, Viator's staff would then @reply the user with a friendly message: "Try a romantic boat ride along the Seine. Lovely views. [Some kind of TINYURL here]. Have a great trip!"
The TINYURL link would land the user on the Viator page for a supplier which happens to sell trips along the gloriously romantic river across Paris.
Hats off to Viator. This is a great and extremely simple idea, probably taking just a minute or two to arrange at Viator's end.
The process - shock, horror - may lead to a product sale, but if nothing else it plants the idea that Viator sells tours of all kinds around Paris.
But what happens if every travel company starts doing the same thing? Random Twitter User X might suddenly find 20 or more @replies peddling similar things. Ggrrrrr...
In the Q&A following the presentation, Cuthbert admitted the practice - generally - could become "spammy" very quickly.
Despite it being a clever idea, this particular practice could be a problem for travel firms using Twitter when trying to proactively engage with potential consumers.
Not only will users quickly become fed up with the reams of @replies (especially if the messages are not helpful in the slightest), meaning they will not bother clicking on the links (wasting the travel firm's time), but users will perhaps avoid mentioning travel plans at all if the message triggers such a response every time.
And that would be a shame...
Would be keen to hear your thoughts on this.
Very interesting. We don't actively go out to look for people asking travel questions as we felt it might be a bit intrusive - since we are a brand tweeting. We do however encourage our followers to ask us questions and we have had some great feedback on that.
More annoying however is the spammy tweeting that people like bookings.com do - they tweet the same thing over and over again from multiple twitter accounts (i.e. @zurich_hotels, @malaga_hotels) using their hotel names and keywords - so uninteresting and clutters up the conversations!
I think that a targetted and relevant @ reply is fine. Obviously irrelevant tweets are just that - irrelevant
What is really irritating to me is when you suddenly get a list of 20 vacation rentals in succession from a single agency taking over your entire field of vision.
Less is more guys!
Really interesting. The strategy you outline is certainly the obvious one for travel companies to take and I can see the dangers in it getting spammy, especially if the replies are too pushy, or lacking in useful information.
Personally, if I got a tweet reply with some interesting information I would value it a lot and there is some potential for this kind of communication - if managed properly!
We're quite some way away from it getting overcrowded yet. I've actually posted several test tweets asking for holiday recommendations and not had any replies from strangers.
We're currently recommending that clients primarily use Twitter to -
a) monitor what is being said about them and their clients
b) using it as a hub for other channels i.e. promote content from blogs / newsletters / special offers etc.
c) manage brand and keyword presence.
Tamara:
It would be interesting to see what happened to your follower numbers if you did proactively engage with random users. Perhaps they would decide to follow you?
Jenny:
Would you consider advising clients to use an interuptive strategy if their product perhaps needed it?
Just recently I was approached on Twitter by one of our followers to give some recommendations as he wanted to take his girlfriend on a short break somewhere in Europe.
I'm not sure if I can post the link to the 'conversation' but here's the search query: #search?q=philsheard holidaypad
I guess he approached us because, unlike many travel firms using Twitter, Holiday Pad doesn't spew out reams of marketing messages.
Also, we stand to make absolutely no financial gain should our follower choose any of our recommendations.
Interesting. Google has established its intention to partner with Twitter as it recognises it, itself, is behind in the real-time conversation stakes. So look at Adwords as a model. It works because it rewards relevance and penalises (financially) irrelevant advertising as the interrupter pays for the interruption without a sale. So, if you're irrelevant you'll waste money.
If, as the scenario states Kev, spam increases, then one way of reducing this is to separate conversations from targeted interruptions and charge for those interruptions in a similar way to Adwords. This would change twitter works - but do you rememeber the big hoo-hah when Google Mail launched on the basis of targeted ads based on analysing email (conversation) content? GMail has over 100 million users, and they don't mind. Not suggesting that's the exact model - but generating revenue is always going to be a consideration for the network, and these guys are probably examining all the options right now.
We dump spammers immediately and usually #followfriday type Tweeters.
Not because we're arrogant but because of what you report - it's quickly becoming swamped by commercial people (and corporates like us - Timesonline Travel) who haven't necessarily worked out the nuances and etiquette of taking people's time without reward.
But as a random way of finding good people with great tales and information Twitter is, at present, unsurpassable. And you know that if it becomes too tedious, the next Google/Twitter version will be as good or better.
Interesting that you mention Viator doing the same as Guy Kawa"stalki" who does it with a robot program.
Luckily Twitter has an option to block certain users and I do not refrain from blocking them (among them a whole list of un twitterlike "hotel" related "twitterati" screaming their offers all over the place ) and I advise everybody to use the blocking option...
Guido
Steve:
can you explain the dumping of #followfriday type tweeters element of your comment?
Worth mentioning here, too, one of Twitter's most under-appreciated functions: BLOCK. As soon as I felt I had been spammed by someone selling me something tourism-related, I'd simply block them. And that would be forever, so anyone who felt they could use the channel to sell me something would have to think very carefully. One inappropriate intervention and they'd be unable to approach me in that way ever again.
Also, given the way information spreads virally on Twitter, you'd have always to err on the side of caution if you wanted to protect a reputation.
Right now, I'd say you're over-pessimistic about this. It's so easy to stop unwanted rubbish from ever entering your field of vision on Twitter. (I use block all the time, btw, to cull 'followers' who are nothing of the sort, in the true meaning of the word. You could say I'm somewhat of a BLOCK evangelist.)
I think that brands can be active in these spaces if they are useful...
Usefulness in this context is I guess providing an answer to the question first. NOT providing another answer to the same question when the person wanting answers already has 30 of them.
Can you tell from twitter how many answers that person has already been provided with? To some degree your twitter search should pick up responses too?
If you can.. then it's simple... if you're one of the first few... cool do it. If there's a list of @repies already... don't
Hi Kevin
We're taking everything on an individual basis at the moment - that's a mealymouthed way of saying, we're trying all sorts of things.
I don't think there's anything wrong in approaching people and offering information (and I have had lots of anecdotal evidence of it working...) - fundementally I think you need to be honest, transparent and interesting - my watchwords for all Twitter activity.
If Twitter User X had instead asked:
"Heading to Paris with the girlfriend. Any tour companies have something to sell me that would translate into a dreamy evening out?"
Then Viator's approach was fine, otherwise it's spam -- don't dress it up as anything else.
Totally agree with Steve Keenan re "Follow Fridays".
I manage the Twitter project at Viator, and it's worth adding a little perspective. The @reply Rod mentioned is only a part of what we do on Twitter. (Don't believe me, have a look: http://twitter.com/ViatorTravel).
My perspective is, if a travel company can add TRUE value, then fantastic. And I believe we do that because we're looking at dozens of Tweets and finding the ones where Viator really and truly can offer value. This is a manual and time-consuming task. Instead, were we (or anybody else for that matter) to turn this into a dynamic spam-anybody approach then absolutely it should be considered spam.
But so far, for the people we've contacted, we've had extremely positive feedback. And that is because they were, in fact, looking for something we could help them with. If the question is "Does anybody know of a romantic tour in Paris?" then yes, we have one possible answer for you. I don't even mind if we make a sale or not (let's be honest, if your business model depends on Twitter then you're in deep deep trouble).
For us, it's a way to help people find something that they might not know exists. They have a question, we offer one potential answer. It's all human moderated. There's no evil algorithm in the background.
Keep it honest, keep it relevant, and don't abuse the medium (e.g., don't abuse Twitter).
If you follow these simple rules, then you have nothing to worry about. And to this day, we've not had a single person complain. Just the opposite, in fact.
Scott McNeely
Viator.com
Apologies, the link to Viator's Twitter page is wrong in my post above, the correct one is http://twitter.com/ViatorTravel
I agree with Jason Till. I feel that the future of Twitter's survival will be targeted algorithm based direct messages. Imagine an automated version of Viator's Scott McNeely.
Although I feel that this will come off spammy, it will also give Twitter users relevant information at the time they are interested in it, which does have value. If this type of service is limited to 1 or 2 responses, it would not be too intrusive.
I am certain we will see some major business model changes in the next two months, and also an uproar from tweeters. I hope we just remember the value that Twitter is providing us all.
some travel companies are jumping on twitter as a look-alike to old fashioned direct response and display advertising of limited specials. The conversation aspect of twitter has merits - so then do social/sharing/travel sites like Whereivebeen.com
The travel twitter spam is overwhelming -
If travel companies took the approach of actually listening and adding value to the conversations where they could, there would be far less emphasis on the number of followers in the supposed ROI model for marketers.
While it is not Twitters problem - if Twitter turned off the public display of how many people were following someone then the gaming of the service might stop and success would not be measured in physical follower numbers.
I wrote this post on Telstra's experience in Twitter which basically showed how much could be achieved by listening to the conversation as opposed to spamming people: http://xebidy.com/2009/04/finally-a-great-twitter-case-study/
To be successful in Twitter you need to build trust and a relationship within your small community so that if you want to share a marketing message it is welcomed. Measuring the number of clicks your URL gets within a tool such as Tweetdeck is ideal. If you pump a message the whole time you will lose followers and no one will click on the URLs you share anyway.
Dan
Brilliant post Kevin. And thanks for the link, most appreciated.
I could not agree more with the post. For most of us who have watched Twitter evolve within the travel industry, the last few months have been both exciting and terrifying at the same time.
A huge leap in users, understanding about the service and new ideas.
But, at the same time, a huge leap in so called Twitter spam.
Some of that spam is just that, simply spam. Which, hopefully is easily ignored by most users.
However, there is also a lot of lazy spam out there from well-respected travel companies. Tweets and blasts promoting a strictly marketing message. Accounts that do nothing but use RSS to push out tweets (not to be a hypocrite, but we do this on @travel2dot0...but we look at it as a subscription method). Or, tweeters who follow thousands for the single purpose of receiving the pity follow.
Make no mistake, the idea of micro-blogging, mass IM or short updates...whatever you want to call...is here to stay. Whether or not Twitter holds on to that market is yet to be seen. In either case, short messages are another option in your marketing strategy.
Print, email, social, Twitter are all tools for our brands. Some are better at one-to-one marketing than others.
Hopefully, our counterparts behind the Twitter accounts understand the delicate balance and restraint needed when marketing via Twitter.
Users have asked us for valuable info by following us on Twitter. It is up to us to maintain that relationship and not abuse it.
If we do, they will find the 'block' button rather quickly.
- Troy
As a unique chance to beat Viator in a useless contest, we at isango! have obviously started earlier experimenting with the same idea... the Twitter log proves it (and the followers count, for whatever it matters... today 335 isango vs 195 Viator).
We had 20 RSS search alerts to target people subject to be interested in - shock, horror - booking with us. What amazing stats!
But we have stopped.
It's very cost inefficient if done manually, and we certainly don't want to automate it.
As Rod said at the conference, we're not convinced of Twitter's overall efficiency and scalability. It's fun (for some) and buzzy, but today it remains peanuts compared to other channels when you speak millions of newsletter subscribers.
And if you think that the platform is already overloaded with information today, it's not going to become more efficient later.
(Follow @isango to catch us).