« If you're looking for ways to persuade your boss to fund your measurement project.. . | Main | Hoping to clarify the Blog ROI discussion »

February 27, 2006


Kami Huyse

Katie; I can imagine your consternation, but ad equivalencies just don't seem to want to die. I think that the measures we have (like comments, trackbacks and links) now are measures of influence. There is quite a good debate going on amomng PR bloggers about Technorati's use of Authority. This word is a little overextended, but I like the idea of the influence of a blog.

On a technical note, how will you measure trackbacks and comments? Will you be able to count them on a blog like mine for instance, that uses Haloscan (a third party) to host these two items?

Finally, last year, Dane Carlson posted his, "What is Yoru Blog Worth" widget based on research by Tristan Lewis. This is the old ad equivalency again, but bloggers loved it since his widget generated a bit of code that you could post on your site.

You can check it out here

David Jones

Funny...I had this conversation with someone today at a very old, very traditional alcoholic beverage company. This is a company that's bleeding market share and spending lots of dough on TV ads. I'll keep plugging away, but it's nice to know you offer a service that I can name drop in the future.

Antony Mayfield

Well said, KD. It's when you stop trying to force old models (measurement, analysis, influence) onto this new space that you can begin to find new ways of understanding and engaging with it. Ad equivalency was a poor yardstick even in the old ways.

Trevor Godman

A couple of other thoughts ...

If you want to measure return on investment, then you first need to have a reliable measure of your investment. Conventional measures of marketing ROI generally use some kind of media cost as part of the starting point. And without a media currency for blog-type comment, that's difficult to achieve. I had a bit of a rant about something very similar here ... http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17496306&postID=113939099144992778

As well as being very old media, trying to measure direct return on investment is also fraught with problems. It's all very well measuring short term impact on sales (even if it's possible), but much more difficult to calculate the long-term contribution to brand equity.

My firm (Millward Brown http://www.millwardbrown.com/) is interested in both metrics around CGM and measuring the contribution of marketing to long term brand equity.

For the time being, neither quantifying the 'investment' nor measuring the true 'return' is easy.

John Wagner


Exactly what week was it that Dell's stock dropped 20 points, as you say?

Jarvis started his campaign against the company on June 21. The stock was at $40.45. His last post was July 11, and Dell was at $39.78.

The stock decline since then is almost certainly related to the company's disappointing Aug. 11 earnings announcement. Wall Street cares far more about earnings than it does about one blogger's poor service experience.

Over the past year, the price of Dell stock has declined about 25 percent but it never lost 20 points in one week.

In fact, Dell recently announced earnings growth, sales growth and market share growth. So one could make the point that the "Dell Hell" campaign had limited impact.

The comments to this entry are closed.