Five brands that are killing it on Twitter

June 25th, 2015 by Charley Downey


25.06.15

Twitter is the ‘big dog’ within the constantly evolving social media world, and these days you can search for almost any celeb or business and find their Twitter account. Whether it be breaking news, opinions on a TV show or social competitions, Twitter is the first point of call for many consumers- so it’s incredibly important for brands to stay active and ‘ahead of the game’.

In saying that, tweets about ‘niche’ products or services will, understandably, require more thought and ‘thinking-outside-of-the-box’. No one likes sales tweet, after sales tweet, after sale – you get where I’m going with this.

So I’ve decided to compile a list of brands that, I think, are killing it on Twitter.

5) Charmin

Who said toilet roll was boring? With a following of 67k and engagement on every tweet, Charmin take toilet roll to another level.

Charmin Tweet     Charmin Tweet

 

4) Tesco

The likes of leeks, sausages and other groceries could prove difficult to tweet about- but Tesco goes about this problem perfectly.

 

Katy Perry- Tesco Tweet

Tesco Tweet
Tesco Tweet

 

3) Delta

Who said aeroplanes don’t have a sense of humour?

 

Delta Tweet

Delta Tweet

 

2) Arby’s

This American sandwich chain knows how to throw humour into their posts while also spreading brand and product awareness.

Arby's Tweet Arby's Tweet Arby's Milkshake Tweet

 

1) Taco Bell

And finally, my winner. With 1.57m followers you know these guys are doing something right. Oh and their followers have become so loyal over the years, a three word tweet can rake up 4.3k favourites. The screenshots say it all…

 

Taco Bell Tweet Burrito- Taco Bell Tweet Taco Bell Tweet  Bell is life

 

At Boutique we strongly believe a little humour gets you a long way. Where it’s possible to instil this into social, it goes along way to people engaging with your brand. The above examples all portray how important social engagement is to a business, whether it be loo roll or tacos!

If you want media advice, we’ve an office full of comms champions bursting with ideas. Drop in for a cuppa and we’ll happily share our thoughts!

Happy Tweeting.

Your Referral Traffic Is Lying To You

June 22nd, 2015 by Jamie Richards


22.06.15

Earlier in the year I noticed that the conversion rate from a client’s referral traffic was dropping YOY. We pride ourselves on creating targeted and loveable content and getting it out in the right places so this came as a surprise. Is our content getting less relevant? Are we reaching out to the wrong places? Surely not…!

So I had a dig around in the referral sources and sorted it by sessions. Here’s what I saw:

Referral Sources

 

The top three traffic sources are registering over 4k sessions alone, making up close to ¼ of all referral traffic, despite not registering any goal conversions. That’s a big skew in our data.

 

What are semalt and adnxs?

Put simply, they’re referral spam. Google Analytics works by transferring information via HTTP requests directly to Google Analytics servers. What these sites do is send fake HTTP requests making it appear as if you’ve had traffic when really they haven’t accessed your site at all. What happens then is people like you and I dig around in analytics data and wonder what semalt is, check out their site and hey presto they’ve just got a hit!

The problem is these sites – and there are loads of them, look for social buttons in your referral traffic – skew data significantly. Your overall traffic is inflated, conversion deflated and bounce rates and time on site taking a hit either way.

 

The Solution

To help stop this traffic being reported in Analytics and skewing your data there’s a button in the admin panel called ‘bot filtering’ that should ignore most of these sites, and to block semalt specifically you can request directly that the crawler stops accessing your site here.

 

Chip Shop Awards

June 8th, 2015 by Sarah Gough


08.06.15

The Drum describes the ethos of its annual Chip Shop Awards as “creativity without limits”. The result? “Ideas that surprise, shock, offend and delight.” That’s why we’re sponsoring it this year.

As an agency, we strive for disruption. We’re not ‘yes men’, we relish a challenge, and we want to put our creative minds to good use to produce client results with a difference (after all, that’s why we were hired). We believe in greatness, not bigness and as our MD Simon says, we always aim for a client roster that makes us “puff our chests out”. The Chip Shops reflect a similar – though more extreme – version of our proposition: bold intentions and actions.

As you may or may not know, some of the Chip Shop entries can be extremely shocking – some historical entries even resulting in the threat of legal action. With my PR hat on, and with a tendency to plan for the worst and hope for the best, this naturally sits slightly uncomfortably with me, but I find myself willing to loosen the reins in the name of creativity. It is this quality that differentiates a good comms team from a great comms team because creativity reigns supreme – it’s the key to longevity and it’s the backbone to breakthrough brands.

In just over a week we will be crowning the winners of this year’s Chip Shop Awards and, by the looks of the shortlist, it’s going to be a wild one. We’re looking forward to meeting the weird and wonderful brains behind the entries.

I’ll leave you with a quote from Simon who, incidentally, bloody loves a bit of controversy…

“As an agency we promise to think intelligently, do things differently and push boundaries, so the notoriously risqué Chip Shop Awards were a pretty obvious collaboration for us. We enjoy working relationships with many creative agencies, so we know what they’re capable of and are excited to see the entries!”

I don’t mind if you call me a flea

June 2nd, 2015 by Simon Bollon


Elephant- 02.06.15

Dominic Mills wrote an interesting article on Mediatel this week about the Elephant and the Flea. Essentially, Networks are big elephants and us independents are the fleas buzzing around picking up the loose ends. Not quite his point… but something like that.

He makes a valid point about ‘most’ agencies being behemoths, and of course for so long media agencies have targeted growth because it becomes self-fulfilling to fund deals and compete with other agencies on price.

However, there are plenty that have a point of difference, such as us of course – agencies focused on clients who need a better strategy, and on working with specific clients. Not necessarily niche as referenced in Dominic’s articles, but clients who need something more than networks deliver. Greatness, not bigness is a focus of our agency and I know that we couldn’t do what we do brilliantly if we were big.

With a pyramid structure you get the value of having a high volume of execs. They come with their strengths; a hunger, desire, passion to learn, grow and climb the ladder and an innate ability to drink until clients give in and go to bed! Sadly, it also means an agency lacking in experience, knowledge and general acumen of having been there and done that (Jesus, I sound old!). Depends on what you need from an agency I suppose, but the pyramid is certainly more prevalent in bigger (and bigger means network) agencies.

A point made indirectly in the article is that big agencies are brilliant….for the right client, and I agree. Selecting an agency shouldn’t always be about size. In business where they can control strategy internally, have the knowledge base to best understand how media fits within the mix and have a need to commoditise media with an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of group deals. Big marketing teams work well with big agencies where relationships are less critical and churn is high. All very different to what you get in a smaller independent agency.

The odd thing in the article is the focus on entrepreneurialism and the specific reference to Communication partners. Dominic references agencies that are set up to be different and have a more service focused approach. That and entrepreneurialism are two very different things. I have never been one for bashing other agencies (a common trait in media agencies!) but whilst Communication Partners certainly has some gravitas through its people, it appears to have been set up with clients in mind – a pre identified new business channel – none of which would make me think it’s ‘entrepreneurial’. Further, it’s an agency offering that might have looked out of date in 2005? No TV buying and no digital. Old school media buying in limited channels. Entrepreneurial? I suppose you might get away with that in in London!

All the same, another independent is a good sign for the industry and I absolutely hope they thrive.

Further, Dominic references 7 Stars, PHD North and Carat Manchester as ‘entrepreneurial’ businesses. I would argue they can use the word but they won’t deliver the sentiment. It’s OK to use the term but when you have pots to piss in via group deals and a network with a stake in your business, I would really argue how independent, free thinking and entrepreneurial they really are. Again, I’m not saying they’re not brilliant – Carat are the biggest billing agency in the North. PHD have a great reputation in the regions and 7 Stars are, for me, THE agency of the moment.

However, the reason they are sucking big accounts from northern network agencies is not because they are ‘entrepreneurial’ but because they act better. They focus on strategy not commoditisation, and not group deals but the right deal. That’s not niche, it’s just better. Clients are changing, they want strategy first, and they care less for buying cheap and more for buying better. That is demonstrated by 7 Stars winning Iceland, Victoria Plumb and more.

So ‘entrepreneurialism’ is not relevant in this debate. Let’s be honest, it’s a bit of a wanky term now anyway. Having said that, if by using the term we mean finding a gap and filling it, thinking beyond the boundaries of expectation and rattling the norms, then there are plenty of entrepreneurial businesses and I’d be happy to be in that bracket. Not so sure Communication Partners were worthy of the high value exposure they received though? I could think of plenty more agencies that better fit the entrepreneurial title and are worthy of being called a flea.