Blog

Addressable media updates

NextMark's Blog

Recommendations, updates, and thoughts from the NextMark executive team.

The Truth About Data Card Quality

April 11th, 2012

Last week, NextMark released its first data card quality report for the 2012 calendar year. This report continues to spark intense debate on the subject of data card quality, so let’s talk about it. Your comments would be much appreciated as we plan to refine the program for digital media publishers and planners.

Here’s how it all began…

When NextMark first launched its self-service data card publishing wizard at the turn of the new millennium, the new interface was met with mixed emotions. Some media managers and list owners were excited to finally have control over their promotional content, but others were not looking forward to the extra work. This created some gaps in regards to the attention that data cards received, subsequently creating issues for researchers who rely on data cards for purchase decisions and campaign planning.

To further encourage media managers to update their data cards and improve their content for researchers and campaign managers, NextMark introduced a new service on October 15, 2000 to integrate data cards on managers’ web sites. This created an even greater sense of ownership and brand awareness, but it was still not enough to address the issues of missing contact information, out-of-date counts, and other deficiencies.

On May 13, 2003, NextMark introduced its first data card quality report by electronically analyzing over 30,000 data cards (currently over 70,000). For each data card, a proprietary algorithm rates the quality of 13 key attributes. The primary objective of this initiative was to make sure that data cards were complete and accurate, and there was a little improvement.

On February 21, 2008, the data card quality report went public with a ranking of the top 50 managers. This resulted in a vanity check for companies that did not make the list, so a refined version was released on June 23, 2008 to categorize the top managers by number of data cards in their respective portfolios.

As word got out, some good things started to happen. Data card publishers began to pay close attention to the scores and the rankings, and many began to institute best practices for timely updates and list content management. Scores have been improving ever since, but something else also started to happen.

Data card quality rankings became a promotional opportunity for media managers and the scores were often taken out of context. The scoring algorithm, intended to measure completeness and update recency, grew in perception as a holistic measure for media management firms. Although unintended, this created some confusion.

To keep it simple, here’s the 3 point truth about data card quality.

Point 1:  data card quality is independent of list quality.

Point 2:  data card quality measures completeness and update recency.

Point 3:  data card quality does not measure content quality or accuracy.

You should not judge a media manager on data card quality alone, and there are more important factors to consider. For example, take a look at the following catalog list rate card and you will notice that it has a high ‘popularity index‘ in addition to a quality presentation of the media (postal list in this case) it represents. The counts are current through the end of the most recent month, the monthly and quarterly hotlines are provided, and the average age and income is provided for the audience. It is important to also be aware of the fact that some media managers may confirm an update without actually changing the counts. We are on to them and will flagging that accordingly to make sure our research users are aware of the difference.

What we learned in launching the RFC

April 9th, 2012

On February 17, 2012, we quietly launched an alternative to the much-maligned RFP called the Request for Consideration or RFC. The aim of the RFC is to provide a better way for buyers and sellers of digital media to connect and collaborate on media plans. The goal of the RFC is to eliminate the hassles of the RFP while encouraging more innovation.  We also launched two products support the new RFC method: (1) Media Magnet for Media Planners and (2) Compass for Publishers.

As with any new product launch, listening and adapting is the key to success. I never get anything right on the first try. Here’s what we’ve learned from agencies and publishers since introducing the RFC seven weeks ago.

What we learned from Agencies

As any sales rep will attest, it’s not easy getting a meeting with a media director. They are incredibly busy people with jammed calendars. Despite their busy schedules, many have asked us to come in to show them and their teams the RFC and Media Magnet. I think they’ve invited us mainly because they hate the RFP and are hungry for an alternative.

So far, 31 leading digital agencies have begun using Media Magnet and 6 more are being set up this week. I’m very pleased with the initial adoption by these great companies and grateful for working with them to improve the industry workflow.  I’m also happy to report that 100% of the agencies we’ve met with have signed on to try Media Magnet.

In initially introducing Media Magnet, we presented agencies with two key benefits: efficiency and innovation. We discovered a third unforeseen benefit through these initial discussions: organization of proposals. One of the challenges that agencies face is tracking and managing of all the proposals they get. We thought it was a given that the Media Magnet should be good at organizing information. We did not realize how much of an improvement it was over existing systems (emails, file servers, etc.). So, we are now including organization as a key benefit.

We learned that agencies want a lot of visibility and control. That’s not really a surprise. In our initial implementation, the list of publishers who received campaign alerts was not displayed. Media planners need to be able to see this list and to be able to control it.  They want to be able to add and remove publishers from the list.

We made a mistake in positioning Media Magnet as a standalone product that runs alongside other RFP tools. We assumed that every agency already had good RFP automation.  Since Media Magnet implements a fundamentally different process (the RFC), our initial approach was to say, “keep using whatever you are using today for RFPs and use Media Magnet to source additional ideas with minimal effort with the RFC.” But this has resulted in proposals coming in from two different directions. Media Planners want all their proposals from all sources in one place.  They don’t want to get proposals from RFPs one way and proposals from RFCs another way.

We also learned that Media Magnet should be extended to support the RFP process. As one media director put it, “You are selling the product short by limiting it to the RFC. You could easily add RFP capabilities.” Easier said than done, but the point was well-taken. It makes sense to be able to run RFPs and RFCs through a single interface.

We’re now in the process of building version 2.0 of Media Magnet, which incorporates the initial learnings: transparency and control of alerts and RFP automation. We’re already pretty far along with the development and it should be out by the end of this month (exact date TBD).

What we learned from Publishers

Publishers are also willing to try out the RFC.  Hundreds of publishers are already getting campaign alerts.  22 publishers have already signed up for “Pro” Compass accounts which gives them access to the Campaign Navigator and all the campaigns on the system. Another 27 have requested free trials and are in the process of getting set up.

Publishers are impressed by the clean and simple design of the product. However, to our dismay, they don’t care about technology.  As one ad sales rep put it, “The last thing I need is another system to log into.” What they care most about is qualified sales leads.  They like when they get an email saying, “Here’s a new campaign that matches your inventory. Check it out.”

We’ve no significant product enhancement requests from publishers. What they want is more sales leads. Publishers want us to ramp up the number of campaigns in the system.  There’s only been a trickle of campaigns so far because we are just starting to get agencies up and running on the system.  You can expect a significant increase in the coming weeks.  Until that trickle becomes a flow, publishers will continue to get free access to Compass.

Happy 12th birthday, NextMark!

March 28th, 2012

NextMark is 12 years old today. We opened our doors here in Hanover, NH on March 28, 2000. I’m thinking back on the good and bad times and want to share some of the highlights. Read the rest of this entry »

What is the RFC – Request for Consideration (vs. RFP)?

March 15th, 2012

The “RFC” or “Request for Consideration” is new method of media planning that was introduced by NextMark in February 2012. The RFC is an alternative/complement to the “RFP” or “Request for Proposal” process that has been traditionally used in the media buying/selling process.

The RFP and RFC are both methods for match-making among buyers and sellers. With the RFP, the buyer requests proposals from sellers. The RFC takes the opposite approach and turns the RFP process inside out. With the RFC, sellers request consideration from the buyer. In other words, the seller says “Here’s why I think this program deserves to be in your media plan. Will you please consider it?”

The motivation for the RFC is the universal dissatisfaction with the RFP. It seems nobody in digital media likes the RFP.

This inspiration for the RFC comes from interviews with buyers and sellers and an understanding of the dynamics of today’s digital media marketplace. The RFP works great in an environment where the options are limited, well-known and relatively static – like TV was in 1962. Fast forward 50 years to today’s digital media and you find the opposite: tens of thousands of options that change every day. It’s virtually impossible for a digital media buyer to keep up with the market and to make efficient and optimal decisions. The RFC addresses this problem by shifting the burden of proof from the buyer to the seller and gives the seller more responsibility in the match-making process.

RFC processThe RFC employs a patent-pending method and protocol between buyers and sellers. The RFC match-making algorithm utilizes NextMark’s proprietary index of the top digital media programs. As you see in the the attached flowchart, the process starts and ends with the media planner. The media planner makes all decisions regarding the media plan.  However, with the RFC the seller has the ability to discover the campaign and make a proposal without requiring the media planner to specifically request it. This opens up the process to both innovation and efficiency. In implementing the RFC, it’s important to include spam controls and identity protection to protect the time of the media planner. Otherwise, more time will be wasted than saved.

The RFC is currently implemented in two commercially available products by NextMark: (1) Media Magnet for media planners and (2) Compass for ad salespeople. Both products access the RFC platform via a web API. The RFC engine and API is available to third party software developers via licensing agreement.

A Strong Case for Direct Mail

March 14th, 2012

By Jim DiProspero, Vice President
Specialists Marketing Services, Inc.

With limited budgets of both time and money, where can I get the most bang for my advertising buck? Business owners continue to ask this question with an increasing volume of choices powered by the proliferation of social media sites and digital advertising opportunities.

Any company seeking new business today has a wide variety of media choices, from print, radio/TV, web sites and social media. Continuing research has shown that one of the most cost effective forms of getting new business is through good, consistent, targeted direct mail. Targeted direct mail lists have several advantages that make them unique. If you know your best customers, then you can use targeted direct mail to reach more of them and generate qualified new business leads. This applies to traditional brick and mortar stores, professionals, or even start up web sites.

Direct mail has the advantage of being perceived as the least intrusive and therefore the most welcome type of advertising. Several studies over the years confirm that most people prefer direct mail to other types of advertising. A recent article, “The Future is Now” in the industry magazine Deliver makes a strong case in support of this. Furthermore, there is less competition in the mail box (due to increasing diversification of marketing budgets online), and this may often lift response.

Unlike an e-mail or SMS text message which can be deleted by the push of a button there seems to be something about a direct mail piece, be it a postcard or a letter that conveys legitimacy on the part of the mailer and encourages the recipient to keep it.

There are a few tried and true techniques that should be employed, or at least tested, on your direct mail campaign

  1. Have a clear call to action. Give your direct mail recipients a compelling reason to contact you.
  2. Make an offer they can’t refuse. Give them something such as a discount or a two for one offer — something to entice them to try your product or service.
  3. Include an expiration date on the offer.

Probably the most important advantage of direct mail is the ability to precisely target audiences better then other forms of advertising. This is due to the lists and data that power its distribution to the right audience. No other channel (online or offline) has the wealth of acquisition data to drive lifetime value (LTV). Although many online advertising sources are real-time, they are often lacking in regards to the big picture of a customer’s purchase (or giving in the case of non-profits) behavior over time.

You may have the most relevant message, and your printing and graphics may be the best money can buy, but the single most important element in the success or failure of your marketing efforts is your selection of the most targeted and appropriate mailing list.

Targeting of your most concise audience is paramount. It many cases it is not enough to target by demographics like age and income you need to target by affinity or interest.

In response to the splintering of the homogenous mass market of yesterday, list marketers have been working at identifying the moving targets and shifting trends of the market place. There are literally hundreds of different lists available to target just about any niche market or affinity group you can think of.

Specialists Marketing Services recently launched a new mailing lists search portal for its Direct Data Division that provides visitors with easy access to rate cards and information about specialty lists and data.

Here you can find an audience for just about any product or service. Keep in mind, you want to reach as many qualified prospects as you can without wasting your message on those who are not interested or can’t purchase your product — targeted direct mail does just that.

If offline marketing with direct mail is not part of your overall mix, then you may be sacrificing LTV at the expense of impressions and clicks. An integrated approach is best.

Ditching the RFP

February 29th, 2012

In yesterday’s Digiday, Brian Morrissey wrote about “Ditching the RFP.” Agencies and publishers both universally dislike the RFP process. Finally, alternatives are actively being developed:

“A pair of efforts are underway to change the dreaded RFP process. NextMark  wants to turn it on its head, taking a page out of the Lending Tree model. The idea behind its “request for consideration” is rather than sending out RFPs to dozens of publishers, media planners would simply post the specifics of what the campaign (budget, campaign dates, target audience) to a site that would match it to likely publisher candidates. Another effort by video ad exchange Adap.tv wants to adapt the auction models that are popular in real-time bidding for reserved buys. And Google, ever the critic of waste in ad buying, is rolling out a “direct deals interface” in April that it promises will eliminate the need for a flurry of emails and phone calls between buyers and sellers.”

[See the full story on Digiday]

The RFC has only been available for 11 days, but already 22 agencies are actively testing the RFC as an alternative / complement to the RFP process.

FYI Free trials of NextMark’s implementation of the “Request for Consideration” or “RFC” are available. Choose from the  two applications that support the RFC:
1) Media Magnet for media planners/buyers at digital agencies
2) Compass for ad salespeople at digital publishers

 

RFP event in Boston draws a crowd

February 24th, 2012

Riding the momentum from their successful event in NYC, the Online Marketing Network brought their Inner Circle Series to Boston. More than 125 media buyers and sellers convened at the Marriott Copley last night to “Learn How to Earn RFP’s and Win Media Business.”

The agenda was similar to the one in NYC, but the discussion was fresh because of the new set of experts.

Panel 1 – Getting on the RFP List

The first panel’s topic was “Getting on the RFP List.” It was moderated by Susan Beard, National Account Manager at The Washington Post Digital. The panelists were:

Here are some of my notes from the session:

  • Melissa – “Most of my team would say they don’t have enough time at their desk to get their work done.”
  • Paula – “I’m at my desk until 9:30 a.m. then gone to 5:00 or 5:30 p.m. when I catch up and get more work done.”
  • Melissa – “I like it when a vendor sends me an Outlook invite after we’ve set up a meeting because it gets it right into my calendar and I won’t accidentally double-book it.”
  • Melissa – “Don’t waste time in a meeting going through roles and clients. Get that up front because it’s a waste of time away from your offer”
  • Paula – “We try to keep our vendor meetings to 30 minutes. Plan for 20.”
  • Paula – “Visuals are good. Powerpoint is good as long as it is well put-together.”
  • Paula – “I have no hope of responding to every email because otherwise I’d be working 50 hours per day.”
  • Melissa – “Expect a 30 minute meeting.  However, you can get a full hour if you bring us lunch.”
  • Melissa – “We try to meet with everyone.  However, expect at least a six week lead time when setting up a meeting because we are so backed up.”

After the panel, I asked Melissa about her perspective on meeting with vendors. She told me that she follows the advice that Sarah Fay gave her when she was working for her at Carat. Sarah advised that you never know where people will end up and you should always treat them with respect.  Plus, you have to meet new people to get new ideas. That’s great advice.  Should we say that Melissa follow the “Fay Doctrine” in dealing with vendors?

I can certainly attest to Melissa’s willingness to meet. She met with me back when our Media Magnet and the Digital Media Planning Systems were just a concept and we wanted to validate our assumptions. She and her team met with us and provided some great feedback that helped us to design better products.  And, because we bought lunch, we got the full hour!

Panel 2 – Getting on the Media Plan

The second panel, moderated by Anthony DeMaio, Director East Coast Advertising at The Washington Post Digital, was on the subject of “Getting on the Media Plan.” The Panelists were:

Some of my notes from this session:

  • Victor – “The difference maker in the RFP is the people that come in, whether or not I trust them, whether they have good ideas, and they are different. What wins is the people and the ideas.”
  • Andrew – “The number of RFPs depends on many factors.  Typically 5-10 per campaign.”
  • Victor – “I don’t want my agency wasting time summarizing proposals. Instead, I ask them to rip the most important page out the proposal and I read that.”
  • Victor – “I have some advice to vendors: no one is the best. No one is world class. No one is one of a kind. No ones is state of the art. So, don’t tell me that because it is a turn off.”
  • Andrew – “What I like about the RFC is it organizes information and has the potential for innovative and brilliant ideas.”
  • Kaileen – “We like to host a media day where we bring in all the vendors and give them each some time.”
  • Andrew – “It sticks with me when the vendor brings in useful market research.”
  • Kaileen – “Mobile remarketing is an example of something that is innovative.”
  • Victor – “Everything has to be multi-channel. No channel is a silo anymore.”
  • Kaileen – “If you follow up, you need to add value every time you do. For example, updated information or a better price.”
  • Victor – “Effectiveness is what wins. I’m okay with trying something new and failing.”

 

NextMark’s “Magnets” raise $7,225 to cure breast cancer

February 16th, 2012

NextMark was among 50+ bowling teams from the media industry who gathered last night at Lucky Strikes Lanes to raise $425,000 to cure breast cancer. The money was raised as part of the 3rd annual NYC Bowling for Breastcancer.org event.

Besides having a fun night at the lanes, the NextMark “Magnets” team raised $7,225 thanks to the fundraising efforts of Kristin Ciccone, Denise Groover, Grace Meiners, Kurt Gantrish, Amanda Arcone, Dewi Paulino, Tom Polley, Jeff Stearns, and Joe Pych. Great job!

Introducing the RFC (an alternative to the RFP)

February 15th, 2012

RFP vs. RFC

The Request for Proposal or RFP has been described by digital media veterans as the “bane of their existence.” That’s because the RFP process is fundamentally broken in the dynamic context of digital media.

Introducing a new alternative to the RFP: the “Request for Consideration” or “RFC.”

While others have failed to solve the RFP problem by automating it, the RFC takes an entirely new approach by literally turning the RFP inside out. As one media director observed, “it’s like LendingTree for media planners.” Others have called the RFC “a game changer” that could “eliminate the need for the RFP.”

You can learn more about the RFC, how it differs from the RFP, and how it works by attending a free 25-minute webinar on Tuesday, February 21st.

>>> Sessions customized for digital media planners:

>>> Sessions customized for digital ad salespeople:

If you can’t make one of these sessions, but want to learn about the RFC, please let us know and we’ll arrange a webinar for you.

Life of a Media Buyer

February 15th, 2012

Life of a Media Buyer

I love this “what they think” collage on media buyers recently posted on Digiday. So true!  Especially, the “what I actually do” part – slaving away in Excel.