Search Marketing "SLAYS" Seasonality in Travel?

This is the conclusion of an article in SearchEngineWatch.

Essentially, what they are saying is that since hoteliers are more savvy now with search marketing, they are able not only to fill up the rooms during low season - but also increase the rates as well. This leads to a "full" hotel year-round. That's sounds great but it ain't reality for most of the hotels...

Here are some tidbits:

"Based on user trends, these organizations manage their search marketing budget and online activities by quarters, monthly, and weekly initiatives. In search marketing, that data becomes even more of a science, breaking down user behavior into daily, even hourly trends when appropriate, in reaction to search ads."

This is the "Holy Grail" but it requires very savvy marketers with very good analytics systems and tight search marketing processes. The former is possible (especially in the mature US market), but the latter two are not so easy. Hotel companies tend to resist spending on infrastructure and systems. "All flash and no cash", as we say.

"So it shouldn't be any surprise that these types of organizations then turn around and start filling that unsold inventory as far in advance as possible, and shortening the gap that used to mean millions (lost) in potential revenue. At least by offering 'last minute' or off-season deals, they're gaining incremental sales in what would've resulted in a loss otherwise."

I just think that these "types of organization" are the exception and not the norm. We have not "SLAYED" seasonality - yet!

"As the occupancy rate shrinks, the gap between 'high season' rates and 'low season' rates gets increasingly smaller. As a result, high season rates continue to track upward with demand, and low season rates aren't as much of a good deal as they once were. That forces travelers to look for new and undiscovered destinations."

True, the off-season deals will not be as good anymore. But as they pointed out, this is destination specific, and not necessarily industry specific. It will also help the smaller hotels, lower star hotels, and the independent hotels in that market that are not as savvy. Additionally, pushing travelers to new and undiscovered destinations is a good thing for the whole industry.

"As search marketers, we're exploiting the trends of seasonality for additional traffic and conversions. The real kicker? As travel search marketers become more effective in paid search, social media, and related online marketing, the concept of seasonality is actually in danger of becoming less relevant."

I disagree with this. Seasonality is based on demand in the market. As they pointed out, if a destination gets expensive, people go elsewhere. The total travel demand is fixed, but where they go will determine seasonality within that destination.

Things like low cost carriers and more disposable income will increase the total travel demand as people want take more holidays and so on. This increase in travel will then affect seasonality but not a shift in travel pattern.

"On the other hand, the seasonality factor in travel may always be affected to a certain extent by the basics of supply and demand, as well as external forces including economic drivers, political unrest, and the unpredictable forces of Mother Nature."

Yeah.. like I just said above.

=========

Next week .... Posts from ITB - Berlin. Let's see what the Technology Hall has to offer.

Social Networking = Social, NOT Working

As a user, I like the social networks.

I have had a profile on Linked In for years and have been updating every now and then. I have made contacts with ex-colleagues and other industry professionals and they are in my "network". And I have used Linked In successfully to search for candidates - on advice from a Bezurk friend and also a Google recruiter. And once in a while I get a random message from someone or other on business opportunities and such. Linked In is useful for business professionals and it is there when you want to use it, but most of the time you just "forget about it".

Last year, with much virtual prodding, I joined Facebook. I came into the Princeton network and the Singapore network. People who were offline friends became online friends. Friends who were lost were now found. Acquaintances from years ago are now Facebook "friends". When you get on facebook, you get bombarded with news about your "friends" and what they are doing. It is truly social, unlike Linked In which is "professional".

So my point is when does "social networking" become "Social, NOT working". I see people "attacking" other people, commenting on their pages, and writing on each others' walls. I have "Texas Hold'em Poker" invites as well as invitations for "zombies", "vampires", "werewolves", and "slayers". I get things about "Friends for sale", "Are YOU interested?", and "find out what city you should live in". I see groups of university alumni group, ex-Open World employees group, and the "I know someone that should be hit by a bus" group. I won't even start on the applications....

There are hundreds of thousands of things to do (if not millions). But the thing is... many people are doing them during office hours! I don't mean your normal Dilbert cubicle farm employee, I mean senior people in major companies "poking", "superpoking", "writing", and "slaying" other people during the working day.

Don't they have work to do? Are they as swamped with duties as I am? All this socializing must come at a cost to productivity. Well, the news has been reporting so...

BBC: Facebook 'costs businesses dear'
INC.com: Pulling the Plug on Facebook
Sydney Herald: Facebook labelled a $5b waste of time
Timesonline.co.uk: Is social networking a waste of time?

To all my Facebook "friends" out there, I am not dissing you. I am just confounded. Don't "remove me from friends". If you do, I will have to add you to the list "I know someone who should be hit by a bus".

eMarketer Confirms That Mobile Users Don't Surf Internet

Finally, there is some concrete evidence to back up my post regarding PhocusWrong's prediction of "Mobile Travel: The Time Is Now".

eMarketer has published research data about how mobile users use their phone (besides talking on it - of course!).


Just look at the data.... 11% in the US, 16% in the UK, 7% in Canada....

So how many of these people will conduct a financial transaction on the teeny weeny little mobile screen? And input their credit cards, first name, last name, address, email address and phone number?

At best, they are just Googling for some quick info. Except in the UK, where they surf and download pornography for their mobile background and view triple X-rated clips over 3G. In Asia, the same is done but via freebie Bluetooth rather than expensive 3G.

Japan - I hear - is the exception. People buy stuff via their mobile ALL THE TIME. That's because the phone companies provide an interface and a payment gateway. You don't have to enter all the above information in frigging Kanji. They just click "confirm" (or whatever) and they are billed via their mobile operator.

I wonder if Amazon is suing the Japanese Telcos for the "one click purchase" patent infringement. Maybe that is why no one else in the US or UK is doing this... They are afraid of being sued by Amazon.

Hahahahah.. yeah right. That's it, that's the reason. Uh huh... Sure.

Consumers don't trust travel agents

Here's a story from TravelMole about why consumers do not trust Travel Agents:

"Consumers doubt agents provide good value"

A few interesting numbers:

1) Only a quarter of holidaymakers believe travel agents offer good value for money

2) 42% "actively disagreed" that agents offer the best deal

3) 46% who arranged their own holiday themselves preferred the DIY route because they wanted to get the best deal or believed it was cheaper to arrange it themselves

4) Around one in five (22%) thought that agents in general do not give honest, trustworthy advice, and only 38% believing that their advice is independent

5) Half of those who had booked a holiday abroad within the last 12 months had arranged everything themselves without using an agent

6) More than two-fifths used the internet to research before booking, compared to 29% who phone or visited a travel agency to do the same

7) Only 14% of those surveyed asked friends and family for holiday advice and just 13% read a guidebook

8) Of those who booked with travel agents, 18% didn't agree that the agent tried to sell them the most suitable holiday, but the others were mostly satisfied with their travel agents

These are stats from a survey of 3,000 adults by Holiday Which? So I would assume these are UK residents.

I find these some of these numbers kinda low.

- Only 22% don't trust travel agents' advice?
- Only 2/5 used the internet for research?
- Only 14% asked friends and family?

What I want to know is:

- What is the demographics of these respondents? I would say younger people tend to be more DIY and have the time and know-how to research on the web and get the deals, whereas older people prefer face-to-face contact.

- How many of these people are regular travelers? i.e. at least twice a year (whether on business or holiday) to a destination outside of - say - 200km radius. This would give an indication of their "savvyness". No 5 above seems to indicate that the more frequent travelers tend to DIY.

- How many have home computers and are active internet users? How many booked online?

- Was this survey done face-to-face (in front of a Thomas Cook and the like), or a mix of online and off-line surveys?

Similar research in the US market would be very interesting as well....

Web Wednesday Singapore - 2008-02-20 - "Show me the eMoney!"

As I mentioned in my post last week, we had the inaugural Web Wednesday Singapore here last Wednesday. It was the first one, so the three "(dis)organizers" - Kevin Tan, Andy Tu and I - just wanted to get a small group together to get some feedback and determine the viability of this kind of event. So we sent out personal invites that included something like this:



*****
Hi Everybody,

It has been a long time since we have had a gathering of like minded individuals for a night of drinks, catching up, and networking. The famous (or rather, infamous) Web Wednesday has now landed on our fair shores. The first one is next Wednesday (20th Feb) at 6-8pm at the J Bar at the M Hotel. Topic of discussion 'Show Me The e-Money!' by Joe Nguyen, Director of Global e-Commerce of Millennium & Copthorne Hotels.

This WILL NOT be:

1) a sales pitch
2) a long speech

It WILL be:

1) informal
2) interactive
3) alcoholic

Hope to see you guys there.
*****

It was a good showing of about 20 people ranging from publishers to advertisers to agencies.

We also try to start discussion by getting people to speak. So as you can see, the first one was me: "Show me the eMoney!".

So I just put together about 10 slides. Download PDF of them here.

But the main one is this one:

What this shows is that:

a) In all of 2007, 58.2% of our traffic is from Search Engines
b) 20.0% are from other site; many of which also derive traffic from Search Engines so indirectly we get that traffic from Search Engines.
c) Of the direct search engine traffic, 23% is from PPC and 77% is from natural search results (SEO)

Since our online revenue source pretty much mirrors that of our traffic sources (within a few percentage points), we are very dependent on search engines. I would say over 75% directly and indirectly of our revenue are attributable to search engines.

So there's the eMoney.... it's in the search engines. Here's an old article on how important Google is to a business and you will see what I mean.

Also, remember this slide below from my posting about "Online Travel Agents: Can we live without them?":


I still think that search engines actually contribute closer to 90% of my online revenue. I am still checking out the 21.8% of my traffic attributed to "Typed/Bookmarked". I do not believe we get that much loyal traffic from this segment. There must be some error in the system or tagging process. Something related to the 302 & 301 redirects...

As I have been saying, "the internet is infinitely measurable, but is (- hence -) never 100% correct!".

Anyhow, can't wait until the next Web Wednesday Singapore in March.

UPDATE: Web Wednesday Singapore Website is up.

Hacked iPhone 1.1.3 upgrade

Since Apple upgraded its firmware from 1.1.1 to 1.1.2 and then to 1.1.3 (last month), I have been resisting the temptation to do so on my own iPhone via hacks. Since January, the iPhone hacker community found ways to get iphones upgraded to 1.1.3, but this was really complicated and really risky and took lots of time. I figured I would wait.

Well the wait was worth it. I upgraded my phone last week from 1.1.1 to 1.1.3 in about 10 minutes.

The description is here, but you have to read it carefully. But essentially,

1) you need to have a Mac running on Leopard

2) download the 1.1.3 restore from Apple's site here. Download the iJailBreak software here.

3) Once it is downloaded, open iTunes, connect your iPhone, and do Option Click on Restore. This will let you select the 1.1.3 package. Do so.

4) Once your phone has been upgraded, turn off iTunes. Unzip the iJailbreak software and activate it. Follow the instructions and within minutes you have a jailbroken, activated iPhone running on 1.1.3.

Suuhhhweeeeet!

The ultimate interaction with the Brand

We had our first inaugural Web Wednesday Singapore gathering last night, and I had a short talk about "Show me the eMoney!". It was a good evening with lots of drinks and good company. More on this in another post.

But as usual when I have many drinks (but not enough to pass out), I tend to wake up very early and my mind races and I can't get back to sleep. Like last night, I came home around 2 am and woke up at 5am and my mind wanders and works around ideas and thoughts. So this morning, it was about "Interaction with the Brands".

The internet is an "interactive" medium. This has become an accepted lingo when referring to the online space. We mean that users interact with the websites that they go to; they "sit forward" rather than "lean back". They choose what they want to read and view. Essentially, the users actively push and pull information that they need as they want it.

From a site publisher and media agency standpoint, the revenue stream is from the advertising - which is measured by impressions, pageviews, clickthroughs and interaction with the creative. So for a campaign, many normally measure its effectiveness by the interaction by consumers with the campaign elements.

However, despite the measurability of the internet, it is still hard to quantify the interaction with the Brand i.e. the advertiser with products or services. I don't just mean driving traffic to their site. I mean the ultimate interaction between the advertiser and the consumer: a financial transaction to buy a product or service. This is what the advertiser really wants. Obviously not all products advertised online can be bought online.

But I guess that is the difference between online marketing and eCommerce.

And that is why I am in eCommerce...

PPC Rap

My colleague forwarded this to me today. It has been circulating around since early December of 2007.

You have to listen closely and listen a couple of times to get it all, but it's worth it. Have fun.

Google's Advice to Travel Agents

In an interview with Travel Trade, Google's travel industry director - Rob Torres - gives advice to travel agents about the online business.

1) Travel agents should have both online and offline presence, even if the online one is just brochureware with a phone number.

- And you work for who? Google? You should be telling them the virtue and ease of having a website with Google Checkout.

2) Be There 24/7:

"People today can shop for travel any time they want. They can wake up at three o'clock in the morning and shop for travel," Torres said. Like DUHH...

Torres suggests making search engine optimization a core part of online marketing.

Hallelujah!!! Amen to that, Brother!

"Showing up in natural search results costs companies nothing," he said. Yeah right. Proper SEO involves a good platform, good understanding of Google's algo, and lots and lots of time. Or you hire someone to do it. And when was the last time an SEO company said they would optimize you site for FREE? What he meant to say was that natural search results DON'T MAKE MONEY FOR GOOGLE.

3) Social Online Community

Having a social community on your Web site allows people to begin their trip research before contacting a travel agent, a trend that all travel professionals are by now aware of. Providing a setting for pre-booking research on your Web site keeps people engaged with your business.

"You know that people are going to other sites to do that [research travel] so if you provide it on your own site, you're actually keeping people and engaging people longer on your own site," Torres said.

I agree the OTAs needs to do that. But I am still wondering about a hotel groups own site. What can we do?

4) Video on Your Web Site

In addition to social networking, offering travel videos is another way of both engaging potential customers on your site and allowing them to do their own research.

He suggested that travel agents take a closer look at YouTube. The site, owned by Google, allows users to set up a channel whereby they can aggregate user-generated videos and decide which ones they want associated with their Web site. In this way, "you let your customers produce them [travel videos] and there's no cost to you."

Boost Google traffic even more! From my perspective - as I posted last year - the stuff on YouTube is mixed: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly and the WTF?

As a hotelier, I would prefer to do my own vids. And am working with TVtrip.com to do just that.

5) Take Advantage of the Long Tail

The long tail, in online marketing terms, refers to the thousands of small sites targeted at niche hobbies, interests and themes. And according to Torres, the long tail of Web sites do matter to online marketers.

"That's where their customers are and at the end of the day it might be more efficient and less expensive for them to be a part of the long tail than it is to be on large sites," Torres said.

That's really the value of OTAs to a hotel company like Millennium & Copthorne. We don't have the resources to go after all these niches and long tails. If an OTA can get that niche and speciality, then they should get the commission. Having said that, if a particular part of the long tail starts bringing in a good chunk of the business, then we - as a hotelier - should go after that chunk ourselves.....

TripAdvisor "doubles" conversion rates???

I ran across an article on Hotelmarketing.com that made me want to put TripAdvisor or other user generated review onto my millenniumhotels.com site.

Just kidding. But it was an interesting read nonetheless.

"Online shoppers who look at TripAdvisor reviews on the Hayes & Jarvis site book trips at double the rate of online shoppers who have not seen the TripAdvisor reviews. Hayes & Jarvis is the first tour operator to provide customers with reviews from TripAdvisor."

Details:

"All visitors to the hotel description pages see TripAdvisor ratings (one to five “owls” depending on user popularity) and 20% of them click on the “Read Reviews” button. Over the four months since launch, the visitors who read the reviews converted at twice the rate of those that didn’t."

Obviously I wouldn't put Tripadvisor on my own site, but this data is certainly compelling. However - this being the web - there are a number of questions that need to be addressed before we can trust these numbers:

1) People surf and search across sites all the time when they do research. For their site, people who start looking at user reviews are possibly further along in their buying cycle than those who have not looked at user reviews. So since they are more ready to purchase, the conversion rate would be higher. So how do we know if the conversion is higher because they are ready to purchase or because of the user reviews?

2) On average, people visit sites more than twice before they purchase and for OTAs this is even higher. So if a person visited 3 times before she purchased, the scenario could easily be that she was researching the first 2 times, and the 3rd time she is ready to buy. She checks the user reviews and then buys. This would give the user review visit twice the conversion rate.

3) On the same vein, are we talking Daily Unique Visitors, Weekly Unique Visitors, Monthly Unique Visitors, Lifetime Unique Visitors or are we just talk Visits? The data would be very compelling if these were Lifetime Unique Visitors rather than non-unique Visitors from each Visit.

In any case - if nothing else - for Hayes & Jarvis, the reviews will serve to make the site more "sticky" and also provide additional features that improve usability and relevancy.

So is there anything similar we can do for a hotel group? Something that would be non-destructive, easy to maintain, and trustworthy (from the consumers' POV).

PhocusWright: "Mobile Travel: The Time Is Now"

I ran across this little blurb on HospitalityNet.org.

Lead-in quote: "Industry pundits have been touting the future promise of mobile travel for years. In 2008, that future will become a reality."

yada yada yada....

"Mobile ad revenues are expected to skyrocket in the coming years—a phenomenon that many travelers will welcome."

Consumers will welcome ads on their mobile? Possible - if my mobile provider does not charge me an arm and a leg for data roaming charges, or roaming SMS text fees.***

"The PhoCusWright Travel 2.0 Consumer Technology Survey indicates that ..."

Ah hah! The soft sales pitch for the survey. (i.e. "soft" = no hyperlink to purchase the report). Or as we used to say it in the TV industry "Product Placement". I am cool with that.

Continuing: "... indicates that 30% of travelers would like to receive special offers during their trips via their mobile devices about local restaurants and activities."

Well we are talking about users receiving info and offers WHILE ON THEIR TRIP. Us hoteliers, airlines, and online travel agents (which makes up a huge chunk of the travel industry) would prefer users to get offers and info BEFORE THEY MAKE THEIR TRIP and while they are planning their trip.

So we are talking mobile, and fairly immediate, information (dare I call it "M-Info" since they are using "m-commerce"). Information that would influence their behavior in the short term and within their immediate locale. This would be a boon for the local businesses that thrive on the traveling public, so - yeah - I might find this useful as a traveler. My hotel F & B outlets might even find this very useful to boost their walk-in traffic. But as a direct travel supplier - whose bread and butter depends on how they get there and where they sleep - I don't see how this M-Info will help me increase my revenue.

And from an "e"-commerce perspective, I still don't see how this can be termed as "m-commerce". Are people actually booking online? Will people type in their credit card numbers and CVV2 codes into their M-devices (and their full name, address, and contact info)? All this on a tiny screen (or even on a huge, lovely, awesome iPhone screen)?

And this will be in 2008? Call me a skeptic or Luddite, but I don't think we are on the "tipping point" yet.

"This interest will grow as more appealing, media-rich offerings become available."

Ibid on the *** above.
===

Anyhow, I certainly do see the value in location-based marketing onto mobiles, but I see this less of a "travel" phenomenon than a platform for targeted marketing to local users (i.e. already residents of the city/town). The "travel" angle does not work for me. Just my 2 cents worth. Sorry, PhocusWrong.

"Big Story Alert - TripAdvisor and Expedia work together" ????

So I was trawling through Wiwih.com and saw the above title which was in the Blog feed. It linked to an article from Travolution.co.uk Blog. It had "++ Big Story Alert ++" so I had to click.

The by-line was "UK media giant Sky has persuaded Expedia and TripAdvisor to put into practice what many have seen as one of the most valuable ways to utilise two mar.."

My first thought was, like, "What's the big deal?"

Doesn't Expedia own TripAdvisor? Yes they certainly do. Check it here. Direct quote: "TripAdvisor and the sites comprising the TripAdvisor Media Network are operating companies of Expedia, Inc. (NASDAQ: EXPE)."

Travolution Blog: "The deal is the first time Expedia and TripAdvisor in the UK have worked together with a third party website." The operative phrase is "in the UK".

Folks, it ain't big news to have two operating units of the same company work together. It's sometimes called "Synergy" (oops.. the "S" word again).

It took InterActive Corp (IAC) long enough. I mean IAC bought Expedia in 2003 and then bought TripAdvisor in 2004. Then they lumped TripAdvisor along with a number of other purchases (Hotwire, Hotels.com; see longer shopping list here) and, in 2005, put the whole freaking monster into the stock market as Expedia Inc. (NASDAQ:EXPE).

Synergy be damned. Money first. I wish I was Barry Diller.

So anyway... three years later... the various "little" purchases start working together. And that's "Big News"?

Hmmm... Then again, may be it is big news.

Google vs "MicroHoo?"

The hostile bid for Yahoo! by Microsoft is probably THE topic of the month, if not the year, so far. Google has responded aggressively asking regulators to block the deal on grounds of anti-competition and anti-monopoly grounds. (see NY Times article here).

It would seem ironic that Google with over 60% of the search marketshare would be worried about Yahoo! (14%) and MSN (3.5%). From my old post:


Is Google really that paranoid about a "MicroHoo?"

My opinion is "Yes" and "No".

"No", Google is not worried about the search business. Google still owns the PPC and SEO game. Yahoo!'s Panama platform is a step up but still very far away from the usability of Adwords. Microsoft's ad platform is a perpetual work in progress to put it mildly. Even if MicroHoo? can pull together a competitive advertising platform, their organic search technology is so far behind Google - who has something like 100,000 servers sweeping the internet every day and indexing everything in sight with the ultimate purpose of giving the users as relevant results as possible. MicroHoo? will still have to try to compete in this arena but they will be perpetually behind as Google continues to pump resources and research into this area. The search engine game is over. GOOGLE WON. Seriously, Google is locating itself next to power stations in order to ensure it has enough resources to power its needs!!!! That's forward planning.

But here's the "Yes". Google wants to be the default platform for all users: Gmail, Google Desktop, iGoogle, Google Documents, Google Checkout, Google Maps, YouTube, and many, many other "betas". So whatever you do, you can find it at Google - espcially in the future where we will always be online. And a Microsoft-Yahoo! merger would be a formidable competitor in THAT arena. Microsoft is already controlling 90% of users's operating systems, and Yahoo!, while it is not great in Search, knows how to build online communities and services (Y! Finance, Y! Mail, Y! Messenger, Flickr, Y! Travel, HotJobs, del.icio.us, Y! News, Y! Groups, Yada.. Yada... Yada.)

And Microsoft and Yahoo! together? What's the fit? Well, Yahoo could get quick distribution into the desktops (though this would still be considered MS anti-trust, no?). Yahoo users would also get MICROSOFT OFFICE ONLINE EDITION - Yahoo! has not entered that productivity suite arena yet. Microsoft is still printing money so it can finance a lot of expansion and development (including above mentioned organic search technology) and may be a power station or two! So while these two seem to have culture clash issues, there do seem to be some sort of synergy. Oops.. the dreadful "S" world. Maybe "marriage of (in)convenience" is a better description.

In any case, Google vs MicroHoo? is not about Search - it is about the future of "Consumer Computing Services". (Hahaha!!! "Consumer Computing Services" ... I just made that up! Sounds about right though.) You read it here first!

'Facebook Fatigue' or rather Web 2.0 Fatigue...

The Register (UK) recently ran an article titled:

"'Facebook fatigue' kicks in as people tire of social networks"

This is what I have been saying about Facebook. There is no real business model that is worth USD 15 billion smackaroos. See Nov 20th, 2007 posting. Gartner was warning against the "Web 2.0 Hype" in December (my posting on this here).

The Reg: "The average length of time users spend on all of the top three sites is on the slide. Bebo, MySpace and Facebook all took double-digit percentage hits in the last months of 2007."

Yes people.. stop wasting your time on FaceBook during Q4. You have to work to make those earnings targets. Facebook and Myspace does not help with productivity.

Checkout these stats from ComScore (courtesy of Creative Capital):

So the total social network audience grew by about 5% YOY, but average time spent DECREASED by 23%.

The Reg: "That 'user engagement' is dropping off (page impression growth is merely slowing) should be of particular concern for the sales people struggling to turn these free services into profit-making businesses. In the age of tabbed browsing, how long people stick around is particularly key for 'interactive' sites, where people aren't attracted by useful information, but by time-wasting opportunities."

Dat's what I said.... 1) no business model, and 2) time waster

The only exception may be LinkedIn where I have been told to go to head hunt rather than use traditional methods. And it seems to be working! And I was told this by a Google staff and by a Bezurk.com staff (recently acquired by NewsCorp).

Anyway, do read the Register article. It's a fun read. The article ended by reminding readers to put things into perspective. Ford Motor Company is valued at less than USD 15 billion by Wall Street! Ford is worth less than FaceBook!

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!!!!! God does have a sense of humour.