Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Nick Garner & James Daly - Google+ & Unibet - ionSearch 2012


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Nick Garner & James Daly - Google+ & Unibet - ionSearch 2012

  1. 1. ionSearch 2012Nick Garner – Head of SearchJames Daly – Online PR ExecutiveUnibet
  2. 2. Google+ &
  3. 3. Some Context on GoogleGoogle is out to monetise their properties as much as possible.Sooner or later they want to make a direct or indirect profit from G+
  4. 4. Nick Garner James Daly Nick Garner: Head of search UnibetWorking across all Unibets 24 international markets, specialisingin- SEO- SMO (Social media optimisation)- Refer a Friend- PPC- Online Public Relations (as a means of influencing SEO andsocial media)
  5. 5. Signals are changing OLD: Look for algo NEW: Look for human weakness and exploit patterns in ranking sites, them socially engineer them.
  6. 6. Information / Commercial Internet Mix in commercial $15.62 per person per year in the UK* with information as much as possible Rank (fairly) Rank (fairly) easy hard
  7. 7. Googles share isnt growing much
  8. 8. But its revenues are > ads engine?
  9. 9. UK: 18% Year on Year growth$15.62 per person per quarter in the UK**assumes 60m UK population
  10. 10. The business case for Google+ We believe Google+ is an emergent force in social media and Unibet wants to be a leading part of this within iGaming. Give a dog a bone
  11. 11. The business case for Google+ > +1You take what you can get from Google... Give a dog a bone
  12. 12. What G+ promises More: • Reach in search • Direct traffic • Engagement
  13. 13. Whats the case for SEO?
  14. 14. He says we will get traffic (kind of) "When someone recommends something, thats a pretty good indicator of quality," said Matt Cutts, Googlesprinciple engineer for search. "We are strongly looking at using this in our rankings."
  15. 15. Core idea: Circles > Reach
  16. 16. G+: Connecting the network
  17. 17. Not Logged in
  18. 18. Logged in > because I follow Unibet...
  19. 19. Excellent PPT on SEO & G+ Search for "Google plus SEO" on Slideshare
  20. 20. +1s anyone? Its the quality of the network, mate.
  21. 21. Content / outreach (kind of) like G+Add another one in...
  22. 22. What resource is needed?The right person: That might suit• Journalist / blog owner me! o Has their own blog/site (ideally) o Not too hung up on being newsey o A bit technical• Personality o Creative o Funny! o Inquisitive o Persuasive
  23. 23. Introducing....James Our G+ guy! o o Southampton Solent BA (Hons) Journalism o Independent On Sunday o Sevenoaks Chronicle o o Five Year Plan fanzine o Stand up
  24. 24. Unibet G+ page
  25. 25. Circles
  26. 26. Not perfect
  27. 27. White space
  28. 28. Whats goodManchester City
  29. 29. Whats good contManchester City exclusive photos
  30. 30. Unibet Open photos
  31. 31. Hangouts
  32. 32. Hangouts cont...Unibet - Hangouts with betting experts Paolo Bandini Iain Macintosh Ed Malyon
  33. 33. Ed Malyon Unibet Hangout
  34. 34. Types of engagement metrics1. Volume of consumer-created buzz for a brand based on number of posts 26. Ratings2. Amount of buzz based on number of impressions 27. Social bookmarks3. Shift in buzz over time 28. Subscriptions (RSS, podcasts, video series)4. Buzz by time of day/daypart 29. Pageviews (for blogs, microsites, etc)5. Seasonality of buzz 30. Effective CPM based on spend per impressions received6. Competitive buzz 31. Change in search engine rankings for the site linked to through social media7. Buzz by category/topic 32. Change in search engine share of voice for all social sites promoting the brand8. Buzz by social channel (forums, social networks, blogs, Twitter, etc.) 33. Increase in searches due to social activity9. Buzz by stage in purchase funnel (e.g., researching vs. completing transaction vs. post- 34. Percentage of buzz containing links purchase) 35. Links ranked by influence of publishers10. Asset popularity (e.g., if several videos are available to embed, which is used more) 36. Percentage of buzz containing multimedia (images, video, audio)11. Mainstream media mentions 37. Share of voice on social sites when running earned and paid media in same environment12. Fans 38. Influence of consumers reached13. Followers 39. Influence of publishers reached (e.g., blogs)14. Friends 40. Influence of brands participating in social channels15. Growth rate of fans, followers, and friends 41. Demographics of target audience engaged with social channels16. Rate of virality/pass-along 42. Demographics of audience reached through social media17. Change in virality rates over time 43. Social media habits/interests of target audience18. Second-degree reach (connections to fans, followers, and friends exposed – by people or impressions) 44. Geography of participating consumers19. Embeds/Installs 45. Sentiment by volume of posts20. Downloads 46. Sentiment by volume of impressions21. Uploads 47. Shift in sentiment before, during, and after social marketing programs22. User-initiated views (e.g., for videos) 48. Languages spoken by participating consumers23. Ratio of embeds or favoriting to views 49. Time spent with distributed content24. Likes/favorites 50. Time spent on site through social media referrals25. Comments 51. Method of content discovery (search, pass-along, discovery engines, etc) 52. Clicks
  35. 35. Types of engagement metrics53. Percentage of traffic generated from earned media 77. Savings generated by enabling customers to connect with each other54. View-throughs 78. Impact on first contact resolution (FCR)55. Number of interactions 79. Customer satisfaction56. Interaction/engagement rate 80. Volume of customer feedback generated57. Frequency of social interactions per consumer 81. Research & development time saved based on feedback from social media58. Percentage of videos viewed 82. Suggestions implemented from social feedback59. Polls taken/votes received 83. Costs saved from not spending on traditional research60. Brand association 84. Impact on online sales61. Purchase consideration 85. Impact on offline sales62. Number of user-generated submissions received 86. Discount redemption rate63. Exposures of virtual gifts 87. Impact on other offline behavior (e.g., TV tune-in)64. Number of virtual gifts given 88. Leads generated65. Relative popularity of content 89. Products sampled66. Tags added 90. Visits to store locator pages67. Attributes of tags (e.g., how well they match the brand’s perception of itself) 91. Conversion change due to user ratings, reviews
  36. 36. Followers April 2012 1,543 3,472 145 40% 28% xx% 438 760 126 February 1,105 2,712 19 2012
  37. 37. FB reach
  38. 38. Facebook v G+
  39. 39. engagement
  40. 40. sources
  41. 41. referrals
  42. 42. This is how we get traffic..
  43. 43. Virgin
  44. 44. What next for Villas-Boas?
  45. 45. Blogs
  46. 46. More memes
  47. 47. Nicks final thoughts for Google+ • Whether or not its Google+ , having a good ‘conversation’ with users is just what an enlightened brand does today • For me its an either way bet • G+ Win: we are early adopters and out pace competitors • G+ Fail: we use this content and engagement on other social channels anyway
  48. 48. James conclusion slide• Scope for lots of fun • Videos look good • Gifs look great • Photos look just lovely • Hangouts offer something different• Not effective for us...yet • Slow start • Techie-centric • White space • More people needed!