<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Facebook flyers experiment - Pt. 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Facebook flyers experiment - Pt. 1</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-3504</link>
		<dc:creator>Facebook flyers experiment - Pt. 1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-3504</guid>
		<description>[...] (see the results here) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (see the results here) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blog Box &#187; Blog Archive &#187; &#8220;Girlfriend Needed&#8221; - Advertising on Facebook.com</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-2419</link>
		<dc:creator>Blog Box &#187; Blog Archive &#187; &#8220;Girlfriend Needed&#8221; - Advertising on Facebook.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-2419</guid>
		<description>[...] have been various people talking about the value of advertising on Facebook.com recently. Most coming to the conclusion that putting an ad up on Facebook will not get you many [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] have been various people talking about the value of advertising on Facebook.com recently. Most coming to the conclusion that putting an ad up on Facebook will not get you many [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Facebook flyers experiment - Pt. 1 &#171;</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1880</link>
		<dc:creator>Facebook flyers experiment - Pt. 1 &#171;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:47:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1880</guid>
		<description>[...] (see the results here) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (see the results here) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Progresswear</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1850</link>
		<dc:creator>Progresswear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1850</guid>
		<description>I'm always amazed when someone doesn't even begin to consider the value of design, of message before anything else.  I haven't seen the flyer in question and can't comment on it, but others did. 

I realize I'm in the den of marketing and technology folks here and must say what I've been telling media and account types for years: trust the creative, will ya?

Good design sells.  Bad design is pissing your money away.  Simple as that.  Learn to spot talent, be willing to pay designers who aren't living at home with their parents.  Learn the difference between good and bad design and writing. Learn to have an expert  eye for the 1% of advertising out there that's actually well done and emulate it. Small business doesn't have to mean poor design, but looking at the state of the industry hiring any kid with a mouse to do work best left to seasoned pros will get you nowhere.  You wouldn't buy Salvation Army furniture or take your clients to lunch at McDonalds, but the quality of your advertising often gives one that impression.

Now I'm off to design my first Facebook flyer for Progresswear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m always amazed when someone doesn&#8217;t even begin to consider the value of design, of message before anything else.  I haven&#8217;t seen the flyer in question and can&#8217;t comment on it, but others did. </p>
<p>I realize I&#8217;m in the den of marketing and technology folks here and must say what I&#8217;ve been telling media and account types for years: trust the creative, will ya?</p>
<p>Good design sells.  Bad design is pissing your money away.  Simple as that.  Learn to spot talent, be willing to pay designers who aren&#8217;t living at home with their parents.  Learn the difference between good and bad design and writing. Learn to have an expert  eye for the 1% of advertising out there that&#8217;s actually well done and emulate it. Small business doesn&#8217;t have to mean poor design, but looking at the state of the industry hiring any kid with a mouse to do work best left to seasoned pros will get you nowhere.  You wouldn&#8217;t buy Salvation Army furniture or take your clients to lunch at McDonalds, but the quality of your advertising often gives one that impression.</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m off to design my first Facebook flyer for Progresswear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shafqat</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1604</link>
		<dc:creator>Shafqat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 07:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1604</guid>
		<description>Bob makes a good point. If you can get that many impressions for less than a buck, this has to be a marketer's dream - even without clicks, you get your brand/meassage/image across. Still dont understand why FB is really pursuing this. I would have paid much more than a dollar to get 13000+ impressions, but now I know I dont have to. Is it just be or does supply and demand economics not hold up here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob makes a good point. If you can get that many impressions for less than a buck, this has to be a marketer&#8217;s dream - even without clicks, you get your brand/meassage/image across. Still dont understand why FB is really pursuing this. I would have paid much more than a dollar to get 13000+ impressions, but now I know I dont have to. Is it just be or does supply and demand economics not hold up here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nihaar</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1596</link>
		<dc:creator>nihaar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1596</guid>
		<description>Bob, 

Thats a very good question. Some of the reasons I can imagine as to why Facebook decided to release the Flyers Pro product are:

1. It is an attempt to tap into the growing cost-per-click advertising market and increase the amount of advertising on Facebook; it leads to people like us more likely to experiment with it.

2. Having a transparent market-driven model (by bidding on CPCs) provides a wealth of useful information not just to advertisers but to Facebook as well. Facebook can now monitor exactly how much advertisers value advertising on Facebook instead of setting static CPMs that are rather inefficient and do not reveal much about the advertising market on Facebook.

That said, I would be interested in how many people still use the Flyers Basic product when you can get so much more accountability of your marketing dollars with the Flyers Pro product.

Nihaar</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob, </p>
<p>Thats a very good question. Some of the reasons I can imagine as to why Facebook decided to release the Flyers Pro product are:</p>
<p>1. It is an attempt to tap into the growing cost-per-click advertising market and increase the amount of advertising on Facebook; it leads to people like us more likely to experiment with it.</p>
<p>2. Having a transparent market-driven model (by bidding on CPCs) provides a wealth of useful information not just to advertisers but to Facebook as well. Facebook can now monitor exactly how much advertisers value advertising on Facebook instead of setting static CPMs that are rather inefficient and do not reveal much about the advertising market on Facebook.</p>
<p>That said, I would be interested in how many people still use the Flyers Basic product when you can get so much more accountability of your marketing dollars with the Flyers Pro product.</p>
<p>Nihaar</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toufique</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1595</link>
		<dc:creator>Toufique</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1595</guid>
		<description>Since we're big fans of Google and frankly are in awe of how they've been able to change the world, I feel morally obligated to make a clarification here.  It would be preposterous for a fledgling start-up to claim that they're 'better' than Google!  And we're not going to be preposterous, not today at least :)

However, there is a difference between being 'better' and being 'better at.'  Facebook is 'better at' social networking than Google.  Del.ico.us is 'better at' social bookmarking than Google.  Our focus is not search, but user-generated recommendations, more commonly known as &lt;a href="http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/whatcomesaftergoogle/" rel="nofollow"&gt;'word of mouth.'&lt;/a&gt;  What Google is for search, our goal is to become that for &lt;a href="http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/09/12/search-vs-recommendations/" rel="nofollow"&gt;word of mouth&lt;/a&gt;.  This &lt;a href="http://blogs.business2.com/business2blog/2006/11/the_perfect_rec.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;article&lt;/a&gt; does a great job explaining the difference as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since we&#8217;re big fans of Google and frankly are in awe of how they&#8217;ve been able to change the world, I feel morally obligated to make a clarification here.  It would be preposterous for a fledgling start-up to claim that they&#8217;re &#8216;better&#8217; than Google!  And we&#8217;re not going to be preposterous, not today at least <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>However, there is a difference between being &#8216;better&#8217; and being &#8216;better at.&#8217;  Facebook is &#8216;better at&#8217; social networking than Google.  Del.ico.us is &#8216;better at&#8217; social bookmarking than Google.  Our focus is not search, but user-generated recommendations, more commonly known as <a href="http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/04/whatcomesaftergoogle/" rel="nofollow">&#8216;word of mouth.&#8217;</a>  What Google is for search, our goal is to become that for <a href="http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/09/12/search-vs-recommendations/" rel="nofollow">word of mouth</a>.  This <a href="http://blogs.business2.com/business2blog/2006/11/the_perfect_rec.html" rel="nofollow">article</a> does a great job explaining the difference as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nihaar</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1591</link>
		<dc:creator>nihaar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1591</guid>
		<description>Haggis, 

You are right. We actually did consider that as a possibility; that the flyer designed was not very attractive - from a messaging stand point. We are planning to run new campaigns using more "targeted"  flyers. As an example, we are designing a flyer for high school students that will send a message along the lines of  "Need help with that Homework? Try Youlicit to instantly find your answers". I am very interested to see how using better designed flyers will improve CTRs although I'm still skeptical about seeing drastically higher CTRs. We will post up our results as soon as we can.

Thanks, 

Nihaar</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haggis, </p>
<p>You are right. We actually did consider that as a possibility; that the flyer designed was not very attractive - from a messaging stand point. We are planning to run new campaigns using more &#8220;targeted&#8221;  flyers. As an example, we are designing a flyer for high school students that will send a message along the lines of  &#8220;Need help with that Homework? Try Youlicit to instantly find your answers&#8221;. I am very interested to see how using better designed flyers will improve CTRs although I&#8217;m still skeptical about seeing drastically higher CTRs. We will post up our results as soon as we can.</p>
<p>Thanks, </p>
<p>Nihaar</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Haggis</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1588</link>
		<dc:creator>Haggis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1588</guid>
		<description>You're making the assumption that the low click-through rate is attributed to Facebook users not wanting external information, or that they are too captivated by Facebook content to click through your banner.

Well, maybe.  

You should also consider that A)  your banner is really quite bland and that B)  you offer nothing beyond that which they can get with Google.

Now, maybe your services are 'better' than Google's, but your banner doesn't reflect it.

Try the test again with a flyer that actually contains a snappy sales message and you'll see a much higher CTR.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re making the assumption that the low click-through rate is attributed to Facebook users not wanting external information, or that they are too captivated by Facebook content to click through your banner.</p>
<p>Well, maybe.  </p>
<p>You should also consider that A)  your banner is really quite bland and that B)  you offer nothing beyond that which they can get with Google.</p>
<p>Now, maybe your services are &#8216;better&#8217; than Google&#8217;s, but your banner doesn&#8217;t reflect it.</p>
<p>Try the test again with a flyer that actually contains a snappy sales message and you&#8217;ll see a much higher CTR.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1584</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://youlicit.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/facebook-flyers-experiment-pt-2/#comment-1584</guid>
		<description>So, basically, you got 13,000+ impressions for $0.09??  Why would Facebook offer this CPC option when they used to make much more on their CPM rates?? Any insight would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Bob</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, basically, you got 13,000+ impressions for $0.09??  Why would Facebook offer this CPC option when they used to make much more on their CPM rates?? Any insight would be much appreciated.</p>
<p>Thanks,<br />
Bob</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
