Less Australians went online in April than March but mobile page views have continued to soar throughout the last 12 months, according to Nielsen's new 'Australian online landscape review'.

The report, which provides a snapshot of Australia's online habits for April 2012 compared to March, reveals that while the number of online Australians has dropped over 5% month-on-month to 15.3 million, views of mobile pages have skyrocketed by 182% to 221,192,586 in April this year.

Nielsen put the fall in this year's online audience down to the Easter and school holidays falling during the month of April.

More women spend time online than men, with 7.8 million online females reported in April, as opposed to 7.4 million online males.

But while there are less men online than women, men spend more time in the ether. The average man goes online 81 times a month, while a woman clicks in only 76 times. Furthermore, men spend more time on their PCs than women, with the average time per month for men on a PC at 82 hours, and women 73 hours.

Over fifties make up the largest online demographic, representing 32% of the total online audience.

Perhaps surprisingly, teenagers spend the least time online, with the two to 17 year old age group representing only 10% of Australia's total online audience.

Google remains the top online brand, recording 13,425 unique browsers in April this year, followed by Facebook which attracted 10,795. Ninemsn comes a close third, with 10,439, beating YouTube which scored 8,946.

Other top ten online brands in descending order include Microsoft, Yahoo!7, Wikipedia, Ebay, Apple and Blogger.

The 'Member Communities Category' - made up of various social media networks - saw a 12% increase in audience in the last 12 months. Facebook leads the category, having reached 10.8 million Australians in April, while Blogger is ranked second with an audience of 4.5 million.

Online Australians are beating their US counterparts when it comes to interacting with brands on Facebook, a new study from marketing software company ExactTarget has revealed. 

More than half of online consumers down under interact with brands via Facebook, while only 45% of American consumers do so, according to the 'Digital down under' research.

The results follow yesterday's reports that General Motors, the largest U.S. auto maker, plans to stop advertising on Facebook after the company's executives determined their paid ads had little impact on consumers' car purchases, according to The Wall Street Journal. 

GM is expected to continue to expand its use of marketing through Facebook's pages in which marketers can display content at no cost.

But while Facebook marketing might resonate with Australians, the research revealed that email marketing was still the most effective in connecting with consumers. 

Just over 95% of local online consumers subscribe to at least one email marketing program and more than half of those subscribers say they have made a purchase after receiving an emailed marketing message, according to the report.

This compares to 16% of Facebook consumers who have made a purchase after receiving a marketing message on Facebook.

The figures were lower for Twitter, with 6% of online consumers saying they interacted with brands on Twitter and 5% of those having made a purchase after receiving a marketing message.

However a whopping 55% of Australian consumers say they have followed a brand on Twitter to stay up-to-date with a company’s products, services or offerings, compared to 35% in the U.K.

Tim Kopp, ExactTarget’s chief marketing officer said:  “Australians are among the most actively engaged consumers on email, Facebook and Twitter that we’ve surveyed."

Facebook Inc. is expected to hold an initial public offering on Friday. 

Junk mail is a silver bullet when it comes to boosting in-store sales, a new report from the University of Sydney has revealed.

Despite its infamous reputation, mail catalogue advertising was shown to significantly increase the sales of featured products compared to advertising via in-store radio, according to findings soon to be published in the Journal of Marketing Communications.

Professor Charles Areni of the University’s discipline of marketing said that while 'No Junk Mail' signs abounded, the tactic was seriously effective.

"While people may say they hate junk mail, somebody out there is having long look at it and planning their purchases around what they see," he said.

The research varied the in-store radio advertising and mail circular advertising in 95 variety discount stores, measuring the sales results of products featured in the two advertising media. According to Areni, the junk mail caused a serious lift in sales whereas the in-store radio had little or no effect on sales.

“The results are surprising because the retailers would have spent millions of dollars on in-store radio, whereas junk mail doesn’t seem at all sophisticated in marketing,” said Areni.

The sales increases from junk mail ranged in magnitude from a 67% increase for disposable razors to a tenfold increase for sandwich toasters.

Areni, however, warned marketers should not give up on in-store radio: “Consumers are creatures of habit. In-store radio advertising is still relatively new in Australian variety discount stores, so it may simply take time for consumers to learn to listen for good deals while they shop.

“Junk mail is a very common form of advertising for this type of store, and as they arrive regularly at the beginning of the month, it could be that consumers may simply be used to looking for them,” he said.

The research concentrated on variety discount chains, which make up the largest retail growth category over the last 20 years.

Tourism South Australia has admitted paying celebrities including singe Shannon Noll to spruik Kangaroo Island on Twitter to their followers.

ABC’s MediaWatch last night revealed an email circulated by a publicist to clients in which it is claimed Tourism SA will pay up to $750 per tweet to well-followed celebs.

However, in the message it said the tweet was to sound “organic”, “injecting your own personality” into it and “they don’t want you to appear endorsed”.

Noll, currently starring in Dancing with the Stars, wrote: “All this moving and dancing training! I think I need a break! I heard Kangaroo Island is awesome. Thoughts anyone?”

TV presenter Sophie Falkiner and celebrity chef Matt Moran were also mentioned as covert endorsers in the story.

Tourism SA marketing manager David O’Loughlin told the programme the tactic is “standard” in the industry and said he did not consider it unethical as they do not “dictate the content of the tweet”.

The story has also sparked a number of pastiche’s on Twitter, with several sly posters using the name Kangaroo Island then demanding cash from Tourism SA.

Facebook is a social network built on photos, currently struggling to compete in the mobile space, while Instagram has developed the best photo sharing mobile platform to date.
Facebook needs Instagram's mobile expertise, and Instagram needs Facebook's social clout.

This acquisition is not just about Facebook having the best applications, or stopping anyone else having them - it's about creating a partnership with the Instagram founders that will see Facebook more able to navigate mobile and continue to dominate the social landscape for years to come.
The relationship between the two companies is symbiotic.

So just what did Facebook pay $1 billion for apart from an app that’s popular and fun?

Answer: data.
Data is the most valuable commodity in social and Facebook has an insatiable appetite for it.
Instagram will allow Facebook to gather huge amounts of location and interest data from its users, with Instagram providing a compelling case for Facebook Places where one hadn't previously existed.

This means that monetisation of Instagram isn’t a high priority for Facebook – it will happen, but for now Instagram’s data gathering scope is value enough.
From the user’s perspective, the first thing to expect from this new relationship is for Instagram, Facebook and Facebook for mobile to integrate a whole set of new features. A lot of people have been talking about the prospective addition of Instagram photo filters in Facebook, but filters are just a toy.
The real effects will be seen with the integration of Facebook Places, photo tagging and sharing functionality on Instagram, as well as Instagram's simple photo upload functionality on Facebook for mobile.

Instagram has been working with Facebook for weeks to get a deep integration into the social graph and Timeline, so in the very near future, when Instagrammers upload a picture, Timeline will create the action 'took a photo', similar to the 'read an article' action that we already see.
Inevitably, people have raised the prospect of a backlash about the deal, but the minority has already spat out their dummies, while the majority will continue to use Instagram unfazed. For the most part the app will appear the same, and will be getting useful new features, such as tagging. Instagram isn't going anywhere, and neither are its users.
It’s interesting to note that Facebook wasn’t the only company to make a play for Instagram.

Google and Yahoo both made unsuccessful attempts to buy the platform. It would be a mistake to think they will now abandon any efforts in this space. In the coming months, we can expect both Google+ and Twitter to respond with their own native photo filter applications, and certainly in the case of Google, a standalone photo app integrated with Google+.

The Facebook-Instagram deal will certainly change the landscape of social media, if it is allowed to go ahead by the Justice Department in the US that is: anti-trust legislators are reportedly investigating the deal for anti-competitive effects.

We don't anticipate the deal falling apart, but it certainly won't be without ripples.

One possible outcome is a new social-mobile bubble, where we will see the acquisition of a number of top rated apps by the big social networks for increasingly large sums of money - a free for all where the company with the most money to spend wins. We can expect Google+, Twitter and even Apple to be big players.
It hasn’t happened yet of course: one big acquisition does not a bubble make.

However, it will be the way Facebook’s rivals react that determines how big this bubble gets.
If they respond just by throwing money at the situation, making ill-advised, over-priced acquisitions of social applications, then yes, the bubble will grow and inevitably burst, with plenty of tears all round.

 

loved this great  read :
http://www.ogilvy.com/On-Our-Minds/Articles/the_4E_-are_in.aspx#.T211Q8BsHk9.mailto

Would you sign up to have cosmetic surgery at an unknown location overseas purely because it was much cheaper than doing it here in Australia? It might save you money, but aren't there way too many risks to consider? Especially if you're dealing with something as important as the way you look?

Why then, would you risk trusting your business, branding or marketing to an outsourced operator in another country? There are risks there too, and in many cases you’re dealing with the image of your business - something that represents you almost as much as your face.

    “ Would you sign up to have cosmetic surgery at an unknown location in Pakistan purely because it was much cheaper than doing it here in Australia? ”

In my business, I’ve recently found that clients are asking for more justification as to why they shouldn't outsource their design work to cheaper international contractors. Since the design process and the steps involved in creating works are not well known to people, the major discernible point of difference becomes price. As a freelance graphic designer, it’s become more important for me to help people understand what my price includes and why it’s a good investment.

Here are some of the factors you should be aware of when deciding between a cheap offshore supplier and a local Aussie supplier. I’ve used graphic design examples here as that’s what I do, but many of these issues could apply equally to other services.
Unknown risks

Outsourcing work internationally may be far cheaper than hiring a local, but there are a lot more risks and unknowns involved – especially if you’re not familiar with the technical aspects of what you’re hiring them for. There are some very talented and professional contractors involved with outsourcing sites, but finding them is a challenge, and normally involves taking a leap of faith at some point. Hiring someone who cuts corners means your project may turn out to be more expensive and time consuming than you originally thought. For example, I’ve sometimes been hired to fix or rework designs that have originally been sourced from international contractors, often because the working files weren’t supplied to the client or the designs were too staid for our local market.
Direct access to the supplier

Working with a local means you get to deal directly with the person responsible for your project, from beginning to end. (Mind you, with a growing number of businesses sub-contracting work out to international contractors and passing it off as their own, be sure to check that the work you’re paying for is being done by the person or people you hope it is).
Relevant experience and cultural reference

An Australian supplier will better understand the Australian market. A designer will understand current styles and trends in design and marketing, an accountant or bookkeeper is more likely to be up-to-date with our tax law, and so forth. They’ll also have a lot more relevant experience with Australian businesses and practices.
Better communication and relationships

Obviously there can be severe language barriers when dealing with international contractors. A local contractor will have a much easier time understanding your brief and won't lose or confuse anything in translation. Forming a long-term relationship with your supplier is also more feasible and rewarding if you’re dealing with a local – especially if you like doing business with people who share your values.
Real time responses

Working with a local supplier lets you work within your normal business hours and get real time responses – either face-to-face or via the communication channel of your choice.
Local protection

If you have any problems or disputes with a local supplier, there are many forms of protection and avenues to rectify situations available. Addressing these issues internationally is almost impossible.

In summary, the price of a service provider shouldn't be the only thing they are measured on. Talent, ability, innovation, professionalism, an ability to interpret and produce what you want and being easy and reliable to work with are equally important considerations.

What have your experiences with the international outsourcing phenomenon been like?

Please share them below.

Google Australia has been found guilty of misleading advertising by displaying ads for competitors when certain company names are typed into the search engine.

A Federal Court yesterday ruled the company is breaching the Trades Practices Act, following an appeal by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

ACCC chairman Rod Sims said: "Google's conduct involved the use by an advertiser of a competitors name as a keyword triggering an advertisement for the advertiser with a matching headline.

“As the Full Court said this was likely to mislead or deceive a consumer searching for

information on the competitor."

Last year a judge ruled Google was not breaking the law when consumers searched for Honda, Harvey World Travel, Alpha Dog Training and Just 4X4 Magazine and were presented with sponsored links to competitors, as it did not “make” the representations.

The ruling reads: “Google's search engine calls up and displays the response to the user's query. It is Google's technology which creates that which is displayed.”

It continued to say Google is not just passing on a statement by the advertiser, adding: “What is displayed in response to the user's search query is not the equivalent of Google saying here is a statement by an advertiser which is passed on for what it is worth."

Mr Sims added: “"This is an important outcome because it makes it clear that Google and other search engine providers which use similar technology to Google will be directly accountable for misleading or deceptive paid search results."

A spokesman for Google said the company was “disappointed” by the decision and is reviewing its options, adding it believes advertisers should be held accountable for their content.

He said: “We investigate complaints about violations of our policies and terms and conditions, and if we are notified of an ad violating our terms and conditions we will remove it.

 

Read more  http://www.bandt.com.au

www.pavingstoneaustralia.com.au

Email marketing
SEO
Social Media
Email  Marketing
Print  Marketing