This morning I received an email promotion from a well-known vendor of email and CRM services, offering a free white paper on high impact email marketing. I was intrigued – I’m always interested in what industry leaders are thinking when it comes to current email marketing best practises. So I clicked the link and, voila, I was immediately taken to a ‘register to download this whitepaper’ form. So far, pretty basic stuff right – get their interest, capture their information. Except that I originally joined this mailing list when registering to download some research using this very same form.

Read More…

Yesterday evening I attended the first ever CaseCamp (link to casecamp.org) held in Vancouver. To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect but was intrigued by the interactive format and the opportunity to get into discussion with a couple dozen really smart people in my field. So I hopped aboard the organization train and pushed information about the event out to as many people as I could think of in this industry.

The whole event was pulled together in under four weeks – that’s right – venue, marketing, wiki, 8 presenters and organizing team in under four weeks. Even more astounding – the event was organized completely by the attendees with very little time really required from the organizing team. Just under 60 people registered – and more than half of those participated. Pretty good results for a free event in a city that routinely gets around 40 attendees at events run by established marketing associations with a few hundred members.

On all fronts, the evening surpassed my expectations! What a refreshing breath of fresh air to hear honest, open, participatory discussion that doesn’t come across like a sales pitch for the company. Real marketers sharing real stories, real frustrations and real wins. I learned more last night than I have at the last dozen or so industry events I’ve attended – and the most important lessons? That the biggest gems can sometimes be found in the tiniest of campaigns; and that every marketer, whether independent or part of a larger agency designs a Ferrari that somehow ends up looking more like a mini-van by the time the campaign gets to market.

My only question – when is CaseCamp 2?

On the theme of major corporations missing the boat - I received an email promotion for a GM Canada contest this morning that is a terrific example. The email itself wasn’t bad once, I downloaded the images. But it was all downhill from there (see image inset).

The email encouraged me to"Feel Energized" by entering to win a Pontiac G5. Heck, I’m as happy to win a new car as the next guy (or gal) but when I clicked through to the contest site I was treated to three distinct flash movies before I even had the chance to enter:

• first, a "feel energized" presentation that encouraged me to use my mouse, keyboard and speakers to "feel energized" but doing those things had no effect on the movie, just distracted me from what was on my screen. I wasn’t energized - I was bored and frustrated.
• Next I had the opportunity to "build my G5". The process was cool once I figured out the somewhat obscure interface but I don’t know what it had to do with the contest - I don’t think that’s the G5 I’ll win. If it is, that wasn’t made clear.
• After I’d built my G5 I was taken to a photo gallery of G5 images that had nothing to do with the car I had just finished building.
• FINALLY I was finally taken to the contest entry page. The entry page required me to scroll down one full screen before I could begin find the actual form. And then, to add insult to injury, there was no opt-in anywhere. I was very courteously asked what language I’d prefer to receive further communications in, but not given the option to decline those communications. There was a line buried in the brief privacy statement at the bottom of the form stating that I could change my preferences simply by letting GM know - but no instructions on how I might do that and no, the phrase "let us know" doesn’t link to anything.

Frankly, if I hadn’t sniffed a great blog topic unfolding, I’d have abandoned the entry process at the first step. This is a perfect example of a great idea gone awry and a major brand skipping best practises. The five major mistakes:

• the HTML email is unreadable with images turned off
• the flash movie has an obscure interface that leaves you confused about what to do next
• You have to sit through three distinct flash presentations before you even make it to the entry form.
• On the entry form you’re actually presented with navigation options to leave the page before you see the form itself.
• The entry form doesn’t include a clear opt-in or permission flag. GM could easily improve the entire process (and response) by making the form easily and obviously accessible from the landing page of the microsite, allowing visitors to skip the advertising and get on with the business of entering. They should either tie "build your G5" into the entry process or make it a completely optional activity. And, above all else, they MUST improve the permission statements and opt-in / opt-out language on the entry form. It took me a full 10 minutes to get through the process and enter the contest (yes I timed it and yes, I do need to get out more!). Too long for busy people who should be working. Fortunately for me, I can call this kind of activity competitive (ahem) research.

On the upside, the copywriting on the text preview screen in Outlook was fantastic. It was the most energizing aspect of the entire campaign!

Click here to check out the contest microsite.

You’ve probably heard of the Poynter Institute’s now infamous Eyetrack studies that reveal how visitors to your website scan pages, what they focus on and what they miss. These are the studies that first revealed the issue of banner blindness in 1999. The last Eyetrack Study (Eyetrack III) was released last year and contained over 300 pages of in depth information of value to Internet marketers. Every time I revisit it, I glean some new tidbit of very useful information.

This week’s revelation comes courtesy of SiteProNews – smaller font sizes encourage visitors to read more and scan less. Yup – reducing the font size on your website might get your readers to focus on the content of your page rather than scanning the headlines. And, on the topic of headlines – underlined headings can discourage visitors from (gulp!) reading the paragraphs that follow.

I’m looking forward to the next update – Eyetrack 2007 due out early next year.

Related Links:
1. Poynter Article: EyeTrack ‘07: New Study Probes Online and Print
2. SiteProNews Article: See Your Website Through Your Visitors Eyes

1. Click Weekly: User-generated video an important marketing trend
2. Hotel Marketing: Restaurants Achieve Best Email Response Rates
3. Marketing Profs: The economics of social marketing
4. Adage Daily: Adweek’s 10 Best Web Performers of 2006