Brand Sites Are No Longer the Digital Thoroughbred
Posted by Matt Story | April 13, 2010
For the non-degenerate gamblers out there, the 136th Kentucky Derby will take place on May 1, 2010. Whether you follow the sport for financial reasons or the amazing (and over-the-top) outfits/hats, the Kentucky Derby is truly a spectacular sporting event.
However behind all the glitz and glamour of the event, there are difficult decisions concerning the horses that fall to injury throughout the season. With no other options, many owners are forced to have their horses euthanized.
While this is a regular occurrence in horse racing, are there similarities in the digital advertising world? Are brands running out of options with their work horse, the brand web site?
The digital revolution (cue dramatic music) has seen the brand site play the central role across all types of executions. It started as the last minute add of a URL tag to traditional marketing platforms that grew to driving me to your (hopefully) engaging branded oasis of product information and campaign extensions. We even saw the “build a micro-site for that” fad that brought us a number of one-off entertaining sites (Admit it. You played with the Subservient Chicken).
So why should brands consider retiring the beloved brand site? The answers to the following questions could make the decision necessary:
• Do I ever leave Facebook/Social Media?
Many brands have given in to this shift by replacing BrandX.com with Facebook.com/BrandX. Recognizing Facebook as the “King of Web”, brands have moved traffic to their fan page. The thinking is I am more likely to check out a brand within the comfy confines of FB (vs. clicking out to a new page) because I remain a click away from those all important status updates and constant mobile photo uploads (You know who you are).
• How much longer will I actually use web browsers?
With a quick peruse of the industry headlines, it appears the major players (Apple, Google, Microsoft) are planning for an eventual browser-less future. They may not agree on the approach but they are all positioning for a digital environment not limited to browsers as the only window to internet. Apple’s announcement of iAds is a great example of next generation advertising not designed to drive me to a site but instead engage me within the native media environment. Even Twitter acquiring mobile darling Tweetie (Isn’t it just fun to say?) hints at filling the gap for my tweeting when not using a browser.
• Can a non-entertainment brand win me in the content game?
It is a battle that every brand has had to consider entering. Some battles have been won but over time the war is usually lost for non-entertainment brands. With the proliferation (Buzz Word Bingo!) of content providers and distribution platforms, the lure of “exclusive” content on your branded site tends be a futile attempt at engaging me. Holding content hostage on a brand site in the current environment of digital consumption will hurt the brand before I ever feel the pain of missing out on content.
It will be difficult for some brands to say good bye to their “money maker”. However, they can look forward to utilizing “up and comers” whether they are in social media, applications, content-partnerships or entirely new opportunities. The chance to effectively engage me (and other consumers for that matter) will present itself through these new work horses in ways the brand site never could have imagined. With that in mind, now I’m going back to my Kentucky Derby research.
Related Posts
Leave a Comment
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
