ImaginativePRO Blog

10 SURPRISING SOCIAL MEDIA STATISTICS THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU RETHINK YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA STRATEGY

Social Media is changing faster than ever, as if that wasn't something everyone already knew!

If you're managing social media for your business, it might be useful to know about some of the most surprising social media statistics this year. Here are ten that might make you rethink the way you're approaching social media.

1. The fastest growing demographic on Twitter is the 55-64 year age bracket.

• This demographic has grown 79% since 2012.
• The 45-54 year age bracket is the fastest growing demographic on both Facebook and Google+.
• For Facebook, this group has jumped 46%.
• For Google+, 56%.

Those are impressive numbers against the prevailing idea that social media is 'just for teenagers.' It certainly points to the importance of having a solid social media strategy if these age brackets fit into your target demographic.

Rethink it: Keep older users in mind when using social media, particularly on these three platforms. Our age makes a difference to our taste and interests, so if you're focusing on younger users with the content you post, you could be missing an important demographic.

2. 189 million of Facebook's users are 'mobile only'

Not only does Facebook have millions of users who don't access it from a desktop or laptop, but mobile use generates 30% of Facebook's ad revenue as well. This is a 7% increase from the end of 2012 already.

Click Image To Enlarge

Rethink it: There are probably more users accessing Facebook from mobile devices than you thought. It's worth considering how your content displays on mobile devices and smaller screens before posting it, particularly if your target market is full of mobile users. Of course, make sure to make sharing to social media from mobile more straight forward.

3. YouTube reaches more U.S. adults aged 18-34 than any cable network

Did you think TV was the best way to reach the masses? Well if you're after 18-34 year olds in the U.S., you'll have more luck reaching them through YouTube. Of course, one video won't necessarily reach more viewers than a cable network could, but utilizing a platform with such a wide user base makes a lot of sense.

Rethink it: If you've been putting off adding video to your strategy, now's the time to give it a go. You could start small with simple five minutes videos explaining what your company does or introducing your team.

4. Every second 2 new members join LinkedIn

LinkedIn, the social network for professionals, continues to grow every second. From groups to blogs to job listings, this platform is a rich source of information and conversation for professionals who want to connect to others in their industry.

Rethink it: LinkedIn is definitely worth paying attention to. In particular, this is a place where you may want to focus more on new users. Making your group or community a great source of information and a newbie-friendly space can help you to make the most out of the growing userbase.

Make sure you share consistently to your LinkedIn company page and profile by for example scheduling your posts.

Click Image To Enlarge

5. Social Media has overtaken porn as the #1 activity on the web

We all knew social media was popular, but this popular? Apparently it's the most common thing we do online. So next time you find yourself watching Kitten vs. Watermelon videos on Facebook, you can at least console yourself with the fact that the majority of people online right now are doing something similar.

6. LinkedIn has a lower percentage of active users than Pinterest, Google+, Twitter and Facebook

Although LinkedIn is gathering new users at a fast rate, the number of active users is lower than most of the biggest social networks around. So more people are signing up, but they're not participating. This means you're probably not going to have as good a response with participatory content on LinkedIn, like contests or polls, as you might on Facebook or Twitter.

Rethink it: If you're hoping to get people involved, think about which platforms are best for that. Looking at the latest Twitter statistics and Facebook statistics, these platforms might be a better place for your contest or survey, while passive content like blog posts or slide decks might be just right for your LinkedIn audience.

Social media carries more weight than ever. It's clearly not a fad, or a phase. It continues to grow as a habit, and new platforms continue to appear and develop.

Rethink it: Putting time and effort into your social media strategy clearly makes sense in light of these stats. If you weren't already serious about social media, you might want to give it a bit more of your time now.

7. 93% of marketers use social media for business

Only 7% of marketers say they don't use social media for their business. That means there are lots of people out there getting involved and managing a social media strategy. It's becoming more common to include social media as part of an overall marketing budget or strategy, as opposed to when it was the outlier that no one wanted to spend time or money on.

Rethink it: If you're struggling to make your strategy work, or you just want some advice, you don't have to go it alone. If 93% of marketers are using social media for business, you can probably find someone to give you a hand. Plus, there are lots of blogs, videos and slide decks around to help you out. Be sure to find the right social media management tool for you to stay on top of everything.

8. 25% of smartphone owners ages 18-44 say they can't recall the last time their smartphone wasn't next to them

Click Image To Enlarge

It's pretty clear that mobile is a growing space that we need to pay attention to. And we've all heard the cliché of smartphone owners who don't want to let go of their phones, even for five minutes. Well, apparently that's not too far from the truth. If 25% of people aged 18-44 can't remember not having their phone with them, there are probably very few times when they're not connected to the web in some way.

Rethink it: While you can reach people almost anytime, since they have their smartphones with them almost always, this also means you can interrupt pretty much any part of their lives. Don't forget that having a phone in your pocket all the time isn't the same as being available all the time.

9. Even though 62% of marketers blog or plan to blog in 2013, only 9% of US marketing companies employ a full-time blogger

Blogging is clearly a big focus for marketers who want to take advantage of social media and content marketing. This is great, because blogging for your business has lots of advantages: you can control your company blog, you can set the tone and use it to market your product, share company news or provide interesting information for your customers.With only 9% of marketing companies hiring bloggers full-time, however, the pressure to produce high-quality content consistently will be a lot higher.

What a lot of people struggle here is how to write the best headlines for your articles, when the best time is to publish posts and lots of other blogging questions that arise when people are starting out.

(Of course, not all marketers work at marketing companies, but the stats are still interesting--how many companies in any industry can afford to hire--or already have--a full-time blogger?)

Rethink it: If you don't have (or can't afford) a full-time blogger for your business, be aware that having a content strategy that requires consistently posting on your blog will mean a lot of work for your marketing team and/or other team members in your company to keep up that volume. This can work, it's just important to realize how big a task it is to run with a full-time content strategy without a full-time content creator.

10. 25% of Facebook users don't bother with privacy settings

We've seen a lot of news about social media companies and privacy. Facebook itself has been in the news several times over privacy issues, Instagram users recently got in a kerfuffle over changing their terms of service, and the recent NSA news has seen people become more conscious of their privacy online.

But despite these high-profile cases of security-conscious users pushing back against social networks and web services, Velocity Digital reports that 25% of Facebook users don't even look at their privacy settings.

Click Image To Enlarge

Rethink it: Assuming that all of your customers are thinking along the same lines could be a big mistake. Especially if you're basing that on what you've heard or read in the tech news. Remember that your customers might have very different priorities than what you expect.

Your social media strategy really comes down to what your goals are, and who your target customers are, but it doesn't hurt to pay attention to the trends happening across the web. Hopefully these stats will help you to identify trends that will affect your strategy and adjust accordingly.

Courtesy of an article dated November 22, 2013 appearing in Huffington Post

NEW HEAD OF GOOGLE+ SAYS, "REPORTS OF OUR DEATH HAVE BEEN GREATLY EXAGGERATED" AND "GOOGLE COMMITTED TO BUILDING A PRODUCT THAT PEOPLE ABSOLUTELY LOVE"

It was Google’s answer to Facebook. Three years ago, the California giant launched the new social network - Google+. The aim:  to counter the rising tide of internet users flocking to Facebook.

That hasn't happened, not matter how hard the search giant has tried. Now the question is: Is Google is giving up the ghost on its grand plan?

Speculation has been fueled by the resignation of longtime Google+ boss Vic Gundotra two months ago, but the company says it has no plans to abandon the service.

Dave Besbris is taking over from Vic Gundotra as Vice-President of Google+ (Click Image To Enlarge)

David Besbris, a Google engineering vice president who took over Google+ when Gundotra left, said.

"Reports of our death have been greatly exaggerated."

In his first public comments to a reporter since Gundotra's departure, Besbris said in an emailed statement to the San Jose Mercury News that Google+ had "hundreds of millions of users (and growing)."

He vowed:

"We're committed to building a product that people absolutely love. So no, Google isn't giving up on Google+."

Experts say Google+ has served a valuable purpose for the giant Internet company as the centerpiece of a broader strategy to create a unified profile for each person who uses any of Google's online products -- the better to deliver more targeted advertising, which is highly profitable for Google.

Google did not make Besbris or Bradley Horowitz, a longtime Google+ vice president, available for a formal interview.

Vic Gundotra, former VP of Google+, resigned to pursue other interests (Click Image To Enlarge)

And Gundotra hasn't publicly explained his departure from the company, though by all accounts he left on good terms.  

In his statement, relayed through a spokesperson, Besbris described Google+ as both a social network and "a social fabric on and off Google."

The latter refered to Google's efforts to make Google+ serve as the identity that people use for signing into other Google services and independent apps, as well as to comment on YouTube and endorse or share things they find on other websites while signed in to Google+.

Google said this helped the company provide a "more consistent experience" to users -- for example, by anticipating that you want directions on Google Maps for the restaurant you found with Google's search engine, then letting you review the meal on Google+.

Analysts say it also allowed the company to compile a more complete picture of a user's habits or interests, by recognizing them on a variety of services and devices, which in turn helps Google show more relevant advertising.

The biggest part of Google's $60bn in annual revenue comes from ads tied to Internet searches, but it's increasingly selling other types of online ads, too.

Forrester Research analyst Nate Elliott told the Mercury News said. 

"The more they can combine what they know about people, across all different channels, the better understanding they have for each user, and that's vital to their ad sales efforts."

When combined, he claimed that Google's broad range of apps and services may provide more information than Facebook can glean from its users' likes and updates.

Besbris actually led the engineering team that built Google+. He posts regularly on the social network, sharing photos he's taken of flowers and other things that catch his eye.

In his statement, he offered few specifics about his goals for the service, but said.  

"I want to build on our momentum, build a product that people absolutely love, and make Google+ the place for meaningful conversations online."

But how many people are having those conversations?

The Mercury News said.

“It's never come close to Facebook's popularity as a digital town square.” 

Chris Abraham, a digital marketing consultant, said

"Once in a while, I meet people who are like, 'Google+ is my life.' But I think it's mostly a small group."

All a far cry from this sort of reporting three years ago:

“ Google+, the challenger to Facebook launched at then end of June, is growing at an astonishing 625,000 users per day and could could reach 400 million users by the end of 2012, it was reported yesterday.  That would still be only half the 800 million users Facebook claims worldwide. But it is still a remarkable turnaround for a network which was not getting rave reviews a month ago. "

The "400 million" prediction came from Paul Allen, Ancestry.com founder and "unofficial statistician" for Google+.

Writing on his blog then - which appeared on Google - Allen said Google+ was adding new users "at a very rapid pace."

Allen said that if new signups continue at just 625k daily then Google+ will reach 100 million users on 25 Feb and 200 million users on 3 August.  

Allen said.  

“At that rate they will finish 2012 with 293 million users.”

Today Abraham said he gets little response when he shares items on Google+. He believes many users simply repost items they've already put on Facebook or other sites.

Google hasn't released any user statistics since October, when it said 540 million people worldwide used Google+ credentials to sign in or post comments on any Google service in the previous month.

A smaller group of 300 million visited "the stream" of Google+ itself, but even that figure counts people who merely click the red Google+ symbol that can appear on-screen while using other Google services.  It’s not impressive beside the 1.28 billion monthly active users who use Facebook worldwide.

Nielsen researchers estimate that 27.4 million U.S. residents visited the Google+ website in April 2014.  By comparison, Nielsen estimates for Facebook there were four times that: 117.8 million U.S. users on the website and 116.7 million on the mobile app, also with some overlap.

Click Image To Enlarge

Google+ always faced an uphill battle against the more established Facebook, said Charlene Li, a social media expert and founder of research firm Altimeter Group.

"If your friends are not on Google+, and likely they're not, you're going to go on Facebook."

The number of Google+ active users is actually roughly the same size as those on another service -- Twitter, according to both Nielsen and Forrester Research.

And while there's no direct advertising on Google+, said Forrester's Elliott, companies that maintain a page on Google+ have more online interactions with their followers than they do on Twitter.

He said.  

"Google+ is actually a useful social site for companies to promote their brands, but even Google doesn't seem to understand the value of Google+ as a standalone property."

Altimeter's Li said the future may lie elsewhere. While Google already operates a variety of apps and services, she noted that Facebook is building and buying a stable of stand-alone apps that let people directly share pictures, news items and messages with their friends -- all without visiting Facebook's main site.

She said.  

"The idea of a destination site, like the Google+ page, is getting kind of antiquated."

Facebook says it has 1.28 billion monthly active users around the world. By comparison, Google+ says 540 million use Google+ credentials for a variety of services, with 300 million users "in the stream." Twitter reports 255 million active users.

At the time of Gundotra's resignation, TechCrunch said Google was gutting the division. According to the website

"Google+ isn't dead dead. They aren't dead bolting the doors and turning off the servers."

Now the service will reportedly continue to serve as a "backbone" of other Google services.

Tech crunch said,

“Whatever happens to the service, don't expect it to become anything more than it is at the moment."

According to the report, Google is gutting its Google+ team by moving its Hangouts (the video chatting portion of Google+) and Photos (image storage and editing) teams to the Android division.

The legal website Findlaw, reporting on Google+ asked;

“Were you Google+'s only user? Tell us about it on Facebook, since, ya know, that's where everyone else is.”

COMMENTARY:    Without a doubt there are millions of people who use and value the social network, which turned three on June 28.  There’s a vibrant community of photographers; there are Hangout on Air true believers; there are marketers who swear it’s the best social network for engaging with customers.

And despite Walking Dead speculation driven by the unexpected resignation of longtime Google+ boss Vic Gundotra in April, two Google executives insisted this week that it won’t go out with a whimper.

But the fact is that by one important measure — referral traffic — Google+ is unusually quiet. Some might say eerily so.

As one Google+ commenter put it,

“We seem to know that G+ is no ghost town. It is more of a social referral graveyard.”

It’s a bit of a puzzle, really. Why don’t more people click through from Google+ to publishers’ content? It’s an important question, one for which we don’t have a definitive answer.

Perhaps Google+ users are content with the content on the network and don’t see the need to exit. Perhaps it’s more of a platform for conversation than consumption of news and entertainment links. Perhaps there aren’t enough loyal Google+ users spending enough time on the network to move the needle.

Whatever the reasons, publishers are apt to start pulling away from Google+ at some point if there isn’t improvement. There are other motives, of course, for publishers to use the network: engagement with fans, perceived search benefits and the ease of live video production with Hangouts on Air. But referral traffic is still publishers’ top metric for measuring success. Without it in significant numbers, it’s harder to make the case that social efforts are paying off.

Facebook Is The Referral King

Any discussion on social referral traffic has to start with Facebook. Publishing strategies — and click-bait empires — rise and fall depending on the vagaries of the Facebook News Feed algorithm. The dominant social network generates more referral views than all the rest combined.

It’s easy to find the evidence. Social sharing platform provider Shareaholic, in its most recent comparison of social media referral traffic, reported that Facebook’s share to the 300,000 websites in its network was 21.25% in the first quarter.  By comparison, Google+ checked in with a meager 0.08%. Pinterest was at 7.1% and Twitter 1.14%. According to Shareaholic, Google+ referral traffic is growing, but very slowly.

Click Image To Enlarge

Shareaholic’s data is supported wherever you turn. Marketing Land asked online marketing and audience development firm Define Media Group to pull year-to-date numbers from a sample of its clients, major U.S. news and entertainment publishers, and found similar results.

Only two of 22 sites generated more than 1% of their social referrals from Google+, a beauty site (1.68%, compared to 45.77% from Facebook and 12.98% from Twitter), and a tech news site (1.16%, compared to 60.2% from Facebook and 16.3% from Twitter). The overwhelming majority of the rest showed Google+ referral traffic of less than half a percent.

Mobile results are even worse. Mobile platform provider Onswipe reported this month that Google+’s referral traffic on its network was 0.046%, 10 times less than social bookmarking site Fark. Facebook’s share was 71.3%; Twitter’s 16.1%.

Bottom Line: Google+ Referrals Suck

When you look at individual stories, it’s the same story. Ars Technica reviews editor Ron Amadeo explained on a Google+ post in April:

“Everyone who writes stuff on the internet has access to some kind of extremely-detailed traffic analytics system. It’s very easy for them to see post traffic from G+, Facebook, and Twitter, and the bottom line is, referrals from Google+ suck.”

Amadeo, who wrote the post to explain why tech journalists have been using the ghost-town metaphor, shared social referral figures from two Ars Technica posts:

• On the Heartbleed bug: Twitter 49%, Facebook 41%, Google+ 5%
• On video game sales data: Facebook 63%, Twitter 28%, StumbleUpon 7%, Google+ 1%.

He wrote.

“StumbleUpon drove x7 times more traffic than Google+, GHOST TOWN.”

There are exceptions. Publishers with audiences that dovetail with Google+’s audience — Android Authority, for instance — do draw significant traffic from the network. Most articles on Android Authority show a Google+ advantage on share buttons similar to this:

Publishers Are Not Dumping Google+

Given the anemic results, you might expect publishers to start backing away from Google+, perhaps by dumping the +1 buttons that sit next to Facebook Like and Twitter buttons on article pages like the examples above. But there’s no evidence of that.

Adam Sherk, vice president of SEO and social media at Define Media Group, said.  

“The overall trend is still to add the Google+ button.  It’s become much more of a standard in the last couple of years, and we haven’t seen many publishers take it away yet. There is still a lot of questioning as to whether or not it is worthwhile. But in the end most do it, primarily in the hopes of gaining some search-related benefits.”

Those search benefits are difficult to quantify, because Google has reversed itself and doesn’t use social signals from Google+ (or other social networks) to boost search rankings. And some of the perceived advantages of being active on the network also evaporated this week, when Google announced it was dropping display of Google+ profile pictures and Circle counts in search results.

So the signals are definitely mixed as Google+ enters its third year. On one hand you have CEO Larry Page’s insisting that Google is still bullish about Google+ —

“We’re super excited about it.”

On the other, Page said that the same day Google+ got only a passing mention during the Google I/O keynote address, making it clear that Google is less excited about promoting it as a full-service social network.

It could be a temporary lull to give Google+’s new management time to reset strategy. Publishers no doubt will be interested in what those next steps will be.

SOME CLOSING COMMENTS

I think you have to characterize Google+ as a "last bastion" for users who are wholly "anti-Facebook or anti-Twitter."   Loyal users tend to spend the majority of their time on Google+ or viewing content on some of Google+-integrated sites like YouTube and Gmail and Google+ Communities and Hangouts.  We engage with brands within Google+.  If we like a brand's post, we give it a 1+ or post a comment about their posting.  We never leave Google+.  So essentially we are "home bodies."

If these social media research firms are tracking only website referrals, they are missing the bigger picture and true mission of Google -- to create traffic for their Google+-integrated sites, and, of course, the Google search engine, where the actual referrals outside the Google+ ecosystem occur.   We also provide a lot of marketing research, which Google uses to improve their targeting based on our interests and online behavioral preferences for their Google search engine.   THAT in a nutshell is what these researchers are missing.   As a consequence, you are getting pitiful referral numbers, because they don't have the complete picture or data, for that matter.

It is also true that there are a lot of inactive accounts on Google+, but the same can be said for Facebook (estimated at 5% of total registered users) and Twitter.    

Having said the above, I am perfectly happy being a Google+ member, because I have found my niche.  My followers are techies, social media hounds and gurus, and digital content providers and lovers like myself.  I now spend the vast majority of my social media time on Google+ and just don't feel like moving or being on another social media site.   I don't have to go outside the Google ecosystem for content.  That content comes to me   So there.

Courtesy of an article dated June 23, 2014 appearing in The Drum, an article dated April 24, 2014 appearing in TechCrunch, and an article dated June 27, 2014 appearing in Marketing Land      

EYEVERIFY'S EYE SCANNING SECURITY SOFTWARE USES YOUR EYES INSTEAD OF A PASSWORD, COULD BE THE ONLY PASSWORD YOU WILL EVER NEED

With biometric security like EyeVerify's Eyeprint scanner, you may never need to remember another password again.

EyeVerify is a start-up company in the Kansas City Startup Village, working on innovative biometric security for smartphones and tablets. The software scans the eyes of the user in place of a password, and if it's not the right person, the software won't open.

 

Biometric security means a physical characteristic is used to identify the right person. This could be something like a fingerprint, handprint, voice analysis, or eye scan.

Chris Barnett, the EVP of Sales and Marketing for EyeVerify, said.

"It actually is equal to a 50-character complicated password - which obviously no human would ever use or remember."

Barnett said many security issues come from people using simple passwords that are easy to guess, or forgetting longer passwords and constantly needing to reset.

EyeVerify hopes its software can fix some of what it calls "password pain."

The software uses the camera already in the smartphone to snap a picture. It looks for vein patterns in the whites of the eyes, which are unique just like fingerprints. Barnett said there is a two-in-one-hundred-thousand chance of someone being able to fake their way into the software.

Click Image To Enlarge

People with bloodshot eyes can still use the software without problem.

Toby Rush, the CEO of EyeVerify, said. 

"You can have allergies, you can have hay fever, you could be out late the night before, drinking the night before, you could live in California and use medicinal marijuana, all those things don't change the pattern of blood vessels, they simply make them bigger." 

Although bloodshot eyes won't affect the software's ability to read eye vein patterns, physical damage, like a swollen shut eye, will.

The software stores the unique "Eyeprint" to the user's smartphone so not only do you need the right device, but also the right person to get access.

Rush said.  

"We use the phone as a token and your biometrics as a second token and take passwords out of the picture all together."

EyeVerify says it could make mobile banking more secure and protect companies with employees who use phones to access sensitive information.

 

Barnett said that more employees use their smartphones to access company information than ever before. That opens up security problems for companies and also can cause frustration in IT departments when employees continually lose or forget their passwords.

Barnett said.  

"With our technology, big companies can just eliminate all that password pain for themselves and their employees and be absolutely sure this really is an employee."

One of the first U.S. companies to feature EyeVerify software on their app is mobile security provider Good Technology. Employees in finance, healthcare, military and government groups use their technology to access email, calendars, project schedules and contact information. 

EyeVerify said it hopes to sell its software to banks, which would use the eye scanner in their mobile apps. EyeVerify believes this would make mobile banking much more secure and ensure that the apps are not easy to break into if the phone is stolen.

COMMENTARY:  The EyeVerify app is available for FREE downloading from the Apple iTunes Store and Google Play (4.7 stars) for iOS and Android devices respectively.     

Courtesy of an article dated June 9, 2014 appearing in Fox Business

A LOOK BACK AT FACEBOOK'S OFFER TO BUY TWITTER, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, THE TWITTER IPO, AND TWITTER TODAY

Facebook depicted as the enemy is pecked to death by an armada of Twitter "Blue Birds" (Click Image To Enlarge)  

In the early days of Twitter, founder Biz Stone says he turned down a huge offer from Mark Zuckerberg. It is now worth $23bn.

Twitter founder Biz Stone has told how he turned down a $500m (£290m) offer from Facebook to buy the firm – and watched as its value later soared to billions.

He told Sky News Digital View that on October 11, 2011 he and co-founder Evan Williams travelled to a meeting with Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg several years ago.

Twitter Co-Founders (Left-To-Right):  Evan Williams, Jack Dorsey and Biz Stone (Click Image To Enlarge)

Neither really wanted to sell the company, he said, so they decided to come up with a number "so big", that "no-one would ever say yes to it".

He said they came up with $500m, and "laughed so hard at that".

But despite Mr Zuckerberg saying it was a "big number", an offer was drawn-up later that day.

The pair turned it down, saying they felt like they were "just getting started" with the business.

He added that he did not get on with the Facebook founder.   He told Sky's Ian King.

"I like him, and I respect him, it's just that we didn't click.  I'm a jokey guy and he's a very serious guy so every joke I made – it was a tough crowd."

He also commented on the use of Twitter by extremists in Iraq and beyond, saying he still believed the social network was a tool for good rather than evil.

"When you create a large-scale platform where hundreds of millions of people have freedom of expression, you have to take the good with the bad.  If you're going to tout the fact you're encouraging free speech then you can't curate it. As soon as you do that you lose the trust."

He also said the growth of Twitter into a $23bn (£13.5bn) company feels "strange".  He said.

"I've come to terms with it but I wouldn’t call it surprised - it feels strange in a good way to go to the shopping mall and see the little bird I drew.  It doesn't seem that long ago that we were just a rag tag group of guys."

COMMENTARY:     

Facebook Tried To Acquire Twitter Twice

According to a report from a new book by New York Times writer Nick Bilton called "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship and Betrayal", Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg tried to acquire Twitter on two separate occasions according to TechCrunch.

The book alleges that Zuckerberg first went through "official channels" before approaching Twitter CEO and founder Jack Dorsey with a $500 million deal. (The price was Twitter's, not Zuckerberg's.)

Apparently, Dorsey took a meeting with Zuckerberg and suggested to the board that the deal would be great for Twitter.   The board disagreed and later Dorsey was pushed out of his chief executive position to a largely symbolic role. It was then that the other founders, Evan Williams and Biz Stone, had a meeting with Zuckerberg, too.

This was in October 2011, just before Twitter was a household name, so saying no to $500 million took some chutzpah -- or arrogance, but the board believed it was a "billion-dollar company." However, the rumor was that Zuckerberg told the Twitter founders that they needed to sell to Facebook or deal with a "clone" that his company would create and strangle Twitter in its crib.

The Road To Twitter's IPO

On October 3, 2013, San Francisco-based Twitter filed its S-1 prospectus for an initial public offering seeking to raise $1 billion. Twitter pegged the fair value of its common stock at $20.62 a share in August.  According to an unnamed source familiar with the IPO filing, this gave Twitter an implied book value of $12.8 billion based on the 620 million shares outstanding.   The share price was 28.6 times Twitter's annual revenues compared to Facebook's 26 times revenues and LinkedIn's 14.5 times annual revenues during their IPO's.

The following infographic tells everything you need to know about Twitter at the time they filed for their IPO with the SEC:  

Twitter -- The Road To The IPO (Click Image To Enlarge)

Twitter's IPO

On November 7, 2013, Twitter's had its IPO.  Shortly after the opening of trading, Twitter Inc. (NYSE:TWTR) shares rose 73 percent in a frenzied trading debut that drove the seven-year-old company's value to $25 billion and evoked the heady days of the dot-com bubble.

The stock closed its first trading day at $44.90 a share from the initial public offering price of $26 set late on Wednesday, falling back from a near-doubling in price at a session high of $50.

Click Image To Enlarge

Investor enthusiasm for the microblogging company defied traditional valuation analyses. The shares traded at about 22 times forecast 2014 sales, nearly double the multiple at social media rivals Facebook Inc and LinkedIn Corp, even though Twitter is far from turning a profit and posted a loss of almost $70 million for its most recent quarter.

Yet fans believed that Twitter, which boasted it had 230 million users globally and had revenues of $253.6 million for the first six months of 2013, and $316.9 billion for the year ending December 31, 2012, had established itself as an indispensable Internet utility, alongside Google Inc and Facebook, and that it has only scratched the surface of its potential as a global advertising medium.

Click Image To Enlarge

Mark Mahaney, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, said.  

"When people use Twitter they are following certain people, they're searching for specific information.  There are powerful marketing signals that are almost Google-esque, something that Facebook doesn't really have."

The IPO was shadowed for months by Facebook's troubled 2012 debut, in which the shares quickly fell below their offering price amid trading glitches and subjected the company and its lead banker, Morgan Stanley, to accusations that they had been greedy in pricing the deal.

Twitter's opening appeared to go off without a hitch, prompting Anthony Noto, the Goldman Sachs banker who led the IPO, to write a simple Tweet: "Phew."

Still, Twitter found itself subject to the opposite criticism, that it had priced the shares too low and left more than a billion dollars on the table.

Ken Polcari, director of the NYSE floor division at O'Neil Securities, said.  

"In my mind they certainly could've raised the price on this thing and gone into the low 30s. From an outsider looking in I would say they were overly cautious because they didn't want a disaster on their hands ... I'm sure the company didn't want a Facebook debacle,  I get that, but I think they were overly cautious and it cost them some money."

Heavy demand for the IPO shares was apparent before the final pricing.  Market sources said investors had asked for 30 times the 70 million shares on offer in the IPO, representing about 13 percent of Twitter's outstanding common shares.

Twitter could've raised $2.1 billion if an underwriters' over-allotment had been exercised making it the second largest Internet offering in the United States behind Facebook Inc's $16 billion IPO in 2012 and ahead of Google Inc's 2004 IPO, according to Thomson Reuters data.

The NYSE, which snatched the listing away from its tech-focused rival, Nasdaq, marked the occasion with an enormous banner with Twitter's bird logo along its Broad Street facade.

Twitter executives including Chief Executive Dick Costolo and the three co-founders - Evan Williams, Biz Stone and Jack Dorsey - appeared on a packed exchange floor to witness the debut.

Twitter CEO Dick Costolo (far right), and co-founders Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams and Biz Stone (l-to-r) cheer as trading begings on the floor of the NYSE. (Click Image To Enlarge)

At current valuations, the stakes owned by Williams and Dorsey would be worth around $2.7 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively. Costolo, who invested $25,000 in the fledgling company in 2007, holds a 1.4 percent stake worth about $360 million.

They hefty valuations were cause for celebration for some insiders but they sounded alarm bells for some investors who cautioned that the froth was unwarranted.

Pivotal Research's Brian Wieser wrote in a note cutting his rating on the stock to "sell" from "buy". 

"With a price that pushes into the high 30s and beyond, Twitter is simply too expensive.  One way to justify a $45 price in our model would involve presuming that Twitter could generate more than $6bn in annual revenue by 2018. However, we think that would seem overly optimistic."

British actor Patrick Stewart, of Star Trek fame, rang the opening bell at Big Board together with nine-year-old Vivienne Harr, who started a charity to end childhood slavery using the microblogging site.

Stewart said, adding that he had only been tweeting for about a year.

"I guess I represent the poster boy for Twitter." 

In San Francisco

At Twitter's headquarters in San Francisco, offices opened early and hundreds of employees flocked to the 9th floor cafeteria to watch the festivities on TV while eating "cronuts," a croissant-donut hybrid, made by Twitter's resident chef, Lance Holton.

The public debut was the latest milestone for a service that was born out of a nearly-defunct startup in 2006 and was derided by many in its early years as a silly fad dominated by people talking about what they had for breakfast.

But Twitter quickly began to penetrate popular culture in unexpected ways, with its open design and broadcasting format attracting celebrities, athletes, politicians and anybody who wanted to share short, punchy thoughts with a digital audience.

Its business potential developed more slowly, and the company appeared to be floundering as recently as three years prior to the IP, when it was riven by management turmoil and frequently crippled by service outages.

Under Costolo, who took over as CEO in October 2010, the company rapidly ramped up its money-making engine by selling "promoted tweets," messages from marketers that are distribute to a wide-ranging but targeted group of users.  In the third quarter 2013, Twitter made $168 million in revenue, it said, more than double the third quarter 2012.

The company said in its investor prospectus that more than three-quarters of its users were outside the United States.  Despite its early reputation as a hangout for Silicon Valley early adopters and tech geeks, some of its most active markets now include Japan, Indonesia, Brazil and Saudi Arabia.

Click Image To Enlarge

The three most-followed accounts belonged to a trio of pop stars: Katy Perry @katyperry, Justin Bieber @justinbieber and Lady Gaga @ladygaga. (U.S. President Barack Obama @barackobama came in fourth.)

P.J. Crowley, the former U.S. State Department spokesman, said. 

"Twitter has, when coupled with the increasing distribution of smart phones and reach of the Internet, an impact on global connectivity and transparency.  It has definitely contributed to the acceleration of the news process and helped to expand the availability of information sources to a wide range of people."

The 140-character messages have spawned an Internet culture of its own. The "hashtag," a pound symbol devised by early Twitter users to denote the topic of a conversation, has became ubiquitous, with the word even becoming an ironic expression parodied by the likes of "Saturday Night Live."

Sell Rating

As Twitter's stock soared after the opening, the company's market value, including restricted share units and other securities that could be exercised in the coming months, was over $28 billion.

Fund managers who got small allocations at the IPO were hopeful the stock would trade down after Thursday's pop.

Click Image To Enlarge

Mark Hawtin, portfolio manager of the GAM Star Technology Strategy, said.

"We have a target of $40 and we won't buy more as long as it is trading above that."

Jerry Jordan, manager of the $48.6 million Jordan Opportunity Fund, who got a small allocation, said he would buy more of Twitter if it trades down around $30-$35.  

Jordan said.

"A lot of these sexy IPOs have a big pop on the first day and then they grind sideways." 

Twitter's successful debut is likely to stoke interest in other up-and-coming consumer Internet companies such as Uber, Pinterest, Airbnb and Square, all of which boast private-market valuations well north of a billion dollars and could go public in the coming years.

Still, two early social media success stories, Groupon Inc and Zynga Inc, have suffered major reversals since going public last year. Groupon, despite big gains in its shares this year, still trades at less than half its 2011 IPO price. Zynga is worth about a third of its 2012 IPO price.

And first-generation social media firms such as MySpace have all but vanished as fickle users moved on to the next big thing.

Twitter Today

On April 29, 2014, Twitter released its first quarter financial performance, reporting revenues of $250 million for the quarter, a net loss of -$132.4 million, and earnings per share of $0.00 on a non-GAAP basis.  The street had expected Twitter to report revenue of $241.5 million, and a three cent per-share loss.

Click Image To Enlarge

That non-GAAP $0.00 EPS is slightly occlusive — the company in fact had non-GAAP net income of $183,000 in the period, or about the cost of one engineer’s yearly cost to a tech company. However, when you stretch $183,000 across more than half a billion shares, it doesn’t go far.

Twitter’s revenue is up 119% year-over-year. On a GAAP basis, Twitter lost a stunning $132 million in the period. That amounts to a GAAP net loss of $0.23 per share.

Twitter Net Losses Pile-up

Twitter has yet to generate a net profit in any quarter since it began operations.  For the years ending December 31, 2013, December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, Twitter reported net losses of -$645.3 million, -$79.4 million and -$164.1 million respectively.  Twitter also reported a net loss of  -$132.4 million for the 1st Quarter ending March 31, 2014.   All together, Twitter is carrying cumulative net operating losses of $1.127 billion since it began operations in 2006.  

Click Image To Enlarge

Twitter Operating Expenses

Twitter operating expenses during the 4th Quarter 2013 were a record $752.4 millon -- exceeding the combined total of $548.4 million spent during first three quarters of 2013.  Most of this went into research and development (R&D) and sales and marketing expenses.    These two constitute the majority of Twitter’s operating expenses and stood at a combined 62.5% of revenue in 2013. 

Twitter’s R&D expenses as a percentage of revenue has come down from a massive 91.7% in 2010 to about 32.2% in 2013.  However, the figure stood way above Facebook’s 9.6% which suggests that the company has a long way to go in terms of improving monetization and reducing the cost burden. 

Click Image To Enlarge

Twitter’s sales and marketing expenses as a percentage of revenue increased from 21.4% in 2010 to about 30.3% in 2013 as it ramped up its sales force to sell ad inventory slots and acquire customers. In comparison, the figure for Facebook stood at around 10.5% during the same year.

 Click Image To Enlarge

Twitter reported that it had 255 million monthly active users. In the sequentially preceding quarter, Twitter had reported 241 million monthly active users. That’s growth of 14 million in the three-month period, or around 5.8%.

Twitter Monthly Active Users

While sharing its financial results for its first quarter 2014, Twitter announced a number of new milestones that showed the service’s user growth has slowed while its mobile advertising share has grown.  The social network has now passed 255 million monthly active users, 198 million of which were monthly active mobile users as well.

The company’s monthly active user count has only grown 25% in the past year. Monthly mobile active users have grown by 31% in the past year.  However, this growth remains modest.  78% of Twitter’s users access the site from a mobile device.  Investors appeared concerned that despite quickly expanding revenue, Twitter’s days of massive user growth were over.  That meant lower future top and bottom line growth.

Twitter Share Prices

When Facebook went public in May 2012, the company's shares were priced at $38. On the first day of trading, the stock price didn't jump as anticipated and would likely have fallen below the IPO price of $38, if the IPO's underwriters hadn't stepped in to support it. In subsequent weeks though, the share price quickly fell below $30 and continued to slide for months. It took the stock more than a year to return to its IPO price, clearly indicating that the IPO had been priced too high by Facebook's underwriters.

18 months later, Twitter, having witnessed first hand how hard Facebook's reputation had been hit by its disappointing IPO, was desperate to avoid making the same mistake as its big rival. The company's IPO was priced at $26, which was above its initial price range, but still modest according to many experts who anticipated massive demand for Twitter's shares. When Twitter finally made its trading debut on November 7, the share price jumped more than 70 percent, creating a lot of positive press for the company. The fact that Twitter's shares have continuously traded above $40 since the IPO and are currently approaching $50 indicates that conversely to Facebook's IPO, Twitter's IPO was significantly underpriced.

In the end it seems that Twitter avoided Facebook's IPO mistake, overpricing, by making another mistake, underpricing. To figure out which is worse, one needs to remember what the goal of an initial public offering is. Normally, a company goes public in order to raise money that can be invested in the company's growth. By pricing its IPO very high, Facebook squeezed every dime out of the investors waiting eagerly to get in on the hottest IPO of all times. The company ended up raising more than 16 billion dollars in return for lot of bad publicity and some disgruntled investors. Twitter chose the opposite route. Selling 80 million shares at $26 a piece, the company raised $2.1 billion when it easily could have raised more. Assuming a possible IPO price of $40, Twitter left more than a billion in investment capital on the table or rather in the accounts of its early investors. Twitter sacrificed that money in return for a lot of goodwill, but filling the pockets of banks and investors has never been the purpose of an IPO. So in the end, by avoiding Facebook's mistake, Twitter may have made an even bigger one: losing out on a billion dollars worth of additional capital.

Click Image To Enlarge

Twitter's share price has been on a steady decline since the start of 2014.  Twitter shares peaked $73.31 on December 26, 2013 and ended the year 2013 at $63.65 per share.  Twitter shares hit a low of $30.66 on May 7, 2014.  Twitter's share price has rebounded some since its low, and ended at $37.84 at the end of trading on July 10, 2014.

  Click Image To Enlarge

Twitter Revenue Forecasts for Q2 2014 and Full-Year 2014

Twitter expects its second quarter revenue to come in between $270 and $280 million. Full year 2014 top line should be between $1.20 and $1.25 billion, coming in on the low end of expectations.

That aside, Twitter’s $2.2 billion in cash and equivalents is right where it was before the quarter started, meaning that the company has plenty of runway to execute on whatever its plans may be.

Conclusions and Ending Comments

I am really disappointed in Twitter.  From the size of its R&D and sales and marketing expenses, I see a public company that is still trying to develop a predictable and successful business model. This is a company went to public much too soon, but in hindsight chose the IPO route to take advantage of the recent popularity of social networks going public, and the success of Facebook in monetizing mobile and rising share price.

Facebook was able to successfully monetize desktop users, then quickly switched its platform to successfully monetize its rising mobile users.  Facebook was able to do this, and it did this quickly, with much success, and has been rewarded by Wall Street and Main Street investors with a stable share price.  

I am not too sure that Twitter will be able to repeat the success of Facebook, and prop up its share price to its high of $73.31 in late 2013.   For one thing, Twitter users were already predominantly mobile, and it has monetized them with its line of "promoted" advertising products.  However, how much more can it squeeze out of those mobile users.  

User participation is also a huge issue with Twitter.  Less than 5% of Twitter users actually tweet on a regular basis (once a day).  So what if they have 255 million monthly active users. Only 5% of them are active on a regular basis.  The recent Twitter redesign may help increase user participation, but not without giving users an incentive or sense of urgency to tweet.  The limit of 140 characters per tweet really limits user participation.  Facebook places no such limit on user timeline posts, and this is a huge competitive advantage.  It is no wonder that average revenues per user are one-fifth of Facebook.                

Courtesy of an article dated June 10, 2014 appearing in Sky News, an article dated October 4, 2013 appearing in Bloomberg, an article dated November 5,  2013 appearing in NBC Bay Area, an article dated November 7, 2013 appearing in Reuters, an article dated April 29, 2014 appearing in TechCrunch, an article dated March 13, 2014 appearing in Forbes, an article dated April 29, 2014 appearing in the TNW Blog, and an article dated December 10, 2013 appearing in Statista

 

FORRESTER RESEARCH: TEENS USING FACEBOOK MORE, NOT LESS, CONTRADICTS STUDIES THAT SAY TEENS FLEEING FACEBOOK

All the talk about teenagers abandoning Facebook (which I have contributed to in previous posts) may be overblown or indeed just plain wrong, according to a new report from Forrester Research, titled “Facebook Dominates Teens’ Social Usage: Why the Sky Isn’t Falling on the World’s Favorite Social Network.”

According to the study, which is based on Forrester’s 2014 North American Consumer Technographics Youth Survey.

“Since Facebook’s CFO admitted in 2013 that young teens were visiting the site slightly less frequently, most marketers have accepted as fact that teens are fleeing the site en masse. But that’s simply not true.” 

Forrester surveyed 4,517 teenagers ages 12-17 about their social media habits, and this is what they found:  

• 78% are using Facebook
• 46% said they were using Facebook more than they were last year
• 28% say they use it “all the time.”

Overall Forrester says,

“Facebook remains by far young users’ favorite social network.  Facebook users agreed that they use Facebook more than any other social site.”

For comparison Forrester compared Facebook with other social networks,

• Instagram lagged behind, used by just over half of teens
• Twitter was used by less than half of teens
• Snapchat was used by 38%.
• Only YouTube was used by more teens, at 87%.

All these sites, including YouTube, ranked lower than Facebook in the proportion of users who said they use them “all the time.”

What’s more, Forrester predicts that rates of Facebook usage will actually rise, thanks to growing smartphone penetration and tweens transitioning to teens:

“As today’s 12- and 13-year-olds grow into 16- and 17-year-olds, it’s likely their Facebook adoption will increase further.” 

For the sake of balance, you can compare the Forrester data with previous research that appears to show Facebook usage declining among teens.

• In August 2013 a Pew survey found that 84% of teens and young adults said they use Facebook; that was down 2% from the 86% who said they use Facebook in 2012.
• In January 2014, iStrategyLabs (see below), drawing on data from Facebook’s social advertising platform, found that the number of Americans ages 13-17 using Facebook declined 25.3% from 13.1 million in January 2011 to 9.8 million in January 2014, while the number of users ages 18-24 declined 7.5% from 45.4 million to 42 million over the same period.
• USC Annenberg Center for the Digital Future and Bovitz, Inc. found that roughly one in three (30%) Facebook users believe they will be using the service less within the next five years. Within this group, 40% say they use Twitter, while Instagram is also growing fast, especially among millennials. 

I’m not sure quite where this leaves us, except to say that the issue is far from settled, and (as always) you should take all these survey results with a big grain of salt. If I were to be slightly more bold I would venture that Facebook will remain the dominant social network for the foreseeable future, and even if teens are adopting other social media platforms, they’re still very likely to have a Facebook account and use it a fair amount, if only for a limited set of activities.

COMMENTARY:   3 years ago, iStrategyLabs published a report on 2011 Facebook Demographics & Statistics that covered gender, location, education, and more (US only). In January 2014, iStrategyLabs dove into Facebook’s Social Advertising platform to get a refreshed snapshot of the same data points to see what exactly has happened over time and to look at the numbers behind many recent claims: teenagers are leaving by the millions. 

Click Image To Enlarge

So who is right?  Facebook's CFO said usage was declining among teens (13-17 year olds).  I am inclined to agree with iStrategyLabs and PEW.  Only Facebook knows for sure, since they have the actual data, and their CFO crunched the numbers.   He said usage was down among teens, so it must be true.

Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is probably not too concerned, and here's why:  Facebook acquired text messaging startup WhatsApp in March 2013 for a reported $16 billion, and Whatsapp is heavily used by teens, insuring they are firmly within the grasp of the social giant. Those teens aren't going anywhere.  If WhatsApp users have log into Facebook to access WhatsApp, then Zuck is going to include their time online on WhatsApp as "time on Facebook." In short, I don't think Zuck is too worried about this.

Courtesy of an article dated June 25, 2014 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf and an article dated January 15, 2014 appearing in iStrategyLabs    

SOCIAL MEDIA EXAMINER'S 2014 SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING INDUSTRY REPORT

Mike Stelzner over at Social Media Examiner has published the 6th Annual Social Media Marketing Industry Report based on a survey of over 2,800 marketers.

It’s a pretty robust report at 50 pages and covers the gamut of social media marketing topics from the most important social platforms for marketing to the most important social content types to the ways marketers will be changing their approach to social media in the future.

Major Findings

Here's a quick summary of the reports primary findings:

• Marketers place very high value on social media -  A significant 92% of marketers indicate that social media is important for their business, up from 86% in 2013. 
• Tactics and engagement are top areas marketers want to master - At least 89% of marketers want to know the most effective social tactics and the best ways to engage their audience with social media. 
• Blogging holds the top spot for future plans - A significant 68% of marketers plan on increasing their use of blogging, making it the top area marketers will invest in for 2014. 
• Marketers want to learn most about Google+ - While 54% of marketers are using Google+, 65% want to learn more about it and 61% plan on increasing Google+ activities in 2014. 
• Podcasting on growth trajectory - Only 6% of marketers are involved with podcasting, yet 21% plan on increasing their podcasting activities in 2014—a more than three-fold increase—and 28% of marketers want to learn more about it. 
• Facebook and LinkedIn are the two most important social networks for marketers - When forced to only select one platform, 54% of marketers selected Facebook, followed by LinkedIn at 17%. 
• Most marketers aren't sure their Facebook marketing is effective - Only 34% of marketers (slightly more than one in three) think that their Facebook efforts are effective. 
• Original written content is most important for social media marketing - A significant 58% of marketers stated that original written content is the single most important form of content, followed by original visual assets (19%).

Major Highlights

Some of the highlights of the report include:

• 92% of marketers say social media is important for their business (up from 86%)
• 58% of marketers say original written content is the most important form of content
• 68% of marketers plan on increasing their use of blogging
• 61% of marketers plan to increase Google+ activities in 2014
• 6% of marketers are podcasting and 21% plan to increase podcasting activity
• Facebook and LinkedIn are the two most important social networks for marketers
• 64% of marketers plan on increasing their use of LinkedIn

You really get a lot of details in this report on all major social networks and activities including Blogging, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google+, Pinterest, Instagram, Vine, Forums, Podcasting, Snapchat and categories like mobile, social review sites and social bookmarking.

SME also asked some great questions about time spent on social, measuring ROI, outsourcing, types of content, integration with other marketing tactics and what other forms of marketing that social media marketers were using.

Top Goals and Benefits of Social Media Marketing

The top benefits cited for social media marketing include top of funnel objectives like increased exposure (92%) and increased traffic (80%). While that is to be expected, what is interesting is that the more time marketers have been at social media marketing, the more social media helped them improve sales.

Click Image To Enlarge

The breakdown between B2B and B2C social platforms that were most important to marketers was interesting as always:

Top B2B Social Media Platforms:

• 33% LinkedIn
• 31% Facebook
• 16% Twitter
• 11% Blogging
• 3% Google+
• 3% YouTube

Top B2C Social Media Platforms

• 68% Facebook
• 10% Twitter
• 6% Blogging
• 6% LinkedIn
• 2% YouTube
• 2% Google+
• 2% Pinterest
• 1% Social Review Sites (Yelp)

The amount of importance placed on Facebook isn’t surprising given their popularity. I guess Marketers have resolved to accept Facebook as an advertising platform more than an organic social network.

Another interesting point is that only 11% of B2B marketers and 6% of B2C marketers find blogging most important while 68% say they plan on increasing their use of blogging in the coming year.

Recent UMass Dartmouth studies show the biggest increase in Fortune 500 companies blogging in their 2013 report so blogging is definitely a future area of focus. Marketers are optimistic about blogging, but I think shiny social network syndrome has them distracted from the true value blogging brings to social media success.

There’s a lot to digest and a lot of insights to be gleaned so be sure to get your copy of the report over at Social Media Examiner.

In the meantime, what are the primary benefits you are seeing from social media and networks? Are you integrating social across marketing and communications or is it treated more independently?

Courtesy of an article dated May 19, 2014 appearing in TopRank Online Marketing Blog

MEET BUGJUGGLER, A 70-FOOT TALL, CAR-JUGGLING ROBOT THAT WILL JUGGLE THREE VW'S IN THE AIR

First stage of the BugJuggler project will be construction of an 8-foot prototype that can toss and catch a 250-pound object.

Former NASA engineer Dan Granett thinks he's created the "new frontier in robotic entertainment." We're not so sure we agree, but fans of the 1999 film Iron Giant will certainly be on board.

Granett has designed a 70-foot-tall robot called BugJuggler that can juggle three cars, namely a Volkswagen Beetle that weighs about 2,700 pounds.

 

Here's how Granett says BugJuggler will work:

"BugJuggler will use a diesel engine to generate hydraulic pressure. An operator located in the robot’s head will be able to control its motions using a haptic feedback interface connected to high-speed servo valves. Hydraulic accumulators - essentially storage batteries for hydraulic fluid - will allow for the rapid movement required for the robot to juggle cars or other large, heavy objects."

According to the DailyMail,

"BugJuggler would also operate within a 'safety radius,' in case a car is dropped."

The first stage of the BugJuggler project will be construction of a working 8-foot-tall, single arm prototype that can toss and catch a 250-pound object.

Granett and his team are currently seeking investment for the project, which he estimates will cost $2.3 million.

COMMENTARY:   This is a robot that I just have to see.   If Granett and his team can raise the needed funds to build a prototype, and can get it to work, a 70-foot tall BugJuggler is could not be too far off.  But first let's build that prototype.   [email protected]@!!

Courtesy of an article dated July 3, 2014 appearing in Robotic Trends

FACEBOOK ACQUIRES PROGRAMMATIC ONLINE VIDEO MONETIZATION LEADER LIVERAIL FOR A REPUTED $500 MILLION

With its LiveRail acquisition, Facebook has set itself well up to compete with Google and AOL -- two of the largest Internet companies and leaders in the programmatic space -- when it comes to digital video advertising.

LiveRail reached 37.2% of the U.S. population in May, third behind BrightRoll (51.3%) and Specific Media (44.4%), according to comScore’s May 2014 U.S. online video rankings. That was slightly ahead of AOL (35%) and Google (34.1%). LiveRail has been third behind BrightRoll and Specific Media since February 2014. AOL was ahead of LiveRail in January 2014.

Click Image To Enlarge

Facebook’s desire to be more competitive in the video ad market did not come cheap. TechCrunch has reported that Facebook paid between $400 and $500 million to buy LiveRail, which would make it one of the priciest ad tech acquisitions we’ve seen to date.

In addition, LiveRail was expected to go public at some point in the next six months. It would have been the second supply-side ad tech company to hit the public market, following Rubicon Project.

Real-Time Daily reached out to ad tech and video industry experts to hear some initial reactions to Facebook’s power play.

Mike Shehan, founder, CEO and president of SpotXchange -- which was sixth on comScore’s May 2014 list with a reach of 32.6% -- said:

“We want to congratulate LiveRail on their acquisition by Facebook, and believe the collaboration between these two companies will have a huge impact on how data is used in digital video. This news is very significant for our industry in several ways. First and foremost, it validates that the video sector continues to be a top driver of growth within online advertising.”

David Burch, senior director of global communications at TubeMogul, which was seventh on comScore’s list with 31.3% reach (note: TubeMogul is on the buy-side, not the sell-side), also weighed in.   According to their CEO.

“We first partnered with LiveRail back in 2011 and are the largest buyer on their exchange.  We’ve been assured that our existing integration and partnership with LiveRail won’t change with this acquisition; if anything, our relationship will strengthen. We believe that the main reason our partnership with LiveRail is so fruitful is because we serve different masters -- LiveRail helps publishers while we’re beholden to brands. This creates a sense of balance and trust for brands and publishers alike that is missing from the market today, where many companies are a one-stop shop and are trying to take money from all sides."

BrightRoll CEO and founder Tod Sacerdoti believes the news “reinforces the importance of video to marketers and publishers globally.”

“As brands and agencies invest more in sight, sound, and motion, buyers and sellers of digital media are realizing the need to have a dedicated video strategy in place along with the technology to enable it.”

According to a Facebook newsroom post announcing the acquisition, Facebook has a similar line of thinking. Facebook’s VP of ads product marketing and Atlas wrote in the newsroom post:

“More relevant ads will be more interesting and engaging to people watching online video, and more effective for marketers too.”

Victor Milligan, chief marketing officer at Nexage, says the acquisition is significant for mobile advertisers, given Facebook’s mobile-first strategy. 

“The acquisition affirms what we know in mobile advertising -- that video, and rich media for that matter, are core to brands embracing mobile.”

Nexage recently reported that video was the fastest-growing vertical in terms of inventory growth on mobile; 516% more mobile video ads were available for programmatic buying in Q1 2014 compared to Q1 2013.

Milligan added.

“Without doubt, they will soon represent the majority creative.” 

Bertrand Quesada, CEO of Ebuzzing, a video ad platform, thinks the news is an “obvious indicator” that Facebook wants to expand its online video presence.

“They have made serious investments into video in the past, and buying LiveRail -- with its programmatic and targeting capabilities -- was a logical next step to advance Facebook’s own technology.”

Quesada is also curious how LiveRail’s existing publisher clients will react to the news.

“The implications of this move for LiveRail’s premium publishers remain to be seen, but publishers tend to be very conscious about third-party access to their data. When Google acquired ad optimization platform Admeld back in 2011, Admeld lost all its big publishers because Google would have access to their data.”

COMMENTARY:   Facebook vice president of ads product marketing and atlas Brian Boland writes in an official blog post on July 2, 2014:

"Today we’re announcing that we have agreed to acquire LiveRail, an advertising technology company that helps companies like Major League Baseball (MLB.com), ABC Family, A&E Networks, Gannett, and Dailymotion serve better ads in the videos that appear on their websites and apps. LiveRail was founded in 2007 and offers a comprehensive platform for online video publishers that help them find and serve the best ads possible. LiveRail also helps marketers by providing them with access to premium video inventory and the information that they need in order to decide where to show their ads. What LiveRail ultimately offers is a complete advertising solution for video publishers."

"We believe that LiveRail, Facebook and the premium publishers it serves have an opportunity to make video ads better and more relevant for the hundreds of millions of people who watch digital video every month. More relevant ads will be more interesting and engaging to people watching online video, and more effective for marketers too. Publishers will benefit as well because more relevant ads will help them make the most out of every opportunity they have to show an ad."

In an announcement of its own, RiveRail said that the company now has "hundreds of active customers,” and delivers more than 7 billion video ads each month.

LiveRail was the top U.S. video ad property in March 2014 by number of ads served, at nearly 3.9 billion, according to comScore. LiveRail, which connects publishers and advertisers, has customers including PBS and Sony Pictures.

Click Image To Enlarge

It wouldn’t be surprising if LiveRail’s technology and tools are integrated into Instagram as well. In March, Instagram signed its first advertising deal with ad agency Omnicom for $100 million, not too long after finally adding support for video, which commands the highest engagement and monetization, as we reported.

LiveRail was founded in 2007 by Andrei Dunca, Mark Trefgarne, and Sergiu Biriș. The company previously raised a total of $12 million in funding from Pond Ventures.

LiveRail allows its customers to place their video ad budgets on their programmatic video ad marketplace and spread their video media dollars across multiple publishers while many content providers tend to sell directly to the brands that want to advertise around their content.

In late April, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's Chief Operating Officer finished up Facebook's Q2 2014 earnings call with news that Instagram and, perhaps even more importantly, online video ads, weren't going to substantially contribute to earnings this year, investors were not amused. Facebook's stock price took a dump.  What's the problem? According to both Zuckerberg and Sandberg, Facebook's video advertising platform wasn't ready for prime time. 

The recent announcement that Facebook has acquired LiveRail for a reported $500 million reinforces what many investors didn't seem interested in hearing a couple of months ago: Facebook isn't going to rollout video until it can be done right. Like Facebook, one of LiveRail's claims to fame is its utilization of data to better target and deliver video ads. If we know anything about Facebook, it's that it loves, and knows how to utilize, user data.

It now appears very clear that LiveRail was the missing piece that Facebook needed to bring real value to advertisers willing to place video ads on the social giants platform.  Facebook has accumulated a huge cache of consumer data about its users, especially the type of digital content they watch, particularly video content, how much time they spend watching videos, their favorite brands, and how much time they spend on the site.  When you combine this with LiveRail's ability to match video ads to a viewer's online behaviors, this makes for a dynamite combination.  

Courtesy of an article dated July 3, 2014 appearing in MediaPost Publications Real-Time Daily and an article dated July 2, 2014 appearing in VentureBeat and an article dated July 7, 2014 appearing in Motley Fool and an article dated July 3, 2014 appearing in Business Insider and an article dated June 16, 2014 appearing in comScore 

TWITTER AND STARCOM MEDIA VEST GROUP RESEARCH SHOWS THAT TWITTER IS HELPNG TV AD CAMPAIGNS

Twitter wants to be the first choice for your second-screen. And today, it released research that backs up its aspirations.

The study, a product of Twitter’s Social TV Lab partnership with media buying agency Starcom MediaVest Group, presents evidence that combining Twitter and TV results in strong gains in brand awareness, TV ad recall, engagement with television shows and sales lift.

Twitter and SMG wrote in a release.

“Results confirm that social TV is here and the opportunity to use it to enhance and amplify brand experiences is only getting bigger.  Thus far, lab results demonstrate that Twitter’s ability to amplify significant cultural moments, far beyond original broadcast audiences.”

The Social TV Lab findings, compiled from various sources, including Nielsen’s Brand Effect for Twitter, Datalogix’s matched household modeling, Twitter’s in-tweet surveys, looked at results for campaigns from 15 U.S.-based SMG clients as well as general social TV engagement.

The results present a counterpoint to skeptics such as the NBCUniversal executive who earlier this year said social media doesn’t drive TV ratings.

Although the issue of TV ratings wasn’t addressed explicitly, the study found that people who use Twitter while watching TV are more engaged with shows and advertising, and therefore more valuable to marketers, than people who watch without Twitter.

Here are the main findings and an infographic by Twitter and SMG:

1. Twitter + TV = Increased Brand Awareness vs TV Alone. For brands that used Twitter alongside their TV advertising, the study found on average a 6.9% increase in awareness for exposed audiences and significant increases for exposed and engaged audiences across awareness, intent and favorability measures.
2. Twitter Amplification = Sales Lift. For the brands that measured sales impact, we saw sales increases of 4% on average in households exposed to ads on Twitter and TV vs just TV ads alone.
3. The Twitter / TV Multitasker is Here – and TV Ad Recall is High for them. Only one quarter of tweeting occurs during the ad break, and it was highest during reality shows (27%). This supports existing Twitter research that found viewers who are actively engaging in social media while viewing TV are genuinely paying attention to both screens as TV show tune away is less and ad recall was higher for TV Twitter multitaskers. Our results found that television ad recall was also 13% higher among Twitter users versus non-multitaskers.
4. Real-Time TV Content Engagement is on Twitter. Tweeting about events/shows is higher (20%) than “general browsing” about a specific event/show (15%.) In addition, most tweeting happens when something in show/game/ad is worthy of a tweet (70%).

SMG CEO Laura Desmond said in a statement announcing the findings.

“Twitter, in a very short period of time, has gone from experimental to essential and there's no better place for marketers who want to reach both influencers and their followers during the biggest live, public and conversational moments.”

Click Image To Enlarge

Courtesy of an article dated June 17, 2014 appearing in Marketing Land 

SOME INTERESTING COMPARISONS BETWEEN MEN VS WOMEN ON INSTAGRAM [INFOGRAPHIC]

Who uses Instagram: men or women? And what top brands do they prefer to follow on the visual social platform? 

The answers vary by country.

Instagram is heavily favored by women in Thailand (65%), the Philippines (64%), and Vietnam (62%), according to a recent infographic by TOTEMS (formerly known as Nitrogram).

By comparison, Instagram users are predominantly men in Saudi Arabia (85%), Iran (82%), and India (75%).

Regarding top brands, more women than men follow them (53% vs. 47%). The top brands with the "manliest" audience are energy drinks and sports brands, and the top brands with the "most girly" audience are cosmetics and fashion.

To find out more about gender on Instagram, check out the infographic:

Click Image To Enlarge

Courtesy of an article dated July 5, 2014 appearing in MarketingProfs