$19k In 10 Hours Via Twitter, Social Marketing Example Options

[AbleReach]

Before you head straight to the money, look at the social aspect of how this person uses the media. Sure, she's thrilled about making the money, but she also genuinely loves interacting with fans.

Also, it must be pointed out that this person had an existing and loyal fan base. HOWEVER, could it be that part of how they got there in the first place was enjoying the give and take and sense of play and inclusion that works so well on Social Media?

i twitter whenever i’m online, i love the way it gives me a direct line of communication with my fans and friends.

i had already seen the power of twitter while touring…using twitter i’d gathered crowds of sometimes 200 fans with a DAY’S notice to come out and meet me in public spaces (parks, mostly) where i would play ukulele, sign, hug, take pictures, eat cake, and generally hang out and connect. this was especially helpful in the cities where we’d been unable to book all-ages gigs and there were crushed teenagers who were really grateful to have a shot at connecting with me & the community of amanda/dolls fans.

The rest:
How an Indie Musician can make $19,000 in 10 hours using Twitter

TOTAL MADE THIS MONTH USING TWITTER = $19,000
TOTAL MADE FROM 30,000 RECORD SALES = ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

This post has been edited by AbleReach: Jun 24 2009, 05:32 PM

[send2paul]

Let's be honest here... every marketer worth their salt is building up email lists, blog friends, Facebook buddies etc etc - a FANBASE - in order to SELL them all something.

I don't know about the give and take etc of Social Media, Elizabeth - I just reckon Amanda Palmer hit on something by accident, (or so the story goes on the report...) - and WHAM - she was selling stuff to her fanbase. Her use of Social Media may also have come out of the fact that bands HAVE to use Twitter etc to keep in contact with their fanbase nowadays.

First it was newsletters, then websites, email/SMS updates etc - I think that media companies such as record producing companies recognize that Social Media is a tool for promotion - and probably even instruct/suggest their bands use them. With some bigger artists I'm sure they have "ghost Twitterers" for themselves who turn up and keep their big self-promotional/Social Media circus going for them.

There a bazillion nobodies on Twitter trying to make a buck selling all kinds of tut, (including me! ). And maybe I will create a "fanbase", maybe I won't. But the members of my fanbase will never be anything like that the fanatical pop music fan who will go anywhere/do anything for that person/band.

And finally.... $25 for a t-shirt?! You have to be a die-hard fan of someone to pay that price for a t-shirt!

[Walter]

Does that T-shirt come with television?

[AbleReach]

See, I knew you'd go straight for the money.

Let's be honest here... every marketer worth their salt is building up email lists, blog friends, Facebook buddies etc etc - a FANBASE - in order to SELL them all something.

A mailing list is not a fan base.

Repeat after me: a mailing list is not a fan base.

If you sign up for Amazon's email list for notices of sales and special coupons, are you then one of Amazon's FANBASE? If you're building an email list for a specific topic, you're building a list of people who expect a service. That's not using social media, though social media may help people be aware of what you offer as a brand --- as a branded entity. The entity, the persona of what you offer as a brand, is what will power word of mouth about your mailing list.


Most marketers are doing social media wrong. They pander. They spam. They brag and pout about how much attention they're getting. They get a little attention with a little pandering and go SEO all over the place with pumping up how many times to pander within what amount of time, or how much could be squeezed out of more followers if they did even more pandering while offering to share the secret sauce. Excuuuuse me, but who the !@#$% cares?

Gotta acknowledge that they (we) are trying!


Where I get excited about social media is seeing how people play, or how they share sympathy or joy and feeling related. It doesn't have to be deep, though sometimes it sticks, and it is out there.

This post has been edited by AbleReach: Jun 26 2009, 03:17 PM

[send2paul]

Elizabeth - hi

I guess I'll have to disagree I think the e-commerce created mailing list/opt in, (Amazon purchaser) etc, is a commercial fan base. And the seller of the product/service knows this - and responds to the purchaser with communication/product offers.

In the case of this artist I'd say - "Yes" - she used various "social media" to create a fan base - but in the end she sold to them .... and when she realised she could do it once - she did it again.

I don't disagree with you regarding the merits of social media and how people use them etc.

But will I disagree when you say that "Most marketers are doing social media wrong." - and then you go onto to explain what most marketers actually do with social media. And you're correct - nobody cares BUT - what marketers do with social media works for them, i.e. they sell products to the punters.... mailing list.... fan base.

I like social media, as such. I just think it is now "media" and it's own little "media space" will be now be washed up on the shores of Media Land with all the other flotsam and jetsam that is media - TV, radio, SMS, internet, the printed word, the spoken word......

[AbleReach]

I think the e-commerce created mailing list/opt in, (Amazon purchaser) etc, is a commercial fan base. And the seller of the product/service knows this - and responds to the purchaser with communication/product offers.

So, Paul, how would you feel if Mr and Mrs Amazon persistently sent you newsletters about their corporate culture, instead of the sale flier? Wouldn't that be a little ridiculous, if what you wanted was a service that kept track of when what you want is on sale? Amazon's subscriber base would change dramatically, in ways that I sincerely doubt would be good for product sales.

On the other hand, if some large company where I like to shop does wonderful things for a cause I support, I may be both a fan and a customer looking for a service. If that company doubled their prices, I'd shop there less - I'd still be a fan, though I'd be less likely to be a customer.

If that company began supporting the opposite of that cause but had great prices, they may lose me as a fan, but keep me as a customer: I might still shop there in a pinch if I had enough of a need and the price for service was right.

But will I disagree when you say that "Most marketers are doing social media wrong." - and then you go onto to explain what most marketers actually do with social media. And you're correct - nobody cares smile.gif BUT - what marketers do with social media works for them, i.e. they sell products to the punters.... mailing list.... fan base.

We're going to disagree here, too. My impression is that, for the most part, spammers, not marketers, are the group who would agree that social media works for them. That's because spammers don't have as much worry about the quality of the traffic -- instead, they can rely on automated systems to mow through a lot of quantity.


Social media is still getting figured out. It's a phenomenon, a pain in the patoo, and often what people see in it is a mystery - I'll be the first to admit that it can be about as deep and useful as a a tabloid. In my experiments I've also seen signs of intelligent life. It's something to watch.

[Walter]

Where I get excited about social media is seeing how people play, or how they share sympathy or joy and feeling related. It doesn't have to be deep, though sometimes it sticks, and it is out there.

All these nice things happen in prison...but not very often, at least relative to all the bad. Social media is a tool fair enough, but I would argue that cultures grow up, become dependent, and can dominate a tool/system like Twitter. The question is what kind of culture is dominating?

Walter

This post has been edited by Walter: Jun 28 2009, 02:33 PM

[send2paul]

So, Paul, how would you feel if Mr and Mrs Amazon persistently sent you newsletters about their corporate culture, instead of the sale flier? Wouldn't that be a little ridiculous, if what you wanted was a service that kept track of when what you want is on sale? Amazon's subscriber base would change dramatically, in ways that I sincerely doubt would be good for product sales.

Well, Amazon are not going to send me corporate newsletters. Amazon's customer base/fan base are two fold - the advertisers to which they sell space to, (like any media), and the punters who buy and sell. Corporate info and that kind of communication will go to advertisers and those involved in that side/level of business. Sales/product info will come to me.

I agree with your comments on the large company/shop scenario. But I don't think it's relevant to the original premise of the fan base having been created through social media - and then being used to sell folks products.

...spammers, not marketers, are the group who would agree that social media works for them.

I think you're probably doing a disservice to many marketers who do use social media to sell their products. But even those "marketers" who suddenly appear in Twitter etc, (without any other history of marketing in any other media prior to that), can still call themselves "marketers" and market/sell products. If quantity of traffic, (through automated systems or otherwise), is the means by which marketers, in such media as Twitter, produce the results they desire, i.e. they've sold their products - then isn't that the result they're after? They may not want to build quality traffic. If Twitter etc is all they have/use as an area to market their goods, then the building of quality traffic may not be what is required to "work that medium". Just because people use a medium in a different way that doesn't agree/conform to the "usual methods" of marketing.... that doesn't make them bad people.

Building quality traffic, branding, feedback, communication and all the other types of "standards" associated with "normal" marketing in other media, or by "regular marketers", just may not be the things which are required to market in social media such as Twitter.

I agree, in other medium- websites selling products, dropping selling, affiliate product selling etc for example - these type of "new social media marketers" may well be called "spammers" because of their lack of depth or not conforming to "normal standards". Taking Twitter as an example, it's defined as:

"A free social messaging utility for staying connected in real-time."

So, in my opinion, that medium is unlike marketing through websites, (for example), and therefore a "social media marketer" would have to use different methods, apply different standards in order achieve there ultimate goal - selling products.