tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4246750637763215596.post3849105991245881859..comments2024-03-12T13:25:16.607-05:00Comments on The Digital Donor: Hey Social Media, Show Me The Money!Tim Kachuriakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14271159058388279000noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4246750637763215596.post-78739808985282998472011-07-12T22:28:38.598-05:002011-07-12T22:28:38.598-05:00Dave,
Thanks for the feedback and the juicy quest...Dave,<br /><br />Thanks for the feedback and the juicy questions. Allow me to respond:<br /><br />1. The DM list was very targeted (with a about 1/3 of the records that were complete propsect thrown in just for testing purposes). And that is exactly the point. The DM 'actual' response rate was 18%-- not bad in itself-- but to your point, we mailed (mostly) to people we knew would respond. The mail piece was the ONLY entry-point to the campaign. No other mention was made in any other channel by design so we could effectively measure what the effect would be from people that responded to the offline piece to the online component.<br /><br />2. YES-- the campaign was integrated once the folks got online. This was another component of the experiment. We wanted to see how we could "Flip the Funnel" and empower our existing audience to help us recruit new people. And they did. The 87 people that responded to the direct mail piece, went online and recruited 1,903 more people. That's 2087% viral recruitment rate. So though you are correct in that we only mailed 488 people in this test campaign, we got 1,039 people to respond to the offer. No matter how you slice it, there were more pieces put back into the baskets than were originally handed out.<br /><br />-tmkTim Kachuriakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14271159058388279000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4246750637763215596.post-56009064096486411432011-07-12T21:58:35.861-05:002011-07-12T21:58:35.861-05:00Hey Tim, intriguing stuff! 213%? Pretty amazing st...Hey Tim, intriguing stuff! 213%? Pretty amazing stuff, but all sorts of questions come to mind from a fellow direct marketer and skeptic! Like: was the DM list insanely tightly segmented and relatively small so the effective response rate could have a chance to be so high? Were there truly ZERO other channels that might have motivated the response or was this a multichannel integrated campaign? Was the response donations or some other lower-friction action that we might expect higher response rates?<br /><br />Regardless of how you slice it, still impressive and well written.<br /><br />Keep pushing the envelope,<br /><br />DaveDave Raleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13137552886605274046noreply@blogger.com