advertisement
advertisement
advertisement

Charming Shoppes E-Commerce Chief Speaks Of Retailer Social Ignorance

Written by Evan Schuman
August 17th, 2011

One of the brightest E-Commerce observers in the industry—Bill Bass—commented recently about the confusion between social media and brand awareness. Bass used to head E-Commerce at Lands’ End and then Sears, and he now runs Fair Indigo and E-Commerce operations for the Charming Shoppes chain (1,989 stores in 48 states branded as Lane Bryant, Cacique, Fashion Bug, Catherines Plus Sizes and Figi’s).

But his point is that retailers need to better understand what social media can do and what it truly represents, rather than what they want it to represent.

“No one has cracked the code on how social media impacts retail. I recently had an agency pitch an app as a way to build brand awareness. I pointed out that for someone to go to the trouble of downloading an app, they already need to be aware of the brand. So at best you could argue that it would help brand engagement, but not brand awareness. Lots of money is being spent in this area. Suspect most of it is being poured down a rat hole.”

The term “rat hole” is wonderful, in that it almost signifies that the person speaking is both not a marketer (always a good trait in a mammal) and probably saying something worth considering. But the rat hole is simply that retailers don’t have the ability today to understand the social-media influence on retail, and that lack of understanding is almost certainly causing a lot of wasted effort and money.


(Related Story: Has Charming Shoppes Really Improved The Accuracy Of Buying Clothes Online?)

Bass notes a disturbing shift away from E-mail toward Facebook and other social media. Eventually, when retailers master social-media issues, that shift will likely be a good change. But for now, he said, “It’s worrisome, as we’re shifting from a known sales driver to an unknown.”

Bass also talked about the infatuation some retailers having with getting large “like” numbers for their business sites, including running contests and other promotions to incentivize people into “liking” a retailer’s Facebook page.

That tactic is actually one of the most self-destructive efforts anywhere for three reasons. First, there’s every reason to believe that consumers do not make their choices of where to buy things based on the number of “likes” on a retailer’s Facebook page. (We could stop right there, but we promised you three reasons and, doggone it, we’re going to deliver all three.)

Second, the only reason to want to increase a site’s “likes” is if you believe that the number of “likes” has high credibility and persuasion with prospective customers. Third, if you believe Point Two, wouldn’t a publicized contest to get people to “like” a retailer’s page thoroughly obliterate whatever credibility it might have briefly enjoyed? Doesn’t the existence of such promotions tell people that the number of “likes” on a site is just a marketing fiction, as opposed to an organic list of people—with no incentives at all—who chose to “like” a site?


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.