This is page 3 of:

When Choosing Customer VIPs, Is It Time To Ignore Purchase History And Focus On Social-Media Clout?

August 17th, 2011

What social networks are doing is delivering a way to quantify the huge buying power of a customer’s friends and associates. As writer Carl Reiner once quipped: “You can choose your friends, but you can’t choose your relatives. So choose friends with a lot of money.”

The influence factor is also based on a lesson so many of us learned in high school. When choosing who to interact with—especially in a non-pleasant manner—the nature of the individual is just one factor. (For example, if making a speech about how the student body’s intelligence seems to be plummeting by the hour, citing the school’s muscle-bound star quarterback is probably a bad choice.)

But a far greater consideration is the student’s associations. It was quickly discovered, for example, that members of the marching band were a very large and tight-knit group. The bandies had a Warsaw Pact perspective that attacking any one of them was an attack on all of them.

That philosophy very closely parallels Facebook friends and Twitter followers. If people think a retailer has ripped them off and they blast a note to that effect to followers, those followers tend to immediately see the rip-off personally as the group dynamics kick in.

(At my school, members of the chess club—and yes, I was a member—were the opposite of the marching band members and were seen as ideal torment targets. If a chess club member was attacked, the other members would most likely scurry away and theorize the most likely scenarios of where the conflict will go and the rough probabilities. It was less Warsaw Pact/NATO and more Keystone Kops with slide rules.)

SAS’s Bastone also makes a good point that a true influence yardstick wouldn’t even stop with the analysis of a customer’s followers and would have to extend—with some reasonable limit—to the followers of the customer’s followers.

“The re-tweet or mention of a post is an incredibly valuable data point, as it simultaneously acknowledges that the influencer’s post was in fact read and it serves to amplify the reach of that message to people who aren’t necessarily following that influencer,” Bastone said. “In other words, it is both a Nielsen rating and an indication of the relevance of the message.”

Admittedly, very little of this data gathering and analysis—let alone a practical means to deliver that information to associates in a timely and convenient way—is doable today. But the only way it’s ever going to be doable is for retailers to think about it today and decide what they would like to eventually see—and to then start changing processes to enable that vision.

The hurdles are mostly logistical and process-oriented, rather than technological. The raw data is freely available today, and the analytics needed are truly not that much more complex than what is currently being used. The biggest hurdle is getting retail execs’ minds to internalize a new way of thinking. If you think consumers are resistant to change, take an honest look at your own senior team.


Comments are closed.


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!

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...

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.