Posts Tagged ‘ Nielsen ’

To Tweet or Not to Tweet, is Twitter Right for your Insurance Business?

January 14, 2010 by admin

Last year, Pear Analytics issued a report saying 40% of tweets are Pointless Babble. However, when used correctly, Twitter can be a valuable resource for insurance agents to monitor industry chatter, build a knowledge base and even generate organic leads with minimal but sustained effort.

Because it is such a minimalist social network, accurate statistics about Twitter usage are hard to come by, so playing the numbers game is tough. The best support from a usage perspective comes from the trusted folks at Nielsen who state:

“Twitter.com was the fastest-growing Web brand in May 2009, increasing 1,448 percent year over- year, from 1.2 million unique visitors in May 2008 to 18.2 million in 2009…The average time per person on Twitter increased 175 percent year-over-year, from 6 minutes and 19 seconds in May 2008 to 17 minutes and 21 seconds in May 2009.”

These numbers paint a prosperous picture of growth. But when contrasted against the 40% babble factor, Twitter can simultaneously be viewed as an endless stream of knowledge and networking opportunities or a colossal time-suck dedicated to people sharing what they had for breakfast.

To help decide whether Twitter is right for your insurance business, it’s best to ask yourself a few questions?

Am I joining Twitter because I understand how it can benefit my business and brand?

Do I have clear objectives for what I want to achieve using Twitter ?

Do I know and trust anyone with expertise who can help me get started?

Do I understand best practices for communicating via Twitter?

Are there people in my community using Twitter?

If the answer to all five questions is YES, congratulations, you’re ready to start conquering the world 140 characters at a time. If you’re still cloudy, take some time to reflect and get to your happy place. It might never be the right time, and that’s OK.

Use it or ignore it, Twitter is a major part of the communications landscape for the indefinite future. But it is NOT the end-all, be-all insurance marketing solution. It needs nurturing and support from a more robust marketing plan that includes search engine optimization, community building and effective web strategy that generates leads while positioning your business as a trusted resource for insurance-related knowledge.

When used correctly, Twitter can reach potential clients in a personal and resourceful way that positions you as a local “thought-leader” in the realm of insurance. When used incorrectly, people will know you had toast for breakfast.

No Comments

Astronomical Ad Spending by Insurance Goliaths

January 12, 2010 by admin

Ad spending by insurance providers hit an all time high in 2008, approaching $3.5 billion! While ad spending figures for 2009 are not readily available, the big two of Geico and Progressive combined spent close to $1.9 Billion in 2008, roughly the GDP of a small country.

2008 Ad Spending By The Numbers:

Geico – $622.7 million – Adweek.com

Progressive – $470.4 million: Adage.com

Ad spending is a part of any solid insurance marketing plan. It’s a necessary (and costly) line item that requires creative resources and well-conceived strategy to be successful, especially in a Goliath versus Goliath battlefield. Nielsen makes a case for why so much is spent (especially on TV) with a report issued earlier last year. Nielsen IAG reports:

When asked about their own banks, insurance companies and investment firms, 55% of respondents who said they had seen more advertising for their financial institution reported having “complete confidence” in the financial health and soundness of their company and only 18% said they had “little or no confidence” in their company. However, among those who said they had seen less advertising, only 18% had “complete confidence” in their financial company and 45% said they had “little or no confidence” in their company.

Richard Khaleel, EVP of Nielsen IAG’s Financial practice explains the figures

“This research shows that ‘out of sight’ can mean ‘out of business. The current economic climate makes it more important than ever for financial institutions to bolster confidence among their clients and this study clearly demonstrates the link between advertising and confidence levels.”

Mr. Khaleel draws a clear line between “advertising” and “confidence levels,” but what are we really learning about our insurance providers from the commercials we see on TV? If you consider, both basically promise the same thing:

Save Money

Better Coverage

Better Customer Experience

So who’s telling the truth?

More importantly, if the insurance providers are spending so many billions just to retain customers and develop the next reptilian, prehistoric or perplexingly sexy fauxsperson, something is being sacrificed. Considering the amount Americans pay for their insurance and the state of the economy you’d think insurers would want to scale back or reallocate some of those dollars into more tangible projects, say reducing premiums/deductibles, customer service or technology infrastructure.

Fortunately for agents, the Internet is an equalizer and the heaps of money Geico and Progressive are spending to drive people to their websites can be leveraged by creating an effective online presence and strategy. While independents will never compete with the ad spending of insurance Goliaths, the social web, insurance marketing programs and a customer-driven business model are a prescription for long-term growth. Furthermore, agents have an inherent advantage because customers are retained when they are serviced with personalized policy and claims support, not entertaining ad campaigns.

I love talking lizards as much as the next couch potato. But spending hundreds of millions of dollars to reiterate the same value propositions as the competition and convince existing clients of viability? The time is coming when “confidence levels” will have more to do with efficient and helpful insurance support and less to do with slick, saturated ad campaigns.