RKG Logo 434-978-4300

Thoughtful MCM article by Cam Balzer on quantifying the value of off-web conversions resulting from paid search:

In one survey, we polled the client’s online customers as well as an anonymous panel regarding their shopping and purchase behavior online and offline. From that information and purchase data we were able to determine that the client’s customer base exhibited an offline multiplier of $2.50: For every dollar in online sales generated by search, an additional $2.50 is generated offline.

This multiplier will vary by merchant, and can be considerably higher or lower. For example, the multiplier for storeless pure-plays like Amazon is, by definition, zero.

My instinct is that for most mechants, $2.50 is too high — I suspect $0.50 is more typical. Regardless, if you have stores, your multipler isn’t zero.

Surveys are one way to get at this number for your business, though there’s often material differences between what people report and what they actually do. Online coupons are another way, if the coupon can be scanned at the store register and later tracked without hassle. Cam didn’t discuss call centers, which also pull orders out of the offline channel. One powerful way to track call-center spillover is to have your call agents ask for a visible tracking code on the web page.

Estimating this multiplier correctly is important. Set it too low, and you leave opportunity on the table, ceding share to your competition. Set it too high, and you advertise recklessly, burning ad budget needlessly. However, when you see smart multi-channel competitors consistently outbidding you in search, it is time to wonder if they place more value on channel spillover than you do, and it may be time to put some serious effort into an accurate estimate of your off-web multiplier.

Update

After writing this, my colleague George Michie pointed out the importance of distinguishing research from shopping. A consumer moving towards a big-ticket considered purchase — say, an expensive piece of consumer electronics — will use the search engines heavily during the research phase. If later polled at point of purchase, many will report having used search to reach the retailer’s site prior to buying. A careful survey or well-designed coupon approach should distinguish between search visitors who come to your site just for research, versus those who come to buy and then opt to do so off-line.

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.


Related Posts

Comments

  1. Russell Ackner, December 18, 2006:

    George makes a good point. While this isn’t the crux of the initial article, isn’t every purchase a considered purchase? I don’t beleive in this classification of purchases. Of course there are those that require more research but for multi-channel retailers, they should be focusing on incentives to their customers to make the Web site their point of purchase vs. their retail stores. Increase that metric and operations costs as well as overhead goes down. The old channel conflict game.

  2. Mattg, January 12, 2007:

    Good thought on shopping.

Your Comment

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2006/12/18/your-off-web-revenue-multiplier/trackback/

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Nancy Kast: I am writing about your billing and online services. I have been receiving calls saying my bill is not paid. My husband pays all our...
  • Marc Adelman: George, Thanks for sharing this data. From an online buzz perspective, Bing is making a big splash. Everyone is talking about it....
  • George Michie: Hi Dennis, I’m not a lawyer, so take anything I say on this with a grain of salt (and please don’t sue us if we’re...
  • survey online: unfortunatelly i have to say that Google tools are the easiest survey web
  • Dennis Yu: Alan, We’ve had several C&D’s sent to us for seemingly innocuous issues. One of our casual dining clients bid on a...
  • George Michie: Hi Vivek, Haven’t had time to put together a full update, but I did take a look at the numbers. No material gains in market...
  • Karridy: You should checkout ClickPath’s call to KW tracking.
  • Vivek: George, really enjoying reading about the analysis you guys do. Was wondering if you have an update on this given a couple more weeks have...
  • Vicki Swaim: Dear Mr.Ullman, I hope you can help me with my problem. I ordered a TV stand the end of April that was advertised as a close out item....
  • Luke: It’s a shame we live in such a litigious society. Why should we have to set up an association? Surely we can prevent senseless...
  • George Michie: Josh, we have had shots fired over our bow and our client’s in the past. Usually responsible companies are reasonable about...
  • Ryan: Ok, George, I’m sufficiently scared… Thanks… :-) Incidentally, are there any trademark resources (other than Google...
  • Josh: We have run into trademark issues for several clients, although it has so far been a matter of trying to make “fair use” of a...
  • Mike: THANK YOU! I love you man!! :)
  • Matthew: Francis, We’ve likewise seen the “A-List” phenomenon in the past. Perhaps with Bing.com, there won’t be anymore of...

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 871
  • Words: 392,916
  • Comments: 2,079

Administration