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.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

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


Related Posts

    No 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

  • George Michie: Kevin, Marc, thanks for your comments. Help is coming, but not the solution. There are a number of instances when the CTR on the...
  • Marc Adelman: George, You have been an advocate of “the advanced control option” for years now. Depressing right YEARS! Eh…listen...
  • Kevin Hill: Is what they really need is a fourth match type. Here’s google’s help documentation on broad match: This is the default...
  • Kevin Micalizzi, Dimdim Web Conferencing: Jim (& George)- We still offer a free version of Dimdim. Just click Sign Up Now at the top of the...
  • Tomas: indeed, i can’t talk about it either… :)
  • Philip Price: Thank you for the RegHack, it worked for me, tho at first when i made the reg file with the information i copied from above i also...
  • George Michie: Sorry Jim, this post was written in 2007. Apparently some of those products are gone.
  • Jim: Hey, I checked two products like dimdim and cutepdf but none is free. What are you talking about free and open source?
  • George Michie: If they keep hearing the same message, and seeing evidence in the data to back it up, something will have to give. There is hope on...
  • Tomas: I’ve been having the same argument with Google for months now and in the end there does seem to be a feature in the algorithm that...
  • George Michie: Doesn’t have to be, it can be intra-adgroup as well.
  • Josh: George – I take it you’re referencing a scenario where your exact-match keywords are not listed as negative exact match keywords...
  • George Michie: Melissa, you’re right, it’s always happened to varying degrees, particularly since the advent of extended broad match....
  • Mel66: I don’t think this is a bug. It’s been happening for years. It *is* impossible to manage, and I can’t help but wonder if...
  • George Michie: Thanks Matt, Sometimes humor serves a purpose.

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 948
  • Words: 451,089
  • Comments: 2,875

Administration