According to this article from Expansion (in spanish), the recently launched Zara.com has reached a astonishing 2% conversion rate for its online ecommerce website.

zara.com daily visitors

About 5000 purchases/day multiplied by the average purchase which is about 40€, makes a whopping 200000€ of revenue.

Quite of an achivement, considering that the average conversion rate of the same segment never really tops 1% global and that the guys at Inditext, are not really keen on investing money in advertisement.

What does this really mean? Brands like these can actually leverage on impulse buying on the internet? Is this really it!?

Ecommerce has always been affected by the whole consumer decisional process, which greatly differs from the real-life one. Consumers plan and consider carefully all different options available prior to the purchase, maybe coming back on the same website more then once within a few days.

If those figures are correct, Zara simply managed to recreate something similar to impulse buying dynamics simply through its massive brand and worldwide recognition… Maybe it is not the case, but surely they will manage to get up to it at some point.

Another great post from ilovecharts.com. A self-explanatory graph is worth thousands of words sometimes.

Just a few years ago Blockbuster Spanish subsidiary announced it was going to shut down all of his Spanish rental shop, due to piracy and eventually a clear change in customer’s behavior. A few days ago the company finally announced its bankruptcy. The company’s lost more than a billion dollars in the past two years. However its a well-defined plan aiming to change the company itself into something more similar to Netflix, hence focusing on online rental services. Bussiness is much like survival of the fittest and every company has to adapt an overcome in order to survive. It will be quite unlikely to see the Blockbuster brand totally disappear though, due to studios backing it up in fear of Netflix to take over the market.

On a side-note, this will certainly mean a clear spike in every US unemployment report for the next year or two, due to the huge amount of people working at Blockbuster’s shops.

Since Twitter went online, beside the early adopters enthusiasts, I always heard many people debating on its actual usefulness.
Still, it is one of the fastest growing platforms, despite its weaknesses, its extreme vulnerability to spam, or its 150 characters limit…

This very last point has been thoroughly debated: 150 characters are not enough to deliver any message and force people to limit the scope of the message they can send.

A few weeks ago, Johnathan Schwartz, former Sun Microsystem CEO, resigned via his his twitter account.

Within 150 characters he managed to say that we resigned from his position, and also gave an explanation for his resignation with a haiku:

Financial crisis

Stalled to many customers

Ceo no more

This should be the right way people should use twitter, and haikus, because or their ability of defining a whole world within a few lines, just fit perfectly this media. Johnathan just seems to have understood this pretty well.

When resigning from a position we often send plenty of emails out, to co-workers, colleagues or acquaintances: Johnathan just exploited the speed and efficiency of Twitter, with no need to waste that much time on writing emails, also getting positive results for his personal brand, communicating directly with the right audience and successfully delivering the message.

Next time we twit, let’s just make sure it is for something meaningful..!

Like everyone else who’s in this industry, I daily read loads of stuff, bog posts and articles, about how good SEO is, how important is to be ranked for the right keywords, how successfull a product can be if is commercially developed on the internet through SEO and online marketing services.

I read loads of this stuff and I’m honestly starting to get sick of it. Years ago things were simpler: marketing departements had no even idea about what SEO was and how crucial the internet would have become in a few years.

Now everybody jumps on the bandwagon… just take a look to your list of Twitter followers: how many people or companies you can find which supposedly know all secrets about SEO and internet marketing? Well, take a few of them and read those blogs and articles. As pointed out by Derek Powazek in this article:

The problem with SEO is that the good advice is obvious, the rest doesn’t work, and it’s poisoning the web.

Then it goes deeper analysing his own perspective about the industry and even if it goes to harsh sometimes, I can only agree with him. The fact is that all the hype about SEO it’s just artificially created by the market. Good webdesign and content shouldn’t need any “seo expert”.

However the need of search engine optimization professional tells us that the quality of web development these days (and the quality of the content) are getting worse and worse, requiring someone to artificially (and magically) make them appear on search engine simply correcting all those stupid mistakes developers do. It’s a pretty simplified explanation, but I guess it delivers the big picture about what the industry has become nowadays.

Take a look to the reaction to the articles as well: from the offended “seo professional” to the old school coder, to whom “magic seo practice” sound obvious. It’s quite interesting and gives also an idea about the different character the industry of made of…

Here’s the full article. And think about adding the Derek blog to your feeds, it’s worth it.

Companies prefer to spend/waste their money on banners, Adwords and affiliates campaign rather than producing some silly tv clip. It was pretty predictable.

Especially if we realize the current economic downturn. I guess it means that advertiser prefer to spend money where they can get some more valuable feedback information, with a more precise and extensive targeting and value for money.

Sounds right to me…but are we really sure that sticking banners and Google Adwords actually works?

Let’s get some hints from the same Guardian article’s comments:

Record £1.75bn online spend… and you still can’t make a profit with your website.

Indeed. Everybody knows or has been working on a company or project which injected a awaful amount on money on internet advertising without getting any profit back, not even in the long term.

This one it’s even better:

I don’t think they actually wasted all that money but expectations on conversions and sales, yeah, those might be quite high if spending get’s up to those digits. And guess what, while only getting away from the last economic downturn, so they guy here could be pretty right.

Anyway, the following comment might settling this down:

I disagree with many of these posts. Web advertising is much more accountable than TV, radio and print advertising – which is why it works. It doesn’t matter if some of you ignore them. Enough web users see them, and, more importantly, click on them.

That’s pretty much my opinion on the problem. And also the way things actually work out in a real enviroment, if you happen to work in marketing or advertisement.

The perception people has got of online ads it’s quite biased though: those who do not click on ads think they do not work:

…but according to these figures (1.75bn quids is not a few pennies) there’s actually some people who click on those ads and purchase products.

In the end, better a few more ads on a page (and adblock activated) rather than more tv crap (who does watch tv anymore… ).

The original article here.

Something big must be going on in between Google and Twitter.

1. Twitter started ranking on Google SERPS.

This means that Google recognized Twitters in nowadays web search results as well as it’s brand.

Therefore Twitter is becoming the next service to be flooded with bogus account filled with keywords. This usually happens when a service really goes mainstream and internet markeeters start exploiting it massively…

2. Google has opened his own account on Twitter.

They set up different accounts for each one of their top services.

This is the very first message posted:

For those who are not familiar with binary code, this means I’m feeling Lucky

I do not want to draw any conclusion from this, but looking back at previous Google acquisitions timeline, I would not be surprised if big G is getting ready to put his hands on Twitter.
In 2003 Google purchased Blogspot, realizing the web was not only made by websites. Three years later they bought Youtube, since the web was not only websites and blogs. I think they’ve just realized the internet is made also of asincronous short messages…

The Internet represents a major step in our evolution, and is a forerunner of things to come. Artificial intelligence researcher Francis Heylighen sees huge growth as this new world-wide communication system continues to gain power from billions of humans adding to its intelligence every day. “It will get smarter,” Heylighen says, “as it morphs into a global super-organism that could one day provide solutions to most of humanity’s problems.
http://www.memebox.com/futureblogger/show/158

As reported here also (whose owner gets the credit for the pic here displayed) one day the net actually gain consciusness.
I actually believe it is gonna be kind of hard, as long as we’re gonna interact through relatively simple machines like most pc’s still are.