One might think that due to the rise of social media and the increasing number of shoppers using mobile and tablet devices to access content, core elements of e-marketing such as email could become outdated.

From “The Purchase Path Of Online Buyers In 2012” I have picked out a couple of interesting results, that tell us otherwise.

One of the key take-aways is, that email matters most for repeat customers. It “is an extremely effective tactic for driving sales from repeat shoppers” – in fact 30% of transactions started with a click on an email from the retailer. Another key point is, that paid search matters most for new customers. They are much more influenced by paid search than repeat buyers – search was “the single most important tactic for new customers; 39% of transactions by new customers started with clicks from paid or organic search results”. The last key point, I would like to put forward, is that social tactics are not meaningful sales drivers. Less than 1% of transactions, for both new and repeat customers, could be traced back to social links. Nevertheless customers report that they enjoy seeing social network links and posts that are about specific products. The weak connection with actual influence on sales is mostly due to the fact, that these tactics are at the top of the customer decision funnel, furthest away from the purchase decision. Most likely these tactics require a longer measurement period than the 30-day period of this report.

What I get from this is that although social is important, it should not be overestimated and it should not neglect tools as search and email, that has a strong impact on sales. Most surprisingly email marketing is still very powerful, and email optimization along with search engine optimization deserve a lot focus.

The social networks did not kill the email marketing industry after all.

At least not yet!

A Saturday in September in a small quiet place in Denmark, a video is shot. It is a video shot in the dying minutes of a Danish second division football game. With an acrobatically bicycle kick the goalkeeper of Frem scores a dramatic equalizer in extra time. The video was put on YouTube, and you can watch it by clicking here or on the picture below:

Now, Denmark is a small country. The event itself, a low-level football game, is nothing spectacular and the clubs and players involved are not famous, not even in Denmark. Will this video go viral?

In this video Tom Ewing explains what constitutes online sharing and communication – in other words; viral potential. I decided to try to analyze the example using this framework called ComMotion™ Index.

According to the framework, emotional intensity is linked to sharing – the feeling of surprise in particular. The three factors tied closely to viral potential is emotional intensity, surprise and a bit of happiness. These three factors are all present in the video; it is emotional intense – the clock is ticking, they are behind, they desperately need that equalizing goal; it is surprising – suddenly the goalkeeper comes forward for the corner kick, he attempts a bicycle kick and scores a last-minute equalizer; it contains happiness – people go crazy and celebrate as if they had won the game.

My conclusion of this mini analysis is that the video has high viral potential. But in reality I would not predict it to spread outside of Denmark, because of its, in my opinion, limited relevance to people not involved with the clubs or players. Now, what happened?

The video lived up to its viral potential! The YouTube video spread throughout the world, and today this video can be found online at news sites in Denmark, England, Spain, New Zealand, Australia and Norway and has almost 3 million views on YouTube!

This example supports the framework mentioned, and that it can be worthwhile to think about what drives viral potential. Personally I am amazed that a video, so insignificant, can spread so far and quickly. It exemplifies the power of online sharing and communication and the use of social media such as YouTube.

However, to me it is not evident that things going viral equal improved performance for companies, e.g. increased sales, visits, awareness etc. The next question needed to be explored is therefore; what makes viral efficient and how do you measure it?