The social media thought police are really getting on my nerves, especially with the “glass half empty” rhetoric. For instance, TravelClick put out a release titled ‘One Quarter of Hotels Not Using Social Media’. Good on them for the research but I find the angle odd when you consider this means 75% of hoteliers are using social media, to my mind an extremely impressive figure. But the more is less angle was immediately embraced online, as it usually is.
Here are just two of many examples: Tnooz (Quarter of Hotels Shunning Social Media) and Hotel Marketing (One Quarter of Hotels Not Using Social Media).
Seriously, I don’t get it. Where I come from, three out of four constitutes a large majority – most hoteliers are using social media (though, just quietly, 3/4 does seem on the high side).
Anyway, according to TravelClick, hoteliers prefer to use search and digital advertising.
“Only 20% of the poll’s respondents cited using Twitter, 10% cited using Groupon or other forms of online couponing (sic), and a minuscule 8% utilize FourSquare promotions,” the press release said.
“Facebook was by far the most preferred social media channel for hoteliers, with 65% of respondents using it to increase bookings and revenue.”
Jonathan Cherins, chief marketing officer of TravelClick, commented: “Instead of running cost-efficient promotions on social media channels like Twitter and Facebook, hotels are electing to increase their advertising spend through online advertisements (57%) and paid search advertising (20%).”
This is the first time I have heard anyone suggest that social media is more cost-efficient than paid search, though online banner ads are certainly open to debate (if that is in fact what the survey refers to – “online advertising” can mean a lot of things).
Talk to anyone on the marketing side of travel and they will tell you that paid search is the most efficient, transparent online marketing there is.
Quite simply search it at the front line of travel marketing – that’s why travel businesses are spending so much money with Google, now the world’s largest and most powerful travel company.
Hotels, airlines and tour operators can invest a $1 in search and track its performance every which way. They can ensure, given the right strategy and staff, that their $1 will return $1.10 or much more in business.
The same certainty cannot be found in social media, where everything I have read suggests inconsistency and a client base heavily orientated toward the younger demographic, which is great when Gen Whatever is your target market.
But a big-spending middle-aged corporate or leisure customer through Twitter. Please.
And while it’s certainly true that some social media campaigns work spectacularly well, others are massive, expensive flops.
Social media has awesome power, no doubt, but how to harness it so that it drives dollars to the bottom line in the same way as search?
No-one really knows.
Also, the real cost of social media must not be ignored. And that cost is labour.
Social media is labour intensive, you need real people working the angles to yield results, even if it is only curtailing the spread of bad news through key online opinion makers.
In conclusion, I believe in social media.
I think it is a lot of fun and has a real long-term future (though it is more about the platform than the brand – witness the decline of MySpace).
Just like the 75% of hoteliers who have embraced it according to the TravelClick survey.
So, to the social media thought police, leave the other 25% alone.
They have broken no laws.
Ends
Aah, come on Martin – we all like a headline to bring people in (as you’ve just demonstrated).
On Tnooz we’ve been balanced as the issue allows, covering those that gush over social media as well as those that give it very little attention at all (Ryanair, Trailfinders).
Anyway, you got my attention with the headline 🙂
Always looking for that hook, Kevin! Love your work at Tnooz btw. Casting no stones but getting fed up with the ‘you just don’t get it’ cool kids approach to social media marketing that some are espousing. It’s an option, sure, but does not suit everyone. That’s all I’m saying.
Martin… seriously? I AM one of those “middle-aged corporate or leisure customer” and I do use social media all the time.
Like nearly every traveller that I know, I do online research before booking. I check out blog posts (ah-hem), Facebook Pages and review sites… and I am in the travel business that sells incentive travel and provides marketing services to travel, tourism and hospitality businesses.
While I agree that 75% adoption is a stretch, I do know that social media can amplify promotions. I also know that Facebook Pages can engage past guests which helps future buyers to make a decision. Twitter? Well, I’m not yet sold on that BUT I do follow airlines, hotels/resorts, destinations etc. on Twitter.
Also, new tools to enhance a Facebook page are being released all the time. I’m currently exploring a Facebook booking app for the industry.
As you say though, social media can eat up hours a day (believe me, been there, done that, still get caught) so there is a cost involved. As with everything though, you need to know why, what, how and who, so you can tell if it’s working for you.
Cheers!
I think it’s shocking that a quarter of all hotels do NOTHING with social media, that’s more shocking than it seems, actually.
Depending on the definition, that means Tripadvisor! Imagine, 25% of hotels are ignoring all Tripadvisor reviews. Now, there’s Foursquare to think about. Try searching the Foursquare tips on any hotel, you will usually find at least one, “Avoid the restaurant!” or “Internet is way too expensive, go across the street for free wifi”. This is just another medium to monitor.
To take what you said about social media OR online advertising, I don’t think its an either-or situation. Social media marketing/monitoring is an essential part of any marketing department. For someone to ignore one part of the marketing mix in favor of another is irresponsible and would make me question their suitability as a modern marketer.
Fair enough but to your last point I think most marketers are time poor and cash-strapped. Therefore they have to make ‘either/or’ decisions so it’s inevitable something will miss out. If it’s not social it will be something else.
Yes, I think 75% is an amazing adoption rate, and also one that probably matches the stats with things like Twitter and Blogs where the service is used for 2 or 3 months and then abandoned. So, perhaps an more interesting stat would be something about the actual use of these services and the real benefits.
For many, FaceBook remains an enigma where they just don’t know how to adjust it to their business style and client base. I keep seeing these great articles about how well it works for Apple and others, but when you’ve got 70 Billion in cash – of course it works.
Another interesting stat has been how few businesses have verified and taken ownership of their Google Places listing when this is in fact a really strong marketing tool with immediate positive benefits.
At any rate, Martin I agree with you fully.
These numbers don’t mean ANYTHING. Facebook is over, biz burnt their bridges… and no one is doing it right anyway. Twitter is incredibly powerful, Facebook is a closed system so less so….
but if that 75% of hotels using social media are hiding guest posts on their Facebook page, not participating in any conversation & just force pushing an RSS feed of ME ME ME specials… well they shouldn’t be on social media to begin with.
All these brands are doing it wrong… so I look at that 75% as a number that means hotels are losing eyes because they are losing attention, and attention is equity. We are failing at social media – there is groupthink and a crisis of perception…. we’ll work through it.
But all that number says is that 25% of people are out to lunch, and the 75% is just a empty stat of people being successful, or completely destroying their brands online. From groupon to being hidden in Facebook… when the social bubble shakes out it’s going to be funny to see what brands still have equity or respect.