When two or more gather in a space, on-line or otherwise, brands hover like gull over a fishing boat and on-line social networks are prime feeding space. I am concerned that brands may be trying to socialize in the wrong space. I raise this issue after seeing an on-line (where else?) article by Jere Doyle titled, “A Call to CPG Marketers: Capitalize on Consumers’ Affinity for Online relationships.” The article suggests that his company’s research indicates people welcome online relationships with consumer brands – specifically consumer packaged goods (CPG) brands.

This author quickly confuses relationships with information gathering. “When asked what they want out of their relationships with CPG marketers, consumers responded:

• 48% want information on products
  
• 46% want savings on products
  
• 6% want tips on using the products
  
  

• 76% would sign up for information on specials and savings offers
  
• 22% for valuable information on new product offerings
  
• 2% for information on where to buy specific products”
  
  

The Marketing Implications

Trolling for customers in social networks is a waste of time and resources. When a brand enters that sacred on-line space that was created to be social and not commercial, they run a risk of turning off the people they most want to attract.

This is worth repeating because I have written this before. Consumers are not looking for a relationship with us, whether we sell products or perform services. We desperately want relationships with anyone who will listen to our story because maybe those who listen will not only buy but keep on buying.

I asked my 20-something daughter what social networks she hangs out in (my feeble attempt at using their “lingo”), and she said Facebook. She avoids MySpace because there is too much advertising.

I explored CafeMom and found it a rather cool site but once you got in it was filled with advertising and links. Cheerios had a good link but had only signed up 701 members, which indicates that the ads are there more as a distraction rather than a destination.

Marketing in 2008, with economic bumps everywhere, is going to be very challenged to deliver results and that requires establishing best practices for the brand that close the gap between expectations and results. With the proliferation of media channels, micro-segmentation and increased globalization, marketing plans are becoming more complex and that threatens to widen the gulf between expectations and results.

My concern is that many of the new channels or media will suck away valuable resources like Cheerios did to capture 701 members. I guarantee that these 701 members might become a little smarter about Cheerios as a snack than others but don’t look for a groundswell that translates into mega-sales anytime soon.

For the last week, I have been working to develop a new panel for the DMA 2008 conference. Our working group wants to focus on the top 10 new hot CRM ideas and that’s a real challenge because “new” generally means untested and a short track record.

I am reminded of many popular books that profiled the best companies and cited their best practices and yet, five years later, they were out of business. This is the challenge marketers face today. As so many new media and channels unfold and we might be too quick to jump in, hoping, as we described in November, to find a Blue Ocean with clear water. (Click here to read what we wrote in issue #180.)

I am not convinced that social networks are the place for brands to be, both from a strategic and an ROI perspective. This week ask your team what social networks they are involved with and how they react to advertisers that hang out in their space.

Have a wonderful week and stay warm.