Study: 61% of smartphone users would book travel on mobile devices

A new Mojiva study being reported by EyeforTravel reveals that 61% of smartphone users would be comforable booking travel on their iPhone or Android.

 

Purchasing_travel_on_mobile

The study, which was based on responses from almost 200 mobile users on the Mojiva network, shows that while 64% of users would be comfortable spending up to $500 dollars via their phones for travel, nearly forty percent of smartphone users would be comfortable booking travel in excess of $500. 

 

Source: Eyefortravel

 

 

02. August 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

5 words that generate the most likes on Facebook

In this era of social media, many companies are looking to increase guest and fan engagement on their Facebook pages. According to a new study from Buddy Media, increasing the number of "likes" your posts and updates receive may be easier than you thought.

After evaluating posts and status updates, the report found these five keywords that generate the most likes for posts on Facebook:

  1. Like
  2. Take
  3. Submit
  4. Watch
  5. Post

The success of these key words indicates that messages with "soft engagement" can be an extremely successful strategy in social media. 

28. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , , , | 1 comment

How reliable are TripAdvisor reviews?

Since its launch in February 2000, travelers and hoteliers have attempted to better understand just how accurate the reviews at TripAdvisor truly are. 

Jonathan Barksy and Robert Honeycutt of Market Metrix, who's specialty happens to be hospitality feedback, compared 12-months of TripAdvisor reviews against their firm's proprietary index to find that – generally speaking - aggregate TripAdvisor review scores tend to be accurate

The hotels used in this comparison were selected on the basis of their location, brand and type to achieve a diverse mix. Each hotel also must have received a sufficient number of responses. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the similarity of scores for each hotel, the distribution of the data, and the change in scores.

The most significant conclusion of this study is that the mean scores of hotels track very consistently and closely between TripAdvisor (CSI) and MMHI. This indicates that, when taken as a whole, the reviews for a particular hotel are a reliable measure of average customer satisfaction of that hotel, given adequate sample size. However, the variability of scores was found to be slightly greater among TripAdvisor hotels. TripAdvisor reviews were more spread out with more high scores and more low scores. While some persons may appreciate reading a wider range of reviews about a hotel, extreme observations may be distracting or even distort consumer perception.

(emphasis added above)

In other words, there are some reviews on TripAdvisor that – regardless of the hotel – simply aren't accurate. Individual reviews can skew negative or positive as a byproduct of an emotional experience. For example, receiving an amenity from the hotel to mark a special visit may elicit a more positive reaction on TripAdvisor than having a hotel misplace a guest's laundry.

On the whole, however, the median score for an individual hotel tends to be accurate and in line with established industry metrics for guest satisfaction.

 

11. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , | 1 comment

Study: Facebook "Likes" mean less than you think

FastCompany details a new social media analysis by Dan Zarella that has some surprising results. Contrary to popular thought, Facebook likes do not mean that more people will read your posts. In fact, posts that are viewed more tend to get fewer likes.

Zarella's study looked at the correlation between impressions per post (essentially the number of page views a post gets) and feedback per post (a tacit measure of how interested the public is in the post material, measured in comments and "likes"). Using Facebook Insights data, which is only accessible to page admins, he looked at 12 months of data and found merely a "weak negative correlation." In other words, the posts that get slightly more views actually have fewer likes and comments.

This study, if it pans out in broader review, knocks a sizeable whole in the social engagement metrics that many companies are using. It will be interesting to see if this report reflects a blip or an actual trend.

06. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , , | 1 comment

Google+ Equals Zero … Four Early Signs that Google Plus Will Fail

There has been a lot of hype around the launch of Google's latest foray into the social space, Google+, this week, with "hype" being the operative word.

After spending time on the site, I'm convinced that Google Plus is destined meet the same fate as the brand's other failed social networking attempts. The reason? Google doesn't understand social networking. 

Here are four early signs that Google+ will fail:

  1. Despite being launched as a social networking site, Google has limited the number of people that can join at launch. This strategy has failed Google before in the social space (Buzz and Wave come to mind) and demonstrates that, for all that the brand does well, Google does not understand social networking. How can users be expected to establish their social network when their friends, family, or coworkers can't join the site? Meanwhile, Facebook and RenRen are immediately accessible to everyone. Not only does this limit the usability of the site, it squanders the initial excitement around the launch and frustrates any attempt to convert early adopters. Google's effort to ensure site stability has guaranteed its demise even before the doors open.
  2. Google+ is neither open nor closed. While Google Plus allows you to set sharing levels among your friends, the site permits strangers to connect with you and – in some cases – interact with your content. While there could be some upside to this model in professional or industry networking, that isn't the audience that Google+ is targeting. I don't think Mom is going to be thrilled when a college student from Brazil starts making comments on her recipes. 
  3. With nearly 800 million people spending one trillion minutes per month on Facebook, why should users bother to joining Google+. As of the launch, Google can't any functionality that solves a user's problem or represents a "killer app". Google Plus is simply another way to accomplish the same thing that users are already doing on Facebook. It isn't targeting a niche market or bringing anything new to the party. There is nothing being done in the space that is unique to Google+. Google Plus is elegantly designed, but the core functionality – including the sharing privacy methods that Google has promoted – already existing within Facebook. To put it bluntly, Google can't express any "reason" to join and, therefore, users simply won't join. 
  4. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Facebook is strong enough to compete and innovate. For all it's fortunes, Google is the underdog in social media. For every gee-whiz thing that Google might be able to implement into Google+, Facebook can simply incorporate those features into their service and easily maintain it's 750+ million user base. 

Google has garnered the media's attention yet again; however, the early signs point to a quick and public end to yet another failed social network. 

 

 

05. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , | Leave a comment

Happy Birthday, America

The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:
Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

04. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Leave a comment

Management Tip: Don't Do What You Love

Today's management tip from Harvard Business Review turns conventional wisdom on its ear. Adopted from Dorie Clark, HBR boldly states: "Don't Do What You Love" for the following reasons:

 

  1. It's not your strength. You may love to do something you are just not good at. Because it can be hard to self-assess, ask for frank feedback from those around you to know where your strengths are.
  2. You're too emotionally attached. Passion may cloud your judgment. When you care deeply about something, it can be hard to be take criticism or let others get involved.
  3. It's a hobby, not a job. Sadly, you can't be paid for everything. What you love may not be lucrative. Instead find something you like that pays.

 

Clark goes on to document her rationale more fully in an extended HBR newsletter, but it certainly runs contrary to the traditional "do what you love" mantra that has been championed for so many years. 

For me, I think the middle ground is the ideal spot. By "loving what you do", you can apply your passions and strengths towards fulfilling goals — both personally and professionally — without being hampered by the very real concerns Clark raises. 

01. July 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , | 1 comment

Luxury brands are big fans of Facebook, other social media sites

High-end brands have woken up awakened to the power of social media because of some compelling statistics. "Households earning over $100,000 a year are on the Internet 23 hours a week and on Facebook six hours a week," said Bernie Brennan, co-author with Lori Schafer of "Branded: How Retailers Engage Consumers with Social Media and Mobility." And 80 percent of households with annual incomes of more than $240,000 use social networking, primarily Facebook, said Brennan. Luxury brands now realize "there's a new way to communicate and if retailers or brands are not engaging in social media, they're missing an enormous market opportunity," he said.

Some of the world's most exclusive names are quickly becoming the world's most engaging brands. Why? It's simple really. Facebook is the social media home to millions of affluents.

These statistics are the sirens song to luxury brands:

- Households earning more than $100,000 spend 6+ hours per week on Facebook

- 80% of households earning more than $240,000 use social media, primarily Facebook

Luxury brands are realizing the intrinsic value of having both affluents and aspirational customers interact with their brand and products at a time and place of their choosing.

So it's little wonder that BMW, Gucci, Chanel, Ritz-Carlton and Louis Vuitton have jumped headfirst into social media, particularly through Facebook.

Burberry has used direct engagement – such as asking Facebook users to submit photos and videos of themselves carrying the signature raincoats and handbags – to boost "likes" to more than 6 million.

One facet of social media metrics that is vastly underappreciated, however, is influence. When a user "likes" a brand, they broaden the degree of influence for that brand.

Even if the user themselves is aspirational and cannot yet afford the brand, generally users will have another 10-20 Facebook users within their network that can afford the brand. By "likeing" the brand, they are spreading the luxury brands influence directly to all of the users within their network. When that "like" shows up on their wall or stream, it serves as a call to action for other users to engage with the brand.

For example, if I "like" a new car from BMW, it will post to my wall. It will be seen by my entire network and the peer influence fundamental will prompt my friends to "like" that BMW and engage with the brand. If the average Facebook user has 130 friends, then Burberry's 6 million fans potentially influence tens of millions of Facebook users.

Luxury brands, with historically smaller traditional footprints and touch points, are finding a home on social media. And with 83% of affluents now making purchases online, Facebook and social websites have truly become the new showcase for the world's premiere brands.  

28. June 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment

Retail Study: 1 Facebook Fan = 20 Visits To Your Website

A UK based study by Hitwise analyzed data from the top 100 retailers to find how much additional web traffic was generated by each Facebook fan.  The metrics showed that each fan of a Facebook page produced an extra 20 visits to the website.  In order to generate this number, Facebook traffic was analyzed and compared against Facebook Page data from Techlightenment.

The study also found that brands utilizing Facebook the most saw increased brand searches on Google, Yahoo! and Bing.  A top UK retailer, Topshop,  saw brand searches  increase by 54% after a visit to Facebook.  This was a trend that stayed true for all of the top 10 brands, with brand searches increasing from 19% to 54% if a user previously visited their Facebook page.

25. June 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , | Leave a comment

Travel Trends for China's Millionaires

The Hurun Research Institute has released The Chinese Luxury Travel White Paper, giving insight into the preferences of China's luxury consumers.

The study, which was created from one-on-one interviews with 463 Chinese millionaires and billionaires, sheds new light onto how the wealthiest Chinese make travel decisions.

I found several details to particularly interesting, including:

  • Chinese millionaires average 15 days of vacation annually, including three trips abroad. One-third will take more than 20 days of vacation per year and 20% will travel abroad five or more every year.
  • France is now the top travel destination, followed by the United State (which had been #1 in 2009 and 2010), Australia, Japan, and the Maldives. 
  • 4 out of 5 millionaires consider sending their children overseas for education, with the US, UK and Canada topping the list. 
  • 80% of Chinese millionaires prefer to travel on their own rather than with a tour group.
  • 57% of the ultra-wealthy make their own travel arrgangements using a travel agent or professional website.
  • Only 11% of Chinese millionaires book travel through a hotel website. 
  • When choosing where to stay, brand is the most important factor, followed by service, facilities, and location.
  • The preferred hotel brands of Chinese millionaires are Shangri-La, Hilton, Park Hyatt and The Ritz-Carlton. 

For US hotel companies seeking to gain a toe-hold in the Asian travel market, this study gives actionable insight in how to market to ultra-wealthy Chinese. 

For example, with such a large number of Chinese considering an overseas education for their children, do you think proximity to major universities would be a consideration for the guest? If so, do your professional travel agents have a list of area universities? Is this information detailed on the top-performing international travel websites? 

With such a high percentage of millionaires preferring to travel without a group, is your hotel prepared to host a single Chinese family? Without a group guide as a primary communicator for the guests, are your facilities and staff prepared to service a Chinese guest? For example, do you have community maps and guides printed in simplified Chinese? Are your restaurant and in-room dining menus availble in multiple languages? Do you provide multiple Mandarin television channels? Do you provide currency exhange services? 

I think this study is truly fasciniating. Hotels and brands that implement these insights in their service standards and marketing stand to gain marketshare in this rapidly emerging market. 

18. June 2011 by Kevin Donahue
Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment

← Older posts

Newer posts →