Guest Post by Matt LaCasse
I have to say it: Snapchat is the hot NKOTB for social media. Much like Twitter when it invaded mainstream America in 2008, Snapchat is either worshipped, or given the “get off my lawn” treatment, depending on the user’s experience with it and their age (for the most part).
Some of us are the exception to that age rule, and Snapchat continues to gain market share in these older demographics.
Here’s the thing: much like Twitter from way back when, Snapchat can’t be ignored.
Here’s five reasons it’s your new best friend:
1. It’s fun to use.
Remember the thrill you got from Twitter while having conversations about national trends in real time? Snapchat has that same feel to it in terms of how you tell your story.
Rather than a lengthy blog post, you’re using 10 second bursts of video or pictures to bring your audience into your world. Yes, 10 seconds isn’t a lot, but users are spending as much as 30 minutes A DAY inside Snapchat.
That’s a hyper-engaged audience.
2. There’s no cheaper way to boost brand awareness.
I’d argue that Facebook is the single best marketing tool on the face of the planet right now. Audience targeting is amazing, and the cost to reach them is pretty cheap. But Snapchat is cheaper.
How cheap?
Inter-State Studio ran a geofilter for the local high school graduation at the end of May for 3 hours at a cost of a little less than $9. We got 181 uses and 8,818 views of our filter for that price. The results are pretty amazing; 20.5¢ per use and 0.001¢ per view. That’s one-one-thousandth of a cent per view.
I’ll pause while you pick your jaw up off your desk.
3. People want to interact with your ad.
Do you remember the last time you had fun with an advertisement? I don’t mean laughed at an ad. I mean actually ENJOYED interacting with it.
Taco Bell ran a paid lens for Cinco de Mayo that turned users heads into a giant taco. It’s totally silly and gave them 224 million views in 24 hours. That’s a powerful shot of word-of-mouth marketing that you’ll be hard-pressed to find anywhere else.
If you’re looking to kickoff a campaign, Snapchat is a channel you need to consider.
4. It’s communication in its purest form.
There’s no call(s) to action allowed in your filters or lenses. An opening date for a movie, or something like that will fly, but no URLs are currently allowed or anything else you can classify as a CTA.
This takes the pressure off you and your audience, as they don’t feel as if they’re being advertised/marketed/PR’d towards. They invite you into their snaps with their friends to make your brand part of the fun they’re having.
In other words, it feels natural rather than forced.
5. Your competition isn’t there.
OK, that may not be the case for everyone reading this, but the number of brands using Snapchat is still far fewer than those that aren’t.
You can set the expectations for your industry and competition by diving in and experimenting.
You’d think we’d be over the nerves of giving a new channel a shot by now… yet somehow, we’re not.
Yes, make sure your audience is on Snapchat before jumping in, but with its rising popularity you should begin paying attention. Because your competition certainly will.
Are you using Snapchat? Let’s talk about what you’re doing with it in the comments.
[…] see a lot more pros looking at a multitude of tactics, and how they can play well together (Matt’s post on Snapchat from Wednesday is a great example of […]
I love snapchat and use it way more than Facebook. They made a recent change that helped brands but hurt users and I saw a decrease in activity since then in my feeds. Basically the updates run as a montage vs clicking on who you want to see. I only follow 2 B2C brands and a band and Tony Hawk in terms of not being a real friend (well the band is pretty big and I know one of the three members).
Engagement is high because people have small networks but imagine seeing 100 account updates in your feed? That is why instagram is better than facebook we all have smaller networks…for now.
It takes paid media spend or pre-event awareness (like Livestream) for any unique one off events to make people aware it is happening. Taco Bell had high engagement but we have no idea if it helped sales or not. Fast food is often location and timing. We eat locally for lunch where we work for example.
So my real question is how do brands get followers without heavy spend to get them? And maybe just paying for ads is better? I don’t know the answer to that, We also don’t know what snapchat calls a view. For example Youtube only counts after 30 secs…Facebook 3 secs. If it runs a sec on my phone and I click past it do they count it?
I bring this up because I see a mad rush into snapchat and livestream by the social media bubble because many are desperate now that Facebook is basically paid advertising only, Instagram has pithy engagement (we like everything we see!) and Twitter has low reach. Jobs are in jeopardy because big brands are questioning head counts for social. Many are abandoning their Facebook pages (leaving them up but posting rarely since engagement is now running 1x per 2 years per fan.
On a positive note I live the magazines on Snapchat and feel that is what the web should of been for print publications 15 years ago. The fact we can’t precreate content makes it tough but real….that is why we love it for our friends. Seeing their snaps is REAL RIGHT NOW vs Facebook and Twitter and Instagram which is always old feeling. And once brands start polluting the channel will it die? I would use Facebook for 30 mins a day if I could pay $5/month and have no ads or brand presence and just have it for friends. Will they make the same mistake Facebook did and invest in the marketing experience for paid advertisers vs the user experience? And will they improve the primitive messaging function because watching a snap is not engagement. Until people can really talk back it is more a one way channel.
That said I love the stats Matt!
There’s a lot of questions on Snapchat, for sure. There’s always the danger of giving in to the paid ads route that FB and Twitter have gone, but I think because of how Snapchat works, it’s fundamentally different. With Snapchat, I’m actively participating in the ad itself. Not interacting WITH it, but interacting IN it. And these ads enhance the user experience, one could argue. Commemorating an event (like we did with the high school graduation) gives people something fun to remember it by all while increasing brand awareness.
You’re also 100% right about whether or not it actively drove sales for Taco Bell. The only real objective you can have with Snapchat right now, in terms of paid ads, is brand awareness. I imagine that clickable filters and lenses with CTAs will be implemented at some point, but even then the fundamental nature doesn’t change. Your ad has to enhance the user experience to be effective. And that’s what separates it from its brethren, IMO.