Cerebra

Today, a quick overview on GM pulling their Facebook ads

Here’s a very interesting read on GM pulling their advertising from Facebook:
http://www.businessinsider.com/facebooks-worst-nightmare-with-gm-pulling-its-ads-heres-how-the-other-dominoes-may-fall-2012-5

The decision was made for two different reasons:

1. GM didn't see the "effectiveness" of the ads, because they are looking for direct return in terms of sales and/or test-drives. Surely they've missed the point of social? Long-term loyalty and the effectiveness of good relationship building will bring about that return sale for the person (or people) who already own a GM vehicle, but not necessarily "Oh, look at that GM ad on FB, I’m off to test drive". Driving traffic to the fanpage, getting more views on the video and increased reach on the story is a definite, but direct sales from social ads? I can't really see the link here. That's what Google PPC / Ride N drive events, radio, television and magazines are for, no?

2. P&G is looking for free media efficiencies. Here's an interesting one, I think once the page is established and the fans are at a considerable number in terms of penetration, and you're creating engagement and getting people talking, that’s when you capitalise on those "free" efficiencies. Should you want to increase the reach of those updates, videos or polls within the entire FB "population", you're going to need the advertising – it’s linked, ironically.

I'm a bit worried this is going to cause a flood of "where is our ROI for these ads” from clients, but in the same breath, we have to ensure the objectives of the advertising campaign are laid out. Falling back to the objectives for social - is it really to sell more cars / shampoo, or are you building the strongest base of brand allies, getting them closer to you so they can engage more than ever before? I think the latter.