Facebook + WhatsApp = <3

Frankly, I don’t know why anyone’s surprised about this whole “Facebook buying WhatsApp” thing. Okay, maybe the $16b price was a little steep. But Facebook sure has some jangle in their pockets, so why not spend a few extra Benjamins to gain even more media coverage focused on the price of the buy?

Facebook is a major social media platform, yes. But they’re losing part of their audience, and the most important part at that. So they have to make another business move. When Facebook bought Instagram in 2012 for $1b, it was groundbreaking. And Facebook absolutely came out on top, with Instagram now having 150 million monthly users. Every second, there are 8,500 likes on photos that have been posted on Instagram. That’s a ton of engagement. And Facebook really likes engagement. So Facebook hung out with Instagram for awhile and they got together and everyone was cool. Instagram has been flourishing and all is well. Then Facebook decided it still didn’t have a total monopoly on the world and everything ever, deciding that it needed another big communication platform.

And WhatsApp was acquired. With good reason.

WhatsApp is gold. Mark Zuckerberg was quoted saying that WhatsApp is on track to acquiring more than one billion users, which makes it a rare (and valuable) mass-market service. It currently has over 350 million monthly active users, and is growing at an alarming rate. And if Facebook is nervous about losing the teenagers to other platforms, then Zuckerberg will definitely want to own one of the messaging services that could threaten to take down the empire. According to The Guardian, cell phone providers were estimated to have lost $23b in SMS revenue even as far back as 2012 because of services like WhatsApp. Now that they’re threatening social media platforms, Zuckerberg wants to fill Facebook’s voids with a competitor. If you can’t beat ’em, buy ’em— right?

Photo: mashable.com

It makes sense, if you think about it. Facebook offers a lot of services: photo sharing, public communication, private messaging, and video chatting. But what don’t they have? Phone calls. Since their Facebook Home idea with Android was a total flop, they had to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to integrate the use of Facebook into every facet of someone’s mobile life. And phone capabilities are the one thing they don’t yet have. So when I read this morning on Mashable that WhatsApp is going to be introducing free voice calling later this year, I wasn’t surprised. Nor was I surprised that they announced it after Facebook announced the buy of the service.

When market change and irrelevancy are constantly imminent for a social network, it’s imperative that you stay ahead of the curve. That’s exactly what Facebook is doing here, and I’m certain that they’re already looking into what platform to purchase next. Especially with the so highly sought-after teen demographic, once things are known as “cool” they stop being viewed as such. Facebook needs to be constantly tweaking and developing its existing services, as well as buying new ones to stay a necessary aspect of everyday communication.

The Magic of a “Limited Time” Offer

Last night, I got to finally try the Cookie Dough Oreo. I can’t keep myself from smiling as I type this, because I know I’m such a typical consumer. Why? Because I so desperately wanted to try a Cookie Dough Oreo simply for the fact that it was only available for a limited time.

Well, and partly because of the fact that it brings together cookie dough and Oreos which is one of the best combinations ever. But I digress.

In January the news articles started going viral about the Cookie Dough and Marshmallow Crispy Oreos that were to hit the shelves in early February. I saw the articles and knew I had to try at least one of them. Not only did the articles say the new flavors were only available for a limited time, but they also listed the release date: February 3. I marked it on my calendar and waited until the day that I could finally try a Cookie Dough Oreo. In retrospect, would I have been so excited to try them if they weren’t only available for a limited time? Probably not. It would have been like every other Oreo flavor ever that I haven’t gotten around to sampling, despite the fact that the flavor does sound pretty good.

What got me was the “limited time” offer, combined with the social media attention. It happened last year too with the Candy Corn Oreo fad, even though they really weren’t all that great.

“Limited Time” are two magical words because they tell people to act now. And when people are told to act now, many of them do exactly that. It’s why “call to action” phrases are effective. It’s why the FOMO exists. It’s why those dumb television informercial things that always advertise $19.99 prices and the offer to double the amount if you call within 10 minutes actually work. And not only does “Limited Time” tell people to act now, but it promises them exclusivity because they’re one of the people that acted now, they get something that other people may not. The hype gets them going, and the prestige seals the deal. It’s kind of sad how predictable we are, but it’s kind of cool to think about, as well. Especially if you’re pursuing a career in advertising like I am (fellow community managers, get at me).

My opinion? If a “limited time” offer is overdone with too many products, people won’t care. But something like Oreo, where the “limited time” offers are scarce? You’re golden, because people love feeling special.

Why Real-Time Marketing and DiGiorno Pizza Win the Super Bowl

That awkward moment when the ads are better than the Super Bowl itself. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge sports fan (well, football and hockey). But the game was so disappointing that I turned my attention to the ads and, when the game was in play, Twitter.

I’ve always enjoyed seeing the Super Bowl ads but I was anticipating them even more since a number of them had already become available online. It was interesting— everyone around me complained about the ads being available sooner than the actual Super Bowl, but the moment the ad came on during the game people recognized it and shushed everyone around them. I’m mainly thinking of the Budweiser #BestBuds ad with this one, but there were a few others too.

However, it wasn’t just the ads this year. Ever since Oreo’s quick-thinking at last year’s Super Bowl, real-time marketing has become a requirement. Some say it’s going to fizzle out just as quickly as it made its entrance, but I don’t think so. I was glued to my phone during the 3rd quarter and most of the 4th following some of the conversations between brands, and many of them were great. Of course there’s the J.C. Penney debacle where there was a small hint toward mittens and then the brand’s tweets were incoherent. It was later explained that they were trying to type in mittens, but when the seemingly “drunk tweet” garnered over 19,000 retweets and the explanation only 3,800, there are bound to be a lot of people left with the impression that J.C Penney let their community manager drunk tweet. But I won’t rant too much about that one. Some other brands got into the fun as well, like Snickers and Coors. My personal favorites were the sassy DiGiorno tweets:

They were really entertaining, and instead of just interacting with other brands that advertised during the Super Bowl it capitalized on the game itself, which has the potential of drawing in a bigger audience than just the ad-focused viewers. The brand also practiced great community management, favoriting and responding to many of the tweets instead of ignoring them.

Sometimes when life gives you a terrible Super Bowl game, you just have to get a little sassy.