waitress report

Facebook

ads report

for Waitress

Using Facebook as a “Bought” Channel for Marketing

By: Jonathan Svärdh, Dagem Hailemariam, Cecilia Linder, Andreas

Truedsson, Özgur Coban. DDS15STO. Hyper Island

Data Driven Marketing (Waitress):

Objective: In this report, we will discuss how we believe Waitress can use Facebook as a bought channel to acquire users to install their mobile application service. We will do this by providing an analysis of ads we have created and the response we received from Facebook user’s. Waitress is a mobile application service that helps its user find local restaurants, use their phone to order and pay with the click of a button, so that the user can either grab the food and go, without having to wait in line to order, or sit down in the restaurant and eat slow, without having to wait for a table to open up.

Ad Set One (Why Use Waitress?)

Decision Making Process: To start shaping a picture of who would be the most relevant people to use the Waitress mobile application service and to get a better understanding of the applications benefits, we decided to use the service ourselves. Why would someone want to use Waitress? We found the service to be applicable for those who have a hectic work schedule and for those who are desiring the VIP approach toward living. The key unlocking thought frames we discovered were, “it is a tool to help someone save time” and “it is a tool to help someone feel like a VIP.” Time becoming a form of currency. Taking those insights we went to Facebook to set up an ad. Segmentation: For location, we decided to keep it broad and selected the whole of Stockholm. For age, we decided to set the spectrum of criteria between “mobile app literate” and “old enough to pay with a mobile.” We settled between ages 23 to 45 years old. When it came to selecting interests we choose places of interest in regards to “time and need for prioritization, need to feel important” and “areas with large amounts of people with a potential for digital technology interests like Hyper Island as an example.” The main factor in our criteria for the segmentation, was to focus our search on the potential user’s “place of interest” rather than the preset layout of “facebook user behaviors.” The reasoning behind the image used in the ad set was to keep it basic to what the person’s ultimate need was in going to a restaurant; to eat. The reasoning behind the copy we used in

the ad set was to keep it basic to what the person’s ultimate benefit was in using the mobile application; to not have to wait in line for any reason. We chose to do an English versus Swedish approach, with the copy, to see if language would have any effect in the response we got. We did not segment using Facebook’s option to choose a language. Target Audience Settings With Ads: Location: Sweden, Stockholm, Stockholm County Interests: Sturehof, Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics, Airbnb, Berghs School Communication, Nordiska Kompaniet, American Express, Dagens Industri or Uber (company) Age: 23 45 Mobile Placement: Thirdparty Apps or News Feed User Devices: iOS version 7.0 or higher, iPads (all) or iPhones (all) Lifetime: 4.25 days (02/12 02/16)

Copy and image for Ad Set One (Swedish and English):

Ad Set One (Findings): Analysis: Our thought to start with the broad and simple approach proved to be successful. We acquired 19 users to take our call to action and install the mobile app at a cost of 16:20 SEK per install overall. The following are some of the key metric results by copy: English Copy Ad: (150: SEK Lifetime Budget)

11 installs, 2334 users reached, 1.17 frequency in ad shown per user reached, 13:64 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Swedish Copy Ad: (150: SEK Lifetime Budget)

8 installs, 2080 users reached; 1.18 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 18:75 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Total of Both Ads:

19 installs; 4414 users reached; 1.18 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 16:20 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Conclusions: We saw better results with the English copy compared to the Swedish copy but not enough to draw any distinguishing insight. Age though became a clear distinguishing insight. The ad set performed best between the ages of 23 and 34 and worst between the ages of 35 and 45. Other than age we could not find any other concrete insight into who on facebook was installing the mobile app and what they do.

Ad Set Two (What They Do?): Decision Making Process: For this ad set we kept everything the same as the first ad set and just split the interests of the target audience we had used. We figured that way we could get a deeper insight into who within the platform is most approachable to market to based on a better understanding of what they (might) do. We placed “Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics, and Berghs School Communication” into one group, which we called Group One and placed “Sturehof, Airbnb, Nordiska Kompaniet, American Express, Dagens Industri or Uber (company)” into another group, which we called Group Two. Group One became Schools and Group Two became NonSchools. We figured this way we could hopefully segment according to places of interest that the person would have to be at and places of interest that the person would choose to be at. Although we did this knowing that it was a big generalization.

Segmentation:

The segmentations we used for each of the two ads, in regards to Targeting and placement, were: Location: Sweden, Stockholm, Stockholm County Interests Group 1: Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics, Berghs School Communication, Interests Group 2: Airbnb, Sturehof, Nordiska Kompaniet, American Express, Dagens Industri or Uber (company) Age: 23 45 Mobile Placement: Thirdparty Apps or News Feed User Devices: iOS version 7.0 or higher, iPads (all) or iPhones (all) Lifetime: 4.25 days (02/19 02/23)

Copy and image for Ad Set Two (Swedish and English):

Ad Set Two (Findings):

Analysis: The thought to segment the ads into smaller groups regarding places of interest proved to be better than our first attempt in acquiring users to take part in our call to action. We had more installs the second time around. The following is what we feel are relevant results from the second set of ads:

English Copy Ad Group 1: 9 installs; 2123 users reached; 1.36 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 16:67 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Swedish Copy Ad Group 1:

7 installs; 2036 users reached; 1.29 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 21.42 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Total of Both Ads Group 1:


English Copy Ad Group 2: 7 installs; 2358 users reached; 1.21 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 21:43 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Swedish Copy Ad Group 2:


Total of Both Ads Group 2:


Total for Ad Set Two:


Conclusions: We saw better results with Schools compared to Non Schools. We also saw better results with the English copy compared to the Swedish copy when both groupings were factored but similar results when just comparing the two language copies with just the results in the Schools grouping. Age again proved to be a clear distinguishing insight. The ad set performed best between the ages of 23 and 34 and worst between the ages of 35 and 45.

Ad Set Three (Who They Are?): Decision Making Process: Now that age had proved to once again be a concrete insight into who on facebook was installing the mobile app and the schools group proved to be more the place of interest as to what they do, we decided to focus on trying to see who they were by testing on those two factors as well as changing the creative aspect of the image and for a more classic waiting in line oriented feel. We also decided to just go with an English language copy since the English ads had proved better in the previous two ad sets. Taking the insights that we found from running Ad Set One, we decided to keep the same location and expanded on the School group from Ad set two. We kept “Hyper Island, Berghs School Communication and Stockholm School of Economics” and added 2 new schools for one ad labeled “3.0” and kept “Hyper Island and Stockholm School of Economics” and added 3 new schools for one ad labeled “X2.” For both ads within this set, we lowered the age group from 2345 year olds to also include 2022 year olds. Segmentations: The segmentations we used for each of the two ads, in regards to Targeting and placement, were: Location: Sweden, Stockholm Stockholm County Interests Ad 3.0: Uppsala University, uppsala universitet, Royal Institute of Technology, Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics or berghs school communication Interests Ad X2 (minus experiment): Uppsala University, Royal Institute of Technology, Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics or Stockholm University Age: 20 45 Mobile Placement: Thirdparty Apps or News Feed User Devices: iOS version 7.0 or higher, iPads (all) or iPhones (all) Lifetime Ad 3.0: 2 days (02/21 02/23) Lifetime Ad X2: 1.84 days (02/21 02/23)

Copy and image for Ad Set Three (X2 and 3.0):

Ad Set Three (Findings):

Analysis:

Ad X2 (plus experiment): 1 install; 155 users reached; 1.06 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 9:02 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Ad X2 (minus experiment): 1 install; 38 users reached; 1.05 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 1:72 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Ad 3.0:


Conclusions:

The only conclusion is that for a clear insight into finding who downloads the mobile application service we would need more time and a bigger budget. [Experiment in Ad X2 had for interests: Luleå University of Technology, Royal Institute of Technology, Chalmers University of Technology, Hyper Island, Stockholm School of Economics, Airbnb, berghs school communication or Uber (company)]

Summary (Extracting the Overall Findings):

Overall For All Ads Combined:

47 installs; 14605 users reached (different ads overlapped and reached same user); 1.18 frequency in ad shown per user reached; 22:11 SEK Cost Per Action (CPA)

Overall Insights:

Because there is no way to track our Call To Action (CTA) through the apple app store, we are unable to see if the actual CTA of “install” lead to an actual install from the apple app store. And since we could not connect our facebook CTA to the apple app store, we were not able to clearly see the flow of our CTA onto Mixpanel.

Most installs came on the weekend. The assumption here is that maybe the people who download the mobile application might be weekend facebook users. We would need more time to call this a concrete insight.

It is best to keep the location broad when it comes to city of interest and work to narrow the focus through applicable places of interest.

When thinking of age, the most relevant factors are mobile app literacy and mobile app payment feasibility.

To get the clearest insight, we would need Facebook to separate interests according to relationship with the interest. (ie: Student, Faculty/Employee, Fan or a combination of Fan with the first two….or a variation with former or current attached)

The simple approach maximizes ROI. Sticking to the basic nature of the service helps to find purpose in approach (relevancy).

Do not start with a “persona” in mind. It will limit the potential relevant reach. There is an unknown variable to facebook that makes it hard to pull concrete metrics

to measure the ads besides cost per action. We think this is because of the different privacy settings with the platform that pushes reach of the ad but blocks pull of information from the user.

waitress report

Social Media