“Social media is like teen sex. Everyone wants to do it. No one actually knows how. When finally done, there is surprise it’s not better.”

Avinash Kaushik

Social media (i.e. Facebook, Twitter) is in vogue among connected consumers and many companies are hoping to capitalize on this marketing avenue to promote their business. I was curious to know how effective (or not) social media has been for other marketing aviation professionals — are they truly walking the walk, rather than talking (tweeting) the talk — I recently posted the above quote on LinkedIn to learn what experiences my colleagues have had using Social Media.

Troy B. reported, “Frankly, we’re loving it. . . When I reach someone who buys an airline ticket, parks in on-airport parking, purchases food, beverages and a magazine, brags about our WiFi and speedy screening lines, and plans to do it again soon — all based on info I’ve tweeted — I start to like the results.”

However, some are not 100% confident in this colleague’s social media experience.

“… there are a great many people who have learned the hard way that the medium is far less benign that was first assumed,” said Ronald K. “A lesson of both teenage sex and social media is that both are best done with adequate protection in place.”

I agree social media can often be impulsive, not to be taken lightly with its implications, and often times regrettable, not unlike teen sex.

And also concede that as a customer service tool, social media may well be worth the time and effort, especially for brand/image sensitive businesses. However, many of my own clients are in B2B space, and I hesitate to recommend Facebook or Twitter as a marketing tool because it is hard to quantify its effectiveness. I know from experience placing an ad for these clients will make the phones ring, and public relations will build awareness.

Steve E. said, “If you compare dollar-to-dollar spending, I’ll take social media over standard media any day as the immediate discussion that ensues is direct and instant and something that far exceeds anything standard advertising has to offer.”

But how well will social media generate new businesses as compared to traditional media is the question I need answered before recommending social media to my clients.

Allow me this hypothetical:

Using traditional marketing tools, say I run a 6-month, $10,000 advertising campaign for a client in a trade publication reaching their target audience. Assume this campaign generates 100 leads and the client closes 10. The cost per new customer acquisition is $1,000.

Alternatively, the client contracts to develop and monitor a social media program. We spend on average one hour a day building their network, making posts, responding to queries and, at the end of six months, the program has also yielded 10 sales. Assuming $100 per hour is charged (social media needs to be monitored by qualified staff, thus a higher per hour fee), then the cost to the client is $13,000! (5 hrs/week over 26 weeks = 130 hours x $100/hour). This is significantly higher than traditional advertising.

Granted, one can argue with my numbers in my hypothetical example, but to do social media effectively, you have to commit to high level of time management, and you also need to highly capable people managing your social media programs (otherwise more harm than good may be generated). With these facts in mind, social media may not be the holy grail of marketing as many proponents suggest.

Social media has a definite role in marketing, such as customer service and company announcements. But as an effective sales generating tool, I remain skeptical. I continue to encourage my clients to wait before they act impulsively and regret it.

Much like I advise the teenagers in my life.

The days of paying a huge monthly cable bill for a pre-packaged bundle of shows you don’t watch may soon be over, and just about everybody realizes it except for the cable companies.

Consumers no longer need to be at the mercy of cable companies, paying for stations and programming they don’t watch. It’s time for cable companies to realize that their business model has been rendered obsolete by a company that is renown for putting the entertainment industry on its head; Apple.

With the iPad, Apple may soon revolutionize how TV is delivered, much like it did with the music industry. Apple is promoting content through its iPad bookstore where publishers can use it as storefront to deliver content. This approach is similar to Amazon’s Kindle, but goes far beyond Kindle’s limited scope as a single use tool for reading. Through the iPad, consumers will not only be able to download books, but also movies and TV programming.

Cable companies are no longer the only source of on-demand content, as in years past. With the advent high-speed wireless delivery, consumers can find the programming they want, when they want it, through a variety of VOD (video on demand) services. The Wall Street Journal reports Hulu, YouTube, iTunes, are just some options consumers are navigating. Netflix is staying abreast of the changing dynamic of content delivery. They changed the video rental business by not adopting a bricks and mortar business model to compete with Blockbuster, which is close to becoming bankrupt, but instead incorporating a low-cost, convenient mail/internet process.  Interestingly, Netflix is also moving away from physical delivery of DVDs by mail to streaming movies and video directly to game consoles and devices, bypassing cable boxes entirely. In addition, the video provided includes a depth of content (director interviews, plot analyses, criticism, reviews) not available through cable access.

The issue isn’t content, but delivery. The days of must-buy bundles delivered by cable companies is on the wane. Victim of the new kid on the block iPad, whose flexible, portable, interactive access to broadband web, provides a far richer experience. The Harvard Business Review notes the iPad and a good internet connection is all the consumer needs for their entertainment.

Can the cable companies reinvent their business model and remain relevant to in this dynamic industry? Or are they doomed to go the way of music industry, where fans took advantage to purchase — or steal — one hit single off an otherwise mediocre album. Why buy the whole package when you can get only what you want, when you want it?

Some marketing professionals are saying the traditional role of Public Relations has lost some of luster, overtaken by a more contemporary form of PR – social media. Marketing forums and group discussions from Inc.com to LinkedIn have all been debating this issue But as far as I am concerned, traditional public relations, i.e. press releases, articles, events, etc. will never play a secondary marketing role for most businesses, especially ones that have a brand image that needs to be nurtured and protected.

Social media plays an important role in marketing, but most times it is one that is supporting more traditional marketing and public relations activities.

For example, if a neighborhood restaurant donates a percentage of sales to the local high school marching band, who benefits? Pretty much everyone. The students, the band, the school and the parents, who have to shell out less for the activity. But the hero is the neighborhood restaurant. If they can leverage their generosity with an effective public relations program, it can generate loads of press exposure and tons of goodwill with consumers. Goodwill that can generate ten-fold payback of the actual donation cost.

Could social media pulled this event off as effectively alone? Probably not. Outreach to mass media outlets traditional PR is the marketing tool that does the heavy lifting in generating the kind of media buzz – one that I’ve only seen achievable through PR. Social media can certainly play a role in building awareness to those who are already fans of your business. But most editors and reporters are much too busy to activity monitoring more that a few Social Media channels. They are still looking to their normal PR channels for news worthy items to feature.