Micro-Investing is providing those of us without the funds to become Venture Capitalists or Angel investors the opportunity to experience the thrill of investing without the risks. The model is somewhat similar to that employed by charities for years. A small amount multiplied many times equals a much larger amount. So instead of seeking thousands of dollars, asking for only a few, but asking thousands of people can equal the same amount.

Micro-Investing: What’s In It For You?

While the rewards of micro-investing are never going to match that of being a VC or an Angel, the amount invested and the risk associated with that amount is much lower as well. What you mainly get from micro-investing is the sense of helping someone get to a goal and a thrill of having backed the right horse.

Sites like KickStarter, Appbackr and newly launched Apptopia provide platforms for would be investors to find ideas that they like and make small investments in them. Kickstarter focuses more on arts based projects, Appbackr and Apptopia are focused on providing funds for mobile app development and the sale of the rights to apps respectively.

Micro-Investing:What’s In It For Them?

In a word, money. Depending on which platform you are using what they have to provide you, the investor with, varies greatly. Kickstarter projects might involve a product, a picture, a song or something similar, but it might just be a thank you card – depending on your level of investment. Appbackr investors get a small revenue share based on the sale of apps and the amount of their investment. Apptopia is a wholesale clearing house for the rights to an app – you are basically taking over the ownership of that app, code, IP the whole package.

For “starving artists” Kickstarter can mean the launch of a project that would otherwise wither in the wasteland of “good ideas”. Appbackr means that app developers can realize some money early on so that they can continue development and marketing of their app and go on to realize a full revenue stream.

Micro-Investing: My Experience

I’ve been playing with these platforms for about 9 months now and have invested in several projects.

One of the early successes was Cliff Roth‘s “Google Plus Speedpaint Hangout Project” – Cliff was looking to raise $2000. I noticed this project just before it’s deadline, he was $33 short of his goal. If a goal isn’t met then none of the investors are required to part with their money, also the project goes unfunded – in other words there is no “part funding” it is all or nothing. I chipped in the $33 and his project was funded. For that investment I was added to a Special Google Plus Circle and invited to Backers-Only Speedpaint Hangout Sessions, in addition I will also receive a pencil drawing of myself signed by Cliff. I felt that was a very fair exchange.

Another huge success was Creatures. This  is a card game and I actually invested in this to get the game as a gift for the holidays. I’ve had a lot of fun playing the game. But the real story here is that they were seeking $2,500 they actually raised over $56,000 in funding. People like me invested anywhere between $1 and $750 to receive various rewards from the creators of Creatures. This game is now available on Amazon.

My latest investment appealed to the geek in me. Twine is a device that allows you to interact with other devices and platforms like Text, Email, Web etc based on certain conditions. The interesting part about it is that it requires no coding. The interactions are all controlled by a very simple web interface. Again this project really appealed to the Kickstarter community. The Twine project was seeking $35,000 in funding, they raised over $500,000.

I have also backed a couple of apps on Appbackr but to date those have not made it into production and therefore I have not actually been charged any money. I’m hopeful that I will pick a winner soon.

If you haven’t tried micro-investing yet I definitely recommend it. Don’t expect to retire on the returns but you will have a lot of fun being part of the micro-investing community.

I was sent a link to a Michael Bublé video the other day. I’m not a big fan of his singing – though I readily admit he has a great voice and it makes for decent background music. What I saw surprised the heck out of me and made me rethink my impression of him. It also made me think a lot about what I and others in marketing are trying to teach brands about listening. We focus a lot on the how and even the when, but we often miss out the why. We assume that brands want to listen, or the brands assume that they have to listen because bad things are being said.  Take a moment to watch the video and then I’ll share what Michael Bublé reminded me about listening.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cw1uLVSl1Y

The first thing that struck me was the fact that Michael Bublé stopped the show to listen to this mother heckling him from the audience. He could easily have had her removed by security. In terms of brands that would equate to ignoring the unhappy customer who tweets about you – the way 70% of brands currently do – see this post from Jay Baer on that topic.

Instead he chose to stop the show (business as normal) and sit down and listen to what this mother and fan was trying to say. He points out that he is a singer, he turns up and thousands of people pay to listen to him (reminding the customer of what business he is actually in) but he allows her to continue with the story.

The mother pleads to have her son be allowed to sing on stage with Michael Bublé (change the way you do things to help me, the customer). Having heard her story, he decides to allow it (trying a new approach with customers). His expectations are no doubt fairly low, after all, all mothers think their sons are wonderful (brands don’t expect customers to bring much value to the discussion). What he gets is a huge surprise, one that evokes the “Holy Shitballs Mom” response (Why didn’t we listen to our customers before?).

At the end of the video Michael Bublé states in a half joking way that he has four years before the young man he just brought on stage will kill his career by winning a TV Show (if brands don’t continue to change based on customer feedback they will become irrelevant).

The point is that listening without knowing why is pointless. You can have all the tools you like at your disposal, have in place all the processes but if you aren’t prepared for the surprise that customers will bring to your brand then perhaps you would be better off not listening at all.

What “Holy Shitballs” moments have you seen with brands?

After three months of waiting Google + Brand pages have launched. Businesses were told that the wait was necessary as Google wanted to get the brand pages right, so that there would be a great user experience for both the brands and the regular users.

Google + Brand Pages: Not Worth The Wait

After all the waiting, what did Google actually deliver? They delivered exactly the same page that regular users have been using for the past three months. The only slight variance is that the default circles are named differently. Did the Google + team hand this project over to a bunch of interns? There is no imagination in these pages, it’s less usable than Facebook business pages. For example the pages can only have one administrator. When you use the Google + business page it signs you out of your personal account, meaning that any action you then take on Google + is as the brand page – a PR nightmare waiting to happen. It also requires you to sign back in to access your personal account – this is cludgy and poorly thought through.

You know you have screwed things up when one of your most vociferous advocates – in this case Robert Scoble – states on his blog:

Anyway, this is just a way for me to tell anyone thinking of signing up their company for a Google+ brand account to think twice.

That’s a pretty damning statement for the platform, which undeniably a lot of people want to see succeed. Perhaps Mark Zuckerberg’s assessment of Google + as being Google’s “own little version of Facebook” wasn’t far off the mark.

Google + Lacks Imagination

Google is a complex beast of a company, with most staffers having very little insight into the bigger picture of the organization. This hasn’t stopped it from producing some incredibly innovative products, from the Android Operating System to self-driving cars. The one area that Google has consistently missed the mark is social. Google + is the best attempt by the company so far, after the messes that were Wave and Buzz. However, the sheer and obvious lack of thought that has gone into Google + business pages is bewildering. They had the chance to change the game and bring something to both businesses and users that would have sealed the deal and had mass migration from Facebook at least for businesses.

Instead what we have is just another place for brands to post their press releases, product announcements, blog posts and generally annoy the rest of the ecosystem. Google has missed the opportunity to redefine how brands act on Social platforms. They could have made Facebook look very 20th century and laid the ground rules for the 21st century. What went wrong?

Google + Business Pages – What Went Wrong?

Firstly, Facebook, like it or hate it, is a tough act to follow. Google has its work cut out for it trying to persuade anyone from the mainstream to move over. Of course the rush of social marketers, tech geeks and brand managers was great at first and the platform has certainly carved out a niche in the hearts and minds of those people, it still isn’t offering anything radically new. Yes there are differences between it and Facebook – Hangouts are cool but so what? One cool feature doesn’t a successful platform make. MySpace was “cool” for years before Facebook.

Secondly, the lack of apparent thought that has gone into some of the features makes me wonder who exactly is designing this product, it certainly isn’t the same talent behind things like the Android OS. Perhaps the problem is that Google is primarily a geeks club. They produce some awesomely geeky tools. Android OS is much more favored by the geeks than iOS for a good reason. With Google + its like the matheletes have been placed in charge of organizing the prom – they know what their fellow math club members want but have no idea how to appeal to the jocks, debutantes, or any of the other students.

I’m with Robert Scoble on this one. If you run a business think long and hard before setting up a Google + business page, because ultimately you are going to be struggling to produce additional content for it.

I recently signed up for another social network, as though I don’t already have enough to manage. Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, LinkedIn, Untappd, Foursquare etc. etc. etc. So why would I sign up for yet another platform? Well firstly of course I sign up for platforms to review them, see if they have anything to offer and see if there is a reason for either myself or a client to use it. The reason I signed up for Chime.In was that it supposedly handled the noise pollution problem differently.

Chime.In : Less Noise More Quality

Chime.In follows the same layout as Facebook, Twitter and Google Plus. A main stream which contains all the posts from the people you are following. As with those other platforms, recommendations for people for you to follow are in the right hand margin and methods of filtering are on the left. This is not a bad thing, it makes getting around the site fairly intuitive, you see things where you expect to see them. You have a profile page to edit which contains the usual information – name, location, short bio, link to your website etc.

Nothing new or dramatically game changing here so far. Why would someone think they could beat Google or Facebook at their own game? This is where Chime.In differs. When you follow a person on Chime.In you get a choice, you can follow all their posts or you can choose to only follow the particular interests that you have in common.

Chime.In: Combating Noise

This is how Chime.In combats the noise. For example I have the following interests listed:

• Photography
• HDR
• Street Photography
• Social Marketing

So if you wanted to follow me, but really didn’t care about my thoughts on Social Marketing but were interested in my thoughts on Street Photography and HDR you could just follow me and see when I post about those topics. This maybe the first platform where it’s safe to follow Chris Pirillo and Robert Scoble and not be flooded with posts. For example I like Chris’ reviews of tech, I like his pictures and videos of Lego, could definitely live without the Cat gifs. If he set his profile up with interests like:

• Tech reviews
• Lego
• Cat gifs

I could choose which topics to follow him by and only see those posts. That gives me a much better level of control. After all that is how we segment people in real life.

Chime.In: Reflecting Real Life

The intersection of You and Me is Us. In any relationship there are overlaps in interests, the greater the number of overlaps the closer the relationship. For example my girlfriend and I both share interests in Sci-fi, tech, cats, books and travel. However, she likes Sushi and I do not, I like Muscle cars and she isn’t really interested. So we have common interests and we have our own interests. This is true online as well. I want to see Robert Scoble’s interviews with startups, I’m really not interested in his political views.

Could you do with less noise in Social Media?

What happens on the internet stays on the internet – or so they say, how many times have you been warned that posting things on websites might come back to haunt you in years to come? Once again this week has disproved that to me. Two of the services that I have been using for more than 18 months have announced they are closing down this month.

The Internet: Temporary Happens

Earlier this year one of my favorite social location sharing apps was closed down. Whrrl which was created by Pelago and subsequently bought and shut down by Groupon – I wrote about my disappointment at the time – took with it a great community, of course I am still connected with some of those individuals on other platforms, but not in the same way.

This week Yap – a voicemail management app I have been using for quite sometime shut down. They sent out an email earlier in the month and within weeks had closed their doors. I will miss reading the sometimes hilarious transcripts of voicemails the service emailed me. Their premise was that they were more accurate than Google Voice in their transcripts – a claim which never really panned out – but nonetheless I really liked the service for its ease of use and the way it allowed for really deep personalization of what is, for the most part, an impersonal service – voicemail.

Also this week I discovered that Retaggr is closing up shop. Retaggr does what About.Me and other similar services do, except that they do it (or did it) in a more professional less ‘me too” way and they were around earlier. The link on my Twitter profile has gone to my Retaggr page for a couple of years now and I met the team at SXSW a couple of years ago. Their announcement says that the principals have all moved on to other projects and that they just don’t have the time to sustain the service anymore.

The Search For Alternatives

Of course when a service you have been using for sometime decides to close up shop you are left with the problem of finding an alternative. With web services that is becoming increasingly less difficult because good ideas are usually copied quite quickly. The problem is that finding an alternative that is more likely to last than the previous one you chose is not easy. As solid as they seem we, as users, have little insight into the dynamics inside a company and whether or not there is any sustainability.

Yap I have replaced with Google Voice. I am undecided about what to replace Retaggr with (suggestions welcome), I’m not wholly sold on the about.me model to be honest. Whrrl was irreplaceable and will forever be just a fond memory for me.

With Great Audiences Comes Great Responsibility

What the stories of Yap and Retaggr tell is that people with great ideas often can complete the early execution, but fail to realize that the sustaining their idea is hard work. It isn’t glamorous, it can be, and for a lot of the time, is digging ditches. You have to not only love the idea but want to commit to it. It’s the difference between dating and marriage. For what it is worth, I think the guys at Retaggr could have easily sold their site on Flippa and at least allowed the service another chance to continue.

But when you are done, you are done and you move on. Leaving behind the detritus of that period – the trouble is that the detritus often includes users with long memories. When the creators resurface with another new “service” they have lost trust from potential users who remember their last encounter. Why should they support your reincarnation? Its a lesson that many an entrepreneur would do well to learn early.

What are the services you can’t do without?

image used under CC by Peter Kaminski

Over the past week I’ve seen an amazing number of what can only be called “missteps” in social and it got me wondering whether being social is just too hard for most businesses. In particular what has amazed me is the number of those who have been less than careful with their social presence who are supposed to be in a position of advising others on the use of social media – marketers and PR companies in particular.

Social Is Too Hard

Economically times are tough. Every one is pressed for time. The “do more with less” philosophy is running rampant and driving business is what is expected of everyone at a company. It seems that in reducing the amount of time any one channel receives being social has become too hard for a lot of businesses, particularly businesses who are supposedly associated with being social. This is a worrying trend. What seems to be missing from these organizations is the understanding that while social media are channels through which you can communicate, the receivers at the end of that channel have to be nurtured, relationships have to be built, trust has to be gained. All of that takes time, time that apparently cannot be spared by these companies.

Over the past week I have seen small businesses berate and argue with customers on Twitter, large PR company employees use their personal Twitter accounts to comment disparagingly about people, conference organizers make demands of speakers in return for nothing and small PR companies use Twitter like a Press release outlet. Are we all so rushed that we have given up even the pretense of being social? Are we all just so desperate to get our message out that we don’t care about the image we portray?

Has Social Become Too Hard For Us?

There is no doubt that being social is hard work. It is time consuming and can sometimes lead to disappointment. Anyone who has been in business longer than five years knows that this has nothing to do with social media. Before Twitter we went to events and networked. We would “work” the room, dipping in and out of conversations, hoping that someone might be interested in what we did for a living and  maybe just maybe we would make a useful contact that we could nurture into a lead and eventually a sale.

Many people still work this way, without the help of any social media channels and do it well. They take the time to develop relationships. I know Car sales people who are selling cars to the third and fourth generation of family members and have been in the business 20+ years. They don’t use Twitter or any other social media channel, the build relationships. For them being social is as natural as breathing. Perhaps social isn’t too hard, perhaps the technology is making us lazy?

Social Isn’t too Hard

The reality is that social isn’t too hard, but it is time consuming and of course there are plenty of automated tools out there that will make tweeting, posting to Facebook or Google Plus or your blog less time consuming but those are just the media. The real success stories in social come from those who actually nurture relationships. Finding that even people who align themselves with “social” as part or all of their business failing to recognize this fact is a trend that I find concerning.

PR companies that berate their audiences, small businesses that argue in public with their customers, Tweets that start with “For Immediate Release” and conference organizers that threaten to pull sessions if speakers don’t use their social networks to promote the conference should be things of the past. I’ve always been an advocate of content being king, but the ace that trumps it is relationships.

Is Social Too Hard for you?

image used under CC Licence by meehanf

This post started as a comment on Google +, but I realized that it was a bigger conversation, why is Google ignoring Mobile? What? How can I possibly say that? They own the android mobile operating system, which is the largest selling mobile operating system in the world. They just bought Motorola Mobile. They are obviously taking mobile very seriously and are fully committed to it.

Mobile and Social

A few months ago I wrote a post questioning whether it was possible to have a social media strategy that didn’t include mobile. I don’t believe it is. Google has built the fastest growing social network in the history of online social networks. For a company that, on the face of it seems so invested in mobile (let’s not forget they launched their mobile payment system last week), the Google + mobile app, both on the android platform and the Apple iOS can only be described as ridiculously bad.

While Google rolls out new features to the desktop version like search, circle sharing etc. The mobile app doesn’t allow for the basics like link sharing, people tagging or search. I know  the naysayers will tell me, hey it’s early days yet, the platform hasn’t been out a full quarter, they will have those features soon and all the other excuses. It seems to me that Google came to this project expecting a failure, similar to Buzz, Wave and their other social attempts and so decided not to invest in the product.

Mobile Is Social

To miss the opportunity of building and delivering the best mobile experience is completely bewildering to me. 50% of all internet searches take place on a mobile device, by 2014 more than 50% of all internet searches will be from mobile devices – did Google forget they are a search company?  Google’s biggest competitor in the social space – Facebook – is taking mobile very seriously apparently (though again we have yet to see any real evidence of this in their application). Erick Tseng, head of mobile products at Facebook was quoted as saying that “Mobile platforms are becoming as important — if not more so — than desktop releases”.

If Google seriously wants to compete against Facebook then it has to take that attitude, and given that it is already light years ahead of Facebook in the mobile space it really shouldn’t be that hard. The phone is arguably the most social piece of technology ever invented. True the amount of time that early adopters spend actually using the voice functionality is declining but the mobile device remains connected in the minds of the user with being social, whether that is sharing a location, updating a status, playing a game or yes even talking.

Mobile And Google

Google doesn’t have the excuse that so many companies trot out about the lack of development for the android version of an app, “we haven’t had the time/funding/development skills” They own the platform, this was/is their opportunity to showcase what the platform can do. Ok so recently they launched Hangouts for mobile – great if you happen to have an android device with a forward facing camera (I do but many don’t) but what about the basics?

The approach from Google has been to build out functionality for the desktop – which is understandable, given that they view the majority of their users as being there and then trickle the features over to the mobile application, this is also the model that Facebook has followed. Because these behemoths of social take this slant, other companies, who are looking to them as models on which to base their own social behavior are following this pattern. Erick Tseng also doesn’t see the changes at Facebook coming any sooner than the next 12 – 18 months, which is a very long time, given the speed of change in the social space (18 months ago who was predicting Google would have the fastest growing social platform?).

How important is mobile to your social life?

News released today indicates that Apple is planning on releasing a pre-paid iPhone in the fall. Based on the current iPhone 4, it will be named the iPhone 4S. I wrote about the expansion of the smart phone market a week or so ago and pointed to the appearance of pre-paid smart phones by cell providers like Verizon as an indicator that the user base will expand rapidly in the next year but the household income indicators that are currently pegged to these users will decline.

A Pre-paid iPhone Changes Everything

While I am not a huge Apple fan, even I would be lying if I said that the iPhone especially on a pre-paid plan holds no appeal. Realistically this is likely to change the landscape of smart phone users dramatically and rapidly. The impact on marketing plans for 2012 cannot be underestimated and I would suggest that the plans you are making now need to be altered to reflect the news of the pre-paid iPhone. Yesterday I wrote about the need for mobile as a central element in any social media campaign. The news that Apple will release a pre-paid iPhone only reinforces that message.

The availability of apps, the overall reliability of the phone and its perceived cachet mean that the iPhone is probably the number one desired device among teens and others who are currently unable to secure one. If your organization isn’t already considering how mobile plays into your marketing mix then this should be the clarion call you have been waiting for. Ensuring your website is optimized for mobile, thinking through mobile specific offerings like an app, considering how location will play a role. All of these things will now need to jump up the priority list.

The Pre-Paid iPhone & Data

The most likely incarnation of the pre-paid iPhone will be on a fixed rate data plan, that is, users will decide how much data they want to use in a month and purchase a plan that meets that need and their budget. What this means for  content creators is that they will have to provide the users with a very compelling reason to consume the content and therefore expend their data allotment on it and not content from someone else. I think we will see a big shift in apps that are downloaded from the app store, those that are data hogs will fall out of favor and those that provide real value in terms of experience will become increasingly important.

The Pre-Paid iPhone User

Will the pre-paid iPhone user be that much different from the current iPhone user? I’d say they are likely to differ in several ways. Firstly, this is more likely to be their first Apple product, secondly it is more likely to be their only Apple product, thirdly it is more likely to be their only mobile device on which they consume the social web. No one buys a smart phone just to make phone calls. A smart phone extends our ability to reach our network through email, the social web and text. However, with a pre-paid iPhone the user will have to make smart choices about how often they upload photos, change their Facebook status or update Twitter.

I think the pre-paid iPhone has the potential to change the landscape of mobile marketing permanently. Quite what that change will be we will have to see. What changes do you think the pre-paid iPhone will bring?

image used under CC license from William Hook

Is it possible to have a social media marketing campaign without a mobile element? This question came to me as part of a conversation I was having on Twitter over the past couple of days. It started as an observation that a lot of social media “guru’s” are still selling fluff but that the medium isn’t really showing results. I countered this with a couple of case studies, it was pointed out to me that my case studies were both centered around mobile implementations.

Social Media Marketing and Mobile

I suppose I am somewhat focused on mobile, as for me it is where social really occurs now. But it got me thinking, can you truly run a social media marketing campaign without having a mobile element to it? When I say mobile I am including all mobile devices not just cell phones, so that extends to tablet devices, many of which run on a mobile operating system. While there are a lot of social media marketing campaigns, all of them incorporate, willingly or not, a mobile element in them. If you are marketing using Twitter you have no control over which device the user will consume your campaign, maybe at their desk, maybe on their phone, maybe on the couch from their iPad.

Knowing this is extremely important, because whatever links you supply in your tweet, Facebook post, Foursquare shout, Gowalla tip or other channel had better work in a mobile environment. I recently came across a project being run by the Sunday Times – a British newspaper – called the Social List. Touted as “the definitive list of who’s who in the world of social networking”, I was curious to see what the project was doing. I accessed it from my Android tablet only to be greeted with the message below:

What I love about this is that they use the phrase “normal browser” – apparently the Sunday Times thinks that mobile browsers are abnormal. This is an example of the type of thinking that kills good creative ideas. The poor execution. With all the numbers showing that the web will be accessed by people via mobile devices more than “normal” devices by the beginning of next year believing that you can control how people consume your content is a dream, one that organizations need to wake from rapidly.

Social Media Marketing – Device Agnostic

Device Agnostic – What does that mean? Literally it means your social media marketing has to work on any device anywhere in any format. Which means your organization is going to have to spend a lot more time and possibly money on thinking through the deployment of that campaign. How many times have you scanned a QR code only to find that it links to a non-mobile optimized website, a website you then have to scroll around to read on your mobile device (if in fact you can access it at all)?

Mobile marketing isn’t a separate entity anymore, it isn’t an add-on luxury that you might do if your campaign goes well. It now sits at the core of your social efforts. Organizations that recognize this now and embrace this will be the ones who have their content consumed by their target audience, those that don’t will simply be passed over.

So Can You Have Social Media Marketing without Mobile?

I would say that the answer is no. A social media marketing campaign that ignores at the very basic level mobile optimization is a failure. Better yet, it not only needs to be optimized for mobile but should include elements that are specific to mobile. We are all animals of routine, we resist change, but in the world of marketing is changing rapidly and only the swift will really be able to capitalize on those changes. What was once considered an edgy form of marketing is rapidly being absorbed into the main stream.

As smart phones become the dominant type of phone carried, not just in the US but globally, so the mobile web and therefore the mobile social web, will become dominant. Quite simply put your social media marketing better go mobile or go home.

Yesterday Foursquare announced that they had passed the 10m accounts milestone. That is a huge number for any business and to achieve it in a little over 2 years is a phenomenal achievement. But what, if anything, is the significance for marketers?

Along with the announcement Foursquare released an infographic that highlighted some of the statistics behind the 10m number. For example – 169 countries visited by US based Foursquare users. Target, Walmart and Macy’s were the most popular retail destinations checked in at. Over 1000 people used the service to announce the birth of a child.

Mash that data together and you get a rather unsurprising picture of a mobile affluent traveling user who has recently started a family. In other words – a smart phone user. Why is that significant? Because it means that quite possibly we are seeing services like Foursquare finally leave the technology early adopter pool and move toward the affluent adopter. That doesn’t mean it’s gone mainstream yet – smart phones are not yet the dominant technology (though that is rapidly changing), but it does mean that we are likely to see the increase in social location sharing.

This is especially true as the check-in starts to take a back seat to the experience. Gowalla has already indicated that it is making moves to shift the focus of that tool toward a method that is less about the check-in and more about experience sharing. Foursquare released a new update today for the iPhone that increases the speed at which users can check-in and we have seen that they are already experimenting with near-field communication (NFC) that would make the check-in process even easier.

What all this means for marketers is that, if you haven’t taken social location marketing seriously before, you better start including it in your marketing mix. With companies like RadioShack seeing 3x the spend by consumers who check-in over those that don’t, this is something that businesses can’t afford to ignore. Rewarding loyal customers isn’t just a nice-to-have anymore, it’s an expectation of your social consumers. Social location marketing enables an organization to build a strategy around that concept and deploy it on existing technology.

How are you including location in your marketing?