1. Pavig Lok said on June 6th

   This is a common misconception about virtual worlds, that they are like the web. This is a complete misunderstanding of the medium. The web can act like a brochure (ie. company or product site), and the main web advertising models are very similar generally to print media advertising - namely buying space in something folk want to read and hoping to catch their attention. Like print media one can argue for the directness and efficiency of these approaches, but one also has to acknowledge that one has to cast their net widely to compete for attention in the advertising market.

   The advantage of virtual worlds is that they occupy space (even if it is fake.) That makes a VW presence for a company more akin to a show-room or other such building or event space. The focus is completely different as you have engagement as soon as one has entered your environment, and all you need to do is retain it long enough to get your message across. Unlike the web when someone is in your virtual space you have their full attention - they aren’t likely to have a bunch of other virtual spaces open in different windows, so there is a direct marketing advantage inherent in the domain.

   Your visitors also approach a virtual space differently, and are approachable within it. Unlike the web you can engage them directly if you happen to be present. Whilst this isn’t appropriate for many companies which might use virtual spaces for marketing, for some companies providing direct access to staff, or direct real time communication between customers within a virtual world may be extremely advantageous.

   To me these kind of arguments are fairly basic and self evident. There is a place for virtual world marketing (albeit perhaps that place is “the future” rather than “the present”) that the web doesn’t satisfy. A mere ten years ago I would have told most folk that a web marketing campaign was insane - well except for those few niche clients who could use the emergent factor to their advantage. This is where virtual worlds are right now, and not for every client.

   Those who can leverage the advantages of virtual worlds now though, should be approaching them. Even if the technology and market isn’t mature, any company which could benefit from VW marketing should be investing now in their first steps while it’s cheap and cheerful. Several years down the track when some folk have got it right, the market will be commanding top dollar.

   Buisiness acumen gained in this early stage of virtual world marketing will save a lot of money later, when the bubble rises and it starts to be expensive to get things done. This was the pattern for the web, and I don’t see how it will be different with VW’s. When there’s money in a rapidly growing market sector it fills with cowboy operations. I’ve known consultants that charge more for an entry strategy report than most buisinesses spend on a years presence in secondlife (builders included). So for a buisiness that sees a future in virtual worlds the decision is, should our alloted budget go to: a ten page report on feasability from a top-line proven consultant, or a years worth of actual experience. The latter makes a lot more fiscal sense to me, as by the end of that year many folk in your company would be familiar with the territory and gochas to look out for. But here, i’m borrowing someone elses approach (and I quote):

   “I notice increasing reluctance on the part of marketing executives to use judgment; they are coming to rely too much on research, and they use it as a drunkard uses a lamp post for support, rather than for illumination.” - David Ogilvy

   The “father of advertising” had a lot of interesting things to say, which many of these marketing folk hear quoted during their tenure at university learning their trade. If you think about what the old man said, much of it still makes a lot of sense. As a rule of thumb, for example: “Every advertisement is part of the long-term investment in the personality of the brand.”

   Advertising creatives devote long hours to creating that “personality of the brand” - cause frankly, most brands don’t have one when you look at their public face. We’re too attuned to the medium to be fooled into thinking it’s what we’re told to think. We filter it.

   For anyone clever enough to leverage the built in engagement of virtual worlds, that personality will emerge. In real life they do it at Apple stores - and you don’t have to believe in it to fall in lust with their shiny boxes and shiny worldview when you’re surrounded by it. Faced with a flat 2d (though perhaps glossy and well printed) brochure, or a complete, immersive wraparound experience, most folk will be more engaged by the latter.

   Now it’s just a matter of figuring out how to retain that engagement.

   Just my two cents. - Pavig Lok.

2. Digado said on June 6th

   I couldn’t agree more Pavig, thank you for this very valuable insight and inspiring addition to my post! Don’t have anything to add to this really, except to really recommend a book I consider to be somewhat of a ‘hidden gem’ by Saatchi and Saatchi CEO Kevin Roberts. Sisomo places more examples, application and cases by the worlds most largest marketing firm to this line of thoughts; persuasion through experience.

3. Yohan Launay said on June 6th

   Interesting article.

   For some time, we have been talking about Virtual Worlds, 3D on the Internet (Web 3D), Web 2.0 and other social media. But what is the common point of all this? Information. A website is in fact the formatting of content from databases, a chat is an exchange of information between two or more individual, an avatar is a (symbolic) representation of information about an individual (fantasized or not)…

   We have always given technological constraints and limitations to the representation of Information. We tend to confine it to one or more dimensions, to a particular interpretation and even sometimes to a certain temporality. Don’t you think Information is rather timeless and without a particular form as the term “in-formation” (no-form) seems to suggest?

   I see the Information as a whole: a fabric of information or ectoplasm, which takes shape depending of the context and to serve particular needs. I consider apart the original “shape” (or “no-shape”) and the final form and its purpose.

   I have written a paper about it, please have a look and leave me your feedback :
   http://www.conceptsl.com/papers/

4. Danton Sideways said on June 6th

   In Second Life I tend to go always to the same places. I should make more of an effort to travel around. When I do, I will go to places that seem more interesting than dorky “corporate” sims. I went once to the Reuters sim, and found a big empty building. The building was well made, certainly, but with no one around it was definitely BORING. It seems to me that a company wanting to do marketing should just make a great sim that people would want to visit for its own sake, and then discretely put their name on it, or a few billboards here and there. That way at least the company sim would have visitors, which so few actually do.

   But I agree with Pavig that the real advantage of Second Life is the possibility of interaction with other avatars. Each medium has its own special potential, and interaction with real people is the great potential of virtual worlds. Companies that are big enough to afford it should consider putting a trained “ambassador” on their sim to talk with visitors, or at least to hold regular “office hours” at posted times. This should pay off in those cases where Second Life residents represent a particularly influential vector for the company’s publicity. Pavig notes other similar possibilities, such as “direct access to staff, or direct real time communication between customers within a virtual world.” The marketing experts Digado criticizes are definitely making a mistake in trying the compare web pages and sims, in terms of “effectiveness” of communication, without understanding that virtual worlds present very special marketing possibilites that are impossible with mere web pages.

5. Digado said on June 6th

   Hello Yohan and Danton! Thank you for leaving your thoughts on the communicative value of virtual worlds here.

   Interesting website Yohan, I liked your papers, we seem to share a vision (though i am somewhat more skeptical about virtual worlds being the ‘new’ web)

   Danton - You’ll find that the Reuters sim is a template model for most corporate ‘islands’ out there. The truly innovative is usually hidden from the public eye (such as the unilever, heineken and some university sims) - I think it will take some time until we start to see some real creative applications. It has a lot to do with a big credibility and accessibility issue virtual worlds are facing right now.

6. Jordyn said on June 9th

   I try to remember 1 rule. (my number one rule of marketing anything)

   “people attract people”

   speaking to the post.. its not the “3d-ness” of virtual worlds.. but the ability they provide to immerse oneself in relationships with other people.. that makes them powerful.

   I’ll leave my comment to that..

Join the conversaton!