During these last years and as a result of the growth of Social Networks and in general the 2.0 environment, one of the parameters that the market has been considering as key to the development of its strategy has been the Buzz Quota. In general terms we could translate it as the presence that a company or brand has on the Internet but, is the information it gives us real? Moreover, is it reliable and allows us to make decisions? As the joke would say, “it’s going to be that not.” 

Buzz-logoThere are several keys that we list below to understand why the Buzz Quota can lead us to make wrong decisions and why it is necessary to complement it with other systems …

  • Company Name or Brand: Commercial names are often general or may coincide with other meanings that have nothing to do with the object of study. Thus, an Apple search could give us aspects related to the Californian brand or with the best offers of a London greengrocer.
  • Name of our competitors: In the same line as the previous point, the Buzz Quota is always a parameter that has to serve as a reference with the competition, and they have exactly the same problem, which falls to us when we are analyzing it.
  • Jargon or associated appellations by consumers: This is one of the old struggles of marketing experts, that the customer calls us by the name we really want to be called, but this never happens. When we talk about our brands we have to be aware not only of our commercial and public name, but of how the audience calls us.
  • Errors in writing: Especially for companies whose main denomination is not in Spanish because, although it may seem strange, a name like McDonald’s is written in at least nine different versions (MacDonald’s, MacDonal, MacDonals)

These are some of the main causes for which Buzz Fees are not as effective as we might believe and are reflected in the latest reports we have prepared. Thus, in a highly competitive market in which there are sections where Buzz’s share is divided between five or ten companies, being able to identify and separate the aforementioned aspects of the analysis can cause a company to win or lose between three and four positions. In contrast, for markets where the number of competitors is more defined and quotas are larger, a difference in results of up to 53% has been obtained depending on the company name and the competition studied.

Taking it to practical ground, do we imagine that we establish our marketing and sales strategy based on data where what seems to be our direct competitor is not and where the position we occupy is not real? Will not it be that we need to be more critical with the search method?