140Char

Twitter advertising is already in existence thanks to third parties including Magpie and Ad.ly, but details of the official Twitter ad platform have emerged in an article by All Things D’s Peter Kafka.

Image by Stefan on Flickr, used under CC Licence.

The plans are apparently evolving and there are plenty of details to be worked out, suggesting that the launch date will be likely in the first half of 2010, rather than in a month as previous articles have predicted. It’s also likely to be designated a ‘test’ rather than the total solution to monetising Twitter.

The platform is very similar to a Google model:

• Adverts will show up in related Twitter searches.
• Adverts will use 140 characters and will be distributed via third-party applications, which can choose whether to display advertising and share in the revenue.
• Twitter will work with ad agencies and buyers to seed the platform, but will move to a self-serve model.

It’s interesting that Twitter has waited so long to implement an advertising model which has been made so ubiquitous by Google – presumably they were waiting for a critical mass of users and search volume before the conversion percentage was likely to be worthwhile.

Conversion rates will be of immense interest, as the usage of Twitter search is likely to show big differences to a Google search – a higher proportion of Twitter searchers are likely to be solely interested in other users and conversation, and will be less likely to covert to purchasing around a search term.

It’s a good step in terms of avoiding advertising in general Twitter usage, and the fact third-party applications can share in revenue or turn down Twitter advertising is a good move, and could help third parties implement a freemium model to monetise themselves.

The 140 limit makes sense – but I suspect it will be challenged by advertisers who suddenly realise exactly how hard it can be to include enough information into 140 characters – remember how adverts tend to carry a brand name, strap-line, and a call to action?

The one thing it doesn’t do is allow Twitter users to monetise their own content – which is the route of third party ad platforms such as Ad.ly and Magpie. They work on the influencer strategy, meaning that I can display their advertising to my followers in exchange for money, and as far as I’m aware, Twitter doesn’t take any share of the proceeds.

I can’t wait to see the first case study from a brand which invests in both approaches at the same time – it could go some way to quantifying the difference between a search advertising route and a influential recommendation route with the same message on the same network.

Ad.ly is a self-serve Twitter advertising network matching advertisers and celebrities to tweet about products. The celeb gets to approve or decline messages, and advertisers get tracking for click-through rates, retweets and geographic locations for Retweeters. The celebs set their own price, but Ad.ly gives suggestions, and the celebrity has to tweet four times in the course of a week, netting them five figure sums for each message if they have more than a millions followers.

So that’s Magpie or Izea Sponsored Tweets system just with only celebrities. And apparently that’s enough to have attracted Kim Kardashian, Brooke Burke, Nicole Richie, Brody Jenner, Dr. Drew and Samantha Ronson for the launch.

It’s potentially a good move to only have celebrities involved – that way you only go for the big ticket advertising to generate the share for Ad.ly. But it’s not exactly an evolution of monetising Twitter for individuals.

I’m not going to rant about sponsored tweets as having tested them, I’ve continued to use Magpie on the odd occasion – within a few days each year it effectively pays for my hosting costs, and with a young family and little time to monetise Twitter in other ways, I can just about justify it to myself.

But surely celebrities actually have far more to lose? And less to gain considering the myriad ways which they can effectively monetise their followers and fans through their products? Particularly the hypothetical example Ad.ly is using

Disclaimer

I’m a spectacular dunce when it comes to marketing.  I look at glossy pictures in a doctor’s waiting room or on a plane or at other moments of ‘dead-time’ and I can be impressed by something good-looking – but do I go out and buy it?  Never.

I don’t trust marketing either, or rather for me, it generates distrust.  A two-for-one deal just reminds me of your utter disloyalty to me.  You can supply me at a price and you don’t normally.  If you are willing to cheat me over money, what else will you stoop to?

So with that disclaimer and no apologies at all to people who make their living from marketing (I know you are enjoying a jolly good party and I think that is rather smart of you), answer me this question.

When and why should a corporate use Twitter?

I mean, what is the point?

Here is a list of brands on Twitter.  When would you follow them?

I do follow BBC.  They are an old habit – much like continuing to drink tea when I don’t like English tea (yep, I don’t, I miss the tea we used to grow in another life).

I do follow Barack Obama.  He alerts me when he speaks and I can patch through to a video.

• There is a clear response that I need to make.
• I am instantly rewarded with something I want (to satisfy my curiosity about what he actually says)

What are the rules of thumb for Twittering when you are a corporate?

Well, a twitter account is worth $1002.01 if you’re Ian Schaefer, the CEO of Interactive Marketing agency Deep Focus, and the person currently auctioning a one-month sponsorship of his Twitter page and profile.

What you get for your cash is:

• Background image of your choice on Ian’s profile page, and the replacement of his profile photo with your image.
• Brand representation in 8-10 outbound ‘tweets’ per day.
• Coverage of the experience on his blog.

The money raised is going to charity, but possibly the most interesting part of the experiment is Ian’s motivation: “Someone’s got to figure out some kind of business model with Twitter. And I’d rather be part of the solution.”

It’s the same thinking which has seen Tweeple start selling individual posts, and hypothesizing about how Twitter can use the extra 20 characters for mobile (160 characters is the limit).

There’s still 18 hours left on the auction at the time of writing, so by tomorrow night we’ll see how much a Twitter account is worth. You can watch the ebay auction, here.

And, for the record, Ian’s got 495 followers, which leaves me wondering how much cash I could raise with my 600?