Facebook (6 Viewers)

[Denny Oubidoux]

the message seems to be "keep spending"

 

[pete]

the message seems to be "keep spending"

this is it.

The genius of it all is the more successful your advertising is in terms of gaining new likes, the more expensive your next campaign will be.

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

what good is a like anyway? load of shite

 

[pete]

what good is a like anyway? load of shite

more likes = more people to see your posts in their newsline timefeed.

EXCEPT THEY DON'T.

I seem to be averaging 10-15% of the 1,200 people who 'liked' https://www.facebook.com/thumped actually seeing my FB posts... unless i pay to promote them.

Either way, if every 100 new likes only means maybe 15 new people seeing my posts, the reward just doesn't justify the effort.

 

[pete]

what good is a like anyway? load of shite

more likes = more people to see your posts in their newsline timefeed.

EXCEPT THEY DON'T.

I seem to be averaging 10-15% of the 1,200 people who 'liked' https://www.facebook.com/thumped actually seeing my FB posts... unless i pay to promote them.

Either way, if every 100 new likes only means maybe 15 new people seeing my posts, the reward just doesn't justify the effort.

 

[GO]

Thats absolutely amazing.Really.

31500 after the 40 notes..700 without..ok..so in real terms..facebook are hobbling your posts if they don't get paid.

What I mean is..the amount of people who would see a post..if facebook let the interactivity of facebookers go unmolested..would greatly exceed the 700 impressions the unsponsered posts get.Maybe they wouldnt reach 31500 the old way..although I'm inclined to thhink they did..but they certainly..just by sheer exponential multiplication,would have reached many more than 700.So obviously,and this is something I know factually,facebook knobble the audience on un paid for content.

 

[pete]

here's the most recent posts on the FB page - you can see the number of people that have seen each one under the post. Remember - the page has over 1,200 'likes'.

 

[GO]

That sucks elephant balls..if you have 1200 likers..then 1200 likers should see the post.

WTF is the point of someone liking your page if they dont recieve your updates?

It makes a mockery of the whole concept.

 

[hugh]

Another thing I have noticed is that if you directly post content INTO Facebook, i. e. upload a photo, it seems to get a lot more attention than if you make a post that links to content that is hosted somewhere else (e.g. A Wordpress site). PrOblem with that though is that they claim all sorts of insane usage rights on content you post to Facebook.

 

[Theseus Mock]

so i'm not the only one doing experiments



http://www.simplyzesty.com/facebook/something-is-really-rotten-with-facebooks-news-feed-for-brands/

Wasn't this debunked last week? I, for one, am glad I'm not spammed by every person/business/object I like on Facebook.

[edit: Link http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/07/ki...-news-feed-reach-to-sell-more-promoted-posts/ ]

 

[hugh]

That debunking was pretty soundly debunked subsequently. It seems the guy who wrote it is something of a schill for the social media industry.

 

[pete]

Wasn't this debunked last week? I, for one, am glad I'm not spammed by every person/business/object I like on Facebook.

[edit: Link http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/07/ki...-news-feed-reach-to-sell-more-promoted-posts/ ]

Which part? There's no denying that a huge number of people are seeing a falloff in their posts reach - the comments on that article are full of them. The 'why' isn't really all that relevant to my concerns.

Here's a random sample of the reach i was getting back in July. there's no disputing the reach was closer to 40%, that the fall off happened, that it happened around the time of the introduction of promoted posts, and that now paying to promote a post massively increases its reach. With the competition from people paying to promote their stuff, it's questionable whether it's worth the effort or expense to even bother post updates on facebook.

Chasing likes, and more specifically paying facebook to advertise to get them, is a mugs game when you're only ever going to reach 15% of them at best (and let's be realistic - that's probably only ever going to decrease even further if you're not paying) with any given post.

 

[Anthony]

Facebook goes public. This. Just a matter of time. It'll die soon.

 

[Theseus Mock]

Websites having to pay FB to spam their followers SHOCKER!

As Anthony said, it was only a matter of time before the monetization side of things kicked into overdrive after their IPO.

 

[pete]

Websites having to pay FB to spam their followers SHOCKER!

As Anthony said, it was only a matter of time before the monetization side of things kicked into overdrive after their IPO.

I think you're missing my point - it's facebook's house, and they make the rules. I don't have a problem with that. Personally I wouldn't see posting updates on facebook and hoping people see them as "spamming" followers - if people 'like' a page, i think it can be assumed they do so at least in part to receive updates. But maybe not.

All I'm saying is that there's been a huge change and the return on investment (whether time or cash) doesn't seem to be worth it anymore.

 

[shower another shower]

Wouldn't be such a major issue if you had a marketing budget.

 

[nooleen]

 

[IFF]

Websites having to pay FB to spam their followers SHOCKER!

but the reason the followers like the page is to receive the updates from the page.

 

[hugh]

Wouldn't be such a major issue if you had a marketing budget.

Yeah, but I don't go on Facebook to receive updates from people who have marketing budgets ...

 

[pete]

Here's a random sample of the reach i was getting back in July. there's no disputing the reach was closer to 40%, that the fall off happened, that it happened around the time of the introduction of promoted posts, and that now paying to promote a post massively increases its reach. With the competition from people paying to promote their stuff, it's questionable whether it's worth the effort or expense to even bother post updates on facebook.

well at least it's not just me

Josh Constine wrote an insightful post last week, debunking the myth that Facebook has decreased page post reach to increase the sales of promoted posts. However, just because that wasn’t the reason, that doesn’t mean that Facebook hasn’t reduced page reach.

Since the end of August there has been a precipitous drop in reach across pages of all sizes, there have been first hand reports of Facebook telling agencies who manage large numbers of pages for clients that they were going to experience a large drop in reach, and data clearly showing this drop from at least three independent sources – Facebook page analytics provider EdgeRank Checker, the head of social measurement at WPP’s Team Detroit and a study conducted by us here at We Are Social in conjunction with Socialbakers.

So We Are Social and Socialbakers went back to the data to see what has happened in the month since our first report, and whether a larger sample of data would lead to the same conclusions.

DATA SHOWS AN AVERAGE 40% DROP IN REACH

http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/16/facebook-has-decreased-page-reach-and-heres-why