All Eyes on Twitter

A comparison of Warby Parker //vs// Eyefly's Twitter strategies.

Transcript

1. All Eyes on Twitter a comparison
2. Warby Parker & Eyefly INTRODUCING... Reinventing the social lens Budget boutique eyewear Online operations a comparison 02. 03. 01.
3. + RESPONDS to all tweets directed @WarbyParker + FOLLOWS/INTERACTS with relevant people in the industry + EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATES other social media outlets
4. + RESPONDS to all tweets directed @WarbyParker -Video responses -@WarbyParkerHelp
6. + FOLLOWS/INTERACTS with relevant people in the industry
7. + EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATES other social media outlets
8. - NO CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT - INFREQUENT tweeting - HAS NOT UPGRADED to new Twitter brand page - Smaller header image - No tweet pinning capability - Separation of @replies and @mentions EYEFLY
9. A well-managed presence on Twitter does matter for the success of the business. Sales Effect on + Sales increased by engagement of customers on Twitter + “Over 50% of our sales are driven by word of mouth.” - Very low customer engagement on Twitter - No increase of word of mouth, no increase of sales -Neil Blumenthal, Co-founder Warby Parker
10. A well-managed presence on Twitter does matter for the success of the business. Cost Effect on + Cost for customer service: <$1 per customer contact on Twitter + More cost-effective customer service - Cost for customer service: $6-12 per customer contact using traditional call center - No customer service on Twitter, costs cannot be driven down
11. A well-managed presence on Twitter does matter for the success of the business. Customer Satisfaction Effect on + Twitter functions as additional service platform - Twitter not used for interaction with customers
12. Can using Twitter be effective? Tweets including a video retweeted 65x more. 5x increase in added Twitter followers during contests. 50% of Warby Parker sales driven by WORD-OF-MOUTH.