| www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com The Aim of This Report Background • McDonald’s run a promoLonal campaign “McDonald’s Monopoly” every year between 20th March and 30th April. Food and drinks purchased in McDonald’s restaurants across the UK come with sLckers containing codes which may unlock prizes. • This year saw a change in the format of the compeLLon. TradiLonally players would collect sLckers on a “monopoly board”, compleLng street sets to unlock prizes, or hoping to find an ‘instant win’ sLcker. This year saw a third addiLon; a “guaranteed win” where McDonald’s customers could expect a much more basic, lower Ler prize with each sLcker. Purpose of This Report • To analyse online data in order to determine McDonald’s UK customers’ opinions of how well the “McDonald’s Monopoly” campaign has been structured. 1. To develop insights into the campaign’s different win styles with regards to their popularity. -‐ Win styles: Collect To Win, Instant Win, Guaranteed Win -‐ Understand the public’s aatude towards this year’s new Guaranteed Win addiLon. -‐ Detail any negaLve opinions or areas for improvement. 2. To develop insights into the popularity of the campaign’s prizes. -‐ Build a case for which prizes to keep, and which to replace. Detail any areas for improvement. 1
| www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Our Data Analysis 0 250 500 750 1000 01-‐Jan 15-‐Jan 29-‐Jan 12-‐Feb 26-‐Feb 12-‐Mar 26-‐Mar 09-‐Apr 23-‐Apr 07-‐May 21-‐May 20-‐Mar 30-‐Apr Campaign Dates 424,428 menLons Related to McDonald’s 10,216 menLons Related to the Monopoly Campaign 1,126 MenFons MenFons in which people discussed, or expressed opinions about specific prizes • All UK-‐based online menLons and conversaLons relaLng to McDonald’s, McDonald’s food and McDonald’s Monopoly Campaign and its prizes were tracked for the period 01-‐Jan to 25-‐May 2013. • Results were filtered down by Monopoly Campaign relevance to 10,216 for the campaign analysis. 1,126 results were found to contain construcLve insights into the campaign’s specific prizes. Monopoly Campaign MenLons 10,216 results 2 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] ExecuFve Summary Win Styles • “Collect To Win” was a more popular compeLLon format than “Instant Win”. Customers felt that by collecLng sLckers for a prize they were working their way towards winning it, increasing their interest in the compeLLon. We recommend building upon this interest by increasing the number of collectables on the board. • An interesLng trend made possible by the “Collect To Win” system was McDonald’s customers taking to Twifer to search for other customers who had the sLckers they needed. 15% of all prize conversaLons volume was people looking to team up and split the grand 50k prize. • This year’s “Guaranteed Win” addiLon received mixed senLment and feedback from customers. There was lifle evidence to suggest that people are pleased and grateful to receive a prize, no mafer how basic, every Lme they play McDonald’s Monopoly. Instead, the senLment and nature of peoples’ opinions depended on whether or not they were saLsfied with their prize. We therefore recommend a careful review of the prizes based on their popularity. We would further suggest offering customers the opLon to either claim their prize, or to choose for McDonald’s to donate the value of that prize to a charity. Customers would consequently walk away feeling proud of themselves for having done a good deed, rather than feeling bifer about the prize they did not want. 3 Monopoly Prizes • The 50k prize was the single most spoken about prize, accounLng for 40% of all prize conversaLons. It is however quesLonable whether the 50k prize encouraged people to eat at McDonald’s, as it seemed to be more of a pipedream. Comments about mid-‐Ler prizes such as the Xbox suggested that while less glamorous, these prizes encouraged the most interest and parLcipaLon in the Monopoly compeLLon, as customers felt they stood a chance of winning. • Customers generally felt disappointed with the Honda Civic as a choice of car. People criLcized the Civic for its unafracLve design, or expressed their disappointment that the Honda has replaced last year’s Mini. Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] ExecuFve Summary • Basic prizes such as the Mini Ninjas Game suffered from customers expressing their annoyance that they have been awarded the same prize mulLple Lmes. Prizes that offered an element of choice, or where mulLple wins were otherwise not a problem proved more popular. 50 Snapfish Photos received the most posiLve reviews of the basic prizes. • The discount voucher prizes were not popular in general. Customers complained that a 20% discount is “not a real prize”, while others felt disappointed that they did not want to buy the specific product the discount could be applied towards (e.g. the mountain bike). 4 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Collect To Win Encouraged ParFcipaFon • The majority of online conversaLons and comments have shown Collect To Win to be a popular and effecLve compeLLon format. Customers generally felt that by collecLng sLckers for a prize they were building towards winning it, rather than simply playing a pure lofery – even though staLsLcally the odds of winning the rare final sLcker to complete the set may be no different. • The majority of relevant comments indicated that collecFng sFckers on the monopoly board made customers feel they were working their way closer to winning the prize, which increased their interest in the compeFFon. e.g. 7 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • We would recommend considering ways to expand the Collect To Win system to build on the excitement of collecFng towards a prize. Customers clearly appeared far more interested and excited about the prospect of progressively working their way closer and closer to a desirable prize, than simply hoping to win it via an Instant Win fluke. • One idea could be introducing a rewards system, where each Lme customers buy food they receive ‘house’ sLckers they may use on any street set on the Monopoly board, and e.g. 10 house sLckers allow a lucky draw -‐ which could contain a street sLcker on that set or a different prize. AddiLons of this sort could help further increase customers’ interest in the Monopoly game, and create incenLves to eat at McDonald’s. 8 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Mid-‐Tier Prizes • Mid-‐Ler prizes received less glamour and publicity than the 50k grand prize. Judging by the comments, mid-‐Fer prizes however provided a strong incenFve for people to repeatedly eat at McDonalds due to the fact that they felt they actually had a shot at winning. The 50k grand prize seemed to be more of pipedream. • Consequently, we believe it is important to offer an afracLve range of mid-‐Ler prizes, and adverLse them as a key feature of the Monopoly compeLLon. The Collect To Win scheme works parLcularly well with these prize, leading people to believe they are building up towards winning a realisLc prize. e.g. 9 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Social Media Engagement • The Collect To Win system has resulted in people using TwiVer to look for other people who have the sFckers they need, for the purpose of teaming up and sharing the prize. • This teaming up was almost enFrely centered around people trying to win the £ 50,000. Besides a few people using Twifer to try to team up for a Honda Civic, there was lifle culture of teaming up for the other prizes. 15% of all online conversaFons and posts relaFng to McDonald’s Monopoly prizes were people looking to team up for the £ 50,000 cash prize, making it the single most popular compeLLon-‐related topic. e.g. Prize MenFons 10 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • Twifer was the key plaporm for communicaLon. A few people posted on Facebook, however they were only reposLng their Twifer message into their Facebook. e.g. • We would recommend exploring ways to build this interacLon into the markeLng campaign. McDonald’s customers are already acLvely engaging with other customers online rather than simply waiLng to win a lofery; this could potenLally be developed into an online markeLng campaign. • As an example, lots of mid-‐Fer cash prizes could be introduced for people to team up for. People clearly prefer teaming up for money as it is easily divisible, while an Xbox is not. Different sFckers could be limited to different stores or parts of the country to encourage online co-‐operaFon. • Currently there are no formal #hashtags or TwiVer pages for people to locate one another. Some people used #mcdonalds and #monopoly, while others did not use any, relying instead on their friends to retweet. This is an area that could be improved. 11 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Is Being Awarded a Basic Prize Instead of Nothing Desirable? • The Guaranteed Win system was presumably introduced with the purpose of making each customer feel rewarded. Customers are offered a small token ‘prize’ every Lme they purchase a meal at McDonalds in order to keep them interested in the compeLLon. • Having analyzed customers’ online comments, we however found no evidence to support the claim that people are pleased and grateful to receive a prize, no maVer how basic, every Fme they play McDonald’s Monopoly. We found that the senFment and nature of peoples’ opinions depended on whether or not they were saFsfied with their prize. • The general gist of comments indicated that when people are told “CongratulaLons! You have won a prize” they expect it to be something special, or at least something that they may want. Prizes did not need to be expensive in order to be popular; some of the low budget prizes, e.g. 50 Free Snapfish Photos, were very posiLvely received. • People who were repeatedly disappointed with their prizes openly expressed their frustraFon, staFng they expect a compeFFon to offer beVer prizes. No comments or conversaFons pointed out that this prize is sFll beVer than no win at all. This was parFcularly the case with the 20% discount tokens; customers repeatedly complained that this is “not a real prize”, with a few staFng that the compeFFon is not worth it if this is the type of reward one can expect. e.g. 12 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • We can conclude that when a company offers prizes they set a certain standard of expectaLon. Prizes that were perceived as cheap and undesirable (e.g. 20% discount vouchers) were not received well. • It is important to therefore ensure as a first priority that the prizes are popular, even if they are very basic. The popularity of the compeLLon’s prizes is fully detailed in the next secLon. • We suggest considering charitable donaFons as a prize alternaFve. Customers could be given a choice; they can either claim the prize that they have won, or if they are not saFsfied they could choose for McDonald’s to donate the value of that prize to a charity (perhaps offer a choice of 3-‐5 chariLes). Customers will consequently walk away feeling proud of themselves for having done a good deed, rather than feeling bifer about the prize they did not want. This scheme would also allow customers to see McDonald’s as a socially responsible, charitable company. 13 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Is That It? • “Is this small prize really all I get?” was a recurring theme in customers’ comments. Some customers expressed frustraLon that the compeLLon is a waste of money; that they are playing for serious prizes on the Monopoly board and all they receive are endless ‘cheap’ prizes they do not want, or could have bought instead of spending money at McDonalds. • In conclusion, not all customers enjoy receiving small, frequent prizes. Some customers who parLcipate in the McDonald’s Monopoly game do so for the purpose of building up their game board for the larger rewards, and they would prefer the compeLLon to be more focused towards this, and less on offering lots of trivial prizes along the way. The introducFon of the Guaranteed Win system has therefore been received differently by different groups. • This again stems from the fact that hosLng a compeLLon creates expectaLons about prizes, and different people will have different expectaLons and moLves. We would recommend considering ways of separaFng these customer groups out. Perhaps several small prizes could be collected to trade in for a larger prize, or instead of referring to the lower Ler Guaranteed Win prizes as ‘prizes’ they could be considered ‘loyalty perks’. Another opLon could be to focus more on offering various McDonald’s food discount vouchers as a loyalty scheme – this way the loyalty benefits could be retained, yet people would not feel they are necessarily winning a Monopoly Prize. e.g. 14 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] Winning the Same Prize MulFple Times • There were complaints from customers who had been given the same Guaranteed Win prize mulFple Fmes. • Regular wins works well as a system for prizes such as Snapfish Photos where having duplicate prizes is not a problem, or for prizes such as music download vouchers or cinema Fckets where the customer is given the choice over which end product they redeem. We would therefore recommend more focus on these types of prizes, or perhaps the ability to exchange a prize for something else within the same ‘prize band’ if the prize has previously been won. e.g. e.g. 15 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • 40% of all online conversaFons and posts relaFng to McDonald’s Monopoly prizes were about the £ 50,000 cash prize, making it by far the single most spoken about prize. • The most popular topic, accounLng for almost 45% of all £ 50,000 cash prize related posts and discussions, was people searching for a another person on the internet that had the sLcker they needed, for the purpose of partnering up and spliang the prize money in half. A detailed analysis of this interacLon is provided on page 7 in the 1st secLon of this report. 40% £ 50,000 Prize 1,126 MenFons • Approximately another 1/3 of the voice consisted of people posLng that they want to win the £ 50,000 prize, or commenLng on how they would spend the money. e.g. 17 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • The remaining share of the voice was people announcing that they or one of their friends had just acquired a sLcker, or that they are hoping for a sLcker. e.g. 18 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • The £ 50,000 cash prize certainly received a large amount of publicity and afenLon. The popularity was boosted by the Collect To Win system, as people who had found a Park Lane sLcker appeared excited by the prospect that they were half-‐ way to winning a large amount of money. • However, it is difficult to determine whether the £ 50,000 prize encouraged people to eat at McDonalds, as the prize seemed to be a pipedream. A small number of posts even stressed that winning the prize is unrealisLc. e.g. 19 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • Approximately 11% of all posts and conversaLons taking place online about McDonald’s Monopoly prizes were about the Honda Civic. • Despite the Honda’s presLge as a prize, customers were disappointed with the Honda Civic as a choice of car. Not a single comment was made praising the choice of car, yet 10% of all Honda related posts and discussions were people criFcising the Civic for its unaVracFve design, or expressing their disappointment that the Honda has replaced last year’s Mini. 11% Honda Civic Prize 1,126 MenFons e.g. 20 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • A quarter (25%) of all Honda prize posts and discussions were Collect To Win related – people posted their excitement about how they or their friends won a sLcker making them one step closer to winning a Honda Civic, or about how they needed just one more or two more sLckers to win. • Despite the Honda’s status as a top prize and its difficulty to win, only a meager 4% of all Honda related posts were from people searching the internet for someone to partner up with to collect the relevant sLckers. e.g. e.g. 21 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • 20% of all McDonald’s Monopoly prize conversaLon was about the Xbox 360. • Many people felt they stood a chance at winning an Xbox, most likely due to it being a mid-‐Ler prize. Only 6% of posts were from people looking to team up with someone else to split the prize. 36% of all related posts and menLons were people expressing their excitement to only be a train staLon or two away from winning. e.g. 20% Xbox 360 1,126 MenFons 22 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • The Xbox’s popularity could clearly be seen in the nature of the comments. The majority of the comments were from people staLng that they would like to win one, or are desperately trying to collect tokens towards one. There is a strong indicaLon that while grand prizes such as the £ 50,000 cash prize generate large amounts of publicity, popular mid-‐Ler prizes such as the Xbox are more likely to encourage people to eat in McDonald’s restaurants as they believe they actually have a chance of winning. e.g. 23 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • There were few posts and conversaLons about the Snapfish Photos prize, in total less than 5% of all Monopoly prize volume. • The few posts were however extremely posiLve; Snapfish appeared to be the most popular of the basic, lower-‐Fer prizes. People commented that they were grateful for the 50 free photographs prize. Furthermore, people were pleased to win this prize mulLple Lmes, unlike other lower-‐Ler prizes such as the Mini Ninjas Game where mulLple wins caused frustraLon. e.g. 5% Snapfish Photos 1,126 MenFons 24 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • Over 19% of all prize related posts and conversaLons were about the Urbanz headphones, however nearly all were simple status updates where people announced that they had just won a pair of headphones while buying a meal. • Only a handful of posts contained opinions about the headphones’ quality. The general tone was that people were pleased and grateful to have won the pair of headphones, but that they felt the headphones were rather poor. e.g. 19% Urbanz Headphones 1,126 MenFons 25 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • Only 4% of all online posts and conversaLons about McDonald’s Monopoly prizes were about the Mini Ninjas Game. • The tone of the comments was in general negaLve. Some people said that the game itself is fun and entertaining, however most posts were people complaining that they did not want the game as soon as they won it. A few people also had compaFbility issues as the game only worked on the Android system. e.g. 4% Mini Ninjas Game 1,126 MenFons 26 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
| May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] • Several McDonald’s customers further expressed their annoyance that they have been awarded the Mini Ninjas game mulFple Fmes. Prizes such as the Snapfish Photos where duplicate wins are less of an issue were more popular. e.g. 27 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
7557 874 230 Contact: The information in this document has been checked for accuracy and completeness, however SocialSENSE shall not be liable for any errors or omissions. The views and opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the authors in their private capacity, and do not represent the views of Heron’s other brands. SocialSense | May 2013 | www.makesocialsense.com | [email protected] 29 Powered by Brandwatch | www.brandwatch.com
socialsense
takashiinui
masakat0
shunk031
yukinobaba
.jpg){kind=avatar}
iflection
cybozuinsideout
gamella
matsui_528
afroscript
ozekinote
trafficbrain
reokashiwa
reverentgeek
sferik
rabernat
ryanjones
brad_frost
charlesmeaden
aki_iinuma
smashingmag
.png){kind=avatar}
helenjbeal
sabderemane
baasie
axbom
![Email: [email protected] | Tel: (+44) 7557](https://files.speakerdeck.com/presentations/3e8c2040cf750130c695420ef8f9cfeb/slide_0.jpg){kind=link}
![Email: [email protected] Web: www.makesocialsense.com Tel: (+44)](https://files.speakerdeck.com/presentations/3e8c2040cf750130c695420ef8f9cfeb/slide_29.jpg){kind=link}