Either I completely misread this, or Marketing Experiments - recently acquired by Marketing Sherpa - by got it completely wrong.
In a study into video as a viral marketing technique, they:
- spent $9600 creating 28 videos for YouTube, Google Video, etc
- which over 60 days received 324,190 views
- which results in 4,162 clickthroughs
- which converted at 1.49% to newsletter subscribers
The article then goes on to laud video viral marketing as a success, and that it beats PPC hands down in terms of acquisition cost.
After all, the acquisition costs for new subscribers via the videos was $0.
But, hang on, what about the $9600 cost of the videos?
Maybe I'm being dumb here, but by my calculator, 1.49% of 4,162 is 62.
Which is $10k to get 62 newsletter subscribers.
I can't see any reason how this can be lauded as a success.