This entry was posted on Friday, July 13th, 2012 at 11:28 am and is filed under .
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
I have always suspected that QR codes are pushed by the industry on a population who overwhelmingly could not care less. I saw another blog article this weekend touting the success of QR marketing campaign which resulted in a quantifiable sale to 14 out of every 100,000 folks who held the ad in their hands, snapped the QR code, got a coupon, and then bought something. So if you have any luck contacting someone at Sherwin Williams who can give you information about this please ask them these questions:
• Assuming that the bar code pointed to in the mailer was trackable, is the printed URL link (sherwin-williams.com/emerald) a trackable printed URL? If I were going to construct this marketing campaign I would want to know how many customers typed in the URL rather than snapping the bar code.
• How many postcards did they send out? How many people used the bar code? Did they use a control group of cards without a bar code? What was the percentage of folks who hit the website from that card? Was it the bar code that drove the response or the product on the card that sparked a response?
• Why did they choose to use the “non-standard” bar code (i.e. not QR)? I have seen many of this type of bar code on the little stakes placed in potted plants, but I have never once been able to get my phone to recognize any of this type of bar code. I stood in a store once and downloaded three different apps onto my phone. None of them would read the bar code. I could not read this bar code either. That could be because it’s a fuzzy jpg image, but more likely I still have no app on my phone that will read it. Given the low of a percentage of folks who will use QR, the type of code they used cuts out another 80% of the audience.