NewUsed

Find by category:

Exhaust Notes

GM Cuts Facebook Ad Spending, But Ford Steps on the Gas

By Automotive News

By AutoWeek May 16, 2012 1:01PM

General Motors will continue to maintain pages for its brands on Facebook. Image courtesy of Autoweek.




On the eve of Facebook's wildly anticipated initial public stock offering, General Motors said May 15 that it will stop buying advertisements on Facebook--about $10 million a year--but "remains committed" to the social network as part of "an aggressive content strategy with all our products and brands."


In other words, GM will not pay Facebook for ads but will continue to maintain content, for which Facebook doesn't collect revenue. News of the decision was reported in The Wall Street Journal.


But GM's position is far from universal. Ford Motor Co. said it would "accelerate" ad spending on Facebook in conjunction with the content it's producing for the network.


Chris Perry, vice president of global marketing for Chevrolet, confirmed the move to Automotive News on Tuesday.


Perry told Automotive News on the sidelines of a marketing event in Los Angeles that the return on investment for paid ads on Facebook--the small ads that appear on the right hand side of Facebook pages that can be targeted based on the interests of users--was insufficient.


"I think we've learned through our experience that the paid advertising is not the best way of activating Facebook," Perry said.


The automaker will continue to promote its brands and vehicles on Facebook by producing content such as videos, contests and photos designed to engage Facebook users.


"Facebook is still going to be an integral part of our social strategy, no doubt about it--it's the biggest game out there. The question is where does paid advertising (on Facebook) come into play versus earned media," or other advertising mediums.


But GM's pullout points to Facebook's biggest challenge: Though most consumer brands see the social network as a way to connect with consumers, opinions are mixed on the value of advertising there. Posting messages is free, but Facebook astonished the market in February when it revealed that only 16 percent of "fans" see any given piece of content. To reach more "fans" as well as their friends, marketers were urged to buy advertising.


Automotive is a tough category for Facebook, as the purchase cycle is long and many factors influence a decision. A spokesman for the company said it would have no comment on GM's decision.


Sources told Advertising Age, an affiliate of Autoweek, that world's second-largest automaker has been reviewing the effectiveness of advertising vs. placing content on the site for a while. (GM named Carat as its new media spending agency in January.)


GM spokesman Tom Henderson said that the carmaker would continue to budget for content spending on Facebook "because Facebook continues to be a really effective tool for engaging with our customers."


Henderson emphasized that "adjustments" were ongoing in ad spending. "This is a regular part of business, and its not unusual for us to move our spending around various media, especially considering growth of digital and social outlets."


Besides putting a damper on the Facebook IPO, scheduled for May 18, GM's move--a company source said timing had nothing to do with the announcement--raises the question of whether Facebook advertising is effective, especially in the automotive space.


But Scott Monty, Ford's head of social media, said that the automaker is bullish about Facebook ads--particularly "sponsored stories" that contain a social layer--and intends to "accelerate" spending on them.


"We've found that Facebook ads are very effective, and they're most effective when we strategically combine them with great content and innovative forms of storytelling rather than a straight media buy," Monty said.


He declined to give the percentage of Ford's overall Facebook budget allocated to ads. (He did say, however, that 20 percent to 25 percent of Ford's overall marketing budget goes to digital and social media.)


According to Avi Savar, founder of Big Fuel, which was GM's social-media agency until GM ended the relationship in December, the automaker never seemed persuaded of the value of social media in general and Facebook likes in particular.


"In a sales-driven culture, it is very hard to wrap your head around putting money in places where you don't see immediate results in an uptick in sales," Savar said.


GM is taking its questions directly to users. On Tuesday it posted a link to its Facebook page asking fans how they found out about it. Possible responses include an ad in Facebook, an ad outside of Facebook, "searched for GM on Facebook" and "saw it on someone else's Facebook page."


GM, the third-largest U.S. advertiser, spent $2.8 billion domestically and $3.9 billion globally in 2010, the most recent year for which data are available, according to Ad Age data.

After a creative-agency review earlier this year, GM assigned its global creative account to a new firm, Commonwealth, made up of talent from Omnicom's Goodby Silverstein & Partners and Interpublic Group of Cos.'s McCann Erickson Worldwide.


Stephen Williams of Advertising Age and Ryan Beene of Automotive News contributed to this report.


Content provided by Autoweek.

Get more Car News from Autoweek.
Get the latest Car Reviews from Autoweek.

9Comments
May 17, 2012 4:29AM
avatar
This is undoubtedly going to have a negative impact on Facebooks's IPO.  Having a major player like GM withdraw their advertising from your site is never good news for investors.  Worse, GM has probably one of the best marketing organizations in the world, regardless of industry.  This decision was made based on measurable results on their Facebook advertising.  The conclusion:  It wasn't working as well as other methods.  Will that change in the future?  Maybe, but Facebook has a lot of challenges of its own to address, like user privacy.  Investors are taking note of this latest turn of events.   
May 16, 2012 3:02PM
avatar
GM has measured the success of advertising on Facebook and have come to the conclusion it isn't as effective as other forms of advertising.  There is a lot of discussion going on about the commercial effectiveness of Facebook as their IPO nears.  Some are concerned that Facebook will be a fad and to invest a lot of money and energy there might no be wise.
May 18, 2012 10:51AM
avatar
Facebook stock didn't do all that well today.  At one point it had even dropped back to the $38 offering price and was only up by about $2 when the market closed.  I can't help but think this announcement by GM depressed prices of Facebook's stock today.  Other IPOs for technology stocks have been offered in the 20s or 30s per share and were into triple digits at the end of the first day of trading.  I would classify the results of this IPO as less than spectacular.
May 18, 2012 3:09AM
avatar
Facebook IPO launches in less than 3 hours at $38 per share.  I will be interesting to see where it settles out over the next few weeks.  Having a major advertiser like GM pull out isn't a good sign. 
May 22, 2012 4:18AM
avatar
There is no doubt GM pulling the majority of its Facebook activity has had an impact on the perceived value of Facebook stock.  When a large company like GM with a sophisticated marketing organization says they aren't seeing the desired results to justify the cost, that's a red flag for Facebook's business model being flawed.  The investors were wise to issue an IPO now  and get as much money out as possible before people started to realize that Facebook has been over-hyped and over-valued.
May 22, 2012 3:01AM
avatar
After Morgan Stanley tried desperately to prop up Facebook stock last Friday it finished yesterday at $34.03, almost $4 below its IPO price.  I predict it will drop below $30 a share before the summer is over.
May 16, 2012 7:29PM
avatar
People who use facebook regularly are generally young, and fairly savvy with technology, meaning that they are more likely buy a hi-tech Focus than a pitiful Sonic, a slick Mustang over the butchy Camaro. GM lacks hi-tech features in their cars, and are still depending on trucks and SUVs for the most part for sales, and are less likely to attract young buyers than Ford, so it would make sense that Ford would increase advertising in the venue their prospective buyers are likely to visit, while GM cuts their losses.
May 16, 2012 2:17PM
avatar

"Considering that GM is cutting it self out of the social media market that tells me that GM is going back to relying on the boomers again to buy their crap.

 

GM, the third-largest U.S. advertiser, spent $2.8 billion domestically and $3.9 billion globally in 2010, the most recent year for which data are available, according to Ad Age data"

 

GM is also starting to figure out that the public is getting tired of hearing GM ads everywhere you look and listen. Yeah that was bailout money well spent!

Report
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
Categories
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
MSN Money

ABOUT EXHAUST NOTES

Cars are cool, and here at MSN Autos we love everything about them, but we also know they're more than simply speed and style: a car is an essential tool, a much-needed accessory to help you get through your day-to-day life. What you drive is also one of the most important investments you can make, so we'll help you navigate your way through the car buying and ownership experiences. We strive to be your daily destination for news, notes, tips and tricks from across the automotive world. So whether it's through original content from our world-class journalists or the latest buzz from the far corners of the Web, Exhaust Notes helps you make sense of your automotive world.

Have a story idea? Tip us off at exhaustnotes@live.com.