Every market with a low entry cost is saturated.
Just that point explains the need to be a proxy adding value and not just a “repeater”.
When you are a white brand , let’s say an adult site white brand for this whole post explanation.
You can be a repeteater for the site’s adult streamers pool and just spray and pray or you can add value and still be unique.
If you choose to be a repeater you will be struggling with amplification, your offer will reach the audience but may not turn into a customer.
You will have to deal with increasingly ammounts of SEO techniques, algorithm play , dark patterns and a no end of affiliate weird words that are just meant to reach audiences at any cost.
But reach is not value.
More about brand value I wrote before.
What’s the point of reach without value
It’s like crossing half country to just reach your destination without a clue of what are you doing there.
Every channel mutates overtime to benefit brand awareness and trust because that’s why consumers do use platforms for.
Consumers don’t want to get spammed, they want a return for their investment and be happy about that ratio.
How to compete vs “repeaters”
- Identify what you can control and what not.
- Who are your audiences?
- What is your value?
- What are the most suitable channels
- Isolate the communication channels
Identify what you can control and what not.
What you can’t control:
You are basically a “reseller” and can’t produce the offer.
Anyone can sell your catalog because you are picking them from the same pool. You have the same channels as everyone else.
(Email lists, social media, blog, the site ‘s designed ad resources…)
You can’t rely on the site offer pool stability.
Third parties may increase or decrease overtime.
You can’t control big tech companies.
Everyone remembers the good old days when you opened a site and a thousand unclickable ads popped right? 😀
You can control :
What you offer.
How you offer it.
The value you provide.
A reason to consume it.
How to consume it.
Who are your audiences?
This is a critical point, not everyone like the same message or seeks the same value.
Audiences may not be compatible.
You don’t put in the same box opposite tastes.
Entertainment or personal connection?
It’s not the same an adult streamer in a show rather In a more personal 1 – 1 talk for example. Audiences have different needs that may drive their behaviour.
Even the demand component may change from luxury to need.
That means the demand may be elastic (luxury) or inelastic (social connection needs)
Someone who seeks social connection don’t rotate,they invest not spend.
People seeking entertainment they spend don’t invest and rotate.
What is your value?
If I were a white brand I would go with quality over quantity.
I would filter anyone that could compromise my user audience stability or don’t align with my brand values.
Same goes for users bulling or disruptive behaviour.
I would not ignore the problems or negative perceptions and make known to my user base the brand value is real and they can trust it.
Social listening comes to mind
But adult audiences don’t really have an open engagement to listen for , let’s be real.
So that’s something you even don’t have to care for, normally there won’t be any good or bad public feedback in socials.
Unless you actively provide it, if you want to earn trust you have to be transpàrent about the good and the bad from your activity.
Cero trust brand enviroments are those usually that never talks about the “bad things”. They evade that because they are actively doing that most of the time.
The value may be visual or “subjective” , but subjective perception always plays a major role.
Its good to make a site skin but it’s not the core. A brand is what lies behind the showcase, is the reason to buy something you resonate with.
It’s not enough to drive value, you may have beautiful pics and banners but your social users may not know who are entertainers or users interested in entertainment only find social connection options..
Yes , I would know what my users like and offer it without leaving them on a trial and error circle.
Because social users are more prone to leave due burn out, but they are more loyal too due the reasons explained before.
“What you see is what you get” don’t apply for them.
What are the most suitable channels?
I personally like social media , it’s direct and may enable a community.
Emails can’t enable communities.
Twitter for example.
Think like my feed was an adult streaming white brand. It’s exactly the practical application of what I’m talking about in here.
I use the feed to drive a brand message (customer brand). I provide a why, how and where.
It’s not about just posting pretty pics. It’s the same reason as pretty site banners.
You need a strategy, integrity and coherent messages to earn trust.
If you are adult , you don’t even have to worry about social listening . You can even make that work in your favor by actively providing feed back about good things and not so good things and how you are willing to deal with it as a brand.
Understand the channels nature, in Twitter the feed is the train and tweets are the wagons.
You need trust if you seek social audiences.
Isolate the communication channels.
Again same as you isolate audiences you do the proper with the channel.
By the same channel you can’t mix opposite messages.
You can’t mix explicit sexual content with social connection it makes no sense from an user pov for example.
Neither feelings with audiences seeking full action.
So I would make different channels for my different audiences. Different twitter accounts sounds good to me.
Streamers may post anything they want but then I would take what I like for my channel.
Audiences stick to the channels,they don’t funnel to other channels if you provide value and are social.
Why anyone would use twitter as a trash can where everything goes into their white label feeds.
The user communication channel makes no sense, there is no value besides “what you see is what you get” and you are using social…yet ditching any social value related to your brand.