Not All Fans Are Created Equal

April 19th, 2010 View Comments


Facebook Infographic

Last week, Vitrue determined that the average value of a Facebook fan is worth about $3.60 in equivalent media each year.

The firm calculated this using a wide range of clients and their 45 million aggregate fans before coming to the $3.60 annual valuation. A couple assumptions they make right up front are that each status update posted by the brand generates an average of 1 new media impression for each fan of their brand. They also assume that the brand is posting two updates per day. Lastly, they placed a value to each impression by assigning a $5 CPM which translates to $300,000 in earned media per month or $3.6 million annually for a fan page with 1 million fans. Here is the mathematical equation if you’re interested:


1M impressions x 2 posts x 30 days = 60M impressions

60M impressions / 1000 x $5 CPM = $300,000

$300,000 x 12 months = $3.6M

$3.6M / 1M fans = $3.60

After the Adweek article hit the intrawebs last Tuesday, the emails came flurrying in. Rick Murray, our fearless leader and President of Edelman Digital said that the value of each individual fan will vary depending on some key variables:

  • the quantity of engagement (frequency)
  • the size of their personal networks (reach)
  • the value of the actions they take… and that various people within their networks take


I agree with him and here’s why. Not all customers are created equal. Assuming the above formula is right and all I do as a fan is consume content, I am worth $3.60. But what if I do more than just consume it? Doesn’t my value go up if I comment on it, share it, and tweet about it? Doesn’t it also go up if I have 1,000 friends in my network versus just 100?

Metrics mogul Chris Lightner chimed in and brought up some excellent points and poked some serious holes in the calculation. And since he is much smarter than me, I won’t attempt to summarize:

First off, I appreciate the approach, leveraging “additional impressions generated by fans” in combination with a known media value of $5 CPM. But this $3.60 valuation heavily relies on the fact that the brand needs to post 730 status updates a year (or twice a day) to reach that $3.60 assumed value per fan. Two posts a day? This seems extremely high, even for the most active brands mentioned in this article (over engagement can result in loss of fans, no?). They’re taking the 1M customers and multiplying by 60 posts a month (each customer generating an additional impression), then valuing those impressions at a $5 CPM.

But, what if you’re like the real Starbucks Facebook page (Edelman client) that exists in real life and only posts 0.67 posts per day (I sampled the past 30 days and counted 20 posts), then what? Let’s use their real numbers:

6.8M Fans, x 20 Status Updates (0.67 per day for one month) x 1 additional impression per fan, x $5 CPM

If my math is correct (it is, I checked), that comes out to $680,000 in monthly value. Annualized, that’s $8,160,000 in media value. Divide that by their number of fans and you have a value of $1.20 per fan. This is using the exact process outlined in this article and makes perfect sense since the actual calculation uses 20 posts per month instead of 60, exactly 1/3 the number quoted in the article (and a result exactly 1/3 of the $3.60 stated in the article). So where did the 2 posts per day come from? If you posted 10 times a day would your fans be worth $18 in media value? I’m having trouble agreeing with that.

Let’s touch on the “1 impression per fan” assumption one more time. This is a key metric to consider when calculating the media value from social, but you also need to consider the connectivity of fans (and thus impressions generated from brand posts) is going to vary greatly from brand to brand. I looked at the fan pages for three of our larger clients and found that the impressions generated per fan per post were extremely different. This was due largely in part to the type of fans attracted to their page, as well as the type of content the brand is posting to their feed. The impressions generated per fan varied from 0.55 impressions to 1.2 impressions, all the way up to 4 impressions per fan per post! Make sure you know how many impressions are generated from your posts before you move forward with this calculation (available to the administrators of Facebook fan pages).

Would I be cheating if I just say that I completely agree with Chris? Well, I do but I’ll try and add a little value here. I decided to list the fan value for a few well known brands on Facebook with more than a million fans using the same formula:

  • Coca Cola – $0.96 cents (5.3M fans and posts about 16 times per month)
  • Youtube – $1.92 (4.8M fans and posts about 32 times per month)
  • Pringles – $.030 (3.1M fans and posts about 5 times per month, in a good month)
  • Adidas – $2.40 (2.7M fans and posts about 40 times per month. Also sharing links to their e-commerce store so one would assume that their fan value is much higher)
  • Red Bull – $1.14 (2.5M fans and posts about 19 times per month)


The key takeaway in the formula isn’t necessarily the total number of fans a brand has on its page; but how often they are posting content. In fact, you can plug in any number in the formula for total fans and the value doesn’t change. The important thing to remember is that if you use this methodology to quantify the value of your fans, ensure that you use “real” numbers that Facebook provides to the page administrators.

And, not to reiterate what Chris has already said but … over engagement ALWAYS results in a loss of fans. I speak from experience managing a branded fan page and as a consumer who has un-fanned pages because of stream spam.

What say you? Do you agree that a Facebook fan is worth $3.60? Why or why not?


Michael Brito
Edelman Digital, Silicon Valley
http://www.britopian.com/
Follow on Twitter @britopian

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Tags: , , , , , , ,


  • hi Sara -- thanks for your thoughtful comment. I agree with you 100% and I truly believe that we will never really know the true value of a community member/fan/follower/subscriber because human behavior changes all the time.

    With this formula, however, it's a good start to something that is so much more robust.

    Michael
  • Sara Bearchell
    Thanks for the great posting- I just stumbled on the same article myself. This is one of the first real attempts to place a dollar value on Facebook fans that I've seen, and it's an intriguing idea but I agree with your thinking here.

    For me, this approach is basically an ad equivalency value model that relies on an apples to oranges comparison. Just like with traditional media, you can't quite equate editorial content with advertising. They are two different things that play different roles in the media landscape for both creators and audiences, and just can't quite be equated.

    I think the same logic holds true in social media. An ad is totally different from a Facebook posting or stream of content that users subscribe to online, and using an ad equivalency model to create a dollar value means ignoring all of the dynamics of human social interaction, influence, placement, audience engagement, etc.

    While I would love to see a simple formula that allows us to calculate the value of community, I think a combination of quantitative and qualitative measures will carry us further when talking about value.
  • Dena Lawless
    Michael, I'm hoping you will take this to the next step and lead 'best practices for FB measurement.' I agree with you and Chris. In every social network (Ok let's just say Facebook), there are hyperconnectors, influencers, mavens (they go by a few name but basically those that influence others). They have, by far, a lot more value.
  • Hi Rebecca -- thanks for the comment and RT! : )

    Yeah, not everyone was happy with the study and some even poked holes in the formula and assumptions made. I do think it’s a good start to something many marketers are looking for – what’s the return on investing budget and human capital on a Facebook fan page? We may never know the true value because human behavior changes all the time and technology isn’t quite there yet.

    Michael
  • Michael, I am so glad you wrote this! I saw that post last week and was just flabbergasted by their methodology and assumptions. I'm glad someone got the chance to look at it with some more realistic numbers and assumptions.

    I'd love to learn more about how exactly you calculate impressions, frequency and reach. This could be a great jumping off point for one standardized FB metric.
blog comments powered by Disqus