Upload
marlin
View
34
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Marketing Database Review 2013. Overview. To impartially review all schools websites in act. 3 main aims were to rate design and usage of all websites, establish PrimarySites accurate market share and to identify our competitors share and performance in the market. How did we do it?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Marketing Database Review 2013
Overview• To impartially review all schools
websites in act.• 3 main aims were to rate design and
usage of all websites, establish PrimarySites accurate market share and to identify our competitors share and performance in the market.
How did we do it?• Every record in ACT was visited and
updated with the required info.• A rating score of 1-4 was given to
each site for design and usage, also each LA and current provider was recorded.
Design Samples
1 2
3 4
The Analysis• Design and Usage totals by %• Design Analysis by Key Competitor• Usage Analysis by Key Competitor• Market Share by Key Competitors• 2012 vs. 2013 Analysis• Sales Focus for 2013/2014
Design and Usage TotalsDesign1 - 9.19% 2 - 50.76% 3 - 31.50% 4 - 8.55%
Usage1 - 13.77% 2 - 36.21% 3 - 35.01% 5 - 15.01%
E4Ed
ucation
Editu
re / D
B Primary
Eschools
Green Sc
hools Onlin
e IK
Joomla CMS (
record
provider)
Moodle CMS (
record provid
er)
Primary
Site
SchoolsO
nline
SchoolsW
ire
SchoolW
ebsit
e
Weban
ywhere
/ Sch
ool Jotter
Wordpress C
MS (rec
ord provid
er)4 7 3
1457 9 4 11 1 3 28 33
58
83
5925
656
120
166
249
340
143
102
974 357345
115
193
128
10
77
14
963
27
58
190
458 206156
331
88
2 3
763
1
5528 6
Design Analysis by Key Competitor
1 2 3 4 (blank)
E4Ed
ucation
Editu
re / D
B Primary
Eschools
Green Sc
hools Onlin
e IK
Joomla CMS (
record
provider)
Moodle CMS (
record provid
er)
Primary
Site
SchoolsO
nline
SchoolsW
ire
SchoolW
ebsit
e
Weban
ywhere
/ Sch
ool Jotter
Wordpress C
MS (rec
ord provid
er)
31 18 10 4117 28 19
42
103
22 32 143 64
145
87
98
56
372 87108
248
155
57 103638 240
258
88
126
96
244 75
57
784
91
100 160
580 242
129
1552
85
77 16 7
905
29 24 54127 56
Usage Analysis by Key Competitor
1 2 3 4 (blank)
No Website11.98%
Other Company 36.29%
Unknown18.51%
E4Education2.49%
Editure / DB Primary0.92%
Eschools1.26%
Green Schools On-line
1.07%
IK3.58%
Joomla CMS (record provider)
0.91%
Moodle CMS (record provider)
0.88%PrimarySite
8.75%
SchoolsOnline1.67%
SchoolsWire0.90% SchoolWebsite
1.55%
Webanywhere / School Jotter6.58%
Wordpress CMS (record provider)2.66%
Market Share by Key Competitor
E4Education
Editure / D
B Primary
Eschools
Green Schools O
nline IK
Joomla CMS (reco
rd provider)
Moodle CMS (reco
rd provider)
PrimaryS
ite
SchoolsO
nline
SchoolsW
ire
SchoolW
ebsite
Webanywhere / S
chool Jo
tter
Wordpress CMS (
record provid
er)
1.77%
0.20% 0.30% 0.74%
5.76%
0.40% 0.50%
5.76%
1.77%
0.20%0.74%
6.51%
1.86%2.49%
0.92%1.26% 1.07%
3.58%
0.91% 0.88%
8.75%
1.67%
0.90%1.55%
6.58%
2.66%
2012 vs 2013 Main Competitor Analysis2012 2013
Sales Focus for 2013/2014Local Authority Total Websites PrimarySite PS % No Website 1 2
Leicestershire County Council 216 22 10.19 2 5 78Lincolnshire County Council 296 44 14.86 15 15 109
Nottinghamshire County Council 241 67 27.80 26 9 107
• Using the various tables and charts, sales can now strategically focus on an area that we are going to hit.
• The table above gives us a clear indication of our foot hold in a specific LA. It also shows us our priority focus of schools with:
• no website• design scores of 1 & 2.
• We can use this for various initiatives, including LTM’s to really pinpoint the schools we feel we can help.
• This will also assist us with future campaigns and ideas for generating new enquiries for the business.
The Positives…87.22%
Of our websites
Rated a 3 or 4
for design
85.35%Of our websitesRated a 3 or 4 for usage
2.17%Market Share ahead
Of our nearest competitor
…And FinallySince 2012
We have increased our Market Share by 2.99%
…Compared to Webanywhere’s0.07%