A few days ago, I saw an interesting infographic comparing consumer and retailer expectations, entitled “What Consumers Want from Product Video” by Invodo, of all things (surprise, surprise), a company that makes videos for product advertising. It seemed to me a bit of the cart before the horse, but I understand their perspective. I think a better study would be ‘what consumers want from rich media advertising’, and I think their data supports taking advertising beyond video where needed.
A couple of information points caught my attention, in particular:
- 71% of consumers say that video is the best way to bring product features to life.
- 65% say that seeing a product demonstrated online makes it easier to imagine themselves using the product.
Both of these points reinforce the theme of what I’ve been writing about.
Regarding point #1, consumers are looking for ways to bring product features to life. I think the best way to do so is to demonstrate the features in the context of realistic consumer problems (and solutions). I question whether video is truly the best, or just the best option presented to those surveyed (of course I believe the latter). If the goal is to experience product features, why assume the vicarious experience is ‘best’, why would consumers not prefer to experience the product themselves, with product simulation (in the context of real-world problems)?
Regarding point #2, this observation makes no mention specifically of video. Whether or not that is an oversight, it drives the point home: consumers need to imagine themselves using the product. I think the product simulation would be a much more compelling venue because they would actually be using the (virtual) product, as opposed to simply seeing others use it.