Not long ago, a good friend and client of ours left his employer to seek pastures new. As he departed, he very nicely chose to highlight a few of the reasons he opted to work with Brandwatch whilst in that role in the first place.
Marketing our product in the listening software market is never as straightforward as it seems, as it is a sector that’s confusing for many, so deciding which features to try and sell and working out what our differentiators are can be tricky business.
So, we’ve kept the client in question anonymous, as these things can be intricate and political. They are supposed to be using a competitor, but love Brandwatch so much they circumvent that relationship to be with us. It’s so romantic.
Here are the seven reasons he believes sets Brandwatch apart from our competitors, published practically verbatim, warts and all:
“Not one of your competitors offers the flexibility you do to construct powerful queries. I don’t think you make enough of this, as it relates to content relevance.
It really helps with the “garbage in, garbage out” problem a lot of your competitors suffer from (especially Radian6). Even the option to search on just the title of a post (which no other tool I’ve seen offers) increases the relevance of the data almost instantly.”
“Some competitors offer this, but not with the same automated sophistication. Some competitors allow a search-within and then tag the results, but that’s it.
Combined with the core filtering, this is a killer feature. Again, I don’t think outwardly you make enough of this.”
(you can read about our Rules here, a feature we’re building into something even more sophisticated soon).
“You crawl your own data – you’re in control! Again, many competitors buy their data in, which means they are not in control. From my experience, we were very conscious about wanting to get coverage of niche resources.
If there was ever a problem, we were also very interested as to whether it could be traced and/or fixed quickly, which you guys are leagues ahead of your competitors at.”
“Query/volume costs aside, a user has complete flexibility once they have data. You don’t impose category/rule restrictions – i.e. you can play with your data as much as you like. There’s a real sense of ownership of the data you buy because of this.
For example, Sysomos Heartbeat only gives you a maximum of 10 (I think) ‘tags’ on top of your main query.”
(Please read the comments to see further information on this from Sysomos).
“Without doubt the best I have ever encountered: responsive, human, efficient, flexible. I’ve had some very bad experiences with Visible, Sysomos and Radian6 (especially with their invoicing). They rarely returned my calls/emails.
Furthermore, I always felt Brandwatch was listening to me and really taking note of any suggestions/ideas I had. It made me feel part of the process. I used to do the same with Radian6 and all they ever said was “we’ll take it on board” – nothing ever happened.”
“Brandwatch has so many options to slice and dice the data once you have it. Authors, followers, posts, views, comments … many of your competitors feel a little two-dimensional compared to what you offer. In the age of Big Data, Brandwatch is sexy!”
“Queries, Authors, sites, locations … this feature to categorise and bundle them together simply isn’t available in competitor tools, which is again another nod to Brandwatch’s flexibility. You feel in control of your data.
I still think you should add Tag Groups (and get rid of Categories), but that’s just my opinion. Adding users to customise their own Page Types (using Site Groups) is also something to consider.”
(thanks valued customer, “we’ll take it on board”).
Well, that was a fun way to ramble on about how good we are compared to our competition without us having to say much ourselves. Please do get in touch if you think we have any blind spots in our marketing, as it can prove really valuable for us to hear from the perspective of an outsider looking in.