This is all very well and good but I do have the following concerns:
- If we add the Fan Bases from all Social Media channels, we end up with an inflated figure due to counting many people twice, since they may appear on multiple social media channels;
- If we only count the figures from a single social media channel, our figures will not account for the total online market opportunity.
Theoretically speaking, Social Media channels are promotional avenues. Just like any other website. With that being said, is it more beneficial to treat Social Media channels as separate markets; for the purposes of market research or not?
If not, would it be better to establish a suitable Sample size for each Target Market, then survey each Target market asking what Social Media channels they are on then extrapolate this information. For example:
- Combined Facebook and Twitter Fan Bases: 100,000 (My Target Market);
- Sampling: 1,000 People (1%);
- Facebook Only: 500 (50%);
- Twitter Only: 250 (25%);
- Facebook and Twitter: 250 (25%).
Rather than treating Social Media channels as Markets, would it simply be better to extrapolate the above figures as follows:
Unique Facebook Users: 50% x 100,000 = 50,000.
Unique Twitter Users: 25% x 100,000 = 25,000.
Actual Market Size: 50,000 + 25,000 = 75,000.
Using the above figures, it would then be fair to assume that around 25,000 people will have had profiles across both Facebook and Twitter. To validate this, we would perform the following calculation:
- 25% x 100,000 = 25,000.
Of course, I have provided an idealistic example here but I would welcome feedback on whether my above suggestion would be a better approach on dealing with Social Media or whether Social Media channels should just be looked at as their own unique markets.