Share of Search: from Peak Kardashian to Frozen Peas
In 30 seconds
Simple branded search data gives a quick read on your brand fame, compared to competitors’.
Go further for to explore brand insights into market share threats and opportunities
It started out with ‘peak Kardashian’
Pop culture moments, and trends, are the beating heart of a PR story plan. And although our calendar had a big sharpie circle around the 6th of Feb for the latest season of Keeping Up with the Kardashians, it took Marina Hyde on ‘The Rest is Entertainment’ podcast to raise the question the rest of dared not ask:
“have we reached Peak Kardashian?”
I thought…if only there was a way to answer Marina’s speculation.
And then I automatically reached for Google Trends - so easy, so totally free - to get the data answer that nobody really wanted.
Certainly not Kim, and the whole Kardashian Krew.
Because they’d be gutted to know that Peak Kardashian was….eight years ago.
Who cares about search data for The Kardashians?
Well, I do. For at least four reasons. None of which are to do with a personal interest in their ‘reality’ show.
Reason 1> It’s surprising, and surprising makes good stories. It’s not as if we’re working with the Kardashians, so I’m not working their story angles. But it’s a reminder that - for all our clients - turning one of those idle musings into a little hypothesis - and then into a quick data test - can quickly yield interesting stuff.
Reason 2> It’s intriguing. The most engaging stories for leave room for people to speculate. To ask themselves ‘hmmm, why 2016?’ and add their two-pence-worth. Whether that little speculation is in their head, or in the comments section, or in the pub later with friends.
Reason 3> It shows a pretty clear arc - from rise, to peak, to fall. Maybe it gives us a sense of the modern celebrity fame-span. Not Andy Warhol’s fifteen minutes…more like fifteen years? Something to compare with others, and see if it’s a new benchmark.
Like: Sabrina and Chappell aren’t in the same ‘category’ as Kim, so it’s not a proper comparison.
And we don’t know (yet) if their ‘peak’ - shown here at the end of ‘24 - is just a false summit on the way to a much bigger / longer-term arc of ascendency. But if that was their true zenith, then it might suggest that pop-stardom is more like a two-year phenomenon.
Reason 4> Comparing brands, and their share of search relative to the others in their category, has been shown to have a predictive quality. That if their SoS (Share of Search) is greater than their SoM (Share of Market) - it indicates a future growth in that market share. So getting a little bit of practice with some totally- topical search data is good for the muscle-memory.
Want to see more of that Share of Search (SoS) in action?
As a demo, I’ve picked the branded frozen food category. (It’s just an example, the four brands span slightly different product sub-categories, so arguably aren’t really competing for the same purchase occasion).
Why frozen food? Well, I stumbled onto some UK Share of Market data, which can be quite hard, or expensive to access. And, I used to work for Birds Eye - so I have an enduring love of the Captain and his fish fingers.
How does Share of Search compare for the four frozen food brands?
Downloading the branded search data from Google Trends, and then turning it into relative shares (ie. as if the 4 brands add up to 100% of the market), we can see that Birds Eye has a commanding lead over the 12+ years of this analysis, although in the last 4 years McCains has been closing on that lead.
Remember - branded SoS is a brand metric. We’re not so much interested in it as a source of traffic - none of the brands might be investing in their organic search visibility (findability).
But, to greater and lesser extents, they are all investing in their brand fame - through advertising, social channels, PR campaigns etc.
Branded searches have been shown to be a reliable indicator of the resulting brand strength from that fame-building. More reliable, and more consistently measurable, than Share of Voice (SoV). Or - as Mark Ritson says - it’s certainly a “simple and elegant” alternative to SoV.
What is Excess Share of Search (ESoS)? And what does it indicate?
The Share of Search analysis, on its own, indicates that Birds Eye is the strongest brand of the four. That will probably not surprise any of us who have seen the enduring, distinctive and updated-for-relevance executions of Captain Birdseye over decades.
A more interesting, dynamic, analysis is to look at Excess Share of Search (ESoS).
That is - to compare the Share of Search with the Share of Market.
In this example, I only had a static estimate of their relative Share of Market for the four brands (ideally we’d be looking at a longer timeframe showing the changes in both SoS and SoM over a multi-year period).
Now, in absolute terms - the Retailers’ Own Brands occupy something like a 67% of the UK frozen food market - a dominance that has been growing - while Birds Eye has around a 14% (and shrinking) share of the total market.
But - relative to each other - it’s Birds Eye who has around 67% of the SoM split between the four brands.
McCains has around 14%, Dr. Oetker and Aunt Bessie’s have approximately 9.5% each.
(67% + 14% + 9.5% + 9.5% = 100%).
So, just like their SoS, Birds Eye has a strong (relative) lead in the branded SoM.
But…
Birds Eye’s SoS is lower than its SoM.
McCains’ SoS is greater than its SoM.
McCains has Excess Share of Search (ESoS).
According to the work of Les Binet, this would suggest that Birds Eye will have continued erosion of its market share.
Whereas McCains -with that ESoS - is the brand that shows growth indicators.*
Because Excess Share of Search (SoS minus SoM) predicts future market share movements.
And sustained gaps between SoS and SoM tend to resolve through market share changes.
Place your bets (and when the fun stops, stop). My money (reluctantly, after many loyal years of saluting the Captain) is on McCains to grow share. Unless Birds Eye makes a brand-fame impact to address their ‘negative ESoS’.
*Again, this is a pretty simplified analysis, with estimates of data for SoM, just for demo purposes. So don’t bring your betting slips back to me.
But it’s an analysis that any brand can do - and should do - as part of setting their fame and findability strategy. Brand teams will undoubtedly have better (longitudinal) SoM data - and clarity on their most relevant branded competitor set. (The analysis can be conducted at the sub-category level - eg. frozen pizzas - for a clearer, tighter reading).