The graph shows averages per attraction category. The difference between offline visits and online reach is clearly visible. The average museum reaches twice as many people online as an amusement or zoo.
It is also striking how the categories
tours’ and ‘sporty’ lag behind. These attractions attract relatively few followers online, or perhaps sports enthusiasts advertisements for pediatric physiotherapy are less inclined to like. Too bad, because for these attractions in particular the possibilities to steer towards a higher visit frequency are obvious. A missed opportunity?
What numbers (don’t) say
As with any research, numbers only tell part of the story. Absolute numbers of followers say nothing about interaction. And engagement scores are colored by the moment: a zoo that goes unnoticed for a year can peak high around a birth. All the more reason to also look for the stories behind the numbers.
Target group thinking
Several day attractions struggle with the diversity of target groups on Facebook. To illustrate this, we zoom in on the activities of zoos. An exploration shows that parks use their Facebook page to appeal to both day visitors and season ticket holders as well as potential staff. Sometimes this is done in different clean email languages. Burgers Zoo, for example, regularly chooses to place posts in two languages: both in Dutch and German.
old hand
The variation of messages for different target groups often causes confusion or resistance. Season ticket holders each of us faces difficult daysin particular assert themselves in various discussions when a discount is offered to day trippers. An old marketing law: the right message to the wrong target group does more harm than good.
