Whatever

Dan thank you for explaining that. I'm sure everyone is totally on the ball with what Experiential marketing entails but to be honest I was cluelessly nodding my head like the Churchill dog whenever the subject came up.

Just to clarify does this not simply come back to the original teachings that we all have an individual learning syntax and all teaching methods are either audio, visual, kinaesthetic be it touch, taste or smell.

People respond better to one sense than another, therefore it does make sense to create a marketing strategy that engages more of the senses and increasing the probability of triggering a response from the audience. As you say.

More specificly learn the strategy of the product and your'll learn the syntax of its customers. Mirror this in your campaign and you'll automaticly trigger the desired responses from your target market.  

Did I get all that from your blog. Is that what its all about or have I wildly gone off the subject and should seriously consider therapy?

Dan,

Definitely food for thought; but I would still assume Experiential referred to a 'live' environment  and experience, I think it has to be real. Websites, however spectacular are a virtual environment and therefore somehow a synthetic experience.

I think when you combine the two mediums you can achieve maximum results - creating a live experience and then backing that up with a virtual edition...

Whilst we are on the subject, can someone please explain to me the difference between a website and a 'virtual exhibition' - don't get it!!!

Dan I think websites certainly are part of experiential marketing, but agree with you that it is really a sub set.  

However I think that the line between experiential and e-experiential (see it's catchy) will become more blurred especially when new ideas such as Microsoft’s Project Natal that allows you to interact through hand gestures becomes available to websites.  Not sure if this link will work but take a look here www.youtube.com/profile

William - that is amazing.

This is not intended to be rude but you did say it yourself Dan "Anyway, blogs that go on too long become unreadable"

I could be guilty of not getting your point but I switched off mid way through your essay.

I would first like to ask... Why are you asking this question? Did someone say that websites are or should be Experiential? Do you as an Experiential marketer not believe in your discipline enough that you feel it needs to eek its way into other media? Do you not think that there is enough confusion with the understanding of our sector without comment like this?

Experiential marketing is a campaign that has a live element at the heart of it and uses other relevant media to enhance and amplify it. Other media channels in their own right do not profess to be Experiential because they are what they are and they achieve what they have always achieved. A piece of DM does not need to be Experiential, a TV commercial does not need to be Experiential and nor does a website need to be defined as Experiential nor prove itself to be Experiential.

Experiential is the immersive live brand experience at the heart of a bigger campaign, this Experience should always were possible and were appropriate uttilise other media to amplify to the wider audience, then give that audience the opportunity to grow the campaign beyond the event or in the case of, for example the Doritos Dodge ball campaign the website engages the audience to be part of a live event that is aired, viewed or even controlled by the digital medium, or another example such as the innocent village fete, when innocent enhanced its LIVE EXPERIENTIAL CAMPAIGN by creating blogs, flikrs, fete finders, youtubes and facebooks so that the visitors to the live experience could make the event live way beyond the live experience itself.

Why on earth should other well-proven media channels be seen to be Experiential.

Dan I think to be honest that you have proven a very valid point brought up by some of our esteemed industry colleagues at last weeks Event Guide Live, we need an industry standard of terms to ensure that questions like this have no relevance or place in our industry and therefore decrease the confusion to our potential clients.

I am shocked by your blog because your colleague recently gave a stunning presentation to an audience of brands keen to learn what Experiential is and she did a damn fine job of giving hers and your agency’s perspective on this and she stood shoulder to shoulder with a group of agencies that are constantly striving to validate the sector and its definition, so I don't know what your angle is here, but to be fair It became unreadable as you predicted.

And by the way, William’s example of the Project Netal is nil and void to this question, it is an interactive game that uses very clever technology but it is not and nor will it be an EXPERIENTIAL CAMPAIGN.