Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

---

China vs. Japan Debt Capacity; Impact of Debt on Chinese Growth; Chinese Recovery On Paper Posted: 18 Jul 2014 09:46 AM PDT Chinese Recovery On Paper Is China really growing at the reported 7.5% rate? I have frequently stated "no chance". Malinvestments in housing, vacant cities, vacant malls, and roads with no traffic prove the point. Michael Pettis at China Financial Markets reiterates that view in regards to credit expansion and GDP growth. First, please consider the New York Times article Chinese Recovery On Paper. The National Bureau of Statistics in Beijing announced on Wednesday that economic growth climbed 7.5 percent in the second quarter, compared with a year earlier. But independent surveys of businesses across China show that in sector after sector, sales and confidence are still deteriorating. "All of them are pointing in the opposite direction from this supposed G.D.P. number," said Leland Miller, the president of China Beige Book International, a New York data service that surveys 2,200 private businesses across China each quarter to gauge economic activity. One of the biggest engines of Chinese economic growth in recent years — construction and other investment in the private sector — is sputtering, while exports have only begun to recover from a weak winter and retail sales growth is leveling off. That leaves government investment and spending, which are running strong, propelled by redoubled lending this spring by the state-controlled banking system to the national railroad system, local governments and state-owned enterprises. The result has been frenzied spending on the construction of railroad lines — up 32.1 percent in June from a year earlier — and subsidized housing. Steel output in China is setting records by tonnage as a result, even as the number of housing starts in the private sector is falling steeply. Total lending has now risen faster than economic output, even before adjusting for inflation, in every quarter since late 2011. Lending accelerated further in June, according to figures released on Tuesday by the central bank, the People's Bank of China. Yet Mr. Miller's survey and others show that private businesses are becoming less and less interested in borrowing money because they see few opportunities to invest it profitably. "Although there is no way to predict with accuracy and certainty the point at which China will reach the limits of its debt capacity, I believe that current rates of credit expansion can continue at most for another 3-4 years," Michael Pettis, a finance professor at Peking University's Guanghua School of Management, wrote in his newsletter after the release of the data. From Pettis via Email Impact of Debt on Chinese Growth Over the short term Beijing can successfully target nearly any GDP growth rate it chooses as long as two conditions are fulfilled. First, it must be willing to allow credit to expand as rapidly as required to achieve the GDP growth target. Second, it must have enough debt capacity for credit to expand at the required rate. Although there is no way to predict with accuracy and certainty the point at which China will reach the limits of its debt capacity, I believe that current rates of credit expansion can continue at most for another 3-4 years. Growth in credit can be subject to "sudden stops", especially when external financed, but even in systems in which sudden stops can be controlled, like that of China, debt capacity is nonetheless limited. In the case where a significant amount of new debt is used to fund projects whose economic value is less than the value of the debt, and in which the gap between the two is not recognized and written down, the debt capacity limit is reached when credit growth is not enough to exceed the acceleration in the rolling over of unrecognized bad debt. Maximum debt thresholds in rich, developed countries are much higher than they are in poor, developing countries. Even though analysts often do this, comparing China's debt ratio with that of a developed country like, for example, Japan, tells us nothing about China's relative ability to manage its debt burden. Failure to recognize bad debt overstates reported GDP growth. Once a country stops accumulating bad debt, however, its reported GDP growth will be understated by the same amount by which it had previously been overstated. Debt is not neutral to economic growth. When a country has "too much" debt, market perceptions of its deteriorating creditworthiness cause agents to change their behavior in ways that reduce growth to less than what it would have been without the debt. This process can be intensely self-reinforcing. In my many meetings with investors around the world, some of the most urgent questions I get about China's future growth prospects have to do with attempts to understand the very different kinds of debt constraints that China faces from those faced by the US, Europe and Japan. I will argue that, like for any country, there are two important consequences of China's current debt burden that will affect China's future GDP growth. Debt is not neutral to growth, in spite of what much academic economic theory implies. An excessive debt burden reduces future productivity and employment growth. The way China has failed to recognize uneconomic investment in the past has caused GDP growth to be overstated, and for similar but opposite reasons will cause GDP growth in the future to be understated. China's debt burden, in other words, can cause future GDP growth to drop for two entirely different reasons. First, it can reduce the real value of future economic activity. Second, it will cause a shift in the reporting biases, from overstatement of growth to understatement of growth. Together these two effects will cause reported GDP growth to drop sharply, although real wealth creation need not drop by nearly as much. One of the key sources of rapid growth for China 20-30 years ago was the way Chinese savings were forced up to extraordinarily high levels by policies whose explicit or unintended consequences were to constrain consumption growth. As these savings were channeled into productive investment, workers' productivity surged and Chinese wealth exploded. About roughly ten years ago, however, what had been a winning strategy turned into its opposite. The combination of moral hazard, very low real lending rates, and a powerful political infrastructure built around cheap credit led to a period of massive capital misallocation. The consequence was both surging debt and an increasing reliance on continued credit growth to power economic activity. I have written many times before, including in my most recent book, why historical precedents should have left us unsurprised that this would happen. But now, as part of China's reform, the conditions that led to capital misallocation must be reversed. This will not be easy. In China a powerful institutional infrastructure has been built around the existing capital allocation process. To control capital allocation is to control the economy, and one of the ways to evaluate the extent of political and economic change in China is precisely by watching reforms in the banking system as they manifest themselves in changes in the capital allocation process. This is why changes in the pricing and transmission of credit are politically so important in China today, and why these changes are likely to be subject to significant political maneuvering. Implications for Growth Prospects There is no mystery as to why Chinese growth rates have remained high long after the vulnerabilities in the Chinese economy have been identified and seemingly accepted as consensus among the economic policymaking elite. Beijing can achieve any growth target it wants as long as it allows the credit growth needed to accommodate the GDP growth target. Unfortunately it is not clear to me that GDP growth rates much above some minimum level (I would suggest 3-4% at most), can occur without excess credit creation, which I define to mean that the growth in credit exceeds the concomitant growth in debt servicing capacity. In that case reported GDP growth will exceed "real" GDP growth by the amount of bad debt that the banking system fails to write down correctly. Because reported GDP growth can be any number determined by Beijing, subject to the debt constraints described above, it is useless for analysts to try to predict, based purely on economic conditions, whether or when China will have a hard landing. Until China reaches its debt capacity constraints, growth will only slow when Beijing feels sufficiently confident of itself politically to rein in credit growth and so allow GDP growth rates to drop sharply. The longer it takes to slow GDP growth, however, the sharper the subsequent deceleration in growth. The limit of Beijing's ability to determine GDP growth rates is set by its debt capacity limits. There are too many relevant variables to permit any credible prediction of how long China can continue to allow credit to grow at current rates, but my instinct is that Beijing has at most 3 to 4 years to get credit growth under control. Some analysts believe that China has much less time and others believe there is much more time, but there is no way a priori to determine who is right. This is probably the most important "uncertainty" about China's adjustment process. GDP overstatement will automatically be written down over future years. For this reason even if the Third Plenum reforms are successful and are quickly and efficiently implemented, so that Chinese growth becomes much healthier, reported GDP growth rates must nonetheless fall substantially. The longer it takes for GDP growth rates to fall, the more they will fall. Because short-term costs are inversely proportional to the long-term benefits, however, and because recent history suggests that Beijing is still unlikely to choose long-term benefits if short-term costs are high, there is a chance that China's adjustment period may stretch out beyond President Xi's expected decade in power. We must remember, however, that when credit growth is finally constrained, the drop in reported GDP growth rates will exaggerate the adverse impact of financial-sector reform on the economy. Just as China's economy has not been nearly as healthy as the last decade of growth might imply, it will not be as "sick" as the next decade implies. China vs. Japan Debt Capacity When my more experienced students at Peking University want to set me off on a tirade they goad one of the newer students into telling me that because Japan's government debt to GDP ratio exceeds 200%, and Japan has no problem serving its debt, China has a long ways to go before its debt level becomes a problem. That this kind of logic is so obviously wrong after even the most cursory examination, and nonetheless yet is repeated so often by economists, is frustrating. It should be obvious that different countries, like different industry sectors, have different debt thresholds, depending both on the structure of their economies and on the structure of their borrowing. Developing countries, whose economies tend to be more volatile and whose financial markets shallower, must automatically have lower thresholds than developed ones. In addition, countries with rigid and less credible financial, legal and political systems must necessarily have a harder time adjusting to the added volatility that comes with higher debt levels (debt increases the volatility of earnings in a linear fashion). Because poor, developing countries are much more likely than rich, developed ones to be in the group of countries with rigid and less credible financial, legal and political systems, their ability to absorb the volatility associated with debt must necessarily be lower. Different levels of credibility show up especially in pro-cyclical reaction to debt. It is a pretty safe assumption, for example, that rising financial uncertainty in rich countries like Japan won't be associated with the kind of capital flight we see in developing countries, for example flight capital from China in the past five or six years. Whereas rich countries can often have government debt-to-GDP ratios that exceed 100%, we have seen countless poor countries forced into default or restructuring with government debt-to-GDP ratios at 50-70%. Poor countries simply cannot rack up the amount of debt rich countries regularly do, and to say that one of the poorest such countries, China, should compare its debt capacity to that of Japan is not the less inane for having been repeated so often. By the way it is even a mistake to say that Japan's current debt levels are not a problem. We don't know if they are not a problem. All we can say with certainty is that when interest rates are extremely low – close to zero – they haven't been a problem. But remember that while economists mistakenly tend to focus only on real interest rates as the cost of debt, nominal rates matter too because of their cashflow and amortization implications. When the nominal rate is zero on a bullet loan, there is effectively no principal amortization, but as soon as rates become positive, borrowers must implicitly amortize a portion of the loan principal. The higher the nominal rate the greater the implicit principal amortization. Japan's debt burden, in other words, may be manageable only because nominal interest rates are close to zero, and this has been possible mainly because nominal GDP growth in the past 20 years has also been close to zero. Any substantial nominal GDP growth in Japan would force Tokyo to choose either between repressing interest rates, which would put downward pressure on consumption (which means of course that China, in similar circumstances, would not have that option), or, by allowing interest rates to rise with nominal GDP, to begin amortizing principal (even with zero real rates), which would cause Tokyo's fiscal deficit to explode. Avoiding the Fall: China's Economic Restructuring Inquiring minds will want to pick up a copy of Michael Pettis' latest book Avoiding the Fall: China's Economic Restructuring, in which he discusses the above (and much more) in more detail. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

Information War: More Ukraine "Who Did It?"; U.S. Official: "Still a Lot of Questions"; No Smoking Gun Posted: 18 Jul 2014 09:08 AM PDT Ukraine is making a lot of hay out of videos showing rebels cheering the downed plane. For example the Daily Mail proclaims, with videos 'That was a blast - look at the smoke': Sick boast of the laughing rebels. No doubt the rebels were pleased at the time with what they thought was a downed Ukrainian aircraft. But does that mean they fired the missile? Reader Jacob Dreizin, a US citizen who speaks Russian and reads Ukrainian, points out the rebels claimed to have downed an An-26 roughly two hours before the first reports of the Malaysian 777 being missing. Still More Confusion Ukrainian Prosecutor-General Vitaly Yarema stated that Militias Do Not Have Ukrainian Buk Missile System. KIEV, July 18. /ITAR-TASS/. Militias in the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk people's republics do not have Ukrainian air defense missile systems Buk and S-300 at their disposal, Ukrainian Prosecutor-General Vitaly Yarema told Ukrainian Pravda newspaper on Friday. "After the passenger airliner was downed, the military reported to the president that terrorists do not have our air defense missile systems Buk and S-300," the general prosecutor said. "These weapons were not seized," he added. Is that an attempt to blame Russia? From Jacob Dreizin ... Interestingly, the original source for the quote in the above article, Ukraine's Pravda (a generally respectable paper, not a blog like it's Russian counterpart), has published photos from Ukraine's infamous, oft-cited "Information Resistance" blog (the one that claims that 200, 500, or 1000 rebels get killed every day) allegedly showing a rebel Buk system on the move. [See Link Below] However, if you scroll down, you can see that another vehicle in the convoy (the second photo) is not something in the Russian arsenal. The picture is blurry, but this is clearly not a Russian/Soviet BTR of any sort. Based on the wheel configuration, it appears to be some kind of European-model personnel carrier. (Yes it is a 6-by-6, but with the high front profile it cannot be a BTR-152, which was in any case removed from Russian service long ago) Is Ukraine's propaganda arm is showing photos of a Ukrainian convoy and claiming it is a rebel convoy? Were these pictures even taken in Ukraine? The ground looks dry and the vegetation is low and stubby, like in the Middle East. Network has Photos of Militants on Carrying "Buk" Here is a link to the translated article Dreizin mentioned: Network has Photos of Militants on Carrying "Buk". Ukrainian Radar Activity on Day of Plane Crash Here is another interesting angle: Russian Defense Ministry Says Intercepted Ukrainian Radar Activity on Day of Plane Crash. MOSCOW, July 18 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Defense Ministry says it had intercepted the activity of a Ukrainian radar system on the day the Malaysian plane went down in eastern Ukraine, the ministry's press service said Friday. "Throughout the day on July 17, Russian means of radar surveillance intercepted the operation of the Buk-M1 battery's Kupol radar station located in the region of the populated area of Styla [30 kilometers south of Donetsk]," the press service said in a statement. "The technical capabilities of the Buk-M1 allow the exchange of data on air targets between batteries of one battalion. Thus, the launch of rockets could have also occurred from any of the batteries deployed in the populated area of Avdeevka [8 kilometers north of Donetsk] or from Gruzsko-Zoryanskoe [25 kilometers east of Donetsk]," the ministry said. Of course, even if that is accurate, it does not mean Ukraine fired the missile. Finally, the Wall Street Journal reports U.S.: Evidence Points Toward Separatists in Missile That Downed Airliner. The U.S. now believes that pro-Russian separatists were responsible for firing the missile that downed a Malaysia Airlines  jetliner, a Defense official said Friday. Officials in Washington also confirmed that the missile was fired from a Russian-made SA-11, or Buk, system, the Defense official said. The official cautioned on both findings that a U.S. probe isn't complete and investigators and analysts are still sifting the circumstances surrounding and leading up to the firing of the missile. Another U.S. official said there are "indicators" that Russian separatists fired the SA-11 that took down the plane, but that officials have not reached a definitive conclusion. "There are still a lot of questions," the official said. Most notably, Americans want to know who was at the launch site when the missile was launched. Officials are keen to try and learn if Russian forces were present. The U.S. official said the missile was fired from "the border region" but declined to give a more precise location. Still a Lot of Questions "Still a lot of questions" accurately sums up both sides of the story. Yet, every day I receive emails from people 100% certain Russia is responsible, 100% certain the rebels are responsible, 100% certain the rebels did it with assistance from Russian personnel. The only answer that would shock me would be that Russia acted alone. Evidence strongly suggests the missile came from Ukraine. And regardless of who claimed to have done it, the important question is who did it? Whoever is responsible wants to make it look like someone else fired the shot. I still lean towards Kiev, but I could be wrong. Either way, I am not jumping to specific conclusions as both sides are clearly not telling the truth about everything. Update - No Smoking Gun Just in From Jacob Dreizin Hello Mish Very interesting story from the "information war": You've heard of the alleged Ukrainian "phone tap" recording in which rebels and Russian officers discussed the downing of an unspecified airplane (allegedly the Malaysian 777.) This alleged recording is mentioned in the New York Times and many other U.S. outlets, being offered as potential proof of guilt. That recording is a compilation of two different conversations. The first conversation is allegedly between a rebel commander and his Russian handler. The rebel commander claims his people downed an unspecified aircraft. There is no reference within the conversation itself as to the time or date. In the second conversation, two men are talking about the wreckage of a civilian aircraft (one of them is apparently on the scene.) There is no evidence within the second conversation to indicate that the speakers had anything to do with it, or that they are even involved in the war at all. So, if this is the "smoking gun", then the Ukrainians need to go back to the drawing board. And the New York Times needs to get a grip. Another twist: Several Russian-language media sources are claiming that the earliest extant Youtube version of the file (as shown by drilling down into its details, properties, source code, or whatever) was uploaded at 19:07:49 hours on 7/16/2014. Even accounting for the time difference between the U.S. (where YouTube is based) and east Ukraine, that is quite some time before the plane went down. I'm just passing on what I've read. There may be something wrong with YouTube's time-stamping. I don't know. Anyone who is 100% certain about this (other than the persons directly responsible) is fooling themselves, even if they get the call right. Correction Jacob Dreizin previously stated "Based on the wheel configuration, it appears to be some kind of European-model personnel carrier." Upon further review of the images, Dreizin now believes the carrier is a souped-up cargo truck. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Mike "Mish" Shedlock is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management. Sitka Pacific is an asset management firm whose goal is strong performance and low volatility, regardless of market direction. Visit http://www.sitkapacific.com/account_management.html to learn more about wealth management and capital preservation strategies of Sitka Pacific.

You are subscribed to email updates from Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Hey, Hari! Don't miss out on these Pins...

Android App · iOS App

Hi Hari, Your latest Pin picks sequins shorts Joanna Hawley / Jojo... what to wear Princess Chaise Lounge Allison Keough ** Wish List & Fun ... Mom's Sloppy Joe Stuffed Peppers Amanda Livesay Nom Nom Nom alice + olivia RIBBON BOW SWEATER Annie style. 25 Hair Style Tutorials... These are super cute. Make sure ... Jennifer Fishkind {P... Want...Need...Love! Bedroom by Larson & Paul, Finalist in 2014 Remodelista Considered Design ... mrs. french * lovely things to wea... New boards to follow Somewhat like Dreams 268 pins · Justina Persnic... Follow Indians 47 pins · Julie Perrault Follow Byron/Jess/Kyler stu... 75 pins · Elaine Caraway Follow BLOGGING: Inspiratio... 176 pins · Hobby to HOT! B... Follow Geekery 604 pins · Elizabeth Chane... Follow Life & Times of the ... 961 pins · Karen Fuertsch Follow Happy Pinning!   Pinterest Facebook Twitter Google Blog   This email was sent to e0nstar1.blog@gmail.com. Don't want to receive this type of email? Change your email preferences. Didn't sign up for Pinterest? Please let us know! Have a question? Visit our Help Center. © Pinterest, Inc. 808 Brannan Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions

President Obama on the Crash of Flight MH17:

Here's what's going on at the White House today.         DAILY SNAPSHOT Friday, July 18, 2014             Featured President Obama on the Crash of Flight MH17: Today, the President delivered a statement to the press in the wake of the tragic crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine. "Nearly 300 innocent lives were taken -- men, women, children, infants -- who had nothing to do with the crisis in Ukraine," President Obama said. "Their deaths are an outrage of unspeakable proportions." President Obama noted that this was "a global tragedy -- an Asian airliner was destroyed in European skies, filled with citizens from many countries." And as a result, there now needs to be a credible, international investigation into exactly what happened. Watch the President's full statement here:       Top Stories "Let's Build Some Bridges. Let's Build Some Roads." Yesterday, the President traveled to the Port of Wilmington in Delaware to talk about creating jobs rebuilding America, and making our middle class stronger. READ MORE Preparing Communities for the Impacts of Climate Change We've been talking a lot recently about the need to rebuild and strengthen our nation's infrastructure. As the President has made clear, a world-class infrastructure system is a vital part of a top-performing economy. But there's another important reason why we need to rebuild our infrastructure: climate change. READ MORE Working to End Pregnancy Discrimination: A Win for Families Everywhere Senior Advisor to the President Valerie Jarrett writes about the challenges that pregnant women still face on the job, more than 30 years after Congress passed the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. READ MORE       Today's Schedule All times are Eastern Time (ET) 9:30 AM: The President receives the Presidential Daily Briefing 11:30 AM: The President delivers a statement on the situation in Ukraine 1:30 PM: The President and Vice President meet with Secretary of the Treasury Lew 1:45 PM: The President and Vice President meet with Secretary of the Treasury Lew and Secretary of State Kerry 4:20 PM: The President meets with Secretary of Health and Human Services Burwell 5:40 PM: The President departs the White House en route Camp David   Facebook     Twitter    |   More Ways to Engage Did Someone Forward This to You? Sign Up for Email Updates This email was sent to e0nstar1.blog@gmail.com Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111

How to Prove ROI Potential of Content Campaigns - Whiteboard Friday

---

How to Prove ROI Potential of Content Campaigns - Whiteboard Friday Posted: 17 Jul 2014 05:17 PM PDT Posted by iPullRank We all know that creating and promoting content can be a ton of work (not to mention expensive). So how do we know whether it'll be worth it? In today's Whiteboard Friday, MozCon 2014 speaker Mike King shows you several ways you can be sure your content has the potential you need before you even start making it. For reference, here's a still of this week's whiteboard! Video transcription Greetings and salutations, Moz fans. My name is Mike King. I'm from an agency called iPullRank, and today here on Whiteboard Friday we're going to talk about how to prove ROI potential of content. Basically, before you launch content, get a sense of will this perform before you go ahead and spend tens of thousands of dollars on promoting that content. Content components Surveying your target audience So let's just hop right into it. One of the things you want to do for your content component aspect of it is survey your target audience. There are a lot of channels that you can do this effectively in. In fact, the ad platforms have gotten even better at letting you hyper target audiences and drive that traffic right away. One of the things you can do is use StumbleUpon Paid Discovery. I love this platform for content promotion as well. But it's great in this use case because it's only $0.10 a click. Again, you can target based on different audiences, not as granularly as you can with something like Facebook or something to that effect, but you can get audiences around ideas, concepts, and things of that nature. What you can also use is a tool called UserReport. What this tool does is allows you to do custom surveys on your own site. You put up your content experience. You throw UserReport on there. Once the user gets to a certain point in the page, you can make that survey pop up. You can ask them questions like: Hey, would you like this? Would you share this? What is it that you didn't like about this content? Does this solve a specific need for you? You can do that with StumbleUpon Paid Discovery. Start collecting data on the users that would visit your content, and then it helps you build a business case saying that these people would be interested in this content. By the same token, you can also use Facebook ads to do this. Like I said, Facebook ads allow you to really granularly target your audiences. They've gotten increasingly more sophisticated with their ad targeting options. In fact, at this point, the ad targeting very much aligns with standard market research in that you can target based on income, education, and so on and so forth. If you're going after the B2C clientele, that's probably your best bet, using Facebook. If you're going after the B2B clientele, then LinkedIn ads make the most sense. You can also target very specifically on firmographics rather than just demographics. In both of these cases, you're going to then continue to use UserReport to collect that data via these custom surveys on your site. Additionally, you can use SurveyMonkey Audience. I love this tool because you can, again, very much target very specific demographics and ask them direct questions. What you can do is host that piece of content in the survey, have them take the time to review it and fill out the questionnaire, and then, boom, you get your results right away. Competitive analysis Those are different ways you can do surveying to understand whether your content's going to perform. But, of course, competitive analysis is a really good way to make a case. I worked on a brand called LG back in the day. The best way to get them to do anything was to show them that Samsung was doing it. By that very same token, you can use a tool like Social Crawlytics. What that tool does is crawls the site and identifies the social shares of every piece of content on that site. You can do that for your site and a competitor's site and see what's working, what isn't, and quickly identify what you can create that is similar to what they've made. Additionally, you can use BuzzSumo, which kind of takes out the legwork out of that, because they've indexed a lot of content. They've pulled out the semantic relationships from that content, the entities. You can search by keyword for different pieces of content and then see what's the most popular content that fits that keyword. Now their index isn't huge, but they have a lot of content, especially around the SEO space, that you can look at. So you can quickly identify what's working for other people and then make your case that way. Finally, you can use any of the link indices -- Open Site Explorer, Ahrefs, Majestic. All of these tools, if you go to the top pages reports for the different competitors, you can quickly see what's working and what's not, and then you have those metrics to make that business case. Pose/review discussions One of the other tactics that I really love to use to identify content that will work is by using the different discussion sites. Quora is a really good one. You can actually identify questions that people have already asked in the past and then see how many people have responded to that. You can see whether or not it's a popular question that you can then use into your content. You can actually pose your own questions, see how many people follow the question and how many people answer the question. Then, you can look at those people that are following the question and see what their demographics are and, boom, another solid business case based on actual data. The finally, Reddit is really good for this as well. People love to get in discussions on Reddit. We've posed questions in the past, and people have given really passionate responses. Then there have been cases where we've posed questions and we got no response. Once you know it's crickets, it's not a good piece of content to launch. People components Business case These are all the content and metric components of this. But what you really need to focus on, when you're trying to get buy-in for this type of content internally, is the people components. When you're building business cases and you're dealing with a variety of people, your boss in fact, you've got to think about what metric is the one that helps him get to his bonus, and how does the content that you're looking to create help fulfill that metric. In most cases, those metrics aren't necessarily channel metrics. It's not: Are we going to be number one for this keyword? Are we going to get more visits from organic search or more likes in social media? It goes back to things that affect the business. In the case of a SaaS company, it can be: Okay, how does this contribute to our cost of acquisition versus our LTV ratio? Does this lower our cost of acquisition because we're going to get a wide range of people that are going to ingest this content and then come back to the site, ending up signing up? Then, is it reaching the right side of our audience that is high value a customer? Is it the one that has the bigger long-term value or lifetime value? Think about those metrics rather than, oh, we're going to get some more likes and shares, because these metrics are typically the ones that go back to the metrics that help your boss hit his bonus. Also, is there a conversion rate based on your existing content on your own site? I've talked at length about doing content on that's both qualitatively and quantitatively, in a guest post that I did for Copyblogger, which will be below in the description, about doing content audits where you can identify what is performing and what's not, and then see what types of content you may want to create in the future. Using that as a framework to work with, you can then look at these content ideas that you've gotten on this side and see, okay, we have content that fits this, and generally the conversion rate is X. So you can make some sort of prediction based on the search volume and the keywords that go with this piece of content, or the amount of traffic you're likely to get from social media to go with this content, and then back that into the conversion rate and then get back to these business level metrics that we talked about before. Finally, or the last two things rather, how does this map to your brand's story? A lot of the times when you're talking about content, you're talking about the brand messaging architecture, the voice, the tone. What are the brand's goals? What is the brand trying to put out there? Moz is really good at developing a good brand story. They have Roger that they weave into a lot of things. How does your piece of content go with that brand's story? Again, back to the Moz example, they're about doing better marketing. My Whiteboard Friday here goes with that idea. So it's really easy for me to make a business case for this piece of content to align with the business. How does your piece of content fit that brand's story? Then, finally, what phase in the funnel does this piece of content serve? Because ultimately, at the end of the day, we're always trying to market something. We're marketers. We're trying to move people through the funnel. So, if you've identified in your content audits that, oh, we're missing a lot of stuff for the decision phase, so this content will specifically speak to that decision phase. Here are all the metrics that go with it. Now, we have a strong business case. That's all I've got for today. My name's Mike King. I'm happy to help you guys out. In the comments, let me know anytime that you've come against anything where you couldn't get a piece of content pushed through at your business or your agency or what have you, and I'm happy to answer your questions. Have a great one, and I'll see you guys next time on Whiteboard Friday. Video transcription by Speechpad.com Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

You are subscribed to email updates from Moz Blog To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610