DemandScience is a data-driven marketing platform that offers lead generation and data services that accelerate the technology sales process by identifying intent among technology buyers. Founded in 2009, DemandScience helps marketers meet the ever-changing demands of B2B sales.
N/A
Metadata.io
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Based in San Francisco, Metadata.io is a Demand Generation and ABM platform designed to execute thousands of B2B campaigns in a matter of hours, automatically optimizing campaigns for pipeline impact at a high velocity.
Demand Science did deliver the quantity of leads without issue. The data for a few was not accurate (bounced when following up). But they agreed to make good by providing substitute leads to meet the quota. Towards the end of my project, they lost a few folks, and so the end of my campaign got a little rough as they were taking over some assignments midway. But we ultimately completed the SOW. I will say that the leads did not perform well in our email cadence - none converted. However, this was a test of the concept for us. Content syndication had a lower cost per qualified lead than some other tactics, so we tested it. Your results may vary, based on your follow-up and your market.
Metadata is well suited when you have a really large ad budget (>50k per month at least). This is because the power of metadata lies in the ability to quickly set up and run a large number of experiments (combinations of channel, audience, creative, and conversion assets). To evaluate these variations, all of them need a large number of impressions, clicks, and conversions to be statistically relevant. If your budget is smaller, you will either have a very small number of experiments (not fully utilizing the power of metadata), or your experiments will not have enough clicks to make informed decisions. We had expected a better explanation of this from metadata before signing up.
The initial pitch and contact from Mason used "show me you know me" well, which we felt was a good sign of company culture and approach to database marketing.
Delivery of leads was ahead of schedule.
They set expectations, and then delivered what they said they would.
The leads matched our criteria as agreed.
Regular check ins and catch ups, and patience when thing were taking a bit of time to get sorted here.
We would like to see more proactive communication on what's working and what's not without requiring a meeting - regular reporting cadence to assess asset quality
A dashboard view might be nice as well, again, so we can look at an asset and see how it's performing (or if it isn't) without having to wait on a rep to pull a report or schedule a walkthrough
If you don't have a large budget and audience it's hard to meaningfully optimize. If I have 4 ad creatives, to 2 audience groups on FB and LinkedIn, that creates 16 experiments, each of which needs an ample enough budget, say $40/day, that's now $640 per day or $19K per month.
Limited ability to edit ads after they've been launched. You usually have to stop the ad, clone it, and launch a new campaign.
Can't add new ads to existing campaigns which limits the ability to optimize. If I start an MD campaign with 4 ads, and in a few weeks we see that one is working well and the other 2 are not performing, I can pause those (or it can autopause by rules), but I can't add 2 more new creatives to the mix against the high performer. I'd have to either stop the high performer, and recreate it in a new campaign (losing likes and comments), OR - leave the high performer in the first campaign, and create. a second campaign with the new ones, which will only optimize against each other.
Limited to a single conversion event on a landing page. I'm not able to choose either a Demo Request OR a Sign-Up conversion, I can only choose one.
Google search ads are doable but aren't necessarily more feature-rich or easy-to use than native, so there's no value added to doing it through Metadata in my opinion aside from unifying ad reporting.
Our executives decided to not renew because we were not seeing the ROI they were looking for. However, our executives did not make the best decisions on the data Demand Science provided.
The leads were pretty straight forward. However, their appointment setting did not integrate well into our system and many of the meetings didn't occur. I had to chase a lot of prospects and many times Demand Science didn't provide direct dials.
Our rep is always available and quickly responds to any question we have. I haven't worked with other partners who are as proactive and excited to help us as our DemandScience rep is. He reaches out with new ideas and suggestions frequently. They are happy to make any changes needed to the campaigns and make those changes quickly and efficiently. They work well with our execution agency, but are also happy to meet with us directly to provide insights and support.
I've not used another content syndication company, and I probably won't after the lack of results we've had. I have used direct email organizations, and they are stronger but also more expensive, so you have to weigh your priorities. I could see if you were selling a specific product or software and how this could be beneficial, but I'd steer away from it for services.
We chose [Metadata.io] because it was a smaller company and could get more personalized attention. The price was better and they seemed more eager to support us. The feature set was what we were looking for and not more - it was exactly as robust as we needed it to be. Didn't want to pay for features we weren't going to use.
Huge decrease in CPLs, CPMQL and Cost Per Opportunity
Big improvement in MQL to SQL rates
90%+ of our leads from paid social now have valid business emails, before it was like 30%
Saving us hundreds of hours over the course of the next year doing daily manual optimization and budget management tasks for us so we can focus on strategy and testing new things
