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 8.3 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.
DemandScience Activate is well suited for inclusion in paid media programs where there is an account-based focus. It's great to be able to pinpoint exactly the personas, job titles, and seniorities of those you're reaching, and see those names come through in acquisition reports. We see success in driving the right title paths into our database for nurturing.
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.
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.
I enjoyed working with the initial rep and campaign manager, but as the campaign manager left the company, there was a gap in expertise and customer care. This drop-off in quality of care was notified internally and caused team members to raise concerns. Hopefully, we will see improvements with the most recent change in campaign managers.
The quality of leads that we got from INFUSE media was truly horrible. The leads often did not meet our qualifications set that would qualify them as MQLs and if they did, when they were reached out to, we were told they had no interest in converting and that they didn't even remember clicking the ad. So, we did not know for sure where the leads came from and we could not convert them. None of this is a problem with DemandScience.
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
