Why data is losing the prospecting battle to search

Fair enough, but what's that got to do with the humble direct marketing industry, you may well be wondering? Well, having recently tried to source prospect data for a client, I was astounded by how many data pools were shrouded in mystery. For most, it was as if I was asking them to break the Official Secrets Act, rather than sell me a few thousand names to run a marketing campaign.
 
Now, of course, I understand this is a highly competitive market. When I worked on the supplier side, I, too, was involved in building some of the first UK prospect pools so I also have personal experience of the issues surrounding confidentiality of sources. But this unwillingness to reveal anything about the data seriously undermines the industry. After all, when you have no idea which data is any good, which is worth testing and what is replicated elsewhere, how can you possibly make a judgement on whether to use it?
 
When data pools were first introduced to the UK from the States, they were hailed as panacea for data industry ills, and financial services institutions were the driving force. As mass-market product providers, they have the greatest need to identify prospects, profile customers, manage risk and define new products. At that time, the sector was still reeling from the loss of its main source of data, following the Electoral Register opt-out clause.
 
Critical mass has been vital to setting up these programmes, but with niche data sales now scarce, everyone in the industry is obsessed with size. The thinking behind this ‘big is beautiful' ethos is that if you build large databases then clients will buy more. Yet the sad reality is that the majority now all offer the same data and it is difficult enough to get a clear USP, let alone discover whether the data is worth using. Bizarre as it may sound, it was almost better back in the old days - at least back then you could buy specific data selections and you knew what you were getting.
 
Those operating data pools will no doubt argue that they can create models which will reveal the best performing segments, but they cannot tell you why these datasets have performed well. In the stampede to go large, the good data is being trampled underfoot.
 
The real issue is that the industry risks being stuck in the dark ages over the way data is sold. Many people in DM complain that they are losing out to the online companies but the simple fact is that digital media are more accountable.

Rather than paying a cost per 1,000 for potentially flaky leads, leads generated through search provide consumers who have actually clicked on websites.
 
At a time when clients are moving their budgets away from lists - both postal and email - into online disciplines, isn't this an opportunity for our industry to rethink how it sells prospect data? If you're a client and you've got the choice to pay a price you've agreed for a lead or go through all this fuss, it really is a no brainer.
 
As MPs across the land have found to their cost, the age-old excuse of  "that's the way it's always been" is no longer valid. Does the data industry really want to get tarred with that brush or will it recognise now is the time for change?