An engaging online strategy doesn’t necessarily mean an increase in bottom-line revenue

Posted by: Alex Erasmus

I’d never really noticed it before, but Burger King has a really cool homepage.

Take a look for yourself, but the website has three volume bars (‘Fun’, ‘Food’ and ‘King’), which control how big the central icons are.

For example, if you max out the ‘Fun’ bar, and minimize ‘Food’ and ‘King’, it makes it easier to see all the advertorial video content on the site.

This is a really cool idea as it offers a degree of customization to the site and it’s certainly more engaging and entertaining than, say, McDonald’s homepage.

It probably creates more brand equity and although not directly connected to Social Media, shows the direction big brands are taking these days.

Another example of this is how Pepsi decided not to have a Super Bowl advert for the first time in 23 years and instead are plowing the money into Social Media.

What I must ask though is does this cool website help sell more burgers? I don’t think it does, whereas McDonald’s site explicitly delivers on their key message of value.

A compelling site like Burger King’s builds brand equity, which is vital for long-term success in the majority of businesses, but I don’t think it will make a major difference when people are choosing between the major fast-food joints.

However, it may help attract the best employees, so if this was the aim then the amount of effort put into creating the site makes sense.