I noted with interest ICD’s recent approach to promoting itself in your publication (MW September 6). This is by highlighting results from a survey which implies it is the leading supplier of lifestyle information in the UK.
“Ah”, I thought, is this a new survey? Unfortunately, on closer inspection, I found this not to be the case. Instead, it was carried out in January 1995 – yes, over 20 months ago.
As we all know, statistics never lie, but it is interesting to look at these claims. Based on the 151 organisations who responded to this survey, ICD’s major claim that it is the leading supplier of lifestyle data over NDL is based on a difference of two responses to this question. Moreover, its second claim that it has the highest (prompted) awareness over NDL is based on only one more response. It’s hardly earth-shattering stuff.
Interestingly (and conveniently), it failed to quote from the same report that 24 per cent more of those polled had actually been supplied with data from NDL than ICD – surely this is a much more important point.
If I were to jump on the statistics bandwagon I could claim that a recent survey in Precision Marketing (June 10) shows the real truth – NDL traded over 42 per cent more names than ICD in 1995 and had a turnover of 31 per cent more – these are the hard business facts.