Previously known for using the type of fonts whose only other use is of that in primary school posters Ryanair has come along way with their branding in marketing campaigns. But has this development of their image been supported in their recent winter sale email by utilising best practice guidelines and technology now widely available.
I unfortunately had the experience of booking a Ryanair flight last year yet fortunately never had to actually endure it. Since then, ignoring the many emails about how they think it’s perfectly acceptable to change the time of a flight by several hours multiple times after booking, I have received the occasional offer. I could have unsubscribed from these house list campaigns however who doesn’t want a potential £9.99 flight from a London airport 42 miles away from London to a Barcelona airport 64 miles away from Barcelona? That and, if they could, I would probably incur a £20 unsubscribing fee along with a 128% surcharge if I wanted to pay using any other method than it’s value in potatoes. That saying I do view these offers when I receive them to see if I could be tempted by a last minute trip to Paris but then I remember. I’m not Mary Poppins. I don’t have a bottomless carry bag to not incur a £45 luggage fee and I don’t have a magic umbrella to take me the additional 93 miles from where I get dumped off.
Since Ryanair have collected a significant amount of my personal details from booking a previous flight I was quite surprised to find that there was no personalisation in this email at all. No “You didn’t make your trip to Geneva last time. Why not go now?”. Not even a “Grab yourself one of these great £9.99 flights Chris!” in the subject line. Just a dreary standardised message. The lack of my name isn’t too much of a concern however as after opening the message my attention is brought directly to the massive £9.99 badge that takes up a considerable amount of the screen just below their logo. Underneath the call to action entices me even more. The remainder of the email is overlooked as not interesting with the nitty bitty details as small as their leg room at the bottom.
Figure. 1
The overall effect of the email is powerful. It conforms to the average 2.4 pages in length from my screen, contains a prominently placed brand logo and contains few links within the main body to avoid confusion of being directed to something other than the intended landing page as indicated Ellis-Chadwick & Doherty (2012). As seen in Figure. 2 it takes on the ‘Inverted Pyramid Pattern’ of viewing as described by Hernandez & Resnick (2013). Where the most important details, the fact that they are having a sale of £9.99 flights and there are 500,000 seats available, are at the top as the primary intention of the email and as you scroll down you are greeted by less interesting areas which is OK if the viewers attention is broken as the core information has been received.
Figure. 2
On following the call to action I get directed to a bold landing page. This allows me to find available flights using a very simple yet painfully slow search function. The core content of trying to sell these cheap flights is above the fold line with an almost subliminal demand of the Gutenberg Pattern reading gravity directing us from ‘Ryanair’ to ‘£9.99’ to ‘Continue’. Once again however there is no personalisation? They know my address. Why am I not straight away recommended a flight from Gatwick? Maybe, as with Paris, they consider Manchester a nearby airport?
Figure. 3
—
Ellis-Chadwick, F. & Doherty, N.F. (2012) Web Advertising: the role of email marketing. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 65(6), pp. 843-848.
Hernandez, A., & Resnick, M.L. (2013) Placement of Call to Action Buttons for Higher Website Conversion and Acquisition: An Eye Tracking Study. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Vol. 57(1), pp. 1042-1046). SAGE Publications.