Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts

Monday, 25 June 2012

Inactive Ingredients-Active Ingredients-Rick Perry, Texas-Hamburger Meat-Social Media

Will Pharma Experience It's Own 'Pink Slime' Social Media Crisis?

No doubt you have heard about "pink slime," the beef additive made from leftover trimmings. According to an article in today's Wall Street Journal (here), "the additive, which has long been used as a cheap filler in hamburger meat without anyone knowing or caring, has become the latest example of a product to fall prey to a social-media feeding frenzy after celebrity chef Jamie Oliver detailed how it is made in a TV special. Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites took it from there. Supermarkets and school districts across the country have been shunning it after mounting public pressure."
To counteract that "public pressure," which Tyson Foods Chief Operating Officer Jim Lochner said is merely a "two-week event," USDA and governors from several "pink slime" producing states (eg, Rick Perry, Texas) are mounting a counterattack. Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad said "We're going to consume it. We'll do everything we can to set the record straight."
"This is so clearly a movement that's been driven by consumers," said Willy Ritch, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D., Maine), who is pushing for a ban of the filler in school lunches.
USDA chief Tom Vilsack pointed to the difficulty of getting ahead of opposition to a product -- even if it is deemed safe by the government -- in a world fueled by social media. He also highlighted a disconnect that continues to grow between people and where their food comes from.
It's possible that the drug industry will one day face it own "pink slime" crisis because there is also a "disconnect" between consumers and where their drugs come from and the ingredients they contain.
Recently, we have seen cases where active ingredients in medicines have been replaced by miscellaneous substances having no medical benefit and cases where manufacturing problems have led to contamination such as Johnson and Johnson's problems with children's medicines (see, for example, "Unsafe Drugs: Is It Counterfeiters or the Supply Chain That's the Problem?").
These problems may be glitches in an otherwise safe drug supply chain, but did you know that up to 80 percent of the active ingredients in drugs used in the United States are made overseas? Hopefully, those ingredients meet high standards. Yet up to 149 Americans died in 2007 and 2008 after taking heparin, a blood thinner, contaminated during the manufacturing process in China.
What's often not mentioned, however, are the "inactive" ingredients in the pills we take. Viagra, for example, contains the following inactive ingredients:

  • microcrystalline cellulose
  • anhydrous dibasic calcium phosphate
  • croscarmellose sodium
  • magnesium stearate
  • hypromellose
  • titanium dioxide
  • lactose
  • triacetin
  • FD & C Blue #2 aluminum lake
Patients are warned to discontinue taking medicines if they are allergic to any of the ingredients.
These ingredients are the "pink slime" of the drug industry. But whereas "pink slime" only constitutes a small percentage of ground beef, these "inactive" ingredients comprise the bulk of the pill's weight and volume.  AND they are probably made overseas with very little FDA supervision.
One of these ingredients may be as controversial to patients as "pink slime" is to hamburger eaters. In fact, this was the case with Johnson and Johnson's baby shampoo that consumers learned contained cancer-causing chemicals. That issue was big on social media for a while until J&J promised to phase out the product in the U.S. (it has been completely pulled from the shelves in other countries).
The food industry is blaming "misinformation" amplified via social media as the main cause of the consumer backlash against "pink slime." They have launched a two-pronged campaign to deal with the crisis: (1) issue "corrective" information, and (2) warn of higher prices if "pink slime" is no longer used in hamburger meat.
This sounds similar read more..

Monday, 21 May 2012

Diabetes Opinion Leaders Paid By Roche-Pharmaceutical Companies-Diabetes Community

Diabetes Opinion Leaders Paid by Roche to Curate Content on New Twitter-based Social Media Site

Diabetes Nest, according to its "About" statement, "is a Twitter-based diabetes network designed to help people discover the best conversations from the most meaningful voices. The Nest was created by Ignite Health and sponsored by Roche Diabetes Care, makers of ACCU-CHEK® products and services."
Ignite Health, an InVentiv Health agency, maintains the site. Fabio Gratton, chief experience officer at Ignite Health, said:
"Few argue that social media has transformed how patients and their caregivers share healthcare information and find support. But the sheer volume of content can be overwhelming. "So we asked ourselves how we could best help the diabetes community find and engage in the most timely, relevant and important conversations. The result is a simple, intuitive, compelling and ultimately self-sustaining diabetes social media community.”Diabetes Nest aggregates, sorts and ranks tweets from a curated list of diabetes experts" (read more here: "Roche Sponsors Diabetes Nest Twitter-Based Social Media Site").All five of those "diabetes experts" are long-time patient bloggers who are "compensated for their time, effort and invaluable guidance." Caretakers include:

  • Amy Tenderich (Diabetes Mine blogger)
  • Gina Capone ("gina - your diabetes BFF" blogger)
  • Kerri Sparling ("six until me" blogger)
  • George Simmons (co-host of DSMA Live on BlogTalkRadio)
  • Scott K. Johnson (co-host of DSMA Live on BlogTalkRadio and blogger at Scott's Diabetes)
Roche "has no control or influence over the content or frequency of the Caretakers' tweets."
Roche Diabetes Care has long been wining and dining diabetes bloggers at yearly "Roche Social Media Summits" held in nice places like resorts in Orlando, Florida. When I learned of the first summit held in 2010, I blogged that "Some Social Media Patient Opinion Leaders Want to be Paid Pharma Professionals." Diabetes Nest is, to my knowledge, the first such time that bloggers have been paid to be "consumer opinion leaders" in a manner similar to how pharma often pays physicians to be "key opinion leaders."
At a patient panel discussion during a 2010 conference, Allison Blass (Patient Blogger, Diabetes Activist, Lemonade Life), said "You need to pay some one's full time salary," referring to the desire of some pharma companies to interact with patients in online communities. "The only way to sustain growth and involvement in a [online] community," said Allison, "is to have someone who actually does it [manage social media interactions with patients] as their job... to become the person who is known and loved by the community."
Not that there is anything wrong with being compensated for your time, but pharmaceutical companies have to be careful how they provide compensation. In the case of Diabetes Nest, Roche probably supplies an "unrestricted grant," which is supposed to specify that the grantor (Roche) has no control over the content created by the grantee. The "grantee" in this case is probably Ignite Health, which owns Diabetes Nest (see NOTE below). Ignite Health is an advertising agency that works with pharmaceutical companies.
NOTE: Doing some WHOIS snooping, I learn that the domain diabetesnest.com is registered to "TWTCLK" and the administrative contact is Fabio Gratton, both located at the same address in San Clemente, CA. A pharmaceutical company providing unrestricted grants or other funds to an advertising agency in support of a patient site related to a product line is a bit controversial, IMHO, especially if there intends to be a "Chinese" wall between the funding and advertising interests. This kind of thing got pharma companies into trouble with the likes of Senator Grassley when "unrestricted grants" were provided to ad agencies to run independent accredited CME programs for physicians. ACCME, which accredits CME, now requires that CME providers to be independent of ad agencies to avoid conflicts of interest read more..

Thursday, 3 May 2012

Pharma People Pioneers-Personal Accounts-Social Marketing-Pharma Companies-Novo Nordisk

Pharma People Pioneers on Pinterest

I have been keeping track of pharmaceutical employees who have personal accounts on Twitter for over a year (see "More Pharma Social Media Pioneers Recognized"). There are currently 105 people on the list (find it here).
I do this for several reasons:

  1. to see if the people who "talk the talk" of pharma social media actually "walk the walk" (only 40% of pharma people who have taken my Social Marketing Readiness Self-Assessment personally use social media "frequently; fill out the assessment here and see more results),

  2. to keep track of how these pioneers are using social media, and

  3. to help me communicate with them (it's often impossible to reach them via email or by phone).
A majority of these pioneers have LinkedIn accounts for professional use and probably many also have Facebook pages. While I also keep track of pharma pioneer LinkedIn pages, I generally do not bother to peer into their personal lives that they may chronicle on personal Facebook pages.
Recently, I've been interested in Pinterest for my own use and started searching for pharma companies who have Pinterest accounts (see "Should Pharma Ponder Pinterest? Novo Nordisk Is!" and "Pharma Pinterest Update: Bayer US Pins, Novo Nordisk Depins!"). Yesterday, however, I received an email notice from Pinterest that Craig DeLarge, Director, Healthcare Professional Relationship Marketing at Novo Nordisk, who liked my pin "Charlie Kimball, Novo Nordisk, and Me Make Up. http://bit.ly/kjIAH." (This link is to the blog post in which that pin/image appears.)
Craig has a very interesting Pinterest page (here) that includes the following "boards" (ie, categories of images):
  • Places I've Been
  • Brands I Love (Live)!
  • Health
  • Wisdom
  • eMarketing
  • Social Media
  • Politics
Craig likes some of the brands I like, including BMW, Movado (watches), and Apple ("Apple MacBook Air My latest tech crush"). Novo Nordisk, of course, is also on his list of brands that he likes and obviously lives by.
I was also interested in what Craig pinned on his "Politics" board, especially this one about Mitt Romney:
Source: a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net via Craig on Pinterest
I've learned a lot about Craig DeLarge in a very short time via the images he has posted to his [emphasis]personal[end emphasis] Pinterest page. While Facebook also now is very visually focused, it takes me longer on Facebook to discover a person's true beliefs and interests than it does on Pinterest. As they say, an image is worth a thousand words.
I searched Pinterest for other pharma people social media pioneers on my list, but found only 2 others: Kevin Nalty, Consumer Product Director, Psychiatry, Janssen, and Brad Pendergraph, Manager, Consumer Digital & Social Engagement at Novartis (recently or soon to be laid off). These people -- and Craig -- are among the most followed pharma people on Twitter, so it makes sense that they would lead the way on Pinterest.
I look forward to finding more pharma people/social media pioneers on Pinterest. In fact, I think I will start a new board on my Pinterest page dedicated to "repins" from pharma people (I already have one for repins from pharma companies). read more..

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Prescription Drug-Fda Regulations-Public Hearing-Social Media-FDA

A Cautionary Tale for Anyone Expecting FDA Social Media Guidelines Any Time Soon

If you think waiting over two years for FDA to issue guidelines it promised for regulation of "Promotion of Prescription Drug Products Using Social Media Tools," then you should take a look at the following timeline and weep.
This timeline documents the major steps in FDA's process of developing guidance for direct to consumer television (DTC) and radio ads; ie, "standards that would be considered in determining whether the major statement in direct-to-consumer television and radio advertisements relating to the side effects and contraindications of an advertised prescription drug intended for use by humans is presented in a clear, conspicuous, and neutral manner":

  • 1 November 2005: FDA convenes a 2-day public hearing to discuss the issue (see "FDA DTC Hearings: Snippets from Day 1" and "DTC Pros and Cons Presented at Public Hearing"). Sound familiar?

  • 21 August 2007: FDA announces it will conduct a study of "consumer evaluations of variations in communicating risk information in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug broadcast advertisements." It opens a 90-day period to submit comments regarding this study. This study used the latest cognitive science technique called Affect Misattribution Procedure (AMP), in which participants are asked not to judge the TV ads' imagery directly, but to judge whether or not a Chinese character shown to them afterward is positive or negative. I suggested it NOT use Chinese characters because that would be discriminatory, but they did not listen to me (see "FDA at a Mall Near You: The Manchurian Connection"). With regard to social media guidelines, the FDA has also announced it will do some studies before issuing guidance (see "FDA's Proposed Web Study Will Further Delay Social Media Guidelines"). Deja vu all over again!

  • 29 March 2010: FDA finally publishes the draft guidance, more than 4 years after the public hearing (see Federal register ref: 75 FR 15376). FDA was goosed along by an act of Congress: the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA), which required that the major statement in DTC television or radio advertisements (or ads) relating to the side effects and contraindications of an advertised prescription drug intended for use by humans be presented in a clear, conspicuous, and neutral manner. FDA was forced into RULEMAKING mode rather than GUIDANCE mode, which is how the pharma industry wants the agency to approach the regulation social media drug promotion as well (see "Pfizer Asks for New FDA Regulations, Not Guidance, for Social Media").

  • June 2011: FDA published an executive summary of a study of the methodology of the AMP study cited above entitled "A Supplementary Test of Distraction in DTC Advertising Using an Implicit Measure, The Affect Misattribution Procedure" (find it here). Maybe FDA read my comments after all!

  • 27 January 2012: FDA announced that it added a document to the docket for the proposed rulemaking concerning a study entitled: "Experimental Evaluation of the Impact of Distraction on Consumer Understanding of Risk and Benefit Information in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Advertisements" (Distraction Study; see Docket No. FDA–2009–N–0582). This document reopened the comment period (extending the deadline to February 27, 2012) for the rulemaking proceeding to allow an opportunity for comment on the study as it relates to the proposed standards. Way back during the public hearing in 2005 I was unimpressed by research claiming that TV drug ads were designed to "distract" viewers from reading the fair balance (see op cit and "Ruth Day and the Bees Repeat Performance at House DTC Hearing" for an update on that).

  • 23 March 2012: FDA reopens the comment period for a second time "in response to a request for more time to submit comments to the Agency." The new comment period will expire on April 9, 2012. According to the FDA, the "Pharmaceut read more..

Saturday, 21 April 2012

Social Media Marketing-Panel Discussions-Pharma Industry-Mobile Search

Musings from DTC National 2011

Didn’t attend DTC Perspectives’ big DTC National conference in Boston this year?
No worries. I spent three days there last week (my first time). Several of us tweeted the highlights using hashtag #DTCN2011, so you can view all the tweets by searching the hashtag on Twitter. You can still view the conference agenda online.
I tweeted. A lot. But one can only say so much in 140 characters or less. So beyond the tweets, I wanted to provide a more in-depth review. Below is the first in a series of blog posts with key observations by day:
DTC National: Day One
Day one of the conference kicked off with a small pre-conference workshop in the morning. Pharma folks gathered for a series of small panel discussions, moderated by Bob Ehrlich, on the following topics:
- Optimizing The Brand Web Site
- The Use of Search
- Advertising on the Web/mobile
- Direct Mail and Direct Response
I was surprised there wasn’t a social media panel, but perhaps everyone’s sick of talking about that for now. How much more can we say about FDA still not delivering guidance anyway?
The panels were lively and informative, focusing in depth on these areas more than – as I learned in later days – the main conference itself. The audience asked questions and there were healthy discussions. I always like the smaller group settings better at these things. A few highlights:
• I laughed during the “Optimizing the Brand Web Site” session when conference chairman and moderator Bob Ehrlich asked the panel to stop talking about mobile (because there was a separate upcoming panel on mobile). What was left unsaid was that the Web and mobile are so intertwined that the two cannot be separated. I saw a tweet last week rom the iStrategy conference (source unknown) that over 50% of Web activity occurs on a mobile device! But wait … I’m not supposed to be talking about mobile here … so moving on …
• I spoke on the panel on which I thought was going to be about online and mobile media – “Advertising on the Web/mobile” - but which turned out to be all about mobile. We talked about optimizing sites and the plethora of healthcare apps available today. And we all agreed that there is a lot more for pharma to be doing in this channel. It struck me, too, that there’s so much more to mobile than just apps or mobile sites … there’s mobile media, mobile search, and optimizing emails for mobile viewing. At what point will pharma pay attention to these on a regular basis? I fear we’re a long ways off.
• I particularly enjoyed the “Use of Search” panel where Yahoo!, Google, and Bing representatives (among others) all gathered to discuss character limitations and potential implications of coming DDMAC guidance. To their credit, they were certainly mindful of the issues the industry faces. And the question was asked … who says there have to be character limitations? Not FDA .... Google, Yahoo! and Bing decide! I was pleased to see so many search reps at the conference and their industry’s openness to working with the pharma industry's – shall we call them – "special circumstances."
• The multicultural panel was hosted by several multicultural marketing agencies who made the very valid case for pharma to be reaching out to minorities, especially in relevant conditions such as diabetes and hypertension that disproportionally affect African-Americans and Hispanics. I have the hunch multicultural marketing is to pharma now as social media marketing was to pharma a few years ago: Marketers have an inkling they need to be doing it, but they don’t know much about it so they avoid it altogether.
While Bob’s panel moderation style came across a bit condescending - as if he didn’t believe people went on the Web or used mobile phones to do anything but talk - it also provided healthy perspective. We in the marketing and digital worlds drink our own Kool-Aid every day. Bob’s right – some of the consumers we’re trying to reach are read more..

Sunday, 8 April 2012

Pfizer Announced Plans-Pfizer, Social Media -Personal Technology-Clinical Trial

Pfizer, Social Media "Clinical Trials: Lipset Explains

Last year, Pfizer announced plans to run the first clinical trial to allow patients to participate from home by using computers and smartphones instead of going to a clinic or doctor’s office. The idea was to create a model for saving money that will rely on personal technology to more easily recruit patients and monitor [...] read more..

Monday, 26 March 2012

Social Media-Gorsky

Advice to J&J's New CEO Alex Gorsky: Start Tweeting, Blogging, and YouTubing

Alex Gorsky will have to address trouble at J&J's consumer business when he becomes CEO, notes the Wall Street Journal (see here).
Sure, "those who know Mr. Gorsky laud his skills diagnosing problems by reviewing reams of data and visiting the company's front lines, motivating experts on staff to fix the issues and then holding the staffers responsible," but can he tweet? That's what I want to know.
Gorsky should learn from the mistakes of his predecessor, Bill Weldon, who flubbed handling the growing PR crisis by not adequately, IMHO, leveraging social media to assure consumers he was working to resolve the issue. More importantly, however, Weldon did not use social media to interact directly with consumers.
Gorsky should have his own Twitter account, Blog, and YouTube Channel. And ALL of them should allow comments. Open the social media floodgates and learn why J&J is now ranked #7 instead of #1 or #2 in the Harris Poll Reputation Quotient study.
You might object and say that a CEO of a huge corporation such a J&J simply does not have the time to engage in social media. That may be the case. But I advise Gorsky to learn from celebrities and political candidates -- have surrogates (ie, PR people) handle the day-to-day interactions and make sure you approve what they say in your name. But EVERY day make at least one personal tweet or reply to a tweet and every week write a blog post. Once a month, do a YouTube video update. Is that too much to ask of a CEO?
I cannot find a Twitter account for Gorsky, whereas at least 5 J&J junior executives have such accounts according to my "Pharma Social Media Pioneers" database (here).
The only social media account I can find for Gorsky is a LinkedIn page (here). It is out of date! Mr. Gorsky, how come you only have 160 links? Not only should you update your page and start linking to more people on LinkedIn, you should have a "vanity" URL. Mine is www.linkedin.com/in/pharmaguy. How about www.linkedin.com/in/Gorsky? Whoops! That's already taken! What about www.linkedin.com/in/AlexGorsky? That's taken as well. Too bad. You should have thought of this sooner.
Having a personal social media presence, however, is even more important when the NEXT crisis occurs -- and, Mr. Gorsky, it will occur, believe me.
During a previous JNJ PR crisis, I was asked what I would do in JNJ's shoes by Melissa Davies -- a mom and Social Media Practice Lead at Return on Focus, a company that helps companies market their brands. Melissa asked:
"John, could you share some thoughts on what you would advise JNJ to do as part of a more fully developed social media response strategy? Are you thinking the company should have more Tweets, engage on more sites, etc.? I'm curious what you think the ideal roadmap looks like."My response:
"For what it's worth, I believe this situation calls for more information and conversation no matter what the channel or the road.
But since we are talking about social media, let's stick to that.
Because the CEO has been targeted, is expected to meet with Congress, and posted a message to JNJBTW, he should lead the discussion. In addition to a formal letter posted to the corporate blog, how about opening up a YouTube channel in which he and McNeil executives talk directly to their audience and provide updates. They should allow comments -- and respond to as many as necessary.
Twitter can work with this to keep people informed about what is going on and link to specific videos.
If the CEO talks to Congress, get the transcript and post it before anyone else does. Ask readers to comment on how well or not so well questions were answered by the CEO and what was missing.
Of course, there needs to be some progress if you are going to give updates. Actions speak louder than words. Social media won't solve the problems.
Right now, I feel that JNJ doesn't have a handle on what's causing the problems. At least that's what read more..

Wednesday, 14 March 2012

Clinical Trials-Pharmalot-Pfizer

Pfizer 'Clinical Trial in a Box' Failure: The Dead Rat Comes Home to Roost

After Years of Telling Consumers Not to Trust the Internet, Pfizer Discovers that It Cannot Convince Patients to Participate in Internet-based Clinical Trials. Duh!
As reported on Pharmalot (here): "Last year, Pfizer announced plans to run the first clinical trial to allow patients to participate from home by using computers and smartphones instead of going to a clinic or doctor’s office. The idea was to create a model for saving money that will rely on personal technology to more easily recruit patients and monitor their progress. Known as a ‘clinical trial in a box,’ the study is testing the Detrol overactive bladder drug in 10 states and gained an FDA blessing. However, Pfizer ran into some snags winning over patients."
Craig Lipset, Head of Clinical Innovation at Pfizer, explained it this way: "I think some of the staunch advocates for using online and social media for recruitment are still reticent to claim silver bullet status and not use conventional channels in parallel. In terms of health literacy, the patient population is largely unaware of clinical trials and participation. You’re going in at a level where there’s still a lot of basic learning needed for individuals to make informed decisions about whether to participate. And doing that without an interaction with a healthcare provider is a challenge."
I wouldn't say there's a lack of "health literacy" regarding decisions to participate, but more lack of credible information and TRUST, which is what Lipset is talking about in the last two sentences quoted above.
As Lipset admits later on in the interview with Pharmalot:
"In a world where we’ve been telling people not to trust (web) sites online and then to ask them to do everything online is still a challenge. A very important takeaway is that online is great, but make sure these folks know they’re not alone and have a sense of contact that they need… The twist here was to go from awareness to randomized participant entirely online, and this is where ensuring some human contact as well as an optimized online process have proven extremely important."
Is this a case of the "dead rat" coming home to roost? See "Was a Rat Harmed in the Filming of This Pfizer Commercial?" read more..

Saturday, 10 March 2012

Social Media Marketing-Personal Experience-Insurance Marketers-Insurance Marketing

Pharma Marketing Vs. Insurance Marketing: What Pharma Can Learn from Geico

Often, when proponents of pharma eMarketing get together at industry conferences, or cry into their beers at receptions afterward, they lament the fact that the drug industry isn't doing as much as other industries in the "e" arena. Sometimes, they cite eMarketing campaigns of companies like Procter & Gamble (P&G) and ask, Why aren't drug companies doing that?
The responses to that question generally fall into the category of "It's Regulations, Stupid!" That is, FDA regulations are hampering what pharma marketers can do online. The packaged goods industry -- of which P&G is a member -- is not regulated like the drug industry is regulated. True that!
So, let's look at another industry that IS regulated: the insurance industry. Where do insurance marketers spend their dollars and how does that compare with pharma? It just so happens that I came across some data that might shed some light on that (see the chart below; click on the chart to enlarge).
The data come from Kantar Media. The Internet data does NOT include search advertising. The insurance data is for the first three quarters of 2011 (total spend = $3.56 Bn) whereas the data for pharma is for 2010  (total spend = $4.3 Bn). To compare apples to apples, in 2010 the insurance industry media spend pie looks like this: TV, 54%; Print, 6%; Internet, 21%.
No matter how you look at it, the insurance industry favors Internet over print whereas the opposite is true for pharma. Why?
Here's what I have learned from personal experience. In my family -- and probably in your family too -- health decisions and purchases are generally the domain of my wife, whereas insurance decisions and purchases are my responsibility. It's no secret that pharma marketers target mostly women. My wife reads magazines like Prevention, etc. that feature a lot of drug ads. I don't read these magazines. While I have seen print ads for insurance companies, they haven't made much of an impression on me, whereas TV ads have.
So, from my personal experience, it's logical that both industries allocate a big portion of their media spend on TV advertising, but only the drug industry spends a lot on print advertising.
What's surprising, however, is the insurance industry's 28% of total media spend on the Internet (versus 5% for the pharma industry).
Coincidentally, yesterday I received an e-mail message from Geico about their "Family Pricing Program" for my son Greg. (We are Geico customers, having both our car and home insurance with them.) The message said:
"If Gregory is getting ready to graduate, preparing for a new job, or looking to establish a little independence, our Family Pricing program allows you the freedom of moving Gregory to his own policy while he continues to receive the same great rates you're currently receiving."That spooked me a bit because Greg just started his first full-time job after graduating and I mentioned to my wife that soon it will be time for Greg to get his own insurance policy! I tweeted:
"Got email from Geico about transferring my son 2 his own car insur plan now that he has a job. How'd they know I was just thinking that?"Of course, they didn't know what I was thinking, but it was nice to know that they anticipated what I may be thinking! Geico knows a lot about me and my family. They know our ages, our sex, our driver's license numbers, our driving records, what kinds of cars we own, etc. I had to give them that information to get insurance. No big deal.
So, it would be easy for Geico to anticipate that Greg recently graduated and that he may have a new job. Further, they know from experience that parents want to get their kids off their insurance plans ASAP.
After I posted that tweet, I received this response from "Shay" tweeting from the @GEICO_Service Twitter account:
"We would be more than happy to give him a quote! He can go to geico.com or give us a call at 1-800-861-8380. -Shay"That was a pleasant note th read more..