U.S. patent application number 12/061618 was filed with the patent office on 2009-01-15 for lead marketplace system and method with ratings system.
This patent application is currently assigned to Reply! Inc.. Invention is credited to Sean Fox, Payam Zamani.
Application Number | 20090018894 12/061618 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 40253900 |
Filed Date | 2009-01-15 |
United States Patent
Application |
20090018894 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Zamani; Payam ; et
al. |
January 15, 2009 |
Lead Marketplace System and Method with Ratings System
Abstract
A lead marketplace system and method are provided. The lead
marketplace system and method provides an auction for leads.
Inventors: |
Zamani; Payam; (Danville,
CA) ; Fox; Sean; (San Caros, CA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
DLA PIPER US LLP
2000 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
E. PALO ALTO
CA
94303-2248
US
|
Assignee: |
Reply! Inc.
San Ramon
CA
|
Family ID: |
40253900 |
Appl. No.: |
12/061618 |
Filed: |
April 2, 2008 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
60958884 |
Jul 9, 2007 |
|
|
|
61021292 |
Jan 15, 2008 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/7.29 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 30/08 20130101;
G06Q 30/0601 20130101; G06Q 30/0641 20130101; G06Q 30/02 20130101;
G06Q 30/0201 20130101; G06Q 10/0637 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/10 |
International
Class: |
G06Q 99/00 20060101
G06Q099/00 |
Claims
1. A lead marketplace system, comprising: a storage system that
stores a plurality of leads wherein each lead is an electronic
contact and transactional information that provides an opportunity
to sell a good or service to a prospective customer; a Lead Seller
unit that stores one or more selling campaigns for one or more Lead
Sellers, each selling campaign enabling the association of one or
more leads to be sold in the lead marketplace system; a Lead Buyer
unit that stores one or more buying campaigns for one or more Lead
Buyers, each buying campaign including one or more parameters
specifying the characteristics of leads to be bought by the Lead
Buyer associated with the buying campaign; and a rating unit that
provides a quality rating for each lead stored in the storage
system.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein a new lead in the system
associated with a particular selling campaign inherits the quality
rating of the particular selling campaign.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the rating unit further comprises
a quality rating generating unit that generates a quality rating
for a new lead associated with a new selling campaign based on one
or more quality factors.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the rating unit further comprises
a quality rating generating unit that generates a quality rating
for a new lead based on one or more quality factors associated with
the new lead.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the one or more quality factors
further comprise a survey provided by a Lead Buyer, a validation
rate of the lead from a third party validation system and a
validation reason score of the lead from a third party validation
system.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the one or more quality factors
further comprise a consumer survey and a lead score.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein a new lead in the system receives
a quality rating based on one or more lead specific factors.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the rating unit generate a star
rating value based on the quality rating.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the rating unit provides a
default star rating to a new lead.
10. The system of claim 3, wherein the one or more quality factors
are weighted to generate the quality rating for the new lead.
11. A method for rating a lead in a lead marketplace system based
on one or more quality factors associated with the lead, the method
comprising: determining, for each quality factor associated with
the lead, if each quality factor for the lead has been triggered;
determining a weight for each quality factor that has been
triggered for the lead; calculating a quality factor score for each
triggered quality factor based on the weight for each triggered
quality factor; combining the quality factor scores for all of the
triggered quality factors; and generating a rating for the lead
based on the combined quality factor scores.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein generating the rating further
comprises generating a star rating.
13. The method of claim 12 further comprising displaying the
generated star rating for the lead in a lead marketplace
system.
14. The method of claim 11, wherein calculating the quality factor
score for each triggered quality factor further comprises
multiplying the weight for each triggered quality factor by a score
for the triggered quality factor.
15. The method of claim 11, wherein each quality factor is
periodically reset.
15. The method of claim 11, wherein the quality factor further
comprises a consumer survey and wherein determining if the consumer
survey has been triggered further comprises determining if at least
a predetermined number of surveys have been completed for the
consumer lead before triggering the consumer survey quality factor.
Description
PRIORITY CLAIM/RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application claims priority under 35 USC 119(e) to U.S.
Provisional Patent Application Serial Numbers 60/958,884 filed on
Jul. 9, 2007 and entitled "System for Implementing an Open Auction
Marketplace for Opt-in Consumer Leads, and 61/021,292 filed on Jan.
15, 2008 and entitled "Lead Marketplace System and Method", both of
which are incorporated herein by reference.
[0002] This application is also related to U.S. patent application
Ser. Nos. ______ filed on and entitled "Lead Marketplace System and
Method with Lead Auctions" and ______ filed on and entitled "Lead
Marketplace System and Method with Ping Campaigns".
FIELD
[0003] The system and method relate to a lead marketplace system
and method that may be used for various different types of
leads.
BACKGROUND
[0004] One of the many uses of the Internet is to connect customers
who are contemplating a transaction with one or more service
providers who want to compete for their business. A Lead consists
of contact information and other information about a transaction
that a customer is interested in, collected from a customer who has
requested information about a possible transaction or has asked to
be put in touch with a Service Provider. Leads are fungible
products that are sold to one or more Service Providers ("Lead
Buyers"). Leads are not purchase requests per se, rather they
consist of the information necessary for a Service Provider to
contact a customer in an effort to acquire the customer's
business.
[0005] Today, it is difficult to efficiently price and distribute
Leads as there is a great amount of variability amongst Lead Buyers
in the value they place on a Lead based on local market factors,
characteristics of the customer, time of month, and their current
ability to service the business. In one market for Leads, there may
be 100,000 Lead Buyers spread across the country. If a company that
captures, or "Generates" Leads sets prices for the Leads, either on
a per-Lead basis or through a subscription, this pricing will not
reflect the value of each individual Lead to the buyer. The impact
of this disparity between price and value to the buyer results in
two things: 1) Leads that are overpriced that do not sell; and 2)
Leads that are underpriced that sell at less than the optimal
price. So, Lead Generators are faced with a situation where they
generate no revenue from overpriced Leads while not generating as
much money as they could from underpriced Leads.
[0006] Thus, it is desirable to provide a lead marketplace system
and method that overcomes these problems of conventional systems
and it is to this end that the system and method are directed.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0007] FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a computer system Web-based
implementation of a lead marketplace system;
[0008] FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a Lead Buyer campaign
creation workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown
in FIG. 1;
[0009] FIG. 3 illustrates an example of a Lead Seller campaign
creation workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown
in FIG. 1;
[0010] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of a lead upload workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1;
[0011] FIG. 5 illustrates an example of a lead auction workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1;
[0012] FIG. 6 illustrates an example of an auction workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1;
[0013] FIG. 7 illustrates an example of auction logic in the lead
marketplace system shown in FIG. 1;
[0014] FIG. 8 illustrates an example of an auctioneer process
system function flow implemented in the lead marketplace system
shown in FIG. 1;
[0015] FIG. 9 illustrates an example of a lead rating workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1;
[0016] FIG. 10 illustrates an example of a buyer information
workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG.
1;
[0017] FIG. 11 illustrates an example of a seller information
workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG.
1;
[0018] FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a buying campaign
management workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system
shown in FIG. 1; and
[0019] FIG. 13 illustrates an example of a selling campaign
management workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system
shown in FIG. 1.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ONE OR MORE EMBODIMENTS
[0020] The system and method are particularly applicable to a
Web-based lead marketplace system and method and it is in this
context that the system and method will be described. It will be
appreciated, however, that the system and method has greater
utility since it may be implemented in different manners, may be
based on different architectures and is not limited to the
particular types of leads described below. In particular, the lead
marketplace system and method may be used to buy and sell various
types of leads including leads for goods purchases or leads for
services.
[0021] FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a computer system Web-based
implementation of a lead marketplace (LMP) system 20. The lead
marketplace system brings Lead Buyers (Lead Buyers) 22 and Lead
Sellers (Lead Sellers) 24 together in a way that efficiently prices
Leads so that they sell at the market-efficient price while
minimizing the Lead Seller's operating costs. The Leads may include
any type of leads including, but not limited to, consumer leads and
business to business leads. The Lead Buyer and Lead Seller may be
coupled to the LMP system over a link 26, such as the Internet or
any other communications or computer network whether wired or
wireless, to a LMP user interface unit 28, such as a server
computer in one embodiment, that executes computer code to generate
and provide the user interfaces to the Lead Buyer 22 and Lead
Seller 22 who each access the LMP system 20 using a computing
device that executes a browser application that displays Web pages
to the Lead Buyer and the Lead Seller. Each computing device may be
a processing unit based device with sufficient processing power,
memory and connectivity to interact with the LMP system as
described below wherein each computing device may be, for example,
a personal computer, a laptop computer, a smart telephone, a
terminal, a mobile phone, a wireless email device, etc.
[0022] A Lead is a set of information about a customer who may
purchase a product or service wherein the Lead can be generated in
various different manners. For example, a Lead (including consumer
lead which is contact and transaction information that might lead
to the acquisition of a customer for a product or service) may be a
person who is looking for a plumber in the Reno, Nevada area to
perform a particular task, a person looking for a mortgage of
$500,000 with a 520 credit rating and living in Livermore, or a
person who wants to purchase a new Mazda RX-8 in the Boston area
who is willing to spend $X. Each of these is a different type of
Lead and the LMP system can be used with any type of Lead.
[0023] A Lead Buyer is an entity (individual, corporation, etc) who
is willing to pay a certain price for a quantity of a particular
type of Lead for a particular good or service. Examples of Lead
Buyers are a mortgage broker who is willing to pay for Leads for
people looking for mortgages in a certain geographic area or a
plumber who is willing to pay for Leads to people nationally who
need to have their houses re-piped. Each Lead Buyer may have one or
more buyer campaigns wherein each buyer campaign provides the
parameters of the Leads desired (such as the types of the Leads,
the number of Leads, time period for the Leads, the budget for the
Leads over the time period, geographic area, etc.) that are of
interest to the Lead Buyer. A Lead Seller is an entity (individual,
corporation, etc.) who wants to sell a particular type of Lead for
a particular good or service, such as a company that runs a
mortgage advice Website and collects mortgage leads. Each Lead
Seller may have one or more seller campaigns wherein each seller
campaign provides a means of grouping and tracking particular Leads
over time for the purpose of attributing Leads to the appropriate
Lead Seller and tracking the quality of the Leads sold.
[0024] The LMP system 20 may further comprise an LMP lead unit 30,
such as one or more server computers that execute computer code in
one implementation, that accepts and stores new Leads, an LMP
auction manager 36, such as one or more server computers that
execute computer code in one implementation, that perform the
auctioning process of the LMP system as described below in more
detail. The LMP system may communicate with a seller lead unit 32,
such as one or more server computers that execute computer code in
one implementation, that interfaces with and stores third party
Leads to be sold, a third party validation unit 34, such as one or
more server computers that execute computer code in one
implementation, that validates third party Leads, and a third party
buyer ping unit 38, such as one or more server computers that
execute computer code in one implementation, that implements a ping
campaign as is described below in more detail. The LMP system 20
may further comprise a consumer rating unit 40, such as one or more
server computers that execute computer code in one implementation,
that provide a rating process of the LMP system as described in
more detail below.
[0025] The LMP system 20 may further include one or more storage
units, such as database tables in one implementation of the system
that store data and are accessed by the various units of the system
as described above. The system 20 may thus comprise a seller lead
database 50 that stores third party seller Leads and interacts with
the lead unit 30, a seller campaign table 52 that stores a
plurality of Lead Seller campaigns for a plurality of Lead Sellers
in the LMP system as described below and a seller account table 54
that stores account information about each seller in the LMP
system. In one embodiment, the seller account table may include an
Object ID field, Identification Fields, a Login field, a Password
field, and Payment Information fields and the seller campaign table
may include an Object ID field, a Seller ID field, a User Defined
Name field, a Collection Method field and a Quality Rating field.
The Lead Seller campaigns enable the Lead Sellers to track the
performance of different variations of Leads generated using
different methods.
[0026] The LMP system may further comprise a buyer campaign table
56 that stores a plurality of Lead Buyer campaigns for a plurality
of Lead Buyers in the LMP system as described below and a lead type
table 58 that stores the different types of Leads (such as
mortgages, plumbers, autos, etc.) and the characteristics, or
filters, for the different types of Leads (such as mortgage amount,
property type and house location for the mortgage leads or house
location and type of plumbing work for a plumbers leads, or
automobile make and model for automobile leads). In one embodiment,
the lead type table may include an Object ID field, a Name field, a
Sharing Allowed field, and XML Schema (Field 1, Field 2, Field3 . .
. ) fields, and the buyer campaign table may include an Object ID
field, a Buyer ID field, a User Defined Name field, a Lead Type
field, Location Fields, a Max Age field, a Min Quality field,
Type-Specific Filter Fields, Bid Amount field and Sharing Level
field(s), an Activity Status field, a Bid Type field, a Ping Type
field and a Ping URL field.
[0027] The LMP system 20 may further include a Lead table 60 that
interfaces with the LMP lead unit 30 and the LMP auction manager 36
and stores information about each Lead in the LMP system and a
validating ratings table 62 that interfaces with the LMP lead unit
30 and stores information about the validating ratings of the
Leads. In one embodiment, the Lead table may include an Object ID
field, a Ping ID field, a Seller Campaign ID field, an Auction
Thread ID field, a Lead Type field, Lead Contact Information
fields, a Generated Timestamp field, an Actual Payout field and a
Sold Timestamp field. The LMP system 20 may further comprise one or
more lead auction threads 64 wherein a lead auction thread is
created for each Lead as described below in more detail. The LMP
system 20 may further comprise a buyer account table 66 that
interfaces with the LMP auction manager 36 and stores information
about each of the Lead Buyers in the LMP system and a lead leg sold
table 68 that interfaces with the LMP auction manager 36 and stores
information about the Leads that are sold in the LMP system to each
individual Lead Buyer. In one embodiment, the buyer account table
may include an Object ID field, Identification Fields, a Login
field, a Password field and Billing Information fields, and the
lead leg sold table may include an Object ID field, a Lead ID
field, a Buyer Campaign ID field, a Lead Type field, Lead Contact
Information fields, a Generated Timestamp field, a Price Paid field
and a Bought Timestamp field.
[0028] In addition to the tables shown in FIG. 1, the LMP system 20
further may include a number of other tables including a lead ping
table, a lead post table, a buyer campaign ping table, a budget
table and a bid table. The lead ping table stores information about
a ping (a conditional bid for a particular type of Lead that fits
certain parameters) and may include an Object ID field, a Seller
Campaign ID field, a Lead Type field, a Last Name field, a Phone
Suffix field, a Zip Code field, Type-Specific Field Values fields,
a Generated Timestamp field and a Minimum Payout field. The lead
post table that stores information about a Lead that has been
posted for sale by a Lead Seller and may include an Object ID
field, a Ping ID field, a Seller Campaign ID field, a Lead Type
field, Consumer Contact Information fields, XML Type-Specific Field
Values, a Generated Timestamp field and a Posted Timestamp field.
The buyer campaign ping table stores information about one or more
ping campaigns (described below) for one or more Lead Buyers and
may include an Object ID field, a Buyer Campaign ID field, a Lead
Type field, a Last Name field, a Phone Suffix field, a Zip Code
field, Type-Specific Field Values fields and a Generated Timestamp
field. The budget table stores information about a budget for
either a buyer campaign or a Lead Buyer account and may include an
Object ID field, a Level field, a Level ID field, a Dollar Amount
field, a Number of Leads field and a Timeframe field. The budget
may specify the maximum number of Leads and/or the maximum amount
of money to spend on Leads during one or more time periods and the
budget may be associated with a particular buying campaign or with
a particular Lead Buyer account. Because the balances of these
budgets will change over time as the Budget timeframes expire or
Lead Buyers modify the budget settings, the active auction approach
enables these changes to be reflected in the auction outcome,
potentially increasing the price paid for a Lead.
[0029] The bid table may store the bids from the plurality of Lead
Buyers associated with the LMP system and may include an Object ID
field, an Auction Thread ID field, a Campaign ID field, an Amount
field, a Max Sharing field and Filters Matched fields.
[0030] The LMP system shown in FIG. 1 depicts Internet companies
that collect, or "Generate" a wide variety of Leads to sell them to
one or more Lead Buyers in an auction format. This auction format
ensures that a volume of Leads from multiple Lead Sellers is priced
and sold efficiently to maximize yield to the Lead Seller while
giving control of the Lead purchase to the Lead Buyer. The system
uses a unique method to match Leads with Lead Buyers, enabling the
Lead Buyer to specify the location, type, characteristics, and
quality of Leads they would like to purchase either through a
standing order called a "Buying Campaign" or in real-time through a
"Live Bidding" user interface. Thus, for a particular Lead sold
through the LMP, both buying campaigns (pre-set by one or more Lead
Buyers) as well as the live bidding (by the same Lead Buyers with
the buying campaigns or other Lead Buyers) may occur so that each
Lead is priced and sold efficiently. Thus, rather than simply
selling the Lead based on information that is stored in the system,
the LMP creates an Active Auction process that runs for a defined
period of time and allows other means of participating in the
auction. Like many auction-based systems the LMP determines to
which Buyer to sell the Lead based on which Buyer or combination of
Buyers that offers the highest price.
[0031] Each buying campaign is set up by a Lead Buyer (where each
Lead Buyer can have one or more buying campaigns) and allows the
Lead Buyer of that buying campaign to specify certain parameters
that are used to identify Leads that are of interest to the
particular Lead Buyer as well as selecting the method for entering
the Lead Buyer's bid into each lead auction. For example, the
buying campaign enables the Lead Buyer to: 1) specify the price and
budgets for buying Leads in a "Fixed Buying Campaign"; and/or 2)
provide instructions for the LMP system to make a server-to-server
request for a price the Lead Buyer is willing to pay for each Lead
that enters the system in a "Ping Buying Campaign". This Ping
Buying Campaign is useful since many Lead Buyers will have systems
through which they will resell the Lead to another Buyer. Thus, the
Ping Buying Campaign allows the Lead Buyer, through their servers,
to receive a notification that a Lead matches the ping buying
campaign parameters, to check for demand for the Lead in their
system prior to committing to a price to pay to acquire the Lead,
and then to provide a bid for the Lead in response to the
notification.
[0032] The LMP system 20 enables the simultaneous pricing of a Lead
to different numbers buyers who will "share" the Lead, and then the
LMP system sells the lead to the group of buyers who generate the
highest revenue for a Lead. The LMP associates a bid with each
campaign, and each bid specifies a dollar amount and maximum number
of other buyers to share the Lead with (the "Sharing Field"). There
can be a plurality of bids associated with one buyer campaign, each
with a different sharing level. To allow the sharing, Lead Buyers
do not need to do anything other than specify how much they are
willing to pay for a maximum level of sharing, and the system
groups these bids together. The sharing fields above allow the LMP
system to support multiple levels of sharing and multiple bids from
a single Lead Buyer. For example, one embodiment of the invention
might have a user interface that enables a Lead Buyer to create a
buyer campaign that specifies a bid of $20 if there is no sharing,
$17 if the Lead can be shared with one other buyer, $14 if the Lead
can be shared with two other buyers, etc so that the LMP system can
be set up to allow a Lead Buyer to enter different bid amounts for
Leads to be shared amongst a maximum of 1, 3, 5, 6, or 10 Lead
Buyers. The LMP system user interface dictates what values can be
entered for sharing by an individual Lead Buyer, but the backend
system will clear Leads to the group of Lead Buyers that generate
the highest return based on any sharing value bid that is in the
system. Depending on how the Lead Type is set up in the system
(e.g., the amount of sharing that is allowed for the particular
lead type, such as sharing with a maximum of two buyers for
automobile leads or sharing with a maximum of 4 buyers with
mortgages), the user interface controls what can be entered by the
Lead Buyer. At any time, the LMP system provides complete
flexibility in the number of buyers that can be grouped together
and compared to determine the highest value group of buyers. In
other words, the LMP system will process whatever sharing level has
been saved in the system (theoretically every single sharing
increment up to thousands is supported), supporting any user
interface design for controlling the Lead Buyer input of bids for
sharing levels.
[0033] Since many Lead Sellers have systems used to manage the
Leads that they generate, the LMP system supports multiple methods
for entering Leads into the system for Sale. As shown in FIG. 1,
Lead Sellers can set up their HTML Web forms to be submitted to the
LMP directly by the customer. In addition, Lead Sellers that
collect Leads and save them on their own systems that can send the
Leads to the LMP system in a server-to-server exchange called a
Server Post. The LMP system also makes it easier for Lead Sellers
to Post Leads to the system by allowing them to map the fields in
their tables to the fields in the LMP system for each Lead Type. By
so doing, the LMP system eliminates the need for the Lead Seller to
make significant modifications to their data structures in order to
sell their Leads.
[0034] Since Lead Sellers may have established relationships with
multiple partners that buy Leads, the LMP allows Lead Sellers to
make a server-to-server request for a payout quote prior to selling
the Lead through the LMP. This type of price quote request is
called a "Ping", and it contains enough information about the Lead
to enable the LMP to run an Active Auction on the Lead, without
including enough information to enable the LMP to actually sell the
Lead. If the Lead Seller system determined that the payout amount
is acceptable, the system can then complete a Server Post of the
Lead.
[0035] Different Lead Sellers use different techniques in
generating Leads. As a result, the ease with which the resulting
Lead can be turned into a customer varies from one Lead Seller to
another. The measure of the ease with which a Lead can be converted
to a customer is referred to as the "Quality" of the Lead.
Differences in Quality affect the value of the Lead to the Lead
Buyer. The LMP uses a unique combination of measures to establish a
Quality Rating for each Lead entered into the system. The LMP has
the ability to consider various factors to calculate a real-time
Quality Rating for each Lead in the LMP such as: 1) the historical
validation rate of the Seller Campaign that generated the Lead; 2)
the historical validation reasons of Leads in the Seller Campaign
that generated the Lead; 3) the reason for validation of the
specific Lead being rated; 4) ratings submitted by Lead Buyers who
previously purchased Leads from the Seller Campaign that generated
the Lead; and (5) ratings submitted by Customers who provided the
information to create Leads from the Seller Campaign that generated
the Lead; and (6) a lead score or rating provided for the Lead
based on an analysis of the specific information provided in the
Lead and the application of demographic and behavioral models to
that information. Rather than tie these Quality Ratings to the Lead
Seller account directly, the LMP uses the Selling Campaign system
object to enable one Lead Seller to deliver Leads of varying
quality. Further details of the rating system and method is
described below. Once a Lead is sold, the LMP creates "Lead Leg"
records in the lead leg table for each of the Lead Buyers. These
Lead Leg records are associated with the Lead, which is associated
with the Selling Campaign, which is associated with the Seller
Account. The Lead Buyer accesses his or her own Lead Leg in the
LMP, and the Buyer Rating, entered by the Lead Buyer through the
LMP Buyer user interface, is stored in the Lead Leg record. Now,
the Lead Buyer campaign creation and Lead Seller campaign creation
are described in more detail.
[0036] FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a Lead Buyer campaign
creation workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown
in FIG. 1, and FIG. 3 illustrates an example of a Lead Seller
campaign creation workflow implemented in the lead marketplace
system shown in FIG. 1. As shown in these figures, a Lead Buyer or
Lead Seller can, using the link 26, access the LMP user interface
unit 28 and create a new lead buying campaign that is stored in the
buyer campaign table 56, the buyer campaign bid table 56 a and the
buyer campaign budget table 56b, or create a new lead selling
campaign that is stored in the seller campaign table 52,
respectively. In one embodiment, the Lead Buyer or Lead Seller can
access the LMP system using a typical Web browser application by
entering the appropriate user identified and password. The LMP
system presents the Lead Buyer with a series of pages that enable
the Lead Buyer to specify (as shown in FIG. 2) the type of Lead to
purchase, the location of the Lead, the characteristics of the
Lead, the bidding method (fixed versus Ping), the bids (including
the max sharing number and/or bid amount) and the Budgets in dollar
amount and number of Leads for different timeframes. The LMP system
presents the Lead Seller with a series of pages that enable them to
specify the method they are using to capture Leads and associate
the data with a seller account ID, a campaign ID as shown in FIG.
3.
[0037] Based on the Lead Type selected when creating a Buying
Campaign, the Lead Buyer will be presented with the relevant lead
characteristics that are associated with that type of Leads. For
example, if the Lead Buyer is purchasing Plumbing Service Leads, he
or she might be asked to specify the type of job requested and
whether it is for emergency service. If the Lead Buyer is
purchasing Mortgage Service Leads, he or she might be asked to
specify the loan amount and type of home among other
mortgage-related criteria. The LMP has a Lead Type Table that
stores the appropriate data schema and selection values for each
type of Lead.
[0038] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of a lead upload workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1. There
are two main methods used by Lead Generators to enter, or "Post",
Leads into the LMP system including: 1) direct posting in the LMP
system and 2) delivering Leads from the third party leads database.
In the direct posting method, a customer on a computing device can
access the an HTML Web page that collects the appropriate Lead
information and performs an HTTP Post directly to the LMP (the LMP
lead unit 30). The Lead Generators can create the form themselves
or make a request to the LMP system to serve a Lead collection form
to the customer for them. Alternatively, the Lead Generator can
collect the Lead information themselves (using their own third
party seller Web server 70 which is accessed by the customer over
the link), and then the Lead Generator can store the information in
their own database system. Once they have stored the Lead, the Lead
Generator can use one of several methods to Post the Lead to the
LMP system through a server-to-server connection, for example,
through an HTTP POST or a Web Service. Prior to posting the Lead to
the LMP system, the Lead Generator has the option to send a pricing
request for the Lead called a "Ping" wherein the lead generator
sends a limited amount of information about the Lead to the LMP to
determine the payout they will receive for the Lead. Then, based on
the response from the LMP, the Lead Generator can decide whether or
not to Post the Lead to the LMP for sale.
[0039] FIG. 5 illustrates an example of a lead auction workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1. In
addition, FIG. 6 illustrates an example of an auction workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1, FIG. 7
illustrates an example of auction logic in the lead marketplace
system shown in FIG. 1 and FIG. 8 illustrates an example of an
auctioneer system function flow implemented in the lead marketplace
system shown in FIG. 1.
[0040] The LMP system has an "Auctioneer" process that creates an
auction process ("Auction Thread") for each individual Lead Ping (a
proposal to post a Lead if there is sufficient demand) or Post (a
Lead for sale) received from a valid Seller Campaign. This Auction
Thread 64 receives bids from the "Bid Manager", "Budget Manager",
or "Campaign Manager" processes and identifies the set of Lead
Buyers who will purchase the Lead, calculates the amount of money
to be paid to the Lead Seller, and creates Lead Leg Sold records
for each Lead Buyer. The Auction Thread is an individual process
within the LMP Auction Manager subsystem that runs for a defined
amount of time, which may be different for each Lead, accepting all
bids for the Lead during the timeframe.
[0041] Rather than simply doing a database query of the Buyer
Campaigns to determine the highest bidder or group of bidders and
awarding the Lead based on the database query results, the LMP
Auction first queries the Buyer Campaigns that match the
characteristics of the Lead to get their bids for each level of
sharing. There is a separate "Sharing Bid Thread" created for each
level of sharing that has a bid in the system. Each of these
individual Sharing Bid Threads manages the initial and subsequent
bidding activity for the level of sharing for the Auction
Thread.
[0042] The Auction Thread, through its Sharing Bid Threads allows
Lead Buyers or Buyer Campaigns to place bids into the Auction
Thread, where they are processed by the appropriate Sharing Bid
thread and the Auction Thread. As changes to the Auction Thread
occur, the Auction Thread sends out notifications to all Campaigns
that are participating in the auction, letting them know the
current status of the auction and allowing them to submit new
bids.
[0043] The benefit of this approach is that in addition to
including bids from Campaigns that qualify at the moment the Lead
enters the LMP, the Auction Thread can accept qualifying bids that
come into the system after the Lead has entered the LMP. For
example, if a Buyer Campaign had a budget limit that had been
exceeded when a Lead initially entered the LMP, but the Buyer
increased the budget before the Auction Process ended, the Budget
Manager within the LMP would be able to submit the bid to the
Auction Thread. As another example, if a Lead Buyer added a new
Buying Campaign or modifies an existing Buying Campaign so that it
matches the characteristics of Leads with active Auction Threads,
the Campaign Manager would apply the bids from these Campaigns to
those active Auction Threads rather than waiting until a new Lead
entered the system to apply the Campaign bid to a Lead.
[0044] In addition, this method of running the auction allows for
"Ping Buying Campaigns", where the Lead Buyer's bid is set through
a server-to-server process. This method also allows for live
bidding by Buyers for individual Leads with active Auction Threads.
This active method of managing the auction of a Lead gives the
system the flexibility to take advantage of the entire window of
time over which a Lead can be sold to increase the number of bids
that can be applied.
[0045] The system can be set up to use a different model from the
Threaded "Listener" model described herein. The LMP system
encompasses any system that creates a process that runs for a
duration of time and can use a combination of 1.) Queries from
static "Purchase Order" or "Bidding" objects that specify Lead
characteristics, prices offered and budgets; 2.) Changes to the
Purchase Order or Bidding objects that change their participation
status in currently active auctions; 3.) Changes to the budget
position of the buyer's account; 4.) server-to-server requests for
a bid on a specific Lead; or 5.) Live bids entered into the system
by Buyers as shown in FIG. 6.
[0046] FIG. 7 illustrates the auction logic when implemented in
software using one or more objects and database tables. The auction
logic may include an auctioneer object 100 for each auction thread
and a bidder object 102 wherein the auctioneer object tracks the
bidder threads for the particular auction thread and the bids
offered by those bidders and can perform the functions of attaching
(adding) a new bidder thread, detaching (removing) a bidder or
changing the auction parameters or arguments. Each bidder thread
object is associated with each bid level in existence in an auction
and can perform the functions of update (when information about a
bid at that level is updated), GetCampaigns to find qualifying
seller campaigns that might have valid bids that might apply to the
bidder thread, CalcPrice to calculate the aggregate price to be
offered by the bidder thread for a particular auction, LogResults
to store the results for the current auction for the bidder thread
and PlaceBid to place a bid into the auction thread. The auction
logic may also include an auction thread 104, a bidder thread 106
and a campaign agent 108. The auction thread item may be an object
associated with a particular Lead that performs the functions of
attach, detach or onchange and, when the auction is
completed/closed, the auction thread item determines the winning
bid(s), returns the results (or no coverage), returns the Buyer
campaign identifier(s) and release budgets that were not associated
with the winning bids. The bidder thread item 106 is associated
with a particular auction thread item and can perform updates and
place bids for a particular amount. The system function flow of a
typical auction is shown in FIG. 8.
[0047] FIG. 9 illustrates an example of a lead rating workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1. The LMP
system runs a Lead Rating subsystem to track the quality of Leads
that are Posted under each Selling Campaign. There is a current
rating, associated with each Selling Campaign ("Campaign Rating"),
that contributes to or, in some cases, determines the Quality
Rating for a specific Lead that is Pinged or Posted as part of the
Selling Campaign. The Campaign Rating serves as an initial rating
that can be enhanced based on an analysis of the specific
information provided in the Lead to generate the actual Quality
Rating. The Quality Rating value is calculated as shown in FIG. 9.
As shown in FIG. 9, the Quality Rating value may be generated based
on any of one or more factors as described in more detail below. In
the example shown in FIG. 9, the Quality Rating value is determined
based on third party validation rules, Lead Buyer ratings and
consumer ratings. The LMP Lead Rating subsystem performs an
algorithm to calculate the Campaign Rating, which is the weighted
average rating of Leads that have been sold associated with each
Selling Campaign. The Campaign Rating is sent through the
Auctioneer Thread to the Auction Thread when a Lead is auctioned,
enabling the LMP to allow Buyers to specify the minimum quality
rating of Leads they would like to buy. Once the Lead has been
acquired on behalf of a Lead Buyer, the LMP may evaluate the
specific information included in the Lead for the purposes of
enhancing the Quality Rating before distribution to the Lead
Buyer.
[0048] FIG. 10 illustrates an example of a buyer information
workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1
and FIG. 11 illustrates an example of a seller information workflow
implemented in the lead marketplace system shown in FIG. 1. These
diagrams show the workflow for a buyer to enter information into
the LMP system and the workflow for the seller to enter information
into the LMP system, respectively.
[0049] FIG. 12 illustrates an example of a buying campaign
management workflow implemented in the lead marketplace system
shown in FIG. 1 and FIG. 13 illustrates an example of a selling
campaign management workflow implemented in the lead marketplace
system shown in FIG. 1.
[0050] Thus, a lead marketplace system and method are provided that
include a storage system that stores a plurality of Leads wherein
each Lead is electronic contact and transactional information that
provides someone with an opportunity to sell a good or service to a
prospective customer and a Lead Seller unit that stores one or more
selling campaigns for one or more Lead Sellers, each selling
campaign enabling the association of one or more Leads to be sold
in the lead marketplace system and a Lead Buyer unit that stores
one or more buying campaigns for one or more Lead Buyers, each
buying campaign including one or more parameters specifying the
characteristics of Leads to be bought by the Lead Buyer associated
with the buying campaign. Each buying campaign has one or more bids
associated with the buying campaign wherein each bid specifies the
amount offered by the Lead Buyer for a specific level of sharing.
The buying campaign also has one or more budgets associated with
each buying campaign wherein each budget specifies a maximum dollar
amount to spend and/or the maximum number of Leads to purchase in a
specified timeframe. The lead marketplace system and method also
has an auction manager that performs a time period limited auction
for each Lead entered into the system for sale by a Lead Seller to
one or more Lead Buyers and the auction manager has a lead auction
thread for each Lead that sets a time period for an auction of each
Lead associated with the selling campaign, that accepts bids from
the one or more Lead Buyers through several means, and that sells
Leads associated with the selling campaign to the group of Lead
Buyers that generates the greatest amount of money. The lead
marketplace system and method also has a budget manager that
ensures that individual Lead Buyers or individual buying campaigns
do not have their bids applied to lead auctions if so doing would
risk exceeding one or more budget rules entered by the Lead Buyer,
a campaigns manager that submits bids associated with each buying
campaign to each relevant Lead being sold, and a bids manager that
submits bids stored in buying campaigns, submitted in association
with a buying campaign by a third-party system, or entered directly
through a computing device by a Lead buyer.
[0051] The lead auction thread of the lead marketplace system and
method may also receive bids from one or more buying campaigns and
receive live bids from one or more Lead Buyers. The one or more
bids associated with each buying campaign may have a sharing
parameter that specifies a level of sharing the Leads being sought
in the buying campaign, with or without a system limit on the
numerical sharing level that can be assigned to the bid. The one or
more bids of each buying campaign may also specify a bid price
representing the amount of money the Lead Buyer is willing to
spend. Alternatively, the bid price can be requested at the time of
the auction of an individual Lead through a process termed a "Ping"
in which a server-to-server request is sent to a computer device
under the Lead Buyer's control, such request including information
about the location and type of the Lead, and a response is sent
back to the system with a dollar amount the Lead Buyer is willing
to bid. The response in the "Ping" may also include the sharing
level of the bid returned. The response in the "Ping" also may
include multiple bids, each bid with a different sharing level
specified. In the lead marketplace system and method, a process in
the system receives the "Ping" response and places the bid into the
appropriate sharing level thread.
[0052] The one or more budgets in the lead marketplace system and
method may be associated with each buying campaign or each Lead
Buyer account and the budgets include a maximum monetary amount
and/or a maximum number of Leads, for the Leads to be bought within
a specified timeframe. The selling campaign unit may include a
mapping unit that associates fields in a third party Lead into
fields in the storage system of the lead marketplace system and
method.
[0053] In the lead marketplace system and method, the Lead Auction
unit creates an individual auction process for each Lead that is
submitted to the system with a defined start and stop time during
which bids from one or more buyers are evaluated to determine how
to sell the Lead. Each individual auction process creates one or
more sharing bid threads to accept bids for different levels of
sharing, such sharing bid threads to be used to create and update
an aggregate bid amount for the particular level of sharing to be
compared against the aggregate bid amounts of the other sharing
levels in determining how to sell the Lead. The multiple auction
processes can enter bids on behalf of a Lead Buyer into one or more
active sharing bid threads and the bids are included in a
determination of how to sell the Lead. The multiple auction
processes are able to enter bids on behalf of a campaign manager
that accepts changes to buying campaigns, a budget manager that
monitors changes to budgets based on time passing or other buying
campaign activity, or a bid manager that accepts live bids from
Lead Buyers through a user interface device.
[0054] In the lead marketplace system and method, the selling
campaigns are assigned a current rating value by the system, such
rating value being calculated through a combination of data
collected from results of a comparison of Lead information to a
customer information database and the rating values assigned to the
Lead by the Lead Buyers. The current rating value associated with a
selling campaign is inherited by each Lead as it is entered into
the system for auction and sale, such rating then being used for
the purpose of determining which buying campaigns qualify for
bidding on the Lead. The initial rating may be enhanced through the
analysis of the information contained in the Lead after the
acquisition of the Lead by the LMP.
QUALITY RATING SCORE DETAILS
[0055] In one embodiment, the ratings described above may be known
as a Quality Rating Score ("QRS") and reflect the relative quality
of a Lead based on the historical performance of the Leads
generated from a seller campaign that is the source of the Lead as
well as an analysis of the specific information included in the
Lead. As described above, in one embodiment, the QRS may include
three Quality Factors ("QF") and is able to accommodate new QF
inputs.
[0056] In the rating system, each QF may receive a weighting that
in aggregate with the other QFs will equal 100. For example, the
validation rate would receive a 25 point weight, the validation
rules would receive a 25 point weight, and the lead buyer survey
would by definition receive a 50 point weight. In that case, the
score from the lead buyer survey would account for half of the
potential QRS. The number of points assigned to a particular QF is
called the Potential Quality Score ("PQS"). In the rating system,
the specific weight assigned to each QF is adjustable between 0 and
100 so that, for example, the relative weighting of the QFs can be
changed based on the market feedback regarding the usefulness and
accuracy of particular QFs.
[0057] In one embodiment, the overall QRS will be associated with a
5-star rating system that is displayed to all buyers and sellers of
Leads in the LMP system user interface. The relationship between
the QRS and the star rating system can be adjustable so that, for
example, the relationship between the QRS and the star ratings
could be changed at any time. If a new Lead is being presented by a
lead seller that does not have any history with the LMP system, the
ratings system may assign a default value to the lead rating that
may be, for example, four stars that would attach to all Leads
generated by the Seller Campaign until appropriate history was
established. Now, each quality factor (QF) that is part of the QRS
is described in more detail.
QUALTIY FACTORS
[0058] The QRS of the ratings system may be made up of one or more
quality factors that may include: historical validation rates,
historical validation reasons, Lead-specific validation reason,
lead buyer surveys, consumer surveys and lead-specific scoring. In
one embodiment, as described above, the QRS may be calculated based
on the validation rate, the validation reasons and the Lead Buyer
surveys.
[0059] The LMP system may allow each of these QFs to be reset by an
authorized representative so that certain data may be purged from
the history that affects the QRS inappropriately. For example, the
validation rate might be exceptionally low as a result of a
technical problem that causes the data to be passed incorrectly for
period of time, therefore causing the rejection of a high
percentage of Leads. The system can thus reset that Validation Rate
QF's history to eliminate the influence of that past data.
VALIDATION RATE DETAILS
[0060] The validation rate is provided by a third-party lead
validation service for the Leads submitted through the Selling
Campaign and the validation rate may be determined by the
validation percentage reported on all Leads in the selling campaign
for the past period of time, such as 90 days. In more detail, each
Lead provided by an selling campaign will be validated by a
third-party lead validation service immediately after the
identification of an appropriate Lead Buyer(s) for a Lead and
before distribution of the Lead to the Lead Buyer(s). If the Lead
is validated, it will be sent to the buyer. If the Lead is
invalidated, it will not be sent to the buyer and instead would be
rejected on post (if a ping post relationship) or left unmonetized
if a post only relationship. The validation rate will be tracked
and reported by selling campaign and presented to sellers of Leads
in a format that will allow the seller to check validation rate
within date ranges specified by the seller. In addition, the 90-day
rolling average validation rate will be presented on the selling
campaign dashboard. The validation rate is determined by dividing
the number of Leads validated by the third-party lead validation
service by the number of Leads on which validation was
attempted.
[0061] The LMP system may provide an interface that would allow for
the validation rate to be tied to a specific score on the 100 point
scale. For example, the following scale may be established: [0062]
<30% validation=10 points [0063] 30-50% validation=25 points
[0064] 50-64% validation=40 points [0065] 65-79% validation=65
points [0066] >80% validation=100 points
VALIDATION REASONS DETAIL
[0067] The validation reasons are provided by a third-party lead
validation service for the Leads submitted through the Selling
Campaign and this score may be determined by calculating the
average score assigned to all Leads in the Selling Campaign for the
past period of time, such as 90 days. In more detail, each lead
provided by an Selling Campaign will be validated by a third-party
lead validation service immediately after identification of an
appropriate Lead Buyer(s) for a Lead and before distribution of the
Lead to the Lead Buyer(s). If the Lead is validated, it will be
validated based on a specific reason. Each reason will be assigned
a score based on our analysis of historical close ratio data that
is tied back to the reasons. The system may provide an interface
that would allow one to define what validation reason ties out to
what score on the 100 point scale.
LEAD BUYER SURVEY DETAILS
[0068] The Lead Buyer surveys may be submitted by the relevant
service providers who purchased the Leads in the LMP. The Lead
Buyer survey would measure the relative quality of the leads as
perceived by the buyers of the Leads. In more detail, the Lead
Buyer surveys may be available to a Lead Buyer in two ways: (1) a
"rate this lead" icon/link will be included in every lead delivery
email and will link to a web page on the LMP that allows for the
completion of the survey, and (2) a "rate this lead" icon will
persist on the Lead Buyer's dashboard both where all leads are
listed and in the details of a particular lead.
[0069] Once a Lead has been rated, the "rate this lead" icon will
be replaced by the actual lead score. To the extent possible (but
not a critical development requirement at launch), the Lead Buyer
should have the capacity to edit the rating for a particular lead
as they get more information about that Lead over time.
[0070] In one embodiment, the LMP system may require that a selling
campaign has a predetermined number, such as thirty, completed
surveys before the Lead Buyer survey score will be considered as
part of the overall rating. The number of completed surveys can be
adjustable.
[0071] The Lead Buyer surveys will request that the Lead Buyer
score each Lead based on a 5-star rating system (through radio
button interface). The survey interface will describe what each
star level means in simple language. As an example, the definitions
could be the following for a new car purchase lead: [0072] 1 Star:
The contact information was not correct (disconnected number, fax
machine, etc.) [0073] 2 Stars: I was able to contact the lead, but
they were not interested in talking with me about the purchase of a
new car. [0074] 3 Stars: I was able to contact the lead and they
were open to talking with me with me about the purchase of a new
car. [0075] 4 Stars: I was able to contact the lead and they were
looking to purchase a new car at some point in the future. [0076] 5
Stars: I was able to contact the lead and they were looking to
purchase a new car in the next 30 days.
[0077] The star rating may then be translated into the following
scores:
TABLE-US-00001 Star Rating Score 1 0 2 10 3 30 4 60 5 100
[0078] The total Lead Buyer score will be determined by averaging
the results for all Lead Buyer surveys received within the past 90
days. The system will round up to the higher star rating if the
average is above the 0.5 of the previous rating level. For example,
an average 2.8 star rating would round to the 3 star rating and
receive 30 points.
[0079] The rating system may enable an authorized personnel to view
the ratings information for the selling campaign and for each
individual Lead (including each lead leg rating) in the system.
Ideally, the admin interface would enable the authorized Reply
employee to "turn off" buyers from being included in the rating
process. The buyer would still be able to rate Leads, but their
ratings would not be used for the rating calculation of the selling
campaign.
CONSUMER SURVEY DETAILS
[0080] The consumer surveys may be submitted by consumers provided
to the LMP through the selling campaign. This survey would measure
the accuracy of the contact information and the level of consumer
intent. In more detail, the consumer surveys may be sent to a
subset of consumers whose contact information is sold through the
LMP. This percentage of consumers that receive the survey would
depend on the number of Leads provided by an selling campaign. To
the extent that an selling campaign has significant lead flow, the
system can rely on a sample of the consumers (bases on statistical
analysis) that will tell the system how many data points are needed
to generate a relevant sample size. In one embodiment, the system
may require a predetermined number, such as 10, surveys to be
completed before the consumer survey score will be considered as
part of the overall rating.
[0081] In one embodiment, the consumer surveys may ask the
following four questions and elicit a yes or no answer (through
radio button interface): [0082] 1. Did you complete a form
requesting [category] information? [0083] 2. Is the contact
information below accurate? [Display submitted contact information
on the form.] [0084] 3. Do you intend to purchase/sell a
[category-specific]? [0085] 4. When you completed the form, did you
want to be contacted by a [type of service provider]?
[0086] The score from the consumer survey will be based on the
responses to the above four questions. Assuming a 100 point scale,
the lead would receive the following score under the following
circumstances: [0087] No to all questions. Score=0. [0088] Yes,
then three No. Score=10. [0089] Yes to #1 and #2, but No to #3 and
#4. Score=30. [0090] Yes to #1, #2, and #3, but No to #4. Score=60.
[0091] Yes to all four questions. Score=100.
[0092] In addition to the survey results, the response rate from
consumers will also be considered in determining the final consumer
survey score. We will determine a baseline response rate that we
expect as the "average" response rate and give a 25% improvement in
the score for all selling campaigns that respond at least 25%
better than average and 25% reduction in the score for all selling
campaigns that respond at least 25% less than average.
LEAD SCORE DETAILS
[0093] The lead score may be provided by a third-party lead scoring
service for the Leads submitted through the Selling Campaign. The
Lead score may be determined by the analysis of the information
provided by the Lead and the application of demographic and
behavioral modeling to the information provided by the Lead. The
lead score may be determined specifically for the Lead or by
calculating the average score assigned to all leads in the Selling
Campaign for the past 90 days.
WEIGHTING DETAILS
[0094] In one embodiment, the rating system may assign a 40% weight
to Validation Rate, a 40% weight to Validation Reasons, and a 20%
weight to the Lead Buyer Surveys. If there are less than thirty
Lead Buyer Surveys for a particular selling campaign, then the Lead
Buyer Surveys receive no weight and Validation Rate and Validation
Reasons are equally weighted factors (50-50%).
[0095] Prior to having any data on validation rates, each selling
campaign will start with a 4-Star rating that will be adjusted over
time as data is collected. The Validation Rate QF and Validation
Reason QF will be triggered once there have been a certain number
of valid leads (changeable within the system) from an selling
campaign, at which point the calculation described below will
determine the applicable QRS for the selling campaign. In one
embodiment, the number of valid leads to trigger those two QFs will
be 30.
FIVE STAR RATING DETAILS
[0096] In one embodiment, the five star rating system may be:
TABLE-US-00002 Star Rating QRS 1 0-19 2 20-39 3 40-59 4 60-79 5
80-100
[0097] The QRS may be determined in the following way:
[0098] 1. Determine which QF is applicable based on minimum
requirements (i.e. Leads or surveys) being met to trigger the
QF.
[0099] 2. Determine the relative weighting of the applicable QFs
based on the QF weighting in place for the system at the time. For
example, if the Validation Rate QF and the Validation Reason QF are
both applicable, but the Lead Buyer QF is not applicable, then the
Validation Rate QF and Validation Reason QF would both get a weight
of 50% (since both had a 40% weight if Lead Buyer QF included).
[0100] 3. Multiply the percentage weight by the total points for
each QF to get a Weighted QF Score. For example, if the validation
rate was 62%, which translates to a score of 40 points, then the
Weighted QF Score would be 20 points (scoring*weight or 40*50%=20
points).
[0101] 4. Sum the Weighted QF Scores for all applicable QFs, which
calculate the QRS.
[0102] 5. Translate the QRS into a Star Rating based on the scale
above.
EXAMPLES OF THE RATINGS
[0103] To illustrate the rating system, three example scenarios are
provided below. These example scenarios are only examples.
[0104] Scenario #1
[0105] An selling campaign has the minimum number of valid Leads to
trigger the validation rate and validation rule QFs, but not enough
to trigger the lead buyer survey QF. Thus, the total QRS will be
determined by Validation Rate and Validation Reason, which will be
weighted 50-50%. Assume that the Validation Rate is 68% (which
translated into a score of 65 points) and the Validation Reason
score is 82. The Validation Rate Weighted QF Score is 32.5
(65*50%). The Validation Reason Weighted QF Score is 41 (82*50%).
The applicable QRS is 73.5, which translates into a Four Star
lead.
[0106] Scenario #2
[0107] An selling campaign has the minimum number of valid leads to
trigger the validation rate and validation rule QFs and the minimum
number lead buyer surveys to trigger the lead buyer survey QF.
Thus, the 40-40-20% weighting above would apply. Assume that the
Validation Rate is 48% (which translated into a score of 25
points), the Validation Reason score is 70, and the Lead Buyer
Survey is 3.4 (which for purposes of the system is a 3 Star
average). The Validation Rate Weighted QF Score is 10 (25*40%). The
Validation Reason Weighted QF Score is 28 (70*40%). The Lead Buyer
Survey Weighted QF Score is 6 (30*0.2). The applicable QRS is 44,
which translates into a Three Star lead.
[0108] Scenario #3
[0109] An selling campaign has the minimum number of valid leads to
trigger the validation rate and validation rule QFs and the minimum
number lead buyer surveys to trigger the lead buyer survey QF.
Thus, the 40-40-20% weighting above would apply. Assume that the
Validation Rate is 35% (which translated into a score of 25
points), the Validation Reason score is 57, and the Lead Buyer
Survey is 2.2 (which for purposes of the system is a 2 Star
average). The Validation Rate Weighted QF Score is 10 (25*40%). The
Validation Reason Weighted QF Score is 23 (57*40%). The Lead Buyer
Survey Weighted QF Score is 2 (10*0.2). The applicable QRS is 35,
which translates into a Two Star lead.
[0110] While the foregoing has been with reference to a particular
embodiment of the invention, it will be appreciated by those
skilled in the art that changes in this embodiment may be made
without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention,
the scope of which is defined by the appended claims.
* * * * *