Update on Magic Rating Patient Review Software

/Update on Magic Rating Patient Review Software

Update on Magic Rating Patient Review Software

We’re excited to announce that the majority of our clients are now using Magic Rating – our software that helps aesthetic practices build their positive online reviews – and they’ve been having a lot of success.

If you’re unfamiliar with Magic Rating, you can check out www.magicrating.com to learn more and demo the software. If you’re unfamiliar, the software uses two modes, email or kiosk mode, to request feedback, from 0 to 10. Based on the rating, the client receives a follow up email either thanking them and then asking them for a review on Google+ or Real Self, or if the feedback was negative, the patient gets a different email from the practice essentially asking how they can make it better (with no request for a review).

We launched Magic Rating back in December of 2016, and in May of 2017 I wrote an article outlining our clients’ progress. In that article, I gathered and assessed the data available at the six month mark. I found that, for our top 3 clients (based on NPS), who had also sent out at least 500 feedback requests, the results were…

  • NPS (Net Promoter Score based on 1-100): 86.67
  • Average feedback requests sent: 1,301
  • Average open rate of feedback request emails: 52.9%
  • Average feedback rate (percentage of patients who leave feedback): 4.41%
  • Average New Reviews (on Google, Real Self, etc): 23

Now, almost one year since launching Magic Rating, I’m reassessing our clients’ progress. Again, I only want to evaluate our top 3 practices that have sent out at least 500 feedback requests. Our top 3 practices had…

  • NPS: 85.66
  • Average feedback requests sent: 1,350
  • Average open rate: 51.33%
  • Average feedback rate: 13.45%
  • Average New Reviews: 21

You can see that the most recent data is very similar to the six month data, with the only metric seeing any significant movement being the feedback rate (percentage of those who were sent feedback requests actually giving feedback). That more than tripled, which is great.

If we evaluate ALL clients using Magic Rating we can see that the average NPS is just above 74. The feedback rate is 13.51 (on par with our top 3 clients), and the average reviews is above 28…

magic rating update Nov 2017

Click or tap to enlarge image

Could your practice benefit from more reviews? Would that improve your social proof and your brand? Your SEO? Of course it would! What if I told you this software was FREE for all Turbo clients? Then it becomes a no-brainer, right?

You can learn more about the software by visiting www.magicrating.com to sign up for your free demo. Feel free to drop us a line here or call 877-673-7096 x2 to connect with us with any questions about Magic Rating or marketing in general.

By | 2017-11-07T13:05:11+00:00 November 17th, 2017|Medical Reviews, News, Practice Reputation|0 Comments

About the Author:

Tom joined Matt in 2010, helping co-found Turbo Medical Marketing. As COO, Tom oversees all production and works directly with both the executive team and the Account Managers. Tom has helped to formulate systems and processes for sales, business development, internal marketing, service offerings, client intake, and employee hiring and training. You can get a sense of Tom's marketing knowledge, as well as pick up some marketing tips and insights, by checking out the Turbo blog that he contributes to weekly. Tom has also spoken at several aesthetic conferences in the past about topics ranging plastic surgery technology to mobile marketing. Tom received his B.A. in Business Management Economics from the University of California at Santa Cruz. He is a former collegiate rugby player and he enjoys golfing, snowboarding, hiking, and playing with his dog Yogi in his spare time. He's also a mentor with the Big Brothers, Big Sisters program in Charleston. Tom lives with his wife Lindsay in Mt. Pleasant, SC.

Leave A Comment

Call Email Portfolio Reviews
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.