Make Your Groupon or Deal Put More Money in YOUR Pocket

Deal sites like Groupon, Living Social, or Zozi seem like a great idea:  Using the power of Groupon-like sites and their millions and millions of users, your business gets massive exposure, a boatload of new customers, and the coolness factor associated with one of the hottest Internet companies of the today. It doesn't cost you anything upfront, and it can be budgeted as a marketing expense that only occurs when people buy your product or service.  

In fact, Groupon has many satisfied customers, and you could be one of them. Not so fast. There's also the 'other side' of the story, where some businesses say that Groupon sucks - damaging your brand, drawing the wrong customers, destroying profit. There's even a PC World expose on it. There was even a report published (and covered in HuffPo) that most small businesses hate Groupon.

That brings me to a deal I saw on Yahoo Deals from a music studio. For $20, I could get rehearsal studio time for 3 hours. I'm not even sure if I'm good enough to be called a 'real musician', but at that price it's something I would consider and not feel like I was being too indulgent. As with most deals, if I'm interested, I read more and do a little research to see how shady or reputable a firm is. In this case, I clicked through to the website and found a pleasant surprise. I did have to make a decision on the spot to get that $20 deal. The studio was offering the same price on a web-only special.

It may not be a good deal for the deal company, but it was suddenly a better deal for the studio and for me. Sure, I would get the same price, but now I didn't have to pay ahead of time in the hopes that I might use my deal voucher. At the same time, if I had a charge/transaction problem, I could deal directly with the studio - or have my credit card deal directly with them. The studio, on the other hand, no longer had to give away the 50%+ in the reduced fees that it would receive from the deal, it would be paid immediately when the transaction cleared, and it received free advertising from Yahoo and the originating deal company. Now that's leverage.

This particular studio may be banned from future deals with this deal company, but if they believed that they would end up like other small businesses that hate the deal sites and never use them again, then they haven't really lost much. Even better, the deal was favorable to deal site and non-deal site users, unlike the deal that caused user backlash from FTD.

The limits of crowd-sourced marketing

I met with a few people today and ended up in a "crowd-sourced marketing" discussion. I enjoy the live sharing and discussion, but especially the banter back and forth around an idea. While I do enjoy it, I have colleagues who are dead set against that type of activity - unless they are paid for it.

I completely understand where they're coming from, and they bring up a number of good points. Here are a few:

• You could give them an idea that could save their business
• You should be paid for the good ideas you provide to others
• They may never hire you - "Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free"
• You cheapen your brand by giving so much away

I don't disagree that those points could be true, however I have my own response based upon my experience:

• Ideas are cheap. Without the details and careful thought about implementation, it's very rare that an idea could save a business
• Ideas are only the first of many steps. If you want my details and help with strategy and implementation (the hard part), then I deserve to be paid.
• If someone takes my idea and doesn't hire me, the odds are that they can only implement part of what I've verbalized. There's more to an idea than what you can share in quick meeting.
• My ability to create, position a product or service, or provide valuable ideation comes grows from past experiences including collaboration. Part of my brand is idea generation, then finding a way (scrappy or full blown) to make it happen. 

Do you agree or disagree?

I've heard a number of good ideas which have been followed by poor implementation, poor messaging, or poor positioning, and that has lead me to believe that the details and the implementation matter as much or more than the idea itself.

The more I see the more I believe the statement attributed to Edison holds true "Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration" (source WikiQuote).

So the next time you worry about someone stealing your idea, think about the time, effort, and energy needed to make steal or copy that idea. If they really did implement your entire concept that you gave them - then yes, the person is a douche-bag, but if you just had the idea and never followed up on it, what ownership do you really have?

Disclosure: This discussion is about marketing ideas and does not apply to patents created or owned by me or my employers. Just sayin 8-).

4 Tips for Pitching Analysts to Get Past the BS Filter

The first step is admission. I was an analyst, I admit it, and I appologize for all the bad ones out there. I hope that by providing useful tips and advice, that others may have more successful future interactions with them.

Some people have suggested that the analysts they’ve met either have attitude problems or have not learned the 5 lessons that I listed on my previous blog post. While that may be true, I’ll submit that there may be some key items missing from your marketing toolkit that lead analyst to respond to you the way they do.

Since others have asked me “what do analysts care about?”, I thought I’d frame my answer in terms of key marketing tips for analyst that often apply to the press as well. Oh, if you didn’t know, the analysts are almost always where the press go when writing stories if an analyst covers the space.

Here are some quick tips when pitching an analyst, in no particular order:

1. Why should they care? 
Really, chanting “we’re #1” without justification instantly turns on the bullshit filter for an analyst. Actually, the filter is always on, but it goes from “normal” to “high” if you just cheerlead. What impact is your company and/or product having now, not what might happen the in future. If your future vision doesn’t sync with your current actions or position, there will be a problem
2. What is the current product/topic of discussion’s position?
If you are talking to an analyst about a new product or service introduction, you MUST be able to state a clear and compelling UVP (unique value proposition). If there’s nothing unique and compelling, I wouldn’t care. Why would the analyst care? Of course, a “me too” offering can be news if you’re a $1B+ company entering a market and about to squash smaller competitiors. The value proposition in that case: Resources, massive customer base, long term market analysis and staying power.
3. How does your product/service really compare to other offerings?
No competition? You’re fired, your market doesn’t exist, or your lying. Good analysts know every significant player in a market, but no, a pre-product startup may not qualify. If there’s no one doing it the same way, in the same location, or with the same technology, then you may be re-segmenting an existing market or opening up a niche in an existing market. In either case, there are certainly indirect competitors or even hidden direct competitors
4. Did you visualize your differentiation?
Key skills that marketers need when presenting to analysts is position mapping and visualization. Analyst create reports, charts, and visualizations that the press and Wall Street love to reference. If you’ve ever heard that a picture tells 1000 words, then consider a good position map or visualization your resume to the analyst. In 3 to 10 seconds, the position map or visualization tells the analyst if and how you matter. Sure they might be pleasant to you anyway, but if you don’t have a position map or visual that conveys why you matter, you won’t. Nuff said.

These tips, suggestions, etc. are part of the marketing framework I use when looking at a company and business and prepare them for press or analyst communications. Remember, the press assume that you already have contacted an analyst willing to speak with you or who is familiar with the product. The press will gauge the "news" value of your product or service depending on if an analyst took your meeting to cover the topic, and sometimes the number of analyst informed also telegraphs news value. If you’re doing outreach to the press, the above tips are good homework  to have done. You will need to do additional work to prepare for testimonials and "social proof."

If you have question on this, please comment below, follow me @dkuroda on Twitter, or formspring me on my blog.

When it comes to trust, Industry Analysts rule

I saw an interesting article in IT Marketing World that struck a cord. I had been an Industry Analyst in the past, but since I left that occupation, I have heard numerous engineers, IT folks, and even marketers call Industry Analysts all kinds of unflattering names.

Recently, I spoke with a Marketing Director who referred to analysts as if it was a curse to work with them. I said it was no problem for me, since I used to be one. Now I do not hold Industry Analysts in a position of honor or holiness, but I knew then and still know now that they play an important role for technology markets, and it's just good business to deal with them properly.

Why should you care? The article I linked above sums up the issue - Trust.

The article states that a SiriusDecisions survey found that "Industry Analysts and Peers are the most influential and trusted sources of information", with Industry Analysts scoring nearly 3 percentage points higher.

Of course there are other factors in decision making, and the study also cites "favored sources of content", "influencial sources of content", in addition to "trusted sources". Because trust is only one important factor of many, I won't claim that Industry Analysts are the end-all be-all, however I do have some fond memories of lessons learned from being an analyst and what it took to be a good one:

1. Always have a BS filter - As an analyst, companies were always trying to bend my ear to their way of thinking. It never hurts to question motivations.
2. You can position anything - Analyst are wary of every positioning statement, since every company positions themselves, and smart ones position their competitors. Good analysts know positioning well and that this is just part of the standard pitch.
3. What really matters to the market? - An analyst is paid to think beyond spec wars and get to the issues that really matter to customers and the market.
4. No one operates in a vacuum - No matter how good someone's story sounds, the competition is always moving. Sometimes they may even be ahead.
5. The road to hell is paved with good inventions - One of my favorite lines first told to me by Jim Handy (hi, Jim), as it describes the hope inherent in every company pitch. Companies want to build a product or service that solves a problem. Often they fall short and the best product/service doesn't win. Good marketing, bigger marketing budgets, legal wrangling, misinformation, related product momentum, goodwill, or other factors can determine the winner.

I think that good analysts apply the 5 guidelines above and can provide a truly balanced view with limited biases. When they do, the real issues that matter to customers can be addressed, and they can provide a perspective worthy of trust.

Set your Brand Free, Protect your Trademark

I was fortunate to have the time to attend the Clearvale 2nd Floor series at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View and see the speaker from Lego discuss his social media successes. While the talk was interesting, I especially appreciated how he provoked my thoughts about brands and trademarks.

He said that a trademark has legal protections for color, proportions, usage, and language, but a brand can change based on the actions of the consumers, users, public, and, oh yeah, the company.

I've written legal clauses and trademark guidelines and even sent 'reminders' to firms to use our trademarks with respect. Over the course of several years working with internal legal and marketing teams as well as external partners, it's become clear that a trademark is really that - a symbol or representation with some well defined parameters for use and display.

On the other hand, I've also participated in many discussions about brand. A wise man once told me a brand is not what you say it is, it's what your customers say it is. If you think of it that way, it's easy to separate brand from trademark. You can legally prevent people from using your trademark in incorrect and/or confusing ways, but the way you deal with customers, consumers, and partners determines the brand that people hold in their minds when they think of you.

Is your brand one where you're known for attacking your own customers for trying to promote you? Is your brand one where you encourage your fans to spread the good word but make sure that your fans use your trademarks correctly? Think about that for a moment if you will. How many times have you seen executives or marketing types state "we need to control the brand" only to have the cover up attempt define the people or company as one who covers up errors or mistakes?

So have all the trademarks you need, but work on brand and keep working on it. Your customers are, even if you're not.

Your bag of tricks is worthless

I had a thoughtful conversation with Dave Aune about business expectations when people hire marketers. Dave made an interesting comment that stuck in my mind, "what's in your marketing bag of tricks?". MY bag of tricks? I knew he was joking and goading me onto my soapbox, so I told him he was funny.

Long ago, while running my first marketing department, the company president wanted to understand what my marketing department did. The knowledge sought was simple - What did we do that was growing the company? How did my staff fit into the big picture, and what would happen if staff were cut? Little did I know at the time, but we were about to be acquired, and cutting head count would make us look more attractive.

What I presented was a marketing operations spreadsheets. A 240 row spreadsheet showing all the tasks that my team was doing on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. The list of operational tasks was impressive, and the company president was initially overwhelmed. Later that week, in a discussion with the engineering team, the company president mentioned that I was "working on my bag of tricks". It was the first time someone referred to my marketing as a 'bag of tricks', and it would not be the last.

The notion of a marketing 'bag of tricks' is now one of fastest filters that tells me that someone doesn't understand marketing or suffers from marketing naivete. When someone really believes in a marketing bag of tricks, they almost always hold the unhealthy belief that a marketer has a tactic will always work. That 'it worked once, it will work again' mentality is the bane of sales executives, presidents, and board members over and over again, as a persuasive marketer can use 20/20 hindsight to explain how some marketing tactic worked last year or in their last job, and it will work again. It CAN work, but rarely does as a straight drop in. A bag of tricks suggests that the customers are either being tricked or that the marketer has magic, neither of which seems like a dependable, let alone repeatable business strategy. Instead of hoping for magic, wouldn't it be better if your marketing was based around strategies, systems, and processes that, when applied properly, lead to awareness, action, and conversion? Good marketing applies those strategies, systems, and processes to identify one hit wonders as well as longer term repeatable phenomenons and allows for the application of the right money at the right time.

Markets, and the people that make them, are dynamic, and what's more important than any trick or tactic are the fundamentals behind why that tactic may have worked earlier. The dancing baby worked once, the dancing hamster worked once, tattoos on the forehead worked once, even cavemen worked for a little while. Some campaigns or marketing memes work once, a few times, or can last, but there's no way to guarantee that you can bring a caveman variant to the next marketing campaign at the next company.

It may seem like magic when good marketers are successful repeatedly, but it's not. In fact, good marketers apply processes and a toolkit by which they temper with experience, past lessons, and an understanding of human motivations and behaviors toward a given business goal. Those tools may be applied with expectations for success, but focus on applying tools that generate results which can lead to greater and greater successes. The end result may seem like magic from a bag of tricks, but there is no magic, just insight derived from the proper selection and application of marketing tools, and the willingness to test, cull poor performers, and expand in winning directions.

Dave has heard this rant dozens of times, but I thank him for suggesting it as a blog topic that needed to be covered.

Outrageous Marketing Stunts by the Clueless

Over the course of lunch, I overheard a marketing professional discuss how he needed an outrageous marketing stunt to be successful. The belief was that the stunt would generate a ton of publicity and people would flock to his website. "What short sighted thinking," I muttered to my colleague. "Who would notice, and what would people do when they got to his website?" Sometimes overeager marketers simply grasp at 'standout marketing' without a clue.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a publicity stunt, and they can indeed draw an audience. Heck, I ran marketing for a startup that grew from 254 Google search results to 44,000 results in a less than a week. My team leveraged an outrageous stunt on the stage of an AlwaysOn Hollywood event to hit those numbers. The more outrageous the stunt, the more attention you might grab. But what is the quality of that attention and how does that translate to users or sales?

A few outrageous stunts that come to mind are: the Aqua Teen Hunger Force blinky lights marketing campaign, the woman who tattooed her forehead for a casino, the Tokbox taco truck with free tacos for laid off Yahoo employees, and the giveaway of the Pontiac G6 on Oprah. Each was an interesting and somewhat outrageous marketing stunt, but all yielded mixed results.

To clarify my point, some additional facts are in order. The Aqua Teen Hunger force campaign ran in 10 cities, with little to any market buzz until it shut down the Boston Airport. How many of you cared enough, even after the buzz, to watch Aqua Teen Hunger Force for the first time? The woman who tattooed her forehead got a permanent tattoo and was paid only $10,000. Do any of you remember the woman, what casino sponsored it, or visited that casino? Tokbox, who did the taco truck promotion seven months ago, recently let go 50% of it's workforce, and all the founders left, so it's not clear what the gains were there. The car giveaway on Oprah was a big success for Oprah, but it was Pontiac's idea (no one gave them credit), no one remembers that the car was a G6, and Pontiac is being closed as a division of GM. Looks like memorable stunts that didn't do the job in these cases.

So what's wrong with outrageous stunts? Nothing, but the context, goals, and audience need to be aligned to make the sure the stunt even has a chance at yielding returns. In each of the above examples, the stunts were memorable, but not in ways that increased brand goodwill, drove the right kinds of customers or audience, or yielded leveragable attention.

Just being outrageous may make your memorable, but that's not really the point, is it? As much fame and notoriety you may get for the marketing stunt, you still have to drive adoption, registrations, and/or sales. A stunt for visibility sake is no guarantee of success.