Sorry Vocus and PRWeb, but you sent me to another vendor #vocus #prweb

I really wanted to give PRWeb a chance, but they reminded me of an important lesson.

There's a phrase that B2B startup marketers and salespeople come to expect: "No one gets fired for buying IBM." That phrase has other forms, such as "No one get fired for buying Cisco" and more recently, "No one gets fired for choosing Google."

What the customer is saying in each case, is that time and battle tested vendors with established track records are safe bets. The buyer, or his manager doesn't want the risk of choosing a startup that may not deliver the same level or quality of service.

It's simple really and can be boiled down to a simple formula: pay A get Y

That equation is actually: pay A get Y, Z percent of the time, where Z = a reliability (or trust) factor. For established and trusted vendors, Z is presumed to be 1. There is an implied certainty that the established vendor has survived this long by delivering Y, 100% of the time.

When you're a start-up or less established business, customers don't know what value "Z" is for your company. Start-ups have two main ways do deal with uncertainty in "Z" for customers. Lower A (Charge less) or increase Y (deliver more value). Basically a start-up or less established business can attract customers with lower prices or delivering more value.

I bring this lesson up as I was in the position to evaluate another vendor for press release distribution and my investigation into using PRWeb has proved unfruitful. I know somone at Vocus, who owns PRWeb, and I recalled seeing a note that PRWeb had a partnership with Zemanta which could provide more social media coverage for my release. I researched my options, signed up for an acount, then froze in my tracks due to the menu of choices. I was considering PRWeb's "premium" release, which provided AP distribution for $160 more than their other options for a total of $360, which was less than the $600 I paid for my usual major wire service. After logging in, I saw an option for "Better visibility" for $269 that would give me AP distribution and several other key distribution points. That meant I would pay $629 for better visibility and, it seems, pay for AP twice. I also noticed that the Zemanta distribution that I had wanted was not listed.

So to recap, I originally though I would get Y + Zemanta + other PRWeb social media benefits for a price somewhere less than $600. In reality, there might not be any Zemanta, and I was going to pay $629, and my reliability/trust factor was still less than 1. I would be paying more for less reliability and maybe more features. That confused me, so I asked the salesman: is Zemanta included? and why do I have to pay for AP twice, which I asked for the response in writing. His response, call me. My response - I need it documented, write it down, then I'll call to ask questions. Again, his response: "Call me". Needless to say my time is better spent using an older, but more trustworthy news service.

So thank you, Vocus and PRWeb, for reminding me that no one gets fired for choosing a trusted and established industry leader. In some cases, and this one in particular, it's not worth the risk when your vendor won't document what service they'll provide and even try to you trust them.

Wisdom or Wisecracking of Crowds

I was following up on a report on KNTV where they discussed lawsuits against users who gave bad reviews when I ran into a thread from a reporter on yelp.

The reporter request was ligit, and I even saw the televised broadcast of the special report. The topic seemed important, as any commenter on Yelp or Facebook could be subject to a lawsuit for libel and slander. Worse yet, precedent could be set by any firm able to sway a jury to their way of thinking about online commenting. If anyone on the forum/comment list could be targeted, wouldn’t it be in their best interests to help the reporter?

The problem, it seems to me, was authenticity, familiarity, and reputation. Without any of those three, the reporter didn’t stand a chance of getting the breadth and depth of responses she deserved. The reporter, Vicky Nguyen from KNTV in the SF Bay Area, has a profile on the TV station site here, but even so, that did not help her. Let’s look at some errors that hurt her trust, reputation, and authenticity factors in getting the responses she was requesting.

Authenticity: The reporter made an honest appeal for feedback and introduced herself. She stated that she was a reporter looking for feedback on a story. Her appeal seemed transparent and open, but there was a problem with her appeal. The reporter chose a screen name that I cringed at immediately “KeepItReal I”. I’ll simply say that the name sounds like someone is trying too hard, but in the interests of brevity, I’ll stop there.

Familiarity: While the reporter did not commit the complete noob error of FPHR (First post help request), she did not have a long enough history of participation on the site or engagement with other users that people could trust that username was not a joke. Sometimes trust can be gained just by familiarity, but there is little you can do to remedy a new, young, or lightly engaged account.

Reputation: Closely tied to Familiarity, Reputation frames how users act with you or toward you. As the sum total of your experiences with the site, your reputation helps others categorize you as a lurker, commenter, value-adder, conversationalist, influencer, leader, troll, or even spammer. If the reporter’s reputation was one of influencer or leader, she may have received the feedback she needed. Without the right reputation and a history of belonging, it’s much easier to dismiss comments by a typical lurker as those of a troll or spammer.

Due to the the above factors, it was unlikely that the “wisdom of the crowds” would play out, and, in fact, the reverse happened. The online responders made innuendos, jokes, and otherwise ignored the ligitimate request for help from the reporter. The response amounted to nothing more than the wise-cracking of the crowds, which may be the expected response for attempting leverage unfamiliar communities.

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.