In my previous posting I talked about Cloud Computing and some of its benefits.  I also stated that cloud computing is NOT for every company and that one should carefully evaluate any vendor who offers cloud computing.

Here are three (3) critical questions; there are others, but if you do not good responses from these, there is no need to pursue the topic any further:

One:  How scalable is the vendor’s offering and how easy is it to scale?  Is there a limit to the number of users or application/per user?  What does one have to do to add another user or equally important add another application AND more users?  What is required to reduce the number of users or applications?

Two: What is the cost structure?  Is the vendor’s cloud computing price based on a utility basis such as cost per user or cost per minutes or cost per transaction?  Does the vendor incur the cost of all the required equipment and applications or does the buyer pay or lease some or all of it? Is the utility cost (if that is the basis) linear or are there certain levels where the cost/utility changes? Are there penalties for not using your “minutes” or “bits”?  Be careful and as they say, read the fine print.

Three: What is covered in the Service Level Agreement (SLA)?  Do not assume that uptime, performance and availability are the only items that need to be covered in a SLA. For instance, what happens if an application goes offline or crashes…is there a backup or a recovery capability available?

Another concern, Is the vendor providing just bandwidth and not applications under the SLA?

Bottom line, cloud computing is not anywhere near what is being promoted and if one does not do their due diligence, you may actually be worse off after signing up for cloud computing then before. So look up, is it a sunny cloud or a rain cloud?

If you would like more information about cloud computing send me an email (dick.lush@firealarmmarketing.com) or Contact Us.

RHL 3/1/11

The social media press has been having a field day with the NY Times revelation that J. C. Penny used questionable tactics to boost their recent Google ratings.  See http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/business/13search.html for the details.

This news led me to think more about the necessity and value for a B2B company to be ranked first in Google search.  Is it worth the time, effort and expense?  There is little doubt about the value of a number one ranking (http://insights.chitika.com/2010/the-value-of-google-result-positioning/) but much of this data is driven by consumer, not B2B products.  Nor is there any doubt that B2B buyers are searching for vendors, reflecting the shift in power created by the Internet.  But, if there is a motivated buyer, won’t he/she examine the first page of findings?  What is the probability that he/she will stop after looking at #1?

A Google search titled “value of Google ranking #1 for B2B” turned up 392,000 responses.  While I didn’t examine each one, most were articles or blogs on how to achieve a number one ranking.  What I would like to see is a balanced A/B test, showing the ROI for Company A, who achieved a number 1 ranking and Company B, who was listed last on the first page.  I don’t think it exists…yet.

That said, what follows is subjective opinion, based on discussions, reading and experience.

• As noted above, power has shifted from the seller to the buyer.  Buyers, both consumer and business, are using the Internet to find out about vendors.
• Most B2B buyers will look for a minimum of three vendors for comparison purposes.  They may have one or two already in mind, and will look for a third (and possibly a fourth) to help create a truly competitive environment.
• B2B buyers have an inclination to purchase locally.  If they can find what they need in their city/state this will tip the scales.  Domestic vendors are preferred to ones offshore, unless the price difference makes up for the shipping costs.
• For the B2B buyer, once a vendor is found via search, the key is web site navigation.  If the buyer is looking for a specific item, he/she doesn’t want to go through 12 clicks to find it.  The landing page MUST BE intuitive to finding product/services.  (In other words, scale back the pretty pictures of people, the mission statement and the latest press release on the landing page.)
• In getting to 3-4 vendors, a motivated business buyer will go through the first, and maybe even the second page, skipping listings that are related but that do not answer his search.

Advice to B2B companies:

• A good web site is mandatory…something well beyond placing your brochure on the web.
• The incremental SEO cost to achieve a number one ranking is probably not worth it…but every effort should be made to ensure placement on the first page.
• Equally important is the navigability of your web site.
• Continually testing of your web site as to ranking and navigability is required, goal is best-in-class.
• Going forward, an analysis of your competitor’s web sites is just as important as an analysis of the product, and how it is different from yours.

Search engine optimization gets a lot of attention, some good and some bad.  For the B2B vendor the focus of SEO should be that they are listed on the first page and that their web site is well constructed.

What have been your experiences?

RHM -  2/24/2011

In my last posting, I talked about a number of critical considerations/ activities that one must review when selecting to use an indirect channel. As I have said in other postings regarding channels  make sure you have an overall strategy and ask; will this channel selection support this strategy?  I then talked in more detail about the financial considerations and how this will have a great impact on the type of indirect method one chooses.

Personally, I believe the most critical consideration in implementing and maintaining an indirect channel of distribution is the partner programs.   The partner programs can be broken down into three major components. One, the strategy on why an indirect channel or partnership, two, the partnership selection process and three, the actual partnership programs.

Let’s look at these in more detail

Partnership Strategy:   What is the corporate strategy and will going indirect support this strategy?  Are you selecting indirect for added sales coverage, augmenting your product or service lines, augmenting a technology you do not have, or seeking to add specific skill sets from the distributor and or reseller? Whatever the case, make sure you understand the overall objective because in the long run if you do everything else and it doesn’t match your strategy, it will be nothing more than a waste of time and money.

Partnership selection: Assuming that everyone understands the strategy and how indirect will support this strategy, then the selection process is the next critical step. Selecting partners should be like conducting an interview for key positions within your company.  Some major areas to investigate are the following:

1-      What is the potential partner’s strategy and does it align with yours?

2-      Will this partner augment your product or service line or will he compete with you?

3-      Does this partner have the skill sets to sell your product or service?

4-      Does this partner have the support functions to provide best-in-class services?

5-      Does the partner’s territory/ coverage add or conflict with your territories?

6-      Will the compensation plan fit within you current sales force’s plans or if there is no direct sales force will the financials make it a win- win for each party?

7-      How well will the partners’ marketing function fit with your company’s marketing?

8-      Will the partner’s brand add or detract from your branding activities?

Partnership Programs:  Some of the programs that a best-in-class should contain are the following:

1-      Rules of engagement for your company and the distributors and resellers

2-      Well defined territory coverage for your company and the indirect partners

3-       Policies on demo units/loaners

4-      Policy on escalation and returns

5-      Warranty coverage, who, when and how long

6-      Volume, discount structure and are there any incentives

7-      Well defined joint marketing activities

9-      Promotional programs  (Push and Pull)

10-   Funding,  who funds what and when

11-   Schedule regarding investments in major activities  and mutual related  metrics

12-   Executive liaison for both parties

13-   Collateral for products and services that are tailored for the distributor and resellers

14-   Tradeshows/events/venues

As one can see going indirect requires a lot of planning and joint activities.   Indirect channels should be a true partnership not a vendor- reseller agreement.

If you would like more detail on areas of consideration for indirect or any other channels; give me a call (508-838-1073) or visit our Contact US.

RHL 02/22/11

In talking with clients and potential clients, Dick and I see  companies that are making “mistakes.”  These are common regardless of size, maturity level, or industry.  The most frequent that we see are: (not in any order)

• Not cultivating the installed base.   Too many companies remain in the “kiss and sell” era.  They forget that their customers are a valuable resource. Key opportunities come from:
  • Up selling to the newest and latest release.
  • Mining the installed customer base for case studies, testimonials and referrals.
  • Establishing relations with new hires in the customer base, who may become decision makers.
  • Using social media (like LinkedIn) to see where ex-employees have landed and following up with them.

• Using the wrong mix of new and old tools.  Some B2B companies are reluctant to adopt social media tools.  Others have gone too far in that direction.  The key is to understand which of the new tools best suits reaching and interacting with your customers and then implementing it.  We advise:
  • Poll your customers to see what resonates with them.  (The assumption here is that future customers will mirror existing customers.)
  • Measure the effectiveness of your current tools, i.e., which tool generates the greatest number of leads, which one reaches your customers, which ones don’t work.  Cut back on the ones that don’t work, increase the investment in those that do.
  • If your customer base is migrating toward some of the new tools, go with them, don’t fight it.

• Not training everyone in the company on the corporate message.  Today almost everyone is using some form of social media.  Inevitably they will tweet, blog or comment about where they work, the products/service, the management, etc.  It is important that everyone be on the same page.  We advise:
  • Make sure that there is a written policy about the use of social media.  It shouldn’t be long or complicated, but should outline the “dos & don’ts” of employee use.  This should be read and signed by each employee annually.
  • Train the customer service personnel, who are often a primary contact point with customers, about the corporate message.
  • Train those involved with Public and Analyst relations on the same message.
  • Train all “C” level executives on the message – No one is exempt.
  • Implement listening of social media for comments about your company, and have a documented, well understood, and tested reaction plan in the event of a crisis.  Remember, you won’t have much time to think how to react, and you must react quickly.  How the NFL is handling the screw-up of sold, but no seats available, Super Bowl tickets is an example.

• Rushing to introduce a product before it is ready.  While Google pioneered the concept of introducing “Beta” versions, on the whole these were well tested, functional products.  Those that have been pulled (Buzz et al) have been the result of market demand, not technical limitations.  We see some companies that are trying to beat their competition by releasing products with limited features or incomplete testing.  In most cases these products fail.  We advise:
  • Unless you are the size of Goggle, forget about the “Beta” concept.  Develop, test and release the product in its normal course.  Don’t force an incomplete product to market early.
  • When launching a product, make sure that the whole system, i.e., sales, marketing, customer service, finance, etc. is ready for the launch.  Having a new customer call customer service and hearing that they don’t know about a product (or problem) is a no-no.
  • Don’t anticipate a hockey stick revenue increase.  99% of products grow slowly.  Very few things rocket up.  Setting unreachable expectations, even when you have great market research results, is a dangerous path.
  • If you choose to go the “Freemium” route, make sure that you fully tested the appeal of the Premium product, and can extrapolate from the “Freemiums” that you ship to a profitable position.  Additional, if this is offer is part of a product line, make sure you fully understand its impact on the whole product line, not just the Premium offer.

• Not resolving the definition of a qualified lead with Sales.  Both Marketing and Sales are under pressure to produce.  It is too easy for the functions to get into a finger pointing contest about who and what. (Ever watch brothers or sisters fight?)  The point is that an agreed upon definition isn’t that hard, what is hard is to stick to it over the course of a year when revenue goals aren’t being met.  Note that the definition of a qualified lead is seldom an issue when sales are growing month over month.  We advise:
  • Establish an agreed upon definition, and mutually present this to the CEO/COO.
  • Establish goals for marketing to provide qualified leads.
  • Establish procedures and feedback mechanisms on how Sales is going to handle the leads, including lost sales reports.
  • Set a 6 month milestone meeting where each function reports on how they met their goals and what needs to be done to improve the process.

• Waiting too long to make a change.  Of all the mistakes that we see, this is perhaps the most common and most troublesome. It expresses itself as Marketing management being wedded to a philosophy or approach that is detrimental, if not fatal to the company.  This could be a failure to push for a new product to replace the “cash cow,” the continuation of a campaign that is old and getting decreasing responses, or not reacting as the product and market matures by changing the distribution model mix (indirect vs. direct for example), etc.  We advise:
  • As CMO, if you haven’t made a significant change in the past 24 months, (re-doing the website doesn’t count) do so, or your successor will have that privilege.
  • Choose only one thing to change at a time, so choose wisely.

What problems have we missed?

Comment below or send me a note at Contact US.

2/9/2011  -  RHM

If you are considering selling your product or service via an indirect channel (when you sell your product or service to an intermediary or middleman, who then sells it to the end user) there are numerous considerations that you must examine. As I have said in other postings make sure you have an overall strategy and ask; will this channel selection support this strategy?    Most people think that companies select indirect channels because they are less expensive to use and support than having your own direct sales force (your product or service is sold by your sales people directly to other enterprises or end users). Again, depending on your strategy, you might use indirect for sales coverage, augmenting your product line, or augmenting a technology you don’t have or to improve your brand awareness. In any case understand the main objectives first.

As for other considerations, be prepared to have thoroughly thought-out the following items (not a complete list but a good start):

• What are your partner programs (things like engagement rules, incentives, joint marketing, financials, etc)?
• What are your criterions for selecting partners (territory, skills, products, and name, just to list a few)?
• What products or services will the partners carry for you; do they already carry your competitor’s products or services?
• How will the partners and your direct sales force interact (will they compete or augment each other)?
• Is your product or service too complex for certain types of partners to handle?
• Financially, will you and your partners make any profit (Do you have sufficient margin built into your product to support this channel)?

Let’s explore the last item (financial considerations) in more detail, because at the end of the day, most companies are in the game to make money and if this can’t happen then the rest is academic (there are cases, particularly in a start-up mode, where getting your name out there is initially more important than making a profit, but let’s look at the other situations).

To go indirect, which can be two or three tier (you and a reseller or you, a distributor and a reseller) each company wants to make a profit.   So a key question for you is, is there enough margin to “share” it with your partners.  Example, let’s say you have a product that cost you $20 to manufacture and the average sell price (ASP) is $50, thus a profit of $30 and 60% margin ( in reality there are other costs ,but for discussion purposes we will keep it simple). In the direct model you will enjoy the $30 and show a profit. 

In the indirect model, each intermediary will want to have some profit also. Depending on the overall situation the intermediaries will ask for a percentage off the ASP so they can sell the product at a profit. The range varies greatly, but it is not uncommon for it to be anywhere from 20% to 60% off of ASP or list.

So with you are two tiered, can you afford to give, let’s say 40% off of the ASP in this example? Is a $10 profit okay for your company?   Now about the three tier situation.

Usually one assumes that the intermediaries have to sell the product for less than the manufacturer (unless they have some unique value propositions).  So given this assumption, let’s see what the margins look like now.              

                                Reseller sells for                               $45.00

                                Reseller buys for                              $40.00                   Reseller Margin                12%

                                Distributor sells for                          $40.00

                                Distributor buys for                         $30.00                   Distributor Margin           25%

                                 Manufacturer sells for                     $30.00

                                 Manufacturer cost                          $20.00                   Manufacturer Margin    34%

 Critical point is does one have enough margins for everyone to go indirect.  As you can see going with the indirect model poses some unique considerations and if they are not explored in detail not only will you lose money, but your creditability and customers.

If you would like more detail on areas of consideration for indirect or any other channels; give me a call (508-838-1073) or visit our Contact US.

RHL 02/08/11

From Wikipedia:

“The Emperor’s New Clothes” (Danish: Kejserens nye Klæder) is a short tale by Hans Christian Andersen about two weavers who promise an Emperor a new suit of clothes that are invisible to those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the Emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes, a child cries out, “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!” The tale has been translated into over a hundred languages.[1]

Pasted from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor’s_New_Clothes>

Recently, on days ending with a “y,” I feel that many B2B Chief Marketing Officers (CMOs) are like the Emperor, and that social media vendors and supporters are the weavers.  They conjure up out of thin air meaningful tapestries of “hits” “bounces” “likes” “followers” “re-tweets” “viewed” and cover them with a cloak of viral.  If I were a B2B CMO and dressed with all this finery I would indeed feel proud and assured when meeting my peers…for they will be able to see how well-dressed I am.

For the B2B CMO who believes this, he will rapidly undressed when the CEO says, “You do look nice today, but tell me how you have helped to generate revenue”  Responses relating to building the Brand, and Brand recognition, along with success with key demographics tend to get tossed aside like dirty clothes thrown in the hamper.  Comments about selective pruning of leads, enhancing the quality of the pipeline, resulting in a large group of potential customers being nurtured via the new marketing automation system tend to appear like clothes that you slept in.  In short, from the point of view of contributing to revenue, “you aren’t wearing anything at all.”

What the B2B CEO wants is increased revenue.  To this end he has his foot on the neck of the VP of Sales, who in turn is saying one of two things; (1) I could close more business, but my team has to spend most of their time prospecting, or (2) Most of the leads we get are old, tired or not qualified. This leaves the B2B CEO with an impression that Marketing is not doing its job.  In this scenario the only solution is for Marketing to deliver an increasing number of qualified leads to the sales organization, month after month.  (This assumes that Sales and Marketing agree upon what is a qualified lead.)

Any other metric beyond a Month-Over-Month increase in qualified leads is like the Emperor’s new clothes, i.e. invisible.  The B2B CMO can, and should, request that he be copied on all lost sales reports so that he can judge the quality of the leads and establish a feedback loop to success.  However, in my experience the sales organization that has the time to focus on writing lost sales reports has one foot out the door.

The bottom line of most businesses in America is profitability.  There are millions of way this can be achieved, but they all boil down to selling your product for more than it costs you to make, distribute and service it.  Selling it requires finding buyers who have a need, and convincing them that your product/service fills that need.  Growth comes from finding more buyers.  Profitability comes from controlling your costs as you grow, or cutting them if your revenue is flat.   One of Marketing’s roles is to find new buyers and pass this information along to sales.

Great marketing organizations provide month-over-month increases in qualified leads.  Good ones do so most of the time.  We need not worry about the ones that don’t, as they a finely dressed in today’s new clothes.

What are you wearing today?

RHM  2/4/2011

Facebook’s revenue estimates for 2010 were in the range of $1B to $1.5B  One source of Facebook’s revenue is from Ads.  Given there are 600 million plus people on Facebook and that it’s and growing at a rapid rate, the potential for record breaking revenues in 2011 is very possible.  So if you would like to be a part of this record, why not place an ad on Facebook and not only enjoy being part of the record but also realize some revenues of your own!

Placing a Facebook ad is very easy;   just create a compelling offer, think of a very short tag line (along with an icon or some form of a graphic to go with the text) link the ad to your web site, sit back and let the dollars roll in.

Oh, I forgot, you need to input your customer profile which will provide an estimate of your Facebook audience, assuming that people are not concerned about privacy and have filled in this section accurately (not very good customer segmentation).

Oh, I forgot, you have to pick a price range or limit per day on how much you want to pay for each time someone opens your ad.

Oh, I also forgot to mention, you are competing with thousands of other companies and you have very limited ad space to get your point across, so compose wisely.

Oh, another thing, your product better be the only one in the world, very consumer oriented and have a finely tuned audience.

Oh, and since you are running your ad at the same time that thousands are, be prepared to run it for years before you get an actual hit.

Oh, make sure you email all the 600 million users that you have an ad and that they should sit in front of their computer and sort through the ad section until they see your ad.

Oh, be prepared to tweak your ad when you get no inquiries.

Oh, be prepared to receive a suggestion to increase your spend rate to improve your hit rate (probably increase the rate from zero).

Oh, if the this is your first time  running a Facebook ad, and the results are not good,  have enough dollars to run the ad again because you will think the second time is a sure thing ( this will prove to be wrong but you will do it anyways).

If these are too many Ohs, with less than favorable results, I have a better suggestion, don’t fall into this money sink, either donate your dollars to your favor charity or makes some phone calls (good old sales 101) to potential clients.  Until the next white elephant, happy marketing.

RHL 2/1/11

Blame it on the repetitive snow storms, the cold, or the blahs of January.  I feel compelled to spout off about a number of subjects:

• Self proclaimed experts.  In the Social Media/Digital 2.0 world a self proclaimed expert pops up every 15 minutes.  Malcolm Gladwell had it right in this book The Outliers where he said that it takes 10,000 hours to become an expert.  One more blog or article about the need to listen, act and integrate social media by some 20+ year old blogger will convince me that the millennials never learned about plagiarism.  I would settle for one good report that tightly links repeatable social media actions to sales by a B2B company whose products sell for over $50K each.  (By tightly I mean, I did this digitally and as a result this specific sale occurred, not that we listened, responded and our overall revenue went up 10 %.)

• The assumption by the social media “experts” that the same tactics used in B2C apply to B2B. Listen up!  B2B is different than B2C.  Any time a company is going to put out 6 or 7 figures for something, and that something is tied to a person or committee in the company, they want to see, hear, and talk to a person…directly.  Yes the significant influencer will do research on the Web.  Yes, they will appreciate “nurturing” emails as they progress through the buying cycle, but at the end of the day the person/committee making the decision wants to sit across the table from a person, have him/her look them in the eye, and talk about the product.  A corollary to this action is that many buying companies want “one throat to choke” and they cannot choke a plug in the wall.

• Providing a value add.  It appears that fewer and fewer companies are providing a true, differentiated value add.  Most companies seem to feel that they can or should offer something that is similar to what is already in the market, and then gain revenue and profit by exploiting a distribution, service or promotion flaw in the market leader.  I recognize that many “first movers” fail, and that being second in a market is a valid strategy, but being 4^th, 5^th or 6^th speaks to either unbelievable hubris or stupidity.  How some of these companies get funding or resources remains a mystery.  If you have a fully differentiated product, go for it.  If you are planning to be a “me too” go back to the drawing board.

• Most buyers are smarter than sellers think. It took less than 2 years for B2B buyers of software to realize that the later in the month/ quarter that they negotiate their purchase, the bigger discount they get.  Buyers quickly learn about, and subsequently reject, ploys to get them to part with their money.  Three things count for a B2B buyer:

• • Does the product do what I want it to do?  (References are key here.)
  • Do I respect the seller and do they respect me? (Personal contact required here.)
  • How long have they been in business and what is their reputation? (Due diligence required.)

The buying company will use the Internet to get some of the information to answer these questions, but in order to               achieve the emotional comfort that is part of the purchase, a person has to be part of the equation.  Note that often price is number 6 or 7 on a list of key criteria.

• Being polite.  People made fun of the way IBM used to enforce a dress and behavior code.  But their salespeople always showed up “presentable” and conveyed an image of respect, helping propel IBM into profitable leader.  It is  not clear that today’s sellers of $100K+ software packages or hardware project the same image or give the same impression, either by their dress or the way they act, with the resulting negative impression reflecting back on their companies.  For some it seems acceptable to show up in jeans and a black T-shirt and say, “Dudes, glad to see you guys here.  Sorry I am late, can you wait a few moments while I get my x%#**g presentation hooked up and by the way do you have any Diet Coke?”  Sure, I am going to give this guy’s company $250K over the next three years.

As someone has said, the only constant is change.  However, underneath the change remain certain bedrock principles of trust, respect, responsibility and doing what is right.  It goes without saying that the higher the value of the transaction, the more important these principles are.  Personally, I don’t know of any way these can be accurately conveyed over the Internet…a knowledgeable, articulate presentable person is required.

I have to go snow-blow my driveway for the 12^th time this month and put another log on the fire.  Your thoughts?

RHM  1/27/2011

We all know the old expression; “you learn something new every day!”   Well, I think this one will be interesting to many readers.   According to a number of surveys that questioned marketers in the B2B environment on what marketing activities were very effective in providing leads, tradeshows, yes tradeshows, were very high on the list.  Marketing Profs’ survey, B2B Marketing Today found that 40.1% indicated that tradeshow were highly effective in generating leads. Google’s 2011 B2B Marketing Outlook found that 28% of marketing budgets are for tradeshows.

To be honest, my first reaction was, “who did they talk to come to this conclusion?”  But after taking a deep breath, I did some “research” of my own.

Consider the follow factors that have an impact on tradeshows:

1-      Tradeshows used to be a “get together”, a chance to catch up, exchange resumes for attendees and booth duty/sales/show management personal.  Granted there was real business being done for the show and lots of preparation for it, but in past years most shows were more oriented towards a “reunion atmosphere”.  With the economic down turn, it became an act of God to go to a show from the vendor side.  As for the attendees, it was basically the same situation.  So on the positive side, this major constraint has caused vendors to be very focused and provide real value, make important announcements, and thus shows have become a better value. On the attendee side, those showing up have specific purposes, like a real intent to get information, seeking specific product or service data, and a tradeshow is one way to accomplish this.  These forces have resulted in better qualified leads (potentially more leads even if the funnel is now smaller).

2-      While, the absolute number of tradeshows and attendance is on the decline, the ones remaining are either of better quality (content) or specific (like pharmaceutical)  or niche  industries (like needle pointing)  Thus companies are now utilizing tradeshows to marquee their company/brand and offerings for certain types of buyers.

3-      While digital marketing activities are becoming a bigger piece of the marketing budget, there still is some concern about their effectiveness, reluctance to change, and the lack of a track record with new metrics to help justify the related expenses.

4-      While the Internet has become a source of information about companies, products, and services, it also provides a great way to get the message out and a quick glimpse of what you might see about a company or products at an upcoming tradeshow.  Thus some of the potential savings from the traditional promotional activities can be put into the actual shows themselves.

5-      Lastly tradeshows still provide the best lead generation activity, the sales person!  Tradeshows provide in one place an opportunity to make numerous “sales calls” and start or build relationships.

A few key points:

A-     Do not always jump to new technologies just for technology sake.  Look at what is appropriate for your company and products and how it supports your overall marketing strategy.

B-      The issue regarding tradeshows is not about; “is this the correct amount to spend?”, but “how do tradeshows fit into our overall marketing mix and is there an integrated plan that tradeshows support and are supported for overall maximum impact?”

See you at the next tradeshow.

RHL 01/25/11

Pasted below is an email I received earlier this week.  In it, I am “uninvited” to attend a seminar where I registered on-line.  Mac called me and then sent the email.  In our conversation he indicated that since I was an “agency,” I wasn’t invited, and that Silverpop had done a poor job of screening their email list.  Here is the email:

Dear Bob,

Sorry for inviting you then asking you not to show up. And thanks for
being so gracious about being uninvited.

We didn’t realize you were with an agency, or we would not have extended
the invitation in the first place. Our bad.

Thanks much for your understanding.

Sincerely,
Mac

———————————-
M. H. (Mac) McIntosh
AcquireB2B – Driving leads & sales with marketing automation
Email: mcintosh@acquireb2b.com
Phone: +1.401.234.4406
Website: www.acquireb2b.com

Executive Breakfast Briefings:
What B2B Marketing Automation is all about, and why you should care
1/26 Boston/Waltham, 1/27 New York City
Details & complimentary registration here

AcquireB2B  - A division of Mac McIntosh Inc.
601 Pendar Rd., North Kingstown, RI 02852-6620 USA

And here are the major problems with Mr. McIntosh’s attempt to conduct business.

1. Fire Alarm Marketing is a consulting firm, not an agency.  If he took the time to find out about us, he might recognize that I could be a valuable agent in referring what he does/sells.  His loss.
2. If he is so concerned about “agencies” attending his seminars, what exactly is it that he is doing or selling?  If it is so tenuous that attendance at a seminar puts his intellectual property at risk, just how worthwhile is it?
3. Since he also rejected my partner Dick Lush for the same reason, but by leaving a voice message, does he really care about people/companies?  At a minimum I would think a direct conversation is required when “uninviting” someone.

Lessons Learned:

1. If you are going to buy a mailing list, test it before sending out repetitive broadcast messages.  I received 3 emails before I signed up.  Had Mac done so, he would have recognized that “agencies” were on the list.  What does this say about Mac’s knowledge of B2B business and automation?
2. If what you are promoting can’t stand up to scrutiny or comparison, go back to the drawing board and develop something that is significantly different.  The Internet is about transparency.  Trying to position yourself by excluding people goes against the grain.
3. If a mistake is made, don’t attempt to undue it in an awkward manner, go with it and learn from your error.

Have you or your company had an experience like this?  How was it handled?  How should it have been handled?

RHM   1/20/2011