Boiler Room Marketers – You’re Doing It Wrong

Boiler Room Marketers – you’re doing it wrong.

Yesterday, I received an email from someone claiming their company was the “#1 education property on the internet.”

Aside from checking my phone to make sure the year wasn’t 1999, I had a good chuckle imagining the copywriting genius it took to compose that gem. Strike one.

As I read further, this person invoked the name of my boss (the president of our college) and referenced a letter he had FedEx’d him (“wow – would you look at that – a Western Union Telegram!”), in order to elicit a sales call with me on their product. For those playing along at home, we call this “strike two.”

Examining the missive even closer, I noticed that there were two different font faces (and sizes) where the person had cut and pasted the boilerplate into the message, but forgot to correct the capital “U” (where he started to type “University”, but instead wrote “UCollege”). Strike three. Next batter, please.

Look – we all have jobs to do. It’s a never ending “arms race” to get past gate keepers, and in front of decision makers. I get it. We all get it.

Pulling cheap marketing stunts (a FedEx letter? Really?) isn’t the way to endear your way into a bona fide sales call.

And, if you’re gonna cut and paste some horrific copy, please make sure that you at least get our / my name right and the style matches.

But – and for me, most importantly – don’t claim a relationship with people in my organization that you obviously don’t have (and can be checked with a text, email, or call – which I always do when someone makes a claim of a prior relationship).

Spotting amateur hour is an occupational hazard in any managerial position. At the very least, make it look like you’re trying.

The Cobbler’s Children Have No Shoes

You know the old saw.

“The Cobbler’s Children Have No Shoes.“

Same’s been true with me and updating my own marketing material lately.

To correct that, I’ve been playing around with Animoto this week (http://www.animoto.com).

Verdict: Me like. Me like lots.

Anyway, here’s the result:

iPhone Apps

Android Apps

Blackberry Apps

Year’s End

I know most people look forward to the last two weeks of the year.

As the owner of a small business, I’ve always looked at these last two weeks of the year with Trepidation… and with Hope.

Trepidation, in that even with folks flitting to and yon for the holidays, I still have people depending upon me to bring home the bacon – regardless of merry making.

And with Hope for the coming new year, and the unwritten promise it brings.

May you and yours have a safe and happy holiday season.

And may the coming year fulfill the promise of better days ahead for us all.

Slow on the Uptake… Or, Why I Suck At “Where’s Waldo”

Over the weekend, Rodney Rumford called me to tell me that I was on the inside flap of Seth Godin’s new book, Tribes.

I had submitted my avatar some months back and had totally forgotten to check the book when it came out to see if I made the cut.  Three months late is better than never.

I’m on the third column from the left, seven down.  Big giant cartoon head.  Can’t miss me.

Seth Godin's Tribes

Where Are Your Markets?

I had a conversation with a friend today about the changing business of software services.  I’ll keep everything anonymous to protect the innocent.

Our conversation was basically about how one can no longer depend upon only those companies physically located nearby to fund ongoing development for small software contract services companies.

In traditional contract services, a software services company would approach or be approached by a company to develop software for hire for a specified cost (hourly or fixed) and for a specified deliverable or scope of work.  For most companies, this activity was geographically localized and software services companies tended to associate themselves with particular platforms (MS Windows, Novell, Apple, etc.).

That was then  THIS is now.

With the economy giving many hiring company the jitters, it’s especially tough for a localized software services company to find work and keep all of their employees “off the bench” (i.e., working on billable projects) – never mind that rising healthcare insurance costs and outsourcing have reduced margins on generalized software development projects.

In effect, for survival, companies that once depended on long lasting personal relationships with localized corporations are having to seek business beyond what was once a very comfortable bubble.

We certainly have been forced to do so.  In fact, I would say our business over the past twelve months has been about 90% outside of our local area (or international) and the remainder performed with companies in the greater Nashville area.

As cool as web development is, and as insular the echo chamber of social networking is, it becomes easy to lull oneself into thinking that social networking and web development constitute the be all and end all of software development today.  And that would be a mistake, because there is a ton of legacy and NEW desktop development ongoing today by armies of corporate developers and the software services houses that cater to them.  Getting entre to those companies and into the inner sanctums of the decision makers for these projects is tougher today, owing to the pressures listed above, and small software services houses simply have to cast broader and more diverse nets to get access to those opportunities.

Some obstacles to moving beyond a localized emphasis for these development opportunities and remote development opportunities are:

Finding a good fit with projects that are well specified and appropriate for remote development

Good management practices on both ends of the engagement that support and accommodate the remote development environment

Understanding that managing a geographically separated development team differs vastly from operating a development team in a collaborative or bullpen environment.

Immediately following 9/11, we had to significantly rethink our software services marketing strategy, because this was the first time that our company faced these pressures.  This became even more important to us when we were located in Florida during 2003-2005 and survived 3 hurricanes in six weeks.  If we had to depend upon local corporations solely, we would have died a sudden and inglorious death.

Doing business nationally and internationally today is worlds easier than it was when we started out back in 1996.  Tools for payment, such as PayPal, make it relatively straightforward to conduct business with people you may never actually get to meet in person.  In fact, I would say that accurately represents almost all of the business that I have done this year,with possibly one or two exceptions.

Business is not static.  Your views of your markets should not be, either.

Where do you fish?  Why, where the fish are, of course.

Where are your markets?

When a Standard Isn’t

Since I’ve been in full bore “old fart” mode for the past week or so, I may as well get this gem off my chest to cap off the week.

A recurring theme this week for me, professionally and personally, is the use (or misuse / misappropriation) of the meaning of words.

Take Standards. I wrote a post earlier today about “the emerging standard of OpenSocial” (emphasis mine). A standard is usually one thing by which some other thing is measured. Since there is an absolute dearth of any applications supporting OpenSocial, how can it be called an emerging “standard?” Hell – it doesn’t even purport to be a specification. At the very most optimistic is a very strongly worded letter with very strong recommendations as to what should be supported – but you can define any extensions you like. What the hell is “standard” about that?

Out here in the wilds of the World Wide Web, people bandy about “standards” as if they are passed down on high, when by and large standards are the most flimsiest of figments of the imagination.

Don’t believe me?

In reality, most “standards” come about because someone is first to crack an idea or concept, make it wildly popular, and everyone follows a “compatibility” formula to success. It is only after the market leader has been established that someone comes along behind, codifies what is in fact a fait accompli, and declares a “standard” now in place. Rarely has it worked the other way around, where someone publishes a document, calls it a “standard” and a successful market spring up around it.

I can think of a set of successful “standards” documents that arguably worked this way: the Q’uran, the Bible, and the Torah – but they are entirely outside the scope of this discussion.

I can cite several early technology examples: the IBM PC compatible (possible because IBM published the ROM code and opened the door to the wild success of PC compatible systems); the Hayes Modem AT command set, which revolutionized the ability of PC software to control modems of any make or manufacture as long as they could recognize the Hayes AT command set; the SoundBlaster audio card and command set, which allowed anyone who could communicate with SoundBlaster’s original code set to talk to anyone else’s SB compatible plug in cards.

This is just a handful of the pioneers who were wildly successful, created the “standard” first, and then had it codified by the marketplace. Again, the emphasis is mine.

Even in the web world, though there exist many so called “standards”, all of the successful ones came about as a result of one company dominating (for a time) and everyone else following behind and calcifying a “canon.” Netscape (plus their extenstions) for HTML; 3COM and Ethernet; Internet Explorer and DOM and XMLHTTPRequest (“Ajax” to many of you); with very few exceptions, the “standard” always recognized the de facto market leader, and THEN became codified canon.

Working code is always the coin of the realm.

If we all had to wait around for specification bodies to waive their hands and declare what standards we’d all use nothing would ever get done. Perfect is the enemy of the good.

I had a conversation with a new Facebook contact yesterday and he was talking about how things would get so much better for communication across social networks once social networking “standards” equivalents like XHTML and Acid were adopted. I reminded him that having a standard like XHTML and Acid codified did not force anybody to use them. How many websites follow XHTML? Far too few. How many browsers are fully Acid compliant? You could count them on one hand and 99 out of 100 people don’t use them.

First movers who capture the market set the standard. Twitter isn’t the best designed site, it’s not the prettiest. But they were first out the gate to capture lightning in a jar and it would damn near take a stroke of timing and luck to knock it out of position merely on the basis of looks, speed, and technical merit. The market has spoken, for good or ill.

So, the next time someone starts yammering about the OpenSource “standard” API, be polite. Smile. Nod. If you’re from the South, think “Bless their heart.”

The market always dictates the standard, not the other way around.

This old fart is now going back into his house and you kids can get your ball out of my yard before I call the cops.

Are Resumes Necessary?

Seth Godin had a post this morning on Why bother with a Resume?

It got me thinking: in my professional life, spanning 1985 to the present, I have NEVER gotten a job as a result of a resume. Never.

That’s not to say that I don’t have a resume or that I have never submitted a resume. Simply that a resume in and of itself has never brought me to anyone’s attention nor has it been the tipping point that has been the deciding factor on a paycheck for me.

Resumes are the HR equivalent of flowcharts in the programming world; they are obsolete the moment they are written, and bear little resemblance to the object they purport to describe.

As Seth astutely points out, if you are remarkable as a person, a resume is entirely superfluous.

So – what is a better use of your time: to create a kick ass Resume, or to become Remarkable?

Branding and Esteem

Just posted an article on my Facebook profile about Dell’s poor quarterly earnings and how they blame their poor performance on everything EXCEPT the root cause of their troubles – terrible customer service. While Dell has reasonably priced and well equipped laptops and desktops, they are losing mind share and market share to Apple (yes, Apple).

Apple’s product offerings across the board are overpriced and underpowered. And yet – they are expanding in all areas: music downloads, music players, desktops, phones, laptops. They are on a tear, no doubt.

Why is Apple prospering, and Dell (and Sprint, another notable customer service story from hell) floundering?

Because Apple respects their customers. Apple products are an esteem issue with their customer. Customers are willing to pay a premium for ease of use, ease of hassle, beauty, elegance.

The marketplace of commerce and ideas is fast changing, and old thoughts of ignoring customers because you CAN are long obsolete.

Just ask Dell and Sprint. While you can.

Getting Beyond

Perhaps the question I am asked the most when approached by connections I make on the web is a variant of “how do you make money doing what you do?” A close second is “what in the hell are you doing?!?” – but that’s a different topic for a different day.

In short, I make money by pimping myself (or those that work for me) on an hourly basis (sometimes per diem, rarely fixed bid). Simple.

That model has altered a bit with the advent of the social web. In that arena, I have sent forth development sorties in directions I would ordinarily not have done in the past, in the name of Business Development and brand building for (a) myself and (b) for my company, Sumner Systems Management (SSM).

The vast army of social network widget code monkeys (present company included) toil away trying to find a way to make this nonsense pay. Some do it by trying build traffic and eyeballs for ad revenue, or to pawn off their traffic and eyeballs to another code monkey trying to build his or her little empire in some corner of the semantic / non-semantic web.

My take is slightly skewed from the majority.

If I am going to invest time, capital, sweat, and intellect to the cause I need to know that there is a tangible long term benefit beyond dwarf tossing, ghoul poking, and general time wasting. Is there a business market for social networking applications, and if so, how does one bridge the gap between the early adopters and the mainstream majority vis a vis businesses engaging the social web to build and extend their brand?

I try to look across the wasteland that is the current state of Social Network applications development and identify (a) underrepresented brands in the social networking sphere, (b) underrepresented features in the social networking sphere, (c) underdeveloped marketing channels in the social networking sphere, or (d) a melange of all of the above.

Having made such an identification, the next step is to determine a way to embrace and extend the underrepresented (let’s say in this case) brand. What is the brand about? What makes the brand special? Is there already community of loyal customers / followers / fans existing around the brand that are simply waiting for an outlet on the social web?

Having answered that, I try to determine the best way to express the brand on Facebook, or Bebo, or whatever network I am targeting in a way that repects the brand. By that I mean, whatever I intend to do OR do, it must add value to the brand and not detract from it; complimentary to this end, if I am doing a “spec” type social application for a brand that I do not own it is important that I do not drawn attention to myself as someone trying to “hijack” the brand for my own profit (other than attracting the attention of the brand owners for the purposes of directly engaging them with me). I have found that it is easier to do this with smaller brands than larger ones, because it is an order of magnitude easier to reach the decision makers at the smaller startups / boostraps, and the decision makers are usually more engaged on the social web that their larger company counterparts (I say usually, not universally true).

What is the end game? To attract and engage business / brand owners underrepresented on the social web, by doing either what they will not, cannot, or want to but have other pressing priorities: build a ready made social network presence for them that they may either acquire outright or negotiate for engagement our esteemed (harumph) insight and wisdom.

This strategy of brand engagement has had mixed results. I have had some satisfying successes, some disappointing near misses, and some downright cones of silence from brand owners.

But where it has been stunningly successful has been in the building of my personal brand. Someone DOING in the social networking arena. Not talking, speculating, bitching, moaning, complaining. Doing.

As John Lennon said, Life is what happens while we are making plans.

To get beyond, you gotta do.