.. or so I thought.
Everytime I'd come across a new social media networking business, I'd shake my head. It's a social network for people who grow their own oranges. I intend to fund it with advertising.. and stuff. "OK, cool if its your thing", I'd say, "but think about the business model".
But soon I realized that there's two reasons why you shouldn't dismiss these startups/concepts off the bat.
1) Gauss. You need volume to bring out and elevate the best networking sites. There are a thousand composers for each Mozart.
2) Marketing. No, I'm not giving the entrepreneur a dime for traditional direct response or brand marketing in his network. But I will be interested in whether my offering is relevant and useful for the network. Having this figured out, I'll be interested in who is my spokesperson in the group - who will passionately talk about my offering and recommend it to others in the network. And if the entrepreneur is able to provide me answers to these questions, I might pay him for it.
Fax marketing aka Fax-a-spam
In the hustle and bustle of the office, the fax machine beeps and whirrs. A fax has arrived. And also, it seems, a full-fledged marketing effort. Are you kidding me?
My office receives a couple of feebly targeted faxed marketing messages every quarter. Unsurprisingly, they mainly come from companies promoting their own fax marketing service. The latest I noticed on the trash bin was from yesterday. I was baffled. Fax marketing, it’s not an urban legend?
Similar to email marketing, fax marketers praise their low cost (only 3.5 eurocents per sent fax!), huge reach (fax numb.. *cough* contact details of over 100 000 companies!) and ability to target specific segments. Give me a break.
In the era of email.. ah nevermind, since the era of dinosaurs only few decision-makers have had their own fax numbers. Most companies, my clients for example, easily survive with one faceless company fax number which is monitored by an assistant/lobby clerk/other non-decision maker. With this in mind, how can these firms claim to have any ability to reach anyone their customers seek? In essence their business could be sending emails to companies’ info@company.com mail address. Granted, someone could actually read their fax, but if I was contemplating fax marketing I wouldn’t risk irritating my customer.
And talk about wasting resources. First of all, printing consumes electricity and paper and wears the machine. And a fax marketer isn’t consuming anyone’s paper (without permission!) He’s consuming his customer’s paper (1.5 eurocents a piece thankyouverymuch). Seth Godin would have a stroke. I’m having a stroke, between laughs. Fax marketing really isn’t 21st Century and it sure isn’t a part of any aspiration to sustainability.
So next time you receive a faxed, undesired marketing message, please remember to recycle the paper.
My office receives a couple of feebly targeted faxed marketing messages every quarter. Unsurprisingly, they mainly come from companies promoting their own fax marketing service. The latest I noticed on the trash bin was from yesterday. I was baffled. Fax marketing, it’s not an urban legend?
Similar to email marketing, fax marketers praise their low cost (only 3.5 eurocents per sent fax!), huge reach (fax numb.. *cough* contact details of over 100 000 companies!) and ability to target specific segments. Give me a break.
In the era of email.. ah nevermind, since the era of dinosaurs only few decision-makers have had their own fax numbers. Most companies, my clients for example, easily survive with one faceless company fax number which is monitored by an assistant/lobby clerk/other non-decision maker. With this in mind, how can these firms claim to have any ability to reach anyone their customers seek? In essence their business could be sending emails to companies’ info@company.com mail address. Granted, someone could actually read their fax, but if I was contemplating fax marketing I wouldn’t risk irritating my customer.
And talk about wasting resources. First of all, printing consumes electricity and paper and wears the machine. And a fax marketer isn’t consuming anyone’s paper (without permission!) He’s consuming his customer’s paper (1.5 eurocents a piece thankyouverymuch). Seth Godin would have a stroke. I’m having a stroke, between laughs. Fax marketing really isn’t 21st Century and it sure isn’t a part of any aspiration to sustainability.
So next time you receive a faxed, undesired marketing message, please remember to recycle the paper.
Business cases that never were
I am always told that hindsight is unconstructive, mainly negative and energy-consuming. It should be avoided at all times – after all, you should always look to the future and its possibilities and not waste energy on looking back.
Or should you?
I’m starting a series of blogposts about Business Cases that Never Were – writings and discussions that make use of hindsight and unexecuted, perhaps even unrealized opportunities. I am doing this just because to disprove the myth of hindsight’s negative aspects, and to generally inspire creativity and innovative ideas. The first case is simply called Flickr – powered by Kodak.
Flickr – powered by Kodak
I was reading Lovemarks – Future beyond brands by Kevin Roberts (CEO Worldwide of Saatchi & Saatchi) the other day. Lovemarks is a compelling, vibrant book about the next level of branding, lovemarks that attract “loyalty beyond reason” in their customers. On pages 150 to 152 Kevin Roberts discusses a certain case of Kodak where the firm between 1999 and 2005 strived to connect with teens, enhance its brand position among them and capture the market of disposable one-time-use cameras in this segment. In the case study, their main fear seems to be (in addition to losing to their competition) becoming a disposable themselves, a fad like Polaroid.
The case study goes on about Kodak’s extensive marketing tactics that succeeded in reaching their target audience and steered (in their own words) Kodak towards a Lovemark. Their continuous goal is to remain authentic and relevant to the teen segment. The case sums up nicely how a certain Lovemark-oriented marketing perspective helped Kodak connect with teens, but I was left thinking about a lost chance for Kodak. Now, its 2009 and disposable cameras sound a bit from the leftfield. Sure, they are the low-budget choice, but teens love their digital cameras, because of their big memory cards and ability to share and edit their digital pictures – their life. The industry where Kodak operates, production of imaging and photographic materials and equipment, is in a world of trouble. I have clients in that same industry and discussions with them turn darker year after year, and digital photography is one of the main reasons. Retailers face bankruptcies as customers no longer develop their pictures but enjoy and store them in digital formats. And to boot, people increasingly purchase their photographic equipment from an often cheaper source, online.
How would we upgrade Kodak’s marketing efforts to 2009 while keeping in mind their business goals, continuous authenticity and relevance, brand preference and increased sales, presented in this case?
Life’s about sharing
Flickr is an open, free online photo and video management and sharing application where people can store and show off their magnificent pictures to the Internet. It’s hideously popular, and for a reason, thanks to its ease and (non-) cost of use and vibrant social community. Launched in February of 2004, it now hosts more than three point six billion images and videos. And it’s owned by none the other than Yahoo.
Kodak’s goal in Lovemarks’ case was to increase their share of market in photography equipment, in this case, one-time-use cameras, by connecting with a potential market of teens. For this example, we will disregard one-time-cameras and focus on other more relevant equipment.
What if Kodak had launched Flickr in 2004, or acquired it before Yahoo on March 2005?
What has been relevant to internet users in general and youth in particular since 2000? That’s right, social media, emphasis on social. In Roberts’ case study, Kodak claims to have gotten to grips with the youth market. In the past years Internet has become a major social playground for teens, a major part of their life. Kodak would’ve needed to be there too, should it want to remain relevant. And what is Kodak known for? Photography. Those Kodak moments.
What would it be/what would it have been?
In the fall of 2004, some exec in Eastman Kodak should’ve had a brain explosion. Realizing the same opportunities as we, he would’ve driven Kodak to the social internet community based on their main competence - photography. By creating a thriving community around their main business, they could attract customers and prospective customers. Kodak could have launched Flickr as a semi-independent, authentic, separate brand, being careful not to over-commercialize a service intended among others for sharp youth. Keeping it free and easy to use, just reminding that all this fun is powered by Kodak. Business-wise, their goals could have been to:
1) offer users easy possibility to develop their best images – direct them to their nearest Kodak retailer or even put out a service where people can develop their photos online by the nearest retailer
2) offer free advice to better photography, useful information on cameras and equipment (something Kodak does already, atleast in their UK website)
3) offer a easy, cost-competitive channel to purchase said equipment
This way, multiple benefits could have been reaped
1) Increase in crucial retail business
2) Major boost to brand awareness – “the little Kodak logo on every Flickr page”
3) Retained deep connection with youth – authenticity and relevance
Think about it: People sharing their Kodak moments online?
Or should you?
I’m starting a series of blogposts about Business Cases that Never Were – writings and discussions that make use of hindsight and unexecuted, perhaps even unrealized opportunities. I am doing this just because to disprove the myth of hindsight’s negative aspects, and to generally inspire creativity and innovative ideas. The first case is simply called Flickr – powered by Kodak.
Flickr – powered by Kodak
I was reading Lovemarks – Future beyond brands by Kevin Roberts (CEO Worldwide of Saatchi & Saatchi) the other day. Lovemarks is a compelling, vibrant book about the next level of branding, lovemarks that attract “loyalty beyond reason” in their customers. On pages 150 to 152 Kevin Roberts discusses a certain case of Kodak where the firm between 1999 and 2005 strived to connect with teens, enhance its brand position among them and capture the market of disposable one-time-use cameras in this segment. In the case study, their main fear seems to be (in addition to losing to their competition) becoming a disposable themselves, a fad like Polaroid.
The case study goes on about Kodak’s extensive marketing tactics that succeeded in reaching their target audience and steered (in their own words) Kodak towards a Lovemark. Their continuous goal is to remain authentic and relevant to the teen segment. The case sums up nicely how a certain Lovemark-oriented marketing perspective helped Kodak connect with teens, but I was left thinking about a lost chance for Kodak. Now, its 2009 and disposable cameras sound a bit from the leftfield. Sure, they are the low-budget choice, but teens love their digital cameras, because of their big memory cards and ability to share and edit their digital pictures – their life. The industry where Kodak operates, production of imaging and photographic materials and equipment, is in a world of trouble. I have clients in that same industry and discussions with them turn darker year after year, and digital photography is one of the main reasons. Retailers face bankruptcies as customers no longer develop their pictures but enjoy and store them in digital formats. And to boot, people increasingly purchase their photographic equipment from an often cheaper source, online.
How would we upgrade Kodak’s marketing efforts to 2009 while keeping in mind their business goals, continuous authenticity and relevance, brand preference and increased sales, presented in this case?
Life’s about sharing
Flickr is an open, free online photo and video management and sharing application where people can store and show off their magnificent pictures to the Internet. It’s hideously popular, and for a reason, thanks to its ease and (non-) cost of use and vibrant social community. Launched in February of 2004, it now hosts more than three point six billion images and videos. And it’s owned by none the other than Yahoo.
Kodak’s goal in Lovemarks’ case was to increase their share of market in photography equipment, in this case, one-time-use cameras, by connecting with a potential market of teens. For this example, we will disregard one-time-cameras and focus on other more relevant equipment.
What if Kodak had launched Flickr in 2004, or acquired it before Yahoo on March 2005?
What has been relevant to internet users in general and youth in particular since 2000? That’s right, social media, emphasis on social. In Roberts’ case study, Kodak claims to have gotten to grips with the youth market. In the past years Internet has become a major social playground for teens, a major part of their life. Kodak would’ve needed to be there too, should it want to remain relevant. And what is Kodak known for? Photography. Those Kodak moments.
What would it be/what would it have been?
In the fall of 2004, some exec in Eastman Kodak should’ve had a brain explosion. Realizing the same opportunities as we, he would’ve driven Kodak to the social internet community based on their main competence - photography. By creating a thriving community around their main business, they could attract customers and prospective customers. Kodak could have launched Flickr as a semi-independent, authentic, separate brand, being careful not to over-commercialize a service intended among others for sharp youth. Keeping it free and easy to use, just reminding that all this fun is powered by Kodak. Business-wise, their goals could have been to:
1) offer users easy possibility to develop their best images – direct them to their nearest Kodak retailer or even put out a service where people can develop their photos online by the nearest retailer
2) offer free advice to better photography, useful information on cameras and equipment (something Kodak does already, atleast in their UK website)
3) offer a easy, cost-competitive channel to purchase said equipment
This way, multiple benefits could have been reaped
1) Increase in crucial retail business
2) Major boost to brand awareness – “the little Kodak logo on every Flickr page”
3) Retained deep connection with youth – authenticity and relevance
Think about it: People sharing their Kodak moments online?
A bit about Cranfield University
Time indeed flies as the saying goes. I've been working and on my free time developing a marketing strategy for a bold start-up, so two months have passed without a single blog post. I'm hoping to be able to write about the start-up and its marketing plans, but for the time being, I regret I can't discuss them here.
But about Cranfield - I recently secured by accomodation there, so the final big issue concerning my Marketing studies is taken care of. I've heard horror stories about damp, drafty and unheated old British apartments but Cranfield's campus buildings (especially the one I'm going to accomodate) seem nothing like it!
For foreigners like me coming to the UK next fall, check this helpful website transportdirect.info. It's great when planning transportation within the UK after your flight etc. Also thanks to Cranfield's administration I have already become acquainted with another future Cranfield Strategic Marketing student, which is fantastic!
Cranfield SOM have developed their 2009/2010 course programme for Strategic Marketing during early Summer, and I'm even more excited about it (is it even possible?). They seem to have put some more flesh to it, and have included a course on digital media, or have atleast emphasized it on their integrated marketing communications course. Insight on digital/social media is a must-have these days in my opinion. Too much is happening in the Net for the marketer to be left out of the bandwagon. They've also added a course on ethics and sustainability in marketing. As excessive consumption is criticised around the globe, marketers of all industries face a moral dilemma - is my business a part of the Change to sustainability? Confronted with 21st century values, is my business viable and acceptable?
The interesting question however is, what is the next bandwagon after social media and 21st century ethics and sustainability?
All in all, it will be a busy year which I'm eagerly waiting for! And perhaps I'll come to know the answer!
But about Cranfield - I recently secured by accomodation there, so the final big issue concerning my Marketing studies is taken care of. I've heard horror stories about damp, drafty and unheated old British apartments but Cranfield's campus buildings (especially the one I'm going to accomodate) seem nothing like it!
For foreigners like me coming to the UK next fall, check this helpful website transportdirect.info. It's great when planning transportation within the UK after your flight etc. Also thanks to Cranfield's administration I have already become acquainted with another future Cranfield Strategic Marketing student, which is fantastic!
Cranfield SOM have developed their 2009/2010 course programme for Strategic Marketing during early Summer, and I'm even more excited about it (is it even possible?). They seem to have put some more flesh to it, and have included a course on digital media, or have atleast emphasized it on their integrated marketing communications course. Insight on digital/social media is a must-have these days in my opinion. Too much is happening in the Net for the marketer to be left out of the bandwagon. They've also added a course on ethics and sustainability in marketing. As excessive consumption is criticised around the globe, marketers of all industries face a moral dilemma - is my business a part of the Change to sustainability? Confronted with 21st century values, is my business viable and acceptable?
The interesting question however is, what is the next bandwagon after social media and 21st century ethics and sustainability?
All in all, it will be a busy year which I'm eagerly waiting for! And perhaps I'll come to know the answer!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
