Global Business Markets Require New Product Marketing Strategies in 2012

Posted on January 26, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

Technology innovators looking to build mission critical requirements within today’s global business markets must develop new product marketing strategies. Pervasive disappointing performance of big ticket technology purchases since the mid 1990s have graced technology buyers with a new tough skin — hard to penetrate and bullet proof just like rhino hide. Portfolio management is now a pervasive reality for IT departments at global businesses. Products without a cogent value proposition are not only unwelcome, they are ignored. Therefore, marketing teams must come up with new product marketing strategies to stimulate interest.

We think it’s helpful to characterize the global business market for technology as dysfunctional. Buyers pursue solutions to requirements that may vanish at any time as the result of dwindling technology budgets. As well, management may rethink needs, deciding that the pain of unmet needs will prove less expensive than a solution. With these assumptions in mind, the prospect of fabricating new product marketing strategies for complex products designed for global business markets takes on a more promising glow. Better get with the program, after all, February, 2012 is already just around the corner.

Collaboration ought to be the new mantra for technology vendors vying for global business markets. Maintaining a collaborative position with customers, prospects and the overall market means crafting opportunities to discuss requirements, objectives and long term planning with buyers as well as the important business managers that have been identified within prospect businesses. An ability to transpose the objectives of technology manufacturers into customer and prospect objectives is welcome. Successfully transposing objectives renders prospect discussions into a level playing field where all parties are after the same objective. As well, once all objectives are uniform and completely aligned, then prospects, customers and vendors take on similar roles that all parties (particularly buyers and business management) will look to perpetuate over the term during which relevant solutions are under discussion.

How to manage this transposition? It’s helpful to realize that the business objectives of vendors include placing products within solutions at global businesses. Buyers truly have the same objective, do they not? In fact, buyers are looking to implement solutions. They will maintain that objective as long as solutions appear viable and rich in value. Therefore, seeing matters clearly is the same as realizing that everyone at the table is after the same thing. With that understanding in place marketing and sales make more sense. Get it?

If you have a product or service that you think makes sense for global business markets, we’d like to hear about it. Please call Ira Michael Blonder directly at +1 631-673-2929 to further a discussion.

Complement TeleProspecting Lead Generation with Online Sales and Marketing to Hasten Global Business Opportunities

Posted on January 25, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

We presently hold the opinion that online sales and marketing are no longer a detriment for innovative businesses looking to sell complex products to global customers and other large organizations. This evolution for a set of media that led many a technology innovator down a “primrose path” to commoditization is entirely positive. In part, the act of transforming interactive media into something useful can be attributed to global business buyers who are demonstrating a new attitude in fiscal 2012. Others have pointed out this new pervasive buyer attitude, most notably the folks at Alinean (http://www NULL.alinean NULL.com). They have posited that 2012 looks to be a year of frugalnomics (http://www NULL.alinean NULL.com/fight_frugalnomics) for global business buyers.

Alinean defines frugalnomics as “an environment where buyers demand quantification of benefits, significant ROI, fast payback and superior value from each purchase.” In our opinion the information gathering stage within the hunt for these value rich products will transpire online. Global business buyers will troll websites to glean as much information as they can in preparation for any dialogue that might be warranted with sales people. In other words, global business buyers in 2012 look likely to identify:

the solutions that make sense
implementation plans for these solutions
and, finally, components of these solutions

prior to engaging with any sales people.

Therefore, it behooves technology innovators to include as much meaningful content about product value propositions online in websites, or web 2.0 vehicles (Twitter (http://twitter NULL.com), FaceBook (http://www NULL.facebook NULL.com) and Google+ (http://www NULL.google NULL.com/plus)) as possible. But these venues should be carefully crafted to communicate value without:

a disclosure of competitive advantage to business rivals
or a failure to gain a commitment to at least share contact information from global business buyers

The challenge for marketers will be to successfully cross these two lines. For those who will succeed at this challenge, the volume of useful business leads will increase and, therefore, business should be easier (whatever that means). When more leads are fed into a direct marketing machine highlighting teleprospecting techniques, the return on investment should be very attractive.

The specifics of how to position information online will, of course, require ongoing management. It will be necessary to balance so-called “on page” optimization of editorial content with “off page” link building and the rest of the task of infusing sites, etc, with the qualities of authoritative online resources.

We are presently working with clients looking to optimize an online message for complex products and services. We are utilizing some feature rich technology that provides us with a panaromic view of online performance. Therefore, we will welcome opportunities to discuss specific needs that may be at hand for your business or your business plans. Please call Ira Michael Blonder directly at +1 631-673-2929 to further a discussion.

Look to Teleprospecting for a Superior Business to Business Lead Generation Program

Posted on January 25, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

Useful Sales leads are food for any business, nutrient rich supplements that promise to enrich cash flow and sales staff alike.

But what constitutes “useful” with regard to leads?

Leads are useful when they include information that can be used to forge successful sales campaigns with appropriate prospects. There is no better way that I know of to accumulate this type of information for innovative technology providers targeting global business and other large organizations than teleprospecting, meaning an outbound telemarketing effort that eschews hard selling for information gathering. Business to business lead generation requires a “hands off” attitude on the part of the teleprospector. Further, top teleprospecting talent will communicate a genuine interest to contacts in the subject of discussion, thereby encouraging a free exchange of information that typically leads to collection of useful sales information.

I do not believe in the value of buying contact lists. The task of identifying companies that constitute realistic targets for products and services is very useful endeavor that will help train a teleprospecting team to qualify contacts; therefore, why hand the team a set of businesses from a purchased contact list? If sales has participated in the business from inception (as I have advocated elsewhere in this blog) then there ought to be plenty of time to canvas the marketplace slowly and carefully to identify businesses that ought to be contacted once selling efforts begin. With regard to contacts within the prospect businesses that pre sales efforts identify, once again, researching contacts online, through address books, etc. and, generally, through sales team collaboration is superior route. Once again, the process of working to identify these contacts helps sales to refine the qualification process that will have to be in place to land the business. It is safe to say that the process of qualifying leads cannot be too precise an activity. The finer the grain the better as far as leads are concerned.

Once a lead list has been assembled, then a teleprospecting program can be successfully implemented to deliver very high quality selling opportunities. There is no error in combining this type of direct marketing effort with online product promotion. With recent improvements in online marketing communications opportunities, as well as with a tendency of today’s prospects to research just about everything they need to know about a product or service by themselves, with little to no hand holding from sales, online promotion can be successfully crafted to support the sale of complex products to global business.

I am wholly engaged with clients who are implementing teleprospecting programs with web 2.0 online marketing. I welcome opportunities to discuss specific needs that may be at hand for your business or your business plans. Please call me at +1 631-673-2929 to further a discussion.

Develop a Thorough Familiarity with Competitors to Keep Market Development In Perspective

Posted on January 21, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

I never counsel clients to enter markets where competitors cannot be identified. The only exception, as I see it, is a market that services a niche set of needs that have arisen from a larger, more familiar and competitive market.

For 95% of innovative technology businesses, markets without competitors are, at best, not worth entering and, at worst, traps capable of sinking entire businesses. Most so called break through products are really, when analyzed, solutions to needs that are either confined to very small markets for which a first provider with little capital may be able to capture most of the business, or to needs that have been underestimated or otherwise unknown (in a television interview aired in January, 2012, Bill Gates communicated some of his own “shock” at the great success that became of the Microsoft that he and Allen founded. He noted that neither of them ever planned on the massive size of the market that would develop for personal computers). With regard to the former type of opportunity, once ensconced in the leader position, a pioneer will be able to fend off competitors “late to the dance”. But these types of opportunities are seldom readily apparent. Usually a first provider of this type will be founded by someone who has personally spent time as a user in the market, knows the need very well as well as the solution.

With regard to the latter, big splash break through products require lots of capital, not only for developing products and solutions, but also for developing and nurturing markets themselves. Therefore, these opportunities are usually the stock and trade for Venture Capitalists with deep pockets. Not the everyday turf trod by under the radar technology driven businesses.

Therefore, business plan 101 dictates that chosen markets must include the participation of competitors as a demonstration of the viability of the revenue potential of the market to feed the business. Once these markets have been identified it is essential that as much information be gathered about competitors as possible. This information will prove to be invaluable when it comes time to select a distribution model for a product, service or solution. After all, why leverage a channel distribution strategy if no one else in your vertical is doing the same? They may well know something that you do not. In this case, what you may not know may be able to hurt you in the form of dollars spent needlessly on intermediaries who no one else is using to win their business.

I am presently working with clients facing just this type of challenge. I welcome opportunities to discuss specific needs. Please call me at +1 631-673-2929 to further a discussion.

Engineering CEOs should Pass Sales & Marketing 101 Before Chasing Revenue from Global Businesses and Other Large Organizations

Posted on January 19, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

Technology companies headed up by engineering management usually need to undergo a “rethink” on certain basic assumptions about products, markets and sales. I include in these basic assumptions at least the following three seriously incorrect assumptions:

My product is unique. If global business prospects do not realize that my product is unique, then they are not capable of understanding what my product offers
I do not need to market and/or sell my product. The value that my product delivers is clearly superior. I will use opportunities to interact with prospects to determine whether or not a prospect has the minimum qualifications required to use my product
My job, and the job of my engineers, is to conceptualize, design and produce technology. Once we have done our job, then we will pass our creation over to marketing who, in turn, will pass the creation with its market message over to sales

Let’s set the record straight on each of these erroneous assumptions. With regard to (1), as Marshall McLuhan (the seminal force in twentieth century marketing as far as I’m concerned) made clear, “The Medium is the Message.” McLuhan’s conclusion is, in my opinion, synonymous with the old cliche, “it’s not what you say, but how you say it”. In other words, how you frame your statement is, effectively, your statement. Scary thought. Nevertheless, keeping this conclusion in mind throughout an ongoing effort to produce lucid marketing communications (whether for offline product promotion, online search optimization efforts, or face to face interactions with prospects and customers) that is accurately crafted to deliver your message to the lowest common denominator for your intended audience is absolutely mandatory. Therefore, if prospects still are not hearing your message correctly post marketing communications efforts, then there is something broken in your marketing communications efforts that needs to be fixed right away. Opacity of message is not a problem to be taken lightly. Fix it now or your product, service, etc will wither on the vine.

Point 2 incorporates the points I have made in the above paragraph with regard to erroneous assumption (1), and then some. Any/all products and services need to be marketed and sold. The erroneous assumption that marketing and sales are not critical components to building a business that delivers technical products and solutions to global businesses and other large organizations stems from one in a million success stories like the rise of Microsoft®, which grew from some completely reactive conclusions of two engineers on an immediate and fleeting opportunity into the mammoth company of today. The lack of big picture market vision that was missing from the early business building work of Messrs Gates and Allen is, in my opinion, at the root of this company’s diminishing stature in the global business technology market. Bottom line: marketing and sales are mission critical components of the business plan and need to be in place from commencement of efforts to build the business, period. Further, any and all prospects represent opportunities that must be qualified. Once qualified, the opportunities need to be nurtured through to purchases by sales staff capable of managing global business prospects.

With regard to point 3, it is pointless to build “solutions without problems”. Do not waste precious time dreaming up market needs that are neither apparent, nor tested by competitors, etc. Going down paths “not traveled” is dangerous for technology businesses with limited developmental budgets. Product Marketing must be in place from the moment product ideas are evaluated for worthiness of investment. If a CEO is not capable of providing product marketing due diligence, then either an outside professional consultant with the right credentials should be brought in, or staff hired to fill the void. Proceeding on product development without marketing is, I fear, a ticket to a possible disaster.

I specialize in these types of discussions. If you have a technology product with some broad market appeal for global businesses and other large organizations, I’d like to hear from you. Give me a call at +1 631-673-2929.

A Post on Rising Above the Commodity Fray

Posted on January 18, 2012 by Ira Michael Blonder

I met recently with the president of an Independent Software Vendor (ISV) with software offerings built with the Java® programming language who expressed disbelief when I let him know that his prices are too low. I later learned that when I took a break to leave the meeting he asked of a trusted colleague “what does he mean that our prices are too low? Each of our competitors are priced into our range? How can we raise our prices?” I should state that this ISV offers a product in the online marketing category, a piece of software that delivers lots of reports about search engine placement for products by keyword, etc. I should also note that I’ve written elsewhere in this blog about the controversy implicit to online marketing for the sale of complex products to global businesses and other large organizations; specifically does marketing online get you anything besides a big dose of commoditization if you’re offering complex products with intangible value to an uneducated prospect? From my conversation with this CEO I must say that the same question applies to vendors of online marketing software, as well.

All well and good, but what’s relevant to marketing and selling big ticket software and other technology products to global businesses and other large organizations in 2012? Specifically that the old adage, “a sales person without a sense of urgency is no sales person at all” rings true. With a product with an entry level price of $199.95, lots of competitors, and a limited universe of prospects, I am of the opinion that the price of this software has to go up, one way or another, if this CEO’s business is to grow to any size of significance. I should also add that this ISV is located in Eastern Europe, where the cost of living is substantially lower than the cost of living here in the States, but no matter. Opening offices internationally will be an inevitable step forward for this ISV if/when they do manage to grow; therefore, at some point they will have to pay out higher salaries which will put lots of pressure on the present pricing model.

When I returned to our meeting I attempted to educate this CEO that he should think about turning some weaknesses of his product into the foundation of his higher pricing model. Our discussions illuminated the fact that this ISV assumes that its customers are presently only utilizing 10% of the capability of their product. My response was, is there a common additional value that most any customer can derive from the remaining 90% of the product that is under utilized? If there is such a common additional value, then why not take a proportion of that additional value (in hard dollars and cents) as an entirely justified additional cost for customers who want, need, and “must own” the remaining 90% value that is presently alluding them. Of course, then let’s take that proportion and build it into the pricing model of the product.

There is an old time precedent to this strategy. Just look back to the mid 1980s when Xerox Corporation successfully sold high end laser printers into the global business market against HP LaserJets. How did Xerox bring off these sales against a competitor with drastically lower prices? Xerox took the steps to integrate its laser printer products into the predominant computing environment of the mid 1980s–distributed mainframe and PC computing. Fact was that their printers had the necessary “hooks” to print mainframe data where HP’s products did not. It doesn’t matter that the required connectivity was rather trivial. What matters is that Xerox had it and HP did not. Xerox made the sales at a higher price point within a heavily commoditized market.

2012 Looks to be a Tough Year for Innovative Technology Product Sales to Global Business

Posted on December 21, 2011 by Ira Michael Blonder

Oracle Corporation reported earnings after the close of markets on December 20, 2011. You can register and then listen to the Oracle Second Quarter, 2012 Webcast (http://www NULL.media-server NULL.com/m/p/i9e57wt8). Your time will be well spent if you opt to listen to this presentation. Within literally the first few minutes of the 37 minute presentation, Safra A. Catz, President and CFO noted that with regard to Oracle’s sales of applications to global business and public sector customers that “. . . in the last few weeks, really for the first time in a while, in some regions we saw an increase in last minute additional approvals required for previously expected deals. As a result, we are putting in place better deal management so that we have the time and the approvals necessary to take this into account [for future deals].”

Kash Rangin, an Analyst from Merrell Lynch picked up on Ms. Catz’s early assertion. He noted that “[t]he only thing that we are scratching our heads about is the applications number . . . [i]s it Financial Services, Public Sector or the [industry] vertical [markets] that are talked about?” Ms. Catz noted that the weakness she had described was in the industry vertical markets. Translate that into global private businesses. Subsequent to further questioning from other analysts on the webcast, she provided this telling indicator: “What we did see was folks where all of a sudden the CEO had to approve [the purchase], or something like that, before it was all set. . . in some cases things literally closed the next day or a few days later once the approval came in. But those [deals], when we do run them right to the end you just run out of time . . .”

Keep in mind that Oracle is one of a handful of top tier purveyors of complex solutions to global business. Further, Oracle has a record of delivering satisfactory value to its customers. Therefore, if a business like Oracle has to note delays in closing sales (deals) and, further, has to note that final approval for these purchases has been escalated up as high as to the CEO of global businesses, then the coming year, or more, of selling enterprise technology solutions to global business has taken on a rather cold tone. I see this vignette as a very clear indicator that delivering measurable, quantifiable value through each and every sale of innovative technology solutions to global business in the coming year, if not longer, must be absolute status quo for any successful selling organization.

Of course, value is a specific quality that must be delivered to specific customers based upon their prescribed understanding of the benefits they seek through solutions. Therefore, substantial effort must be expended to understand the value specific customers are after. As well, successful sales teams will participate with theses customers in the creation of the prescribed solution. I will be happy to elaborate on these points upon request. You may reach me at 631-673-2929.

VCs that Know Nothing

Posted on December 11, 2011 by Ira Michael Blonder

On Friday, December 9, 2011, Ms. Maha Ibrahim of Canaan Partners was interviewed by Ms. Emily Chang on Bloomberg West. Bloomberg West is a television show that is broadcast Monday through Friday of each week. The topic of conversation was Zynga’s IPO. Zynga is in the business of manufacturing online games. Online games are far removed from the type of complex product that I have focused on in this blog. Further, online games are not the typical product of interest to enterprise business customers. Nevertheless, this pair went on to posit absurd claims about the enterprise market for software, seemingly out of nowhere.

Ms. Chang opened the gate when she asked Ms. Ibrahmi to speak to “what does [SAP's acquisition of Success Factors] say about traditional software’s business model?” When Ms Ibrahim jokingly mentioned that there was “no reason to have client server software anymore” and, further, that there was no longer any need for enterprise business to bring in “large Ernst & Young or large integration firms for years to help you to implement your software for your employee base” as the result of the supposed revolutionary nature of “cloud” computing, I needed to put type to page on this one. The fact is that Ms. Ibrahim is, in fact, dead wrong.

As I’ve written elsewhere in this blog, “cloud computing” is nothing new. Just reflect back on computer timesharing which was a business with some heft to it back in the mid 70s and 80s. Yes, mid size companies opted for the economies of scale represented by buying time on systems that were otherwise out of reach. Further, large businesses leveraged IBM mainframe computing systems via 3270 terminal emulation to deliver the features of mainframe computing to desktop PCs distributed across the enterprise. But in neither case did these early instances of cloud computing displace on premises computing systems. In fact, with the advent of the Graphical User Interface (GUI) and powerful PCs, timesharing went the way of the dinosaur.

“Own your own” has always been the preference and always will be the preference for those businesses with the financial capability to do things the right way. Cloud computing for enterprise business is simply a side track to be taken while ISVs take necessary steps to improve their ability to deliver bonafide value to customers. The real “meat” to this “motion” for under the radar innovators is still to be found in the enterprise sale of precisely the multi year engagement that Ms. Ibrahim claims is now gone for ever.

Not so, says Mr. Marin Petry, CIO of Hilti Corporation. Mr. Petri participated in a panel discussion of the definition of Cloud computing hosted by the Tuck School at Dartmouth in October of this year: Risk and Rewards in Cloud Computing (http://www NULL.tuck NULL.dartmouth NULL.edu/digital/media-library/radiotuck/risks-and-rewards-in-cloud-computing/). Mr. Petry clearly states ” . . . I do not understand cloud computing as I basically turn the key on my data center and said ‘that was it’ and everything else that I’m doing from that point onward is coming out of the cloud. We do actually at Hilti do quite a bit with cloud computing but that is peripheral additional applications that I do not have to run in my data center. I still have my data centers. I still run SAP in my data centers. I still run Microsoft Office in my data centers. That will not change in the next few months. That might change over the next 10 to 15 years, very likely, in different steps, but that’s not reality today. I do not believe that the larger industries today can close the data centers because everything is coming out of the cloud.”

Another participant in this panel discussion, Mr. Olivier Gouin, Group CIO of Nestlé speaks of a private cloud that is specific to a larger enterprise business as opposed to a public cloud that is “more appropriate” for smaller businesses. He cautions against a “wrong perception” that cloud computing is antithetical to the typical method of implementing software (meaning via data centers) for larger businesses. Rather, the sole utility cloud computing represents for the enterprise is specifically within an entirely private “cloud” that, Mr. Gouin makes clear, ought to be separated from external facing websites. Finally, Mr. Gouin voices his opinion that the public Internet is still not ready for “prime time” as the result of the insecurity of data communication. Perhaps in a “few years” that may improve, but not the case at present.

I know that Ms Ibrahim is entirely off the mark. I would be happy to elaborate. Call me at 631-673-2929 to learn more.

More Software for Nurturing the Right Leads — Alinean XcelLive v.3

Posted on December 7, 2011 by Ira Michael Blonder

Tom Pisello, CEO of Alinean (http://www NULL.alinean NULL.com) has written extensively on the “new buyer” for technology products and services. I discussed a short piece that Tom Pisello prepared for Sandhill, Recovery Makes Selling IT Much Easier into 2012 Fahgettaboudit (http://sandhill NULL.com/article/recovery-makes-selling-it-much-easier-into-2012-fahgettaboudit/) back in November, 2011: How to Win The Complex Sale of Technology Products & Services in 2012.

Alinean has launched a SaaS offering, Alinean® xcelLive™ (http://www NULL.alinean NULL.com/XcelLive) which purports to be the first Saas sales and marketing offering that is accessible without a programmer. Cut through the marketing speak and you come up with a very handy online program that creates personalized (remembering Peppers & Rogers and Marketing 1:1, online marketing ought to speak directly to each web site visitor if it is to be effective) white papers, charts, and more. Best of all, Alinean customers can feed their specific information into the SaaS system from Excel spreadsheets, Word and PowerPoint documents. It’s safe to say, on paper, that ease of use is quite high with this product.

What’s the objective? No less than to empower customers of Alinean’s SaaS to respond to the new IT buyers of 2012 and beyond right away, even as they visit web sites sifting through Pisello’s “noise” for the information they require to make an informed decision about whether or not the product at hand is a product worth a second look and, perhaps, a call to a sales person. Note: sales people in the soon to be at hand new world of 2012 are called in after a decision is already in progress, not before.

While I am not completely sold that I want my sales team to be called in after the fact, I have to acknowledge that the premise is quite plausible and borne out by my own extensive experience. The fact that IT budgets are very tight as the result of the fact that, pervasively, IT implementations have failed to deliver full dollar value on their promise. Further, information overload is the rule. Buyers do not need sales people to add more information, they need sales people to provide the business case rationale (as Pisello frames it, in clear, palpable estimated cost savings) why product A is superior to product B or C. Therefore, where prospects have a clear sense of what they’re after, I think that this SaaS offering is quite compelling.

For the record, I want my sales people working prospects in very early stages, typically prior to the formulation of clear buying decisions. If sales is ensconced within a prospect at a very early stage of a buying decision, then the opportunity exists to influence the prospect and ensure that the solution of choice becomes something unique to my sales team and my products. Of course, development of my type of opportunity requires lots of time and a lengthy sales cycle. Certainly contact me directly at 631-673-2929 if you care to hear further about my approach.

Nevertheless, a safe bet would be to utilize Pisello’s SaaS on the web, with my kind of sales team back at the office.

Good Luck Selling Unclear Products

Posted on December 3, 2011 by Ira Michael Blonder

Technology innovators with products in flux should have minimal to no expectation of sales.

What are products in flux? Products in flux are conceived by marketers who opt for the “ready, fire aim” approach to product development rather than a more conservative “ready, aim, fire” approach. I am using “in flux” as a synonym for “in play”. Changing either products, or the method of distribution for products, subsequent to market introduction confuses buyers. Confused buyers generally are in no position to buy anything, especially if a confusing product presentation alights atop a heap of additional internal confusion within the business. Therefore, be especially careful not to opt for this product development technique for products that require a commplex selling strategy.

If you’ve already gone and polluted your market space with this lack of product clarity, then the best way to deal with your soon to be sales-less situation is to drop any/all pretense of selling and revert to listening and surveying customer prospects to garner their best thoughts of markets that you intend, ultimately, to serve with your ever evolving product. How to catch an early indication that your product might need retooling? Consider your market pricing, and preliminary estimate of the length of a typical sales cycle for your product. If realities are way off of your assumptions, then you need to reconfigure your product.

Real life example: a client of mine has built a product for a market serviced by channel partners, meaning resellers who add value to manufacturers by configuring products for end customer implementation and supporting these same products after implementation. My client opted to offer products directly to end users, without availing of channel partners. Our attempts at direct sales were characterized by very lengthy sales cycles, and a rather low level of buying interest. When we landed orders, the orders were landed at low prices. General consensus, we would not be able to achieve revenue “escape velocity” via our direct to the end customer approach for our market.

We decided to reconfigure our distribution plan. We approached channel partners with an interest in discussing their expectations for products like ours in their market, etc. We also reassembled his product to better conform to channel offerings. All of this work transpired during his initial “go to market” effort. Revenues lagged, but we had taken a promising turn that bodes well for the future of his product.

If your product is unclear, better strive for clarity before expecting much of sales. Your time will not be wasted. Once you’ve repositioned your product you may be able to hasten revenue beyond the timing you assumed in your product plan.

Marketing, Promotion & Sales Consulting for Business

IMB Enterprises, Inc., Huntington, NY 11746 +1 (631) 673-2929, imblonder@imbenterprises.com