Businesses with more than one product distribution channel need controls to insulate revenue plans from the negative impact of conflicts between distribution channels. Barnes & Noble is an example of a business in need of these controls. The company sells products through its website, and through an extensive network of retail locations. We found pricing on books through Barnes & Noble’s website to be a couple of dollars higher than the same item as priced on Amazon. The retail price for the same book, but purchased at one the company’s retail locations was substantially higher.

We think Barnes & Noble is missing a significant opportunity to take market share from Amazon as the result of the pricing difference between its online store and brick and mortar equivalents. If, for example, the couple of dollar difference between the cost of the same book on either Amazon or Barnes & Noble’s website is put together with a zero cost shipping option, then Barnes & Noble wins. The zero cost shipping option can be achieved by permitting the online purchaser to pick up her item at a Barnes & Noble retail location. But this option isn’t available.

The option may not be available as a method of protecting profitability, which is essential for retail booksellers who otherwise have to operate under substantial pricing pressure on popular titles. The cost of operating retail locations is certainly much higher than the cost of operating the online store. But when protecting profits requires a 75% uplift against the online store price for the same item, then some sort of control is required, or else plan on losing market share.

We have a call into Barnes & Noble requesting a conversation with someone in their marketing team to learn more about the rationale for the pricing differences. Macy’s, BestBuy and others are all trying to match Amazon’s prices from the retail location. We think this is a much better approach.

Anonymous visitors to websites identified by VisualVisitor (http://www NULL.visualvisitor NULL.com), or one of their competitors, can be successfully targeted to receive the type of promotional collateral proven to build brand awareness.

Press releases are an excellent choice for this type of activity. Here’s how to identify recipients:

1. Select businesses to receive your press release information from the leads list provided by VisualVisitor for your website
2. Check your internal CRM system for any identified contact from the businesses selected in 1)
3. Use social media resources, including LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and Google + to add contacts who you can reach
4. Add these contacts to your internal CRM system
5. Where possible, send a link to your press release, along with a one paragraph précis of the release, directly to targeted recipients by email
6. Where an email address is not available, make careful use of messaging features of social media to send the same message to targeted recipients
7. After sending the press release, note the activity in your internal CRM and schedule another message three (3) months out

This system will help you build marketplace awareness for your brand. We write and publish press releases with PRweb

We’ve seen a marked improvement in clicks to our client’s website since implementing VisualVisitor on a blog that we produce for the client.

You will note we recommend scheduling a second email, or social media message to targeted recipients ninety (90) days from your first direct marketing effort. We chose a date several months out to spare the contact from the type of excessive contact activity we’ve noted as the norm for drip email marketing campaigns. Keep in mind, your effort is meant to introduce your brand to the recipient, not to sell your product. Should the recipient have a need for a product in your market in the future, chances are he or she will look further into your offer once your brand has been introduced through this method.

IMB Enterprises, Inc. has considerable recent experience working with direct marketing programs for early stage businesses with technology products. If your business can use a more effective direct marketing program, please contact us (http://www NULL.prweb NULL.com) to discuss what you need.

Direct marketing should be an ongoing activity for businesses of any size. But frequently smaller businesses either overemphasize this lead generation strategy, or complete ignore it. The familiar picture of a small consulting firm with two or three representatives placing lots and lots of unsolicited telephone calls usually lacks one or more smiling faces. This approach is very difficult and expensive when you factor in the amount of time required to identify targets, place calls and, hopefully, finally engage with a contact. As a client once explained to us, “when you do finally find someone who’ll listen to your story, you can bet they’ve got a real hard problem to solve”. So there ought to be a better way to implement a direct marketing strategy for a smaller business on a tight budget.

Let’s start by categorizing direct marketing efforts into “sensible” and “not so sensible” buckets. The picture of a consulting firm’s “boiler room” falls into our “not so sensible” bucket. Lots of work, lots of irate recipients of unsolicited telephone calls, burned out sales representatives and a miniscule contribution to the bottom line. But a plan to use direct marketing efforts to produce leads rather than sales makes more sense and is a worthy addition to the “sensible” bucket. Better yet: this type of program may not be very costly to implement.

VisualVisitor (http://www NULL.visualvisitor NULL.com) is an example of a Software as a Service (SaaS) cloud system designed to provide website owners with leads, in this case information about visits to their websites from businesses. At a monthly cost of $39.00 we think VisualVisitor is worth some investigation. By focusing direct marketing efforts on the smaller businesses identified by the VisualVisitor system, smaller consulting firms have a better chance of identifying specific individuals who may want to hear about what the firm has to offer. Keep in mind, the reason why the smaller firm is on your radar is a visit placed to your website by someone employed at the firm. So a genuine rationale for a call is available, which is important when placing unsolicited calls to businesses.

In the next post to this blog we’ll look further at this system.

If your business is struggling to identify a sensible lead generation system, please contact us. We’ve put together a package of service specifically for smaller businesses.

Advanced manufacturing techniques help competitors in commodity markets lower their cost of production. Creative product marketing teams can portray these techniques as true innovation, and thereby cloak the real mainstream nature of products from buyers. When this happens, competitors with truly leading edge products lose market share and fade into the background, invisible to buyers.

We think this scenario is playing out on three fronts to the disadvantage of Microsoft®. The three fronts are:

1. the Small, Smart, Mobile Device (SSMD) market for tablet computers
2. the SSMD market for smart phones
3. and the desktop computing market for Operating System Software

Microsoft is clearly the technology leader in all three of these markets. No one else has come to market with a scalable operating system that provides the core of Windows 8, for desktop computing, the Windows Phone 8 OS for the Windows Phone and the Surface tablet. Apple has not made an attempt to implement touchscreen technology for its laptop or desktop computers, nor has Google’s Android division for the Chromebooks.

But, we argue, the market perceives Microsoft as the technology laggard in these markets. Whether it’s a matter of someone on a television show extolling the iPad, or someone else, online, exaggerating the penetration of cloud and/or SaaS vendors into the enterprise computing market, the same message reverberates. Microsoft fails to communicate the true market-leading nature of their new operating systems and products.

We think a shift in focus, away from “me too” messaging to “why follow me” would certainly help Microsoft’s marketing communications efforts. Consider how their efforts in market 3), above, would fare should they highlight how anyone with Carpal stress syndrome would welcome touchscreens on the desktop. Examples of manufacturing businesses with noisy shop floors and a lack of desk space would likely make the same impression on buyers.

If you need to tune up your brand, and understand the importance of successful marketing communications to your efforts, please contact us. We’d welcome an opportunity to hear about your products and your needs.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

Tech product buyers in the United States looking for hot items are always open to identifying the items they want to purchase with “high tech” or “advanced technology” brand labels. This openness borders on gullibility. Savvy marketers can use it to their advantage.

In 2013, Small, Smart Mobile Devices (SSMDs) are hot items. Several computing concepts, including cloud, Software as a Service (SaaS), Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) and Elastic Infrastructure depend directly on market interest in SSMDs.

Industry pundits usually refer to the market leaders in the SSMD space (Apple, Google Android, and Samsung) as “high tech” businesses with “advanced technology”. But we think these industry players are really good at building products for commodity markets. Their manufacturing methods may be innovative and advanced, but the market for SSMDs is pure commodity.

On Thursday, May 9, 2013, the All Things Digital blog published an article by Arik Hesseldahl, Samsung Galaxy S4 Costs $237 to Build, Teardown Analysis Shows (http://allthingsd NULL.com/20130508/samsung-galaxy-s4-costs-237-to-build-teardown-analysis-shows/?KEYWORDS=Arik+Hesseldahl). The techniques Samsung has implemented to control the cost of manufacturing its “leading edge” “smart phone”, as Mr. Hesseldahl details in the post, are all designed to bolster the competitive position of the product in the market. With manufacturing cost kept as low as possible, Samsung is better able to deal with each of the five forces Michael Porter covers in his classic article on the topic of competition, The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy (http://hbr NULL.org/2008/01/the-five-competitive-forces-that-shape-strategy/ar/1). Reading Mr. Porter’s article, most people will acknowledge the scenarios he depicts, for example, competition in the airline travel market, the photo snap shot market, etc. are all commodity driven.

Product marketers thoroughly familiar with commodity markets are highly likely to do a better job hitting revenue targets at tech companies embroiled in the SSMD market, or the market for applications dependent upon SSMDs, than their “leading edge” peers. Why else did Steve Jobs roll the dice on John Sculley from Pepsi?

If your software, or hardware business can use a different perspective on the market factors actually impacting your bottom line, please contact us. We can bring nearly 30 years experience to your challenge, which may be just what you need.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

Public announcements about products should be carefully timed and composed. Press releases, public appearances by company executives and even marketplace opinion pieces must all be closely coordinated with a product brand. Marketing communications efforts must adhere to the same guidelines.

But an apparent announcement by Microsoft® of a release of a new version of SharePoint Online (http://community NULL.office365 NULL.com/en-us/blogs/office_365_technical_blog/archive/2013/05/03/upgrading-to-the-new-sharepoint-online NULL.aspx), surprised us.

We maintain an Office 365 Enterprise E3 Plan account and recently completely a migration (actually, the migration occurred on April 6, 2013) to a new version of SharePoint Online. Our user interface is now consistent with SharePoint 2013, on premises. So what is this announcement all about?

Mystery can certainly be used to build market anticipation for a product. But the mystery enveloping yet another “new release” to a recently implemented “new release” for SharePoint Online, confused us. We expect lots of other SharePoint Online customers will experience the same confusion. Especially when the uncertain nature of the timing of the upgrade is factored in.

We think the public relations team could have done a better job at managing the public announcement of this “upgrade”. Unfortunately, this gaffe occurred soon after a couple of much more encouraging public announcements from Microsoft, which lead us to think (the prior two posts to this blog treated these announcements) the company had substantially, and successfully renovated its public relations strategy.

Reading the announcement on the Office 365 Blog, an article on the Redmond Mag web site, and some other opinions, we could not help but think how much better the announcement could have been handled by simply one spokesperson. A carefully composed notice, with specific details differentiating May’s “upgrade” from April’s “upgrade” would have been helpful.

Early stage ISVs grappling with how best to handle public relations can learn a lot from studying the activities of Microsoft’s PR team over the last month.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

On May 7, 2013, the online edition of The Wall Street Journal published an article authored by Shira Ovide, Microsoft Concedes Windows 8 Misses Expectations (http://online NULL.wsj NULL.com/article/SB10001424127887323826804578468823595533416 NULL.html?mod=WSJ_Tech_LEFTTopNews). We liked what we read in this article. Here’s why:

• In a short statement, Ms. Tami Reller, co-head of the Windows Division, broadly echoed marketplace sentiment about the quality of the Windows 8 launch: ” . . . and frankly we also didn’t get everything we dreamed of done in the first release . . .”
• Shira Ovide summed up Microsoft’s recent public announcements about “Windows Blue” as ” . . . an unusually frank admission about the shortcomings of its Windows 8 operating system . . . “
• The focus of the article shifted from Steve Balmer bashing to lots of details from Ms. Ovide’s conversation with Ms. Reller, which proved much healthier for Microsoft

It’s certainly difficult for a market leader to gracefully change its public persona from an organization frequently perceived as calculating, to one now voicing a ” . . . frank admission about . . . shortcomings”, but the PR team at Microsoft appears to have changed the view with this article.

PR does not exist in a vacuum. Marketing communications, and even customer relations activities from both sales and marketing teams also contribute to the public brand message. If Microsoft can exhibit more of this transformation through these other product marketing avenues, the market message will have to improve.

We don’t see the same disconnect with the promotional effort for Microsoft SharePoint, another product with a huge share of the market for a wide range of enterprise business requirements, including collaboration, document management, and business intelligence gathering. Despite analyst knocks we think SharePoint 2013 and, particularly, SharePoint Online, Office 365 is doing very well. Most of the brand management effort for this product has been handled by the application design team. The interface is visually much more appealing. Product features are also more accessible for business users.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

Public Relations is an important tool in the product branding process for any business. Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) need to skillfully implement a Public Relations function. Early stage ISVs can benefit from a study of the activities of mature, large ISVs.

Microsoft®‘s Public Relations function has been very visible over the last several months. Many brands are in a state of transition at the company. While its marketing communications efforts have maintained a consistent tone throughout these changes, the Public Relations strategy appeared to take a significant shift in direction in early May, 2013.

Let’s focus on the launch of the new Windows 8 operating system. Windows 8 debuted in the fall of 2012. A serious Public Relations problem arose soon after:

1. Steven Sinovsky, Head of the Windows products division abruptly left the company. Formal comments from Microsoft indicated problems for Mr. Sinovsky arising from what we, and likely the public, could only construe as a breakdown in the proper performance of the marketing team — not the picture Public Relations would otherwise want to paint for the public

Controversy arose soon after the launch of the product about actual sales numbers for Windows 8 licenses. As Tom Warren wrote on The Verge on April 26, 2013, Six months on, Windows 8 sales are a mystery (http://www NULL.theverge NULL.com/2013/4/26/4265182/windows-8-sales-after-six-months-are-a-mystery), despite an early announcement of sales of 40 million licenses for the new OS as of the end of November, 2012, and an additional 60 million announced in January of 2013, ” . . . at the current point in the Windows 8 rollout, Redmond has not yet disclosed the latest figures. Microsoft’s Q3 earnings have come and gone, and Windows revenue was flat despite a reported downturn in PC sales. At the same time in Windows 7′s history three years ago, Microsoft was declaring it ‘by far the fastest-selling operating system in history” with over 10 percent of all PCs running Windows 7. The company also announced 100 million license sales for Windows 7 on April 27th, 2010.’” (quoted entirely from Mr. Warren’s article. Please click the link we’ve provided to read the complete article).

Bottom line, the actual sales number are, at a minimum controversial, and at best indicative of a very cool reception for the product by the public.

Finally, questions were arising around the same time about Microsoft’s product distribution strategy. These questions stemmed from the company’s decision to enter the computing hardware business with the Surface tablet.

We think it’s useful to file most of the Public Relations tactics we’ve noted here in the “denial” bucket. The message of the denial bucket is “we’re fine, they’re wrong”. In the next post to this blog we’ll speak to the shift we noted early this month in the Public Relations strategy, to one better labeled “sober acceptance”. We think this message is working better.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

On Monday, May 6, 2013, the “Heard on the Street” column in The Wall Street Journal included a short piece authored by Rolfe Winkler, LinkedIn’s Real Value: Knowing All About People in All the Right Places (http://online NULL.wsj NULL.com/article/SB10001424127887324582004578461390393261864 NULL.html?KEYWORDS=Rolfe+Winkler). The article, in our opinion, is notable for a number of reasons, including

• misuse of common industry terms
• lopsided attention to one side of the vendor customer relationship
• a lack of attention to the importance of complex sales strategies to productive campaigns with larger businesses

We think it is instructive to take a post to discuss each of these points. Marketing Communications (MARCOM) needs to be as precise as possible. Where industry specific terms must be used, we think they should be used sparingly and strictly consistent with marketplace usage. While Mr. Winkler’s piece is an article, and not MARCOM collateral, it exhibits errors we’ve also noted in pure MARCOM promotional collateral efforts for “cloud” “SaaS” products and services.

Misuse of Common Industry Terms
Mr. Winkler writes: “LinkedIn Corp’s main product, driving 57% of first-quarter sales, is enterprises software . . . ” LinkedIn is a Software as a Service (SaaS) business, operating in the “cloud”. The service uses a common client, the web browser. In contrast, enterprise software is commonly understood to be software installed on premises, served locally, and usually with a proprietary client. So LinkedIn doesn’t market any enterprise software, at least as we understand it. On the other hand, they have a lucrative base of customers in enterprise business (meaning Fortune 1000), who opt to subscribe to the service directly, without using contingent search firms in the middle. This is Mr. Winkler’s point, we think.

Lopsided Attention to One Side of the Vendor Customer Relationship
If LinkedIn were actually as baldly avaricious as Mr. Winkler’s article would lead one to expect, then how would one explain the popularity of the service? LinkedIn subscribers get a lot out of the service. So they keep using it and convince colleagues to sign up. LinkedIn is not only about selling access to a method of ” . . . Knowing All About People in All the Right Places”.

Lack of Attention to the Importance of Complex Sales Strategies to Productive Campaigns with Larger Businesses
The days are past when “Joe address book” could produce the stellar sales results with Fortune 1000 businesses. Mr. Winkler’s conjecture “Imagine if, before making a call, a salesperson knew a colleague went to high school with a lead and could provide an introduction” is pure smoke in the age of Alinean’s “Frugalnomics” and the necessity of drip lead generation systems (Marketo, Eloqua and their ilk).

We think MARCOM teams for Cloud and SaaS ISVs will do well to avoid these mistakes. If your business can use some guidance on MARCOM style and theme, please let us know. We’d be enthused to learn more about what you’re after.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved

As the result of a growing number of well publicized successful attempts to compromise the data security of some prominent cloud services, the near term potential for security solutions is more promising.

But the problem is not an easy one to solve. As we wrote earlier in this blog, Ethernet data communications does not lend itself to the the extensive handshaking of other protocols. So tracing origination points, etc, is a far more difficult process than would otherwise be the case with a different protocol. Of course, Ethernet data communications is the worldwide standard for communications over the wide area, so it’s not likely that the public will migrate to a different protocol any time soon.

Now that President Obama and other leaders in the US Federal Government have expressed the urgency of building a defense system for cloud services, the media has begun to adopt a more strident and urgent tone on the question.

Take a recent article by Nick Biltin, “Disruptions: New Motto for Silicon Valley: First Security then Innovations” (http://bits NULL.blogs NULL.nytimes NULL.com/2013/05/05/disruptions-new-motto-for-silicon-valley-first-security-then-innovation/?ref=technology), which was published on the New York Times website, Bits Blog, on Sunday, May 5, 2013. Mr. Biltin takes a close look at the security problems at Twitter. He thinks two stage authentication should be implemented to fix the security question (we aren’t so sure two stage authentication will fix the problem. We recently read a blog post on successful hacks of celebrity accounts where two stage authentication was compromised). Regardless of whether the solution he has in mind will work, or not, is not key to our point. Either way, the public has a need for better security. ISVs with relevant solutions should take the steps required to spread the word.

There is a case to be made for a security training offer. A lot of research has shown users either fail to follow correct procedures, or have not been informed about them. ISVs with an online help system offer should think about partnering with businesses with the security training content required to equip cloud services users with the procedures they need to use cloud services safely.

Ira Michael Blonder (https://plus NULL.google NULL.com/108970003169613491972/posts?tab=XX?rel=author)

© IMB Enterprises, Inc. & Ira Michael Blonder, 2013 All Rights Reserved