RareBird

• home
• about us
  • Why Rare Bird?
  • The Crew
  • Our Clients
  • Job Openings
• news
  • Blog
  • Releases
  • Web Reviews
  • Newsletter
• portfolio
  • Web
  • Email
  • Print
• contact
• login

Rare Bird Blog

Why Nobody Cares About 'Billions'

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Here's a great idea about how you should present your business data to investors, prospects, or even just Mom: forget the billions. In a recent article, author and business plan expert Tim Berry explains that these numbers and this top-down approach just don't mean anything to anyone.

"As an investor, as a business plan contest judge, or as a teacher, I don’t really care how many billions of dollars are spent on this or that or the next thing when I’m reading a business plan. That number is too big. It tells me nothing."

He explains that what really matters, and what most of us can easily get our arms (and brains) around are the simple numbers; the granularity. For a web-based business, figure out what it will cost to get a single visitor to the site and how you'll do it. If you're a restaurant, tell me how you'll fill those seats on opening night and what you'll make from each customer. If you're the government trying to sell me a new healthcare plan, put it in terms of cost per doctor's visit or an average monthly premium. Then you can build forecasts from these details up into the larger numbers.

Especially for those companies in the business-plan-writing stages, this can be invaluable. Berry says, "I know that I’m in the majority, among people who read business plans, in really disliking the top-down, billions and billions kind of forecasts. When they start talking about getting only a very small percentage of an enormous market, they lose me. Those huge markets don’t split down into millions of pieces."

[Read the entire article]

Labels: business consulting, business forecasts, marketing

Can social media replace traditional marketing communications? Doesn't look likely...

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Dan forwarded me an article today that ranks right up near the top of my "Things to read that are relevant" list. Titled "What If Giving Up Your Brand Really Means Giving Up?" this Advertising Age article from Jonathan Salem Baskin asks some very pointed questions and draws some mildly controversial conclusions. (At least, I'm assuming they might be considered controversial among those people advocating a complete rush to social media in lieu of traditional branding, but it hasn't seemed to bubble up to the top of Digg or gain a notable trend on Twitter, so we may never know.)

Baskin argues, basing his conclusions on the recent Edelman 2010 Trust Barometer, that consumers are growing weary (and wary) of their peers as credible sources of branding information. Where we once happily turned to people we trust to learn their opinions about a company or brand, we're now skeptical of the same people and what they have to say. Maybe it's because so many have turned out to be shills working on behalf of the companies they were promoting. Or maybe it's because some of them turned out to be the actual companies themselves, pretending to be average Joes.

Or maybe it's because Twitter recently announced that they've surpassed the 50 million tweets per day mark, and we're all buried under the noise.

Regardless, this paragraph from the article seems a perfect summation:

"If we renewed our commitment to selling based on credibility, authenticity and utility, maybe people would trust what we tell them, respect our corporate reputations, and give us their purchasing loyalty. Maybe if we stopped thinking we can give up responsibility for why they should buy, and start acting like David Ogilvy and sell to them once again, they'd find comfort relying on our communications as well as the subsequent iterations through the social echo chamber. This might unleash the ultimate promise of social and empower people to know, discuss and change the way businesses function, not just blather on about marketing blather."

Absolutely, positively right on the mark. I recommend that you read the rest of his excellent article. You can also read the results of the Edelman study. Enlightening stuff.

Labels: authenticity, marketing, social media, twitter

Can you afford to be authentic in business?

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

I often say that true authenticity– being exactly who you really are and nothing else– is one of the most important things you can do to help be successful in whatever you're doing. When I saw this article from Business in Blue Jeans CEO Susan Baroncini-Moe talking about some of the issues people struggle with when trying to be authentic, it really struck a chord. To wit:

• We're all works in progress
• The truth has a way of seeping out
• It's not about appearances, it's about truth
• The real secret to gaining legitimacy is authenticity

How refreshing to hear someone discussing both the merits and difficulties of being truly authentic. I think her point about achieving legitimacy is key: we can only hope to find it by first gaining trust, and it's simply impossible to gain someone's trust by pretending to be something you aren't.


I often talk with people who are afraid to be authentic for fear that they might offend someone with whom they hope to do business. In fact, the opposite is often the case. By being true to who you are, you're more likely to connect with someone, not offend them. And, obviously, connecting is far more beneficial than leaving no impression at all. Of course, you certainly run the risk of not connecting– even offending– someone by being yourself. But if the two of you are that diametrically opposed, you're unlikely to be able to build a meaningful relationship anyway. And wouldn't it be nice to know that right away?


If you're interested, read Susan's article on Authenticity in Business.

Labels: business consulting, marketing

Social self-promotion: arrogance or confidence?

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

"There is a difference between being arrogant about yourself as a person and being confident that your work has some value. The first is unattractive, the second is healthy and natural. Some people respond to the one as if it were the other. Don’t confuse them. Marketing is not bragging, and touting one’s wares is not evil. The baker in the medieval town square must holler 'fresh rolls' if he hopes to feed the townfolk."

"But direct self-promotion is ineffective and will go unnoticed unless it is backed by a more indirect (and more valuable) form of marketing: namely, sharing information and promoting others."

Labels: marketing, self-promotion, twitter

Free shipping could make (or break) your holiday sales

Friday, November 6, 2009

According to Shop.org's annual eHoliday Study conducted by Big Research, retailers are increasing looking to the Internet to boost lagging sales. Among the efforts getting the most attention: increasing or enhancing their presence on social networks, improving site functionality, and creating enticing discounts.

Some nugget-sized statistics:

• 60% have updated their Facebook pages
• 58% are using Twitter
• 65% are blogging and using RSS feeds
• 45% have improved shopping cart functionality
• 44% improved site search
• 42% added or improved cross- and up-selling
• 40% added or improved ratings and reviews
• 37% featured sale pages

Consumers expect to shop online 30% more

Free shipping will be a key strategy: nearly 80% will offer some sort of free shipping and almost 60% will offer free shipping with no attached conditions.

It's clear that online retailers are considering every tool in the arsenal to help drive sales. We're seeing similar efforts with our clients. My favorite item might surprise many of you: almost eighty percent of online retailers expect sales to be at least 14% above 2008 levels. But maybe not all that surprising, as almost 30% of consumers plan to devote more of their holiday budgets to online purchasing this year. The motivation? Compare prices, get free shipping, eliminate hassle and avoid the crowds.

Labels: e-commerce, marketing, retail

One simple key to improving (nearly) everything

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Harvey Mackay, owner of Mackay Envelope, is widely known for his books and speaking engagements on sales. In his weekly column, he recalls the Broadway musical "My Fair Lady" to make a point:How can your products adopt this personal approach? How can your messages take the listener into consideration and truly make it all about them? How can your sales efforts follow this same success strategy? The solution is simple, and it's the one thing we're all designed to do: Listen. As the old saying goes, you have two ears and one mouth for a reason. Use them in proportion to one another.

Labels: business consulting, marketing, sales

Paint-by-Numbers or Blank Canvas?

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

In the April 2009 issue of Inc. magazine, Bo Burlingham interviewed Jim Collins (author of business best-sellers Built to Last and Good to Great) about the current state of entrepreneurship. There are several great insights, including this about the definition. Collins said, "I see entrepreneurship as more of a life concept. We all make choices about how we live our lives. You can take a paint-by-numbers approach, or you can start with a blank canvas. When you paint by numbers, the end result is guaranteed. You know what it's going to be, and it might be good, but it will never be a masterpiece. Starting with a blank canvas is the only way to get a masterpiece, but you could also blow up. So, are you going to pick the paint-by-numbers kit or the blank canvas? That's a life question, not a business question."

The follow-up question was about risk, when Burlingham asked, "It has to do with your ability to handle risk, no?"

Collins replied:

"Not risk. Ambiguity. People confuse the two. There's lower ambiguity on the paint-by-numbers path: very clear but more risky. The entrepreneurial path: very ambiguous but less risk. Of course, the truth is that it's all ambiguous, anyway. If you think you can predict the future, you're crazy."

So, the question for you is, are you trying to create something good, or are you working on a masterpiece?

Labels: business consulting, entrepreneurship, marketing

Focus on the message to survive the recession

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

As my old boss used to say, "cutting your marketing budget to save money is like stopping your watch to save time." It seems to be common knowledge among both business owners and marketers that a recession is the absolute worst time to cut your marketing budget. While knowing what not to do is important, it's better to know what you should do.

To help, a recent Knowledge@Wharton article offered some helpful advice that's worth considering: "The first reaction is to cut, cut, cut, and advertising is one of the first things to go," says Wharton marketing professor Peter Fader, adding that as companies slash advertising in a downturn, they leave empty space in consumers' minds for aggressive marketers to make strong inroads. Today's economy "provides an unusual opportunity to differentiate yourself and stand out from the crowd," says Fader, "but it takes a lot of courage and convincing to get senior management on board with that."

But as Wharton marketing professor Leonard Lodish points out, weakened demand causes the cost of many of these services to go down. "If your company has something to say that is relevant in this environment, it's going to be more efficient to say it now than to say it in better times," says Lodish.

Most interesting, however, is recent research that demonstrates just how powerful this economic downturn can be for companies that take advantage of the environment. According to the article, "a McGraw-Hill Research study looking at 600 companies from 1980 to 1985 found that those businesses which chose to maintain or raise their level of advertising expenditures during the 1981 and 1982 recession had significantly higher sales after the economy recovered. Specifically, companies that advertised aggressively during the recession had sales 256% higher than those that did not continue to advertise."

Some key concepts for success:

• Craft messages that reflect the times and explain how you can benefit the consumer
• Without dwelling on the economic conditions, realize that certain products require a straight-up approach; be authentic
• Focus on a goal-oriented message that helps people plan for the future
• While some can craft messages based on price, choose value instead
• Luxury products should appeal to emotion, highlighting the escapism, emotional release and comfort in difficult times
• Regardless of the tactic you choose, stay true to your brand

Other gems await... Be sure to read the entire article for more.

Labels: marketing, strategy, writing

Succeed in business: get the equation right

Monday, December 1, 2008

There are enough gems in this short two-page article to keep any business owner churning through possibilities and thought for some time, but the one that grabbed my attention may be the simplest (and should be the most obvious):

Start with what the customer wants and go from there.

This BusinessWeek article is about New York restaurateur Jonathan Rapp and his journey building a sustainable enterprise in the small town of Chester, Connecticut.

He left New York thinking his experience and reputation would be enough to succeed in the small town. He quickly learned otherwise. Says Rapp: "By Year Two, the trouble signs were too numerous to miss. Numbers were declining for both customers and revenue. There was a persistent drumbeat of criticism of virtually every aspect of the restaurant, except the food. No matter what we did, we couldn't shake the perception that we were too expensive, too “New York-y” (a nasty epithet here), and on top of that, had inconsistent, aloof service and a menu that was too limited."

He thought of selling, but after running the numbers realized he had nothing to sell. Quitting was also an unfavorable option, so he chose to take stock and try to turn the enterprise around. "I realized that I had the equation backwards," said Rapp. "I was making decisions based on what I wanted. In our own minds, we were the best restaurant around—but the fact was, we weren't connecting with our customers." Marketing Guru Seth Godin is fond of saying that you shouldn't create a product and then find a market for it. Instead, you should find out what the market wants and then create that product. This sounds like sage and obvious advice, but Rapp's story illustrates how easy it is to overlook it in practice.

So he fired his 'talented chef' that wouldn't adapt, formed a focus group of customers, and really dug into the community vibe of the small town. Specifically, he:

• Remodeled the restaurant to be cozier and more comfortable (less New York-y, to be sure)
• Began asking his customers what they wanted from a local restaurant
• Changed hours to be more accessible to when customers wanted to be customers (opening for lunch and dinner)
• Began communicating with customers on a regular basis to let them know what was happening in and around their 'community' restaurant
• Began collaborating with local artists, businesses and even other restaurants to create events and to reinforce their image as a member of an unique, thriving village.

But the best idea may be the purest, something Rapp calls "Dinners at the Farm." Dinners at the Farm is "a summertime series of outdoor dinners that we put on in the fields of local farms. The food, 100% locally produced, is cooked from scratch on our bright red 1955 Ford fire truck kitchen. Each dinner benefits a local agricultural nonprofit. Over the past two seasons, we have donated $28,000 and purchased over $50,000 worth of food and wine from local producers. More than 150 guests show up on any given night."

The short article is worth the read.

Labels: business consulting, marketing, strategy

What is the value of design?

Friday, August 22, 2008

We often field questions and have conversations around justifying the investment in good design. Traditionally, it's been very difficult to quantify the ROI of design. In some ways, the internet is helping to change that.

We've recently had the opportunity to accurately measure the impact of design for DRG, one of our clients in the publishing industry. While re-designing their primary lead generation site, FreePatterns.com, we focused on improving the usability to help members more quickly and effectively address their individual preferences. It's important to note that the design changed dramatically, the function changed somewhat, and the content remained the same.

The results were astounding:

• Visits increased by 8%
  
• Pageviews are up by 64%
  
• Time on the site increased by 30%

[Learn more about this project]
[Visit FreePatterns.com]

Labels: analytics, design, marketing, web development

What Do Cosumers Want Online?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

So, you think you know what your customers want? Go ahead and list the top three, I'll wait...

Got it? Great! Now check your list against this reality: Forrester Research recently conducted a survey of more than 5,000 online consumers to find out what content and functionality is most important to them. Here's what they found out:

Consumers want user ratings and reviews the most. Sixty-four percent of consumers reported wanting to see user ratings and reviews. And nearly the same amount also wanted price-focused offerings, like special offers or coupons (61%) and product or price comparison tools (59%).

Interestingly, while the majority want to have access to ratings and reviews, only a few (23%) have any intention of writing one. Not surprising, there were differences in preferences based on age groups. Generation Y (18 to 27) are more interested in being entertained and sharing content. Younger Boomers are trying to get things done. And Seniors just don't want the clutter of extra information keeping them from getting things into their cart and getting on with it.

One final, revealing item: Overwhelmingly, consumers voted for ease of use.

So now you know what they want, the question is, what are you doing about it?

[See more from Forrester's North American Technographics Customer Experience, Marketing, And Consumer Technology Online Survey]

Labels: consumers, marketing, web development

If You Read Nothing Else Today, Read This:

Monday, February 4, 2008

Seth Godin, pitchman for common sense and a marketer's marketer, wrote a post recently that should be printed, laminated, and stuck on the wall of every single person who is even contemplating sending a 'promotional' email out to a customer or prospect. Marketers everywhere should read it every day (some, probably twice a day.) They should point to it every time someone walks into their office and says, "Hey, we have an email list, right?" They should print extra copies and have them on hand for marketing meetings, sales meetings, board meetings, and water cooler gatherings.

In a word, this is the truth, as hard as it is to hear and as hard as it is to follow. Do this, and reap the rewards. Don't, and, well... The world is full of people who squandered long-term opportunities in pursuit of short-term gains.

[Read Permission Marketing from Seth Godin's blog.]

Labels: branding, email marketing, marketing, permission marketing

Target: So Many Things Right, One Big Thing Wrong

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Disclaimer: I'm generally a fan of Target®. I appreciate the turn around they've implemented and I applaud their belief that general consumers (read: the rest of us as the unwashed masses) appreciate good design and want to own it, even if we don't want to pay an arm and a leg for it.

So it was with some alarm and a great deal of surprise when I learned that they seem to be so far out of touch with the reality of the world in which they do business. Here's the story:

They recently ran an ad that featured a young girl laying spread-eagle across a life-size representation of the notable trademark. This girl happened to be lying in a position that placed the center of the target -- the bullseye, so to speak -- directly between her akimbo legs.

A blogger named Amy Jussel from an organization called Shaping Youth took notice of the ad and sent a question to their corporate headquarters voicing her concern that this ad might be placing too much emphasis on the woman's genitals, and didn't they think this might be a little overly sexually subversive? (At this point in the story, you can choose to agree or disagree... it's their response that was truly imbecilic.)

Target responded with the following terse reply:

Good Morning Amy,

Thank you for contacting Target; unfortunately we are unable to respond to your inquiry because Target does not participate with non-traditional media outlets. This practice is in place to allow us to focus on publications that reach our core guest.

Once again thank you for your interest, and have a nice day.

"We want to focus on publications that reach our core guest"? It's the Internet, folks, which part of your core do you think isn't being reached by the Internet? I could go on, but the stupidity of this stance is hopefully obvious.

I am forced to ask, however, "So what?" So they've alienated bloggers and marginalized that part of their core that is being served by the Internet. So what? Will they be generally incensed enough to write thousands of words about how idiotic Target is? Probably. Maybe Definitely. Will these people stop shopping at Target? Maybe. Maybe not. The truth is, Target may never know the full cost of taking this position, because it may hit them in ways unforeseen by methods not contemplated.

An example? Sure... It's a known fact that the inclusion of product reviews on an e-commerce site can provide a noticeable boost to sales, especially for products receiving positive reviews. The reviews that have the most impact are not written by professional reviewers, they're written by customers. Is it possible that some of these customers, perhaps bloggers themselves, might be less likely to take the time to write a positive product review on Target's web site? Or, realizing that Target devalues their input, isn't it also possible that these same people might be more likely to only share their negative reviews? I think you can count on it.

Labels: blogging, internet, marketing, strategy, stupidity

The Inmates (and/or the Legal Department) Are Running the Asylum

Friday, January 18, 2008

File this under the same business category as "New Coke" only bigger, dumber, but (possibly) less expensive, though the true cost is to be determined. You probably didn't know, but Mattel and Hasbro have been stewing recently about a MySpace application call Scrabulous that allows members of the site to play a game that is suspiciously (ok, it's the same) like Scrabble™. Unable to stand themselves any longer, they've ordered the game squashed like a G-R-A-P-E (17 points).

Now, obviously, this game is a violation of the Scrabble™ trademark, so why shouldn't they put their collective foot down? Well, let's consider that there were over 600,000 registered users playing this little wonder. And let's consider what percentage of half a million likely rekindled some sort of fondness for a game they hadn't played in years, and maybe -- just maybe -- picked up a new physical for home. And let's consider how virulent this new online world we live in can be. What were their options? I couldn't write a better list than Matt Dickman, so I'll just repeat it here:

If I were in Mattel's marketing department here is what my train of thinking would be here:

1. Somebody please kick the legal department out of the room. Thanks, now let's continue.
2. Wow! These guys built an awesome application around our brand
3. We NEED to talk to them and buy this application ASAP
4. We NEED to hire these guys (or at least retain them) to do updates and possibly roll this out to other networks (Bebo, MySpace, etc.)
5. Seriously guys, keep those lawyers out of here! Just tell them somebody in accounting is using the wrong Pantone color in the logo again.
6. If we can't buy it, we at least need to sponsor/co-present it as *the* official Scrabble game on Facebook
7. If none of those options work we need to congratulate those guys publicly for their efforts and encourage people to join in
8. I wonder why we didn't think of this.

Matt goes on to make some recommendations about how you should be applying this lesson learned to your own situation. Read it and take heed.

Labels: legal, marketing, stupidity

Business Consulting or Web Development?

Friday, December 21, 2007

We walked out of a client meeting the other day when Michael, one of our recently-acquired programmers asked me, "So, was that fairly typical of how these meetings go?"

I ran through a mental checklist... let's see, we talked about design, site architecture, implementation strategy, marketing strategy, product delivery, logo and identity development, branding issues and concerns, product pricing, sales efforts, post-launch PR and marketing efforts, beta testing, testimonials, and a few other things.

"Yes," says I, "that's a pretty good example of how these things go." His response surprised me:

"I'm surprised at how much business consulting goes on," he said.

Which is interesting to me, primarily because it can be difficult to define what we do. Obviously, we specialize in web development and new media, but there are so many other issues involved that we're providing a high level of business consulting at every step of the way. I just never really thought about it in that light before.

Thanks, Michael!

Labels: business consulting, marketing, strategy, web development

E-Commerce, Affiliate Marketing, and Predictive Modeling

Monday, November 19, 2007

I had the good fortune of addressing a group of progressive-thinking marketers last week at a Marketing Roundtable held by Strategic Fulfillment Group. The meeting, held in the historic Stockyards of Ft. Worth, Texas, proved to be enjoyable and enlightening. Aside from my presentation about "Perfecting the Online Buying Environment", attendees heard from Ash Ishrak, Strategic Solutions Leader for IBM's West Region; Mike Gunn, president and CEO of Chicago-based Profit Rank; and Jim Tucker, president and CEO of Integrated Marketing Technology in San Francisco.

Some of the most interesting topics from the event dealt with the methods being employed by Tucker's group to provide realistic and accurate predictive modeling. Their analysis applies 138 different criteria to your database records to help you determine which segments would perform the best. The upside is that you can achieve similar results by targeting a much smaller portion of the whole. Pretty cool stuff.

We also spent some time discussing the ins and outs of strategic, triggered email events that can be used to automatically contact customers based on a variety of criteria. You're probably familiar with things like order and shipping confirmation, but this same approach can be used for a whole variety of contacts. Examples include customer service and promotional messages, and almost any kind of targeted communication based on customer order history, preferences, activities, etc. Also pretty cool.

My time was spent highlighting some of the best practices in web design, both at the product and the cart level, with a eye toward helping companies realize the best possible results from their online efforts. I'll get more into some of this later, but here's a hint of one item: too much choice can be a bad thing.

Labels: marketing, strategy

Everyone's An Expert

Friday, November 16, 2007

It seems like everyone is an expert at something. We have automobile experts, stock market experts, antique experts... we even have a client who's a sheep and goat expert. This abundance of experts in all fields butts up against a point of friction with the Internet, where information is clamoring to be free (or pretty cheap) and readily available. This leaves experts in a tough place. It's no longer enough to declare yourself an expert and expect everyone to just accept it. Instead, experts are forced to engage in a continuous effort to prove that they are, in fact, expert in a given subject.

[Read the complete article]

Labels: internet, marketing, web reviews