SharedBook: On Demand

Marketing Myopia: Does the Song Remain the Same?

When I was studying Marketing in college (long before there was anything called the Internet and Personal Computers were something only the Jetsons had in TV land) we were assigned to research an area of marketing that was of interest, and prepare a paper on how it applied to today’s market. My project was on Marketing Myopia, based on a paper written by Theodore Levitt. This paper was published in the Harvard Business Review, a journal of which he was an editor. What’s amazing to me is that the paper was written in 1960, but it continues to apply to business today.

Basically the paper discusses how businesses are too restricted in their thinking and continuously miss opportunities by not “thinking out of the box.” Hence, why I also used the theme song from one of my favorite bands Led Zeppelin. I know I bring up the music business often in my posts. I just can’t think of another industry that could be so narrow in their thinking that by the time the Internet was adopted by over 50% of homes in the U.S., it was too late for them to adopt a new distribution strategy and fully recover. And that was almost 40 years after Levitt’s paper was published. Often I wonder how many corporate decision makers I will encounter that will fall into the same predicament.

Our charter in business development for SharedBook is to work with progressive companies that have a strong online presence with good content that can be utilized offline in book form. Our job is to convey how our software can monetize online assets that otherwise would lay dormant, as well as extend brands. The good news is that a lot of businesses understand the importance of adopting new Web 2.0 strategies. We have some terrific marketing partners here at SharedBook and I am sure there will be many more to come. However, as influential as Levitt’s work was, does the song remain the same? Stay tuned!

How to Create a Market 101

The take up on Google’s non-Internet advertising efforts has been a slow go at best. Their strategy as a whole (from a Google or Google shareholder perspective) makes complete sense. However, the traditional media outlets and agencies are not quite ready to embrace it yet. Media companies want the revenue but don’t want another middleman between them and their advertisers.

What’s a company to do …? If you’re Google, I guess you go out and buy a media outlet! Rumor has it that Google is eyeing Sirius Satellite Radio! Dave Utter on WebProNews has some coverage which apparently originated on ClickZ.com.

If this deal does come to fruition it just goes to show that if a willing market doesn’t yet exist, your own money can create one.

Monetizing Content in the Web 2.0 World

Following the trends in today’s marketplace for where corporations are directing their acquisitions, leads one to conclude that there has been a gradual but steady paradigm shift towards user-generated content and social networking. Over the past few years, some major acquisitions have taken place: Google acquired YouTube and News Corp. acquired MySpace at tremendous valuations reminiscent of the late 1990s.

But the numbers don’t lie, and many social networks have built tremendous user bases with countless amounts of content such as pictures, video, blogs, etc. to share with the public. It’s debatable as to what is the best method for how content get’s consumed, should it be free based on an advertising model, or should it be charged through a subscription model. All that is highly debatable, but one thing is for sure, the user ultimately is in control.

User-generated content and social networking on the Web also have other implications; the old method of content distribution has changed forever. For example, the music industry no longer has the control it once had over artists and retail. They are scrambling how to figure out how to best sell content now that digital distribution is growing and physical distribution through retail has basically shrunk to only a few outlets. Plus, peer-to-peer file sharing is as strong as ever. Who would have thought the mighty Tower Records would close their flagship store in NYC? The fastest growing segment of the music business is the independent community. But this is only a snapshot of what is happening in other digital content marketplaces such as publishing and television.

People are clearly interested in user-generated content and old distribution models are changing fast, so how can companies that have digital content best address the online marketplace and monetize their assets?

I am admittedly biased, but perhaps it’s best to utilize a platform such as SharedBook's that enables on-demand distribution, allows the user to select the content that is important to them and provides a certain level of customization and personalization. The faster organizations address the changing content distribution marketplace and invest or partner with companies that can enable them to engage their customers, the sooner they will see returns. 

What Goes Around

Five years ago, when SharedBook technologists started working on the specs for what is now the SharedBook Reverse Publishing Platform, we believed that our platform would particularly resonate within the trade publishing world. Pre POD, pre-Web 2.0, pre-personalization, we learned the hard way that we were just too pre. So, we turned our attentions to the travel and sports worlds, where we found wonderful customers like Regent Seven Seas and Yosemite National Park and Little League International and AYSO. Then came social networking and clients like Legacy.com and CarePages (launching soon) and a slew of others to come this summer. Having just returned from the O’Reilly TOC Conference in San Jose, I’m excited about the creativity and thinking within the trade publishing world. For most, a book is no longer text within bound covers, but content that can be distributed in a host of new ways. Watch for a SharedBook installation within this world soon.

What Is It About Ad Agencies?

...and marketing firms that seemingly makes them the most resistant to change and new ideas? Isn't this the antithesis to why the clients have hired them in the first place? I experienced this first in the new media world when brands just started discovering online, but now I am with a company that is truly trying to change paradigms in how we think about media and consumer engagement. We not only deliver the hot Web 2.0 topics like consumer generated media and word of mouth marketing to brands but it is funded by the consumer. Let me repeat that... FUNDED BY THE CONSUMER!

We like to talk directly with companies, but I really feel the agency world should be looking at ideas like this so I continue to try. Here's what happens. After dozens of reach out attempts to our friends at the agencies, cold, warm and hot, I finally have a meeting and the feedback is "hmmm… cool idea" .....................zzzz........grass growing.......birds chirping.  They have no idea what to do with it. Yes, there are exceptions but I've worked for a world class media company and I've worked at a start-up and the experience is the same.

I know what you are thinking: "Maybe your idea stinks?" But it doesn't. Trust me. Brands get it. You talk to people with a stake in generating revenue or creating real consumer engagement for their company and their eyes get wide when they hear.

I know the pressures of agencies and the slim margins they work on, etc., but I have to think they're not helping themselves by being as inaccessible and as task-oriented as they seem to be.

Answering the Door

Last week, was one of those weeks we love in business development.  I was down in DC exploring a new potential application of our technology (early indicators say it looks promising by the way!).  In the interim, I did some research on my fellow exhibitors at Web 2.0 to target potential opportunities.  Neither of these activities was time spent on our core targets.  Of course, in that time, we were also trying to wrap up a few deals that fall into our key areas of focus. 

All this activity makes me analyze my time closer.   It's a constant balance between focus and opportunity. There seem to be two schools of thought about business development in a start-up world.  Opportunistic vs. Singular Focus.   My philosophy has always been that any organization, not just a start-up, needs to be able to stay nimble and outward looking to hear opportunity knocking.   

There are acquisitions, timely current events, new information gained (even people you meet on a plane, right Dave? ), which any good business should be able to act upon in real time.  I think a team should devote up to 20% of their time researching, exploring and responding to new ideas.  If the 80% left does not allow enough time to execute your core plan, then the core plan is too broad and you should narrow your focus to allow you to answer the door when opportunity knocks.