Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged...
 

Web 2.0

Are you ready? Here's my take. Feel free to disagree.

If you had a product to sell, a real one, not a virtual one...like a water purifier for example...

Which would you rather have...a team of Salespeople selling directly to the customers OR a Web Site that sold your product?

There is NO right or wrong answer, your opinion is wanted. I'm going to share mine.

Before I get into it, some food for thought:

Derek Gehl took over Internet Marketing Center (IMC) when Corey Rudl passed away in a race car accident (we should all be so lucky to go out doing something we love doing like Corey did). The IMC has made over 60 million dollars in the last 10 years, and is, I believe, one of the larger and more successful Internet marketing companies...with a REAL product that gets shipped out.

You could probably name several more, but consider that Rodale, Time-Warner, Publishers Clearinghouse, SCI, AARP, Credit card companies, banks, publishers...yada, yada, yada...

many of whom will take in 60 MILLION dollars in the next few months...and do that amount every year...YEAR after YEAR after YEAR...well,

It just makes me wonder...that's all, makes me think about the REAL world out there...cause sometimes, I forget it exists as I'm focused on this screen in front of me.

I was down in Canton, Ohio the other day and I drove by several companies including London's Candies, Hoover, Timken, Suarez Corporation Industries, Universal-Syndications, James Direct, Fitness Quest, NCP Marketing Group (Billy Blanks and Taebo)...

and several other companies...and these all SELL products. Sweepers, Ball Bearings, Chocolates, Heaters, Jewelry, Collectibles, Books, Exercise equipment, DVD, audio programs...all kinds of products.

And I noticed their PARKING lots were full. In fact I was surprised because a couple of these were PACKED with no place to park...some off line brick and mortar businesses must be doing pretty well.

Friends, my point is this: Just because you "live" online, look around your home and see how many products you bought from a real person.

AH. Web 2.0.

It is in MY opinion bringing the CONNECTION between people back...the so-called High Tech-High Touch that John Naisbitt wrote of in his 1982 best seller, MegaTrends.

And it is also my opinion we have just seen the beginning of PEOPLE TO PEOPLE marketing done online.

You might want to cut and paste that into a document and ponder on it for awhile.

You've seen the video testimonials at scores of sites.

WEB 2.0 is going to put the SALESMAN back in front of the PROSPECT (another keeper).

Real Time Connection...your question...my answer. Your INTEREST, my SALESMANSHIP...no longer in "print" as a letter (or screen)...

BUT with all my ability to persuade, control, lead, influence, manipulate, encourage, cajole and get you to say YES to my offer.

Isn't that what Internet Marketers have been trying to do for the last decade...lead you through either a long winded, multi-page sales "letter" or to cut to the chase and say...here it is, buy it now (for a good reason)? They have been trying to get your YESes, and some copywriters have made fortunes with their "salesmanship in print".

How will YOUR online promotion, your web site stand up against MY directly competing WEB 2.0 site? How will your sales of that Water Purifier compare to mine, where a prospect gets a LIVE person...in real time...and has all her questions answered...all her objections addressed, all her reluctance to buy taken care of...

OF course, your well targeted NICHE web site, with a quality OFFER (salespage) will probably continue to make you sales. But some of those companies I mentioned above already have DOZENS of people at desks, on the PHONE...ready to take your credit card number...

And I think a few of them may very soon have the ability to have those "operators standing by" types...armed with professionally crafted sales script on the wall...and TALK directly to you and SEE you and.... well...

USE SALESMANSHIP at it's most effective level...person to person.

Web 2.0 is that: PERSON TO PERSON.

Same TARGET niche, say those searching for Water Purifiers. Your google ad against mine. My PEOPLE ready 24/7 to answer your questions, to 'guide' you, to take your money and make you a satisfied customer.

And write this down. Before the year is out, there will be DIRECT MAIL solicitations that take you ONLINE to a real person.

I think it was Gary Halbert who wrote many years ago...and I'm paraphrasing from memory...that the object of your web site was to get people OFF line and to get them to deal with YOU (your sales team) DIRECTLY...

and the next huge Direct Marketing Revolution will be to get you to GO ONLINE, where you can CONNECT WITH ANOTHER HUMAN being...
and there will be windfalls made in record breaking time...just

WATCH what happens.

But, that is just my opinon.

OH. And one other thing...I've had friends all over the country lose power for up to a week or more...some longer. Their INTERNET only businesses came to screeching halt...a few headed to the nearest HOT spot with their notebooks to "keep the business alive".

It will NEVER happen. NEVER. But, what if, for whatever reason...the Internet wasn't available to you for, say a month. I wonder how sales would be at the Internet Marketing Center?

I do know that sales in Canton, Ohio would be just like the Energizer Bunny at this point...they'd keep going, and going and going.

Direct Marketing is alive and well outside of that box sitting on or under or behind your desk...

OK. How do you think WEB 2.0 will impact marketing? Any ideas? Any comments?

Thanks for your time and attention.

Gordon Jay Alexander

PS. I wonder what is going to happen when the first REAL TIME person to person dating, introduction, WEB2inar takes place? I better head to the gym right NOW.

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged...
 

Thanks for writing about web 2.0 Gordon.

I think every good marketer should study the techniques of FutureNowInc.com

They've helped sites get 5-10-20% response rates consistently. Even as high as 60% response rates! That is unheard of in the direct marketing world.

I'm not sure if they call it web 2.0 selling - but what they do is give people options based on their personalities. One site will have 4-16 different sales funnels based on 4-16 different imaginary personality profiles.

More than direct person-to-person contact - what web 2.0 has done is shown how easy it is to give different options to sell the same thing depending on what people show what they like. For me, web 2.0 is simply better "user interactivity".

In direct marketing jargon - its latency based (or trip wire based) marketing on steroids.

Which product does a customer buy? What information did he read or search for to make that purchase decision? How long before he showed interest in the product did he actually buy it?

Based on such questions - show more relevant buying options to the customer - in real time.

Web 2.0 =
 

ZIP.

Yup, ZIP. Mostly, Web 2.0 is nothing more than hype. It involves doing what people have been trying to teach you to do all along. In other words, there is no "Web 2.0".

What there IS, is a new phrase coined by a marketer trying to give his stuff some zip.

I've been to a couple of hard-nosed marketing forums in the past few weeks were this has been kicked around, and kicked to death. And, most all of those that have participated in the discussions all agree.. Web 2.0 is nothing more than doing what you SHOULD have been doing all along. :)

But hey, it makes for some lively discussions, and it gets the newbie to buy something that they might otherwise pass on. Shoot fire, if it says Web 2.0 it must be something really hot! (Not)

My 2¢

Pete

Re: Web 2.0 =
 

Pete,

I've heard you say this before but didn't reply to it.

I think you have a misunderstanding of what web 2.0 is all about.

For the kind of stuff you do, like mostly ebooks and sales pages, web 2.0 is pretty much meaningless, as it is to most marketers.

I've got a few web applications being built right now where web 2.0 is totally for real and a key part of what I'm doing.

I'd like to hear your defination of what you think web 2.0 really is because I'm guessing you've got it all wrong.

Jim

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

I haven't had time to do the research on Web 2.0 so no direct opinion there yet.

IF, and that's a big if, web 2.0 or some such allows more direct sales like interaction, then I'd be all for it. One of the big frustrations for me has been the lack of a real sales situation. As a long time salesperson, trainer etc..I really miss the face to face interactivity. There's nothing quite like seeing a person's reaction and judging their body language etc...to increase comfort level and leverage for both parties, IMHO.

Until I have time to read and study, that's the best opinion you'll be able to get from me. Personally, for anything major, I would hate shopping online as it now stands...in fact, I won't do it currently, if I have a choice. Yet, I've been known to buy from catalogs so...go figure.

Here's another little thought: I find I buy more confidently and easily from catalogs these days. Wonder if the influence of the internet has anything to do with that change? Could it have something to do with not being rushed by 'time outs' and being more in control of the entire ordering process (like going back and re-reading portions of the description, for example, without having to re-do everything again) from a catalog versus internet? More food for thought?

Sandi Bowman

Re: Web 2.0 =
 

Hi Pete,

You might want to read:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/orei...is-web-20.html

Yes web 2.0 is a term coined to describe an idea. It was coined by Tim O Reilly - the publisher of all those web programming books.

This snapshot pretty much gives you the difference between web and web 2.0:

Web 1.0 --> Web 2.0
DoubleClick --> Google AdSense
Ofoto --> Flickr
Akamai --> BitTorrent
mp3.com --> Napster
Britannica Online --> Wikipedia
personal websites --> blogging
evite --> upcoming.org and EVDB
domain name speculation --> search engine optimization
page views --> cost per click
screen scraping --> web services
publishing --> participation*
content management systems --> wikis
directories (taxonomy) --> tagging ("folksonomy")
stickiness --> syndication

* List taken from the above linked article. Bold is my emphasis.

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

In the last decade, two somewhat similar but different thoughts have emerged.

1. Wisdom of the Crowd. How crowds make better decisions than a single person.

2. The Long Tail. How different people want different and very uncommon options. Best example: 60% of books sold by amazon.com are unknown hidden books that aren't carried in the retail brick and mortar book stores at all.

Internet is the only medium that allows efficient use of the idea behind the "wisdom of the crowd" and the "long tail" together.

Provide a lot of options to people (or let the people themselves create the options). And let them make a decision as to what they want and what is hot.

And web 2.0 is the term coined to describe that idea.

Is the idea itself new? Not at all. Just look at Dell.

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. I agree.. and disagree..
 

I fully understand what Mr. O'Reilly is saying. HOWEVER, I do NOT agree with those that are claiming that if you don't follow their "Web 2.0" methods, you aren't going to make it on the Internet. You don't have a choice!

If you look at Tim's explination of Web 2.0, you can see it's more or less a natural progression, not some "Whoa.. The Holy Grail" as some are shouting, and that's what's tickin' me off about the whole thing.

Web 2.0 as outlined by Tim O'Reilly is just a natural progression in my mind, not some great, hot-off-the-press-grab-it-or-lose concept as many marketers would have you believe.

Consider those just hitting the Internet for the first time. They never knew the Web 1.0 stuff. They're starting right out of the gate with "Web 2.0" and know nothing else. Just like you folks that have never had the "joy" of starting out on a Commadore Computer. You started out with Computer 2.0. :)

So, guess I'm saying that there's nothing "Super Natural" about Web 2.0 as many marketers would have your believe. It's simply using the platforms that are available to everyone.

Some guy saw the O'Reilly term, said "hey, let's use that term and we'll sell more stuff 'cause everyone will think it's something they just have to have."

Clear as mud? :)

Pete

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. I agree.. and disagree..
 

Pete, I think you're missing the point.

I don't see marketers pushing anything about web 2.0. I don't hang out in those circles.

It's not any sort of sales tactic or associated with any type of product you can purchase so I'm not sure what you are getting at there.

It's all about user connectivity and user generated content and building communities where users can interact and share. It's about websites built and directed by it's users in real time. (or at least that's a big part of it without getting too deep into it)

Take a look at the top 10 websites in the US and tell me if you see any web 2.0 stuff there....

-Yahoo
-Google
-MySpace
-Microsoft
-eBay
-YouTube
-Facebook
-Wikipedia
-Craigslist

Most of it!

And the "heavy" web 2.0 stuff on the list we had never heard of a couple years ago - MySpace - YouTube - Facebook - Wikipedia

It shows that web 2.0 is what users are looking for and demanding.

Jim

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

The Concept of Web 2.0 is Great for Nichifying business and marketing...

But overall How Many sites can & Do Most people spend time at Daily, weekly...?

Although http://secondlife.com/

Has been one Incedible business model of Success. ;)

Stay on Top of it all... Right? :)

http://www.econsultant.com/web2/
http://www.go2web20.net/
http://www.web2journal.com/
http://www.techcrunch.com/

Phil

Where's the BEEF?
 

They are all places where people can share ideas, discussions, binary files, form communities of like minded individuals...

Hey wait a sec...

Back in the early 90's when there was only roughly 25-30 million people using the Internet (compared to the 600 million today), we didn't have to worry about spammers as much. There were business groups on the USENET where we networked, shared files (binary newsgroups), and forums for discussion on just about any topic you could imagine. That's where I first, virtually met, Paul Myers. He used to be one of the moderators of one of the business discussion forums I subscribed to.

Well, the point is, by the marketers definition of Web 2.0, I think the Usenet would fit the description too. Does that sound about right to you?

Me, I think over the years the Internet has evolved into becoming more interactive simply because now a lot of people can have a voice without being a programmer, and the programming languages have progressed and developed over time. But I'm not ready to slap a new moniker on it just so I can market to people who don't know didley squat about the web and sell them the same old goods and services re-branded as Web 2.0.

Jim Rapoza, eWeek writes:


You can read the full article here:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2089495,00.asp

If you don't mind me being blunt, "Web 2.0" is the new buzz word, old and tired marketers are re-branding themselves to -- trying to make themselves look like they are on the cutting edge of technology with the same "must have" products and services they peddled the last few years.

Best Regards,
Steve MacLellan

Re: Where's the BEEF?
 

Can you give me an example of a couple of marketers branding themselves with the web 2.0 thing?

Jim

I don't think so, Jim...
 

Hi Jim,

I'm sure you can understand. I'm not going to start labeling any company or individual on a forum. If you know how to use Google, I'm sure you can find them on your own.

Regards,
Steve MacLellan

Re: I don't think so, Jim...
 

No, Steve, I can't.

I can't find one marketer who is "re-branding themselves to Web 2.0"

That seems to be the impression that you and Pete have here and I can't figure out what it is based on.

I could be wrong. I'm not saying that I'm not.

Just looking for an example or two since you guys seem to know.

Jim

Re: Web 2.0 =
 

Hey Pete,

What forums would these be? I'm interested in checking out the discussions.

Jim

I'll send you a private email.
 

On it's way soon...

Regards,
Steve MacLellan

Hopefully the email cleared things up
 

Hi Jim,


I would appreciate it if you don't mention the name of the person I emailed you about on this forum. Hopefully you will understand what I'm talking about.

Regards,
Steve MacLellan

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged...
 

Thanks for the email and the explanation, Steve, but I still don't get it.

I looked at the person's article you directed me to and I also looked at his website and blog.

There was no mention of web 2.0 anywhere on his website and one blog post that talked a little bit about it but nothing that came anywhere close to what I would call "rebranding" himself.

I know you build websites, and from what I see and hear, you're really good. But from looking at your own website, I see that you build the sort of sites where web 2.0 doesn't really come into play. It has no real purpose there.

I'm guessing that when you are focused on that sort of thing every day, that web 2.0 talk is nothing more than a distraction because it doesn't fit in with what you are doing.

Also, we very likely have totally different opinions on what web 2.0 really is because I thought your example of USNET groups was way off - not even close to what I see web 2.0 as.

Back then, before Al Gore created the internet, we didn't have anywhere near the technology to pull off some of the stuff we are seeing today and while most all of it was probably thought of, as Pete put it, "natural progression", it was also impossible with the technology at that time and cost prohibitive.

Today, the technology is cheap and available to most anyone to pull it off.

There's no question in my mind that web 2.0 is for real for those of us using it but I can see where it can be meaningless to those who don't.

Jim

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

LOL, I guess you don't get it then.

This conversation has moved into the working week, and I've got work to do...

Best Regards,
Steve MacLellan

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

Actually, Steve, I do get it, bit I'm not sure you do.

What I didn’t get was your claim of marketers “rebranding” themselves to web 2.0 - It's just not happening as far as I can see.

I haven’t been able to find an example of this and the one you emailed me with certainly didn’t fit.

What I do get is that I’m having a “Rich Internet Application” built at the moment that is all about web 2.0.

The big difference between this and the type of stuff you build is that this one is all about the user experience.

Users will be uploading audio and video and images as well as having the ability to record by phone and record by webcam and have their media instantly available to share on the site and do a lot of other things with.

This is where the web 2.0 concepts and technologies play a big part.

The example you gave me about this marketer having no knowledge of some simple concepts back in 2003 made no sense to me. That was 4 years ago!

I didn’t even hear the term “web 2.0” until a couple of months ago but that has been enough time to study and totally understand it.

I can’t understand where you think it’s not for real.

It has nothing to do with the way people market things which seems to be what you are focused on here.

It’s about building webapps that work and that users are wanting.

Jim

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

Actually - there are quite a few people who are "rebranding" themselves with the web 2.0 tag.

For eg: many people are trying to raise money by claiming that they have a web 2.0 website... and many internet marketers too have come out with ebooks that show how to use linking strategies on social networking and other such sites. If you visit some hard core internet marketing forums - you'll see what Steve and Pete are talking about.

Most of these people over-do it a bit. They act like web 2.0 is the next big short cut make-a-million-bucks-in-half-a-day thing.

But that doesn't mean web 2.0 is a fad. It's an idea that has some real value. As Gordon also stated in the beginning post - Inter-Connectivity is great for selling more.

Gasoline on the fire...BUZZ words...interpretations...Marketer's obfuscation
 

Web 2.0?

Internet Marketing? What does it mean?

Auto-Pilot Business? Meaning?

I hope more people weigh in on this discussion...

Neurological event? What the he** is that? Heart Attack? NO. Stroke? NO. "More like aftershocks of an earthquake, sort of like tremors in the brain"...so said my idiot doctor (whom was subsequently fired) a few years ago...right before the RIGHT diagnosis was made...DKA...

Anyhow, doctors aren't the only ones that deftly use OBFUSCATION which Wikipedia defines as: Obfuscation refers to the concept of concealing the meaning of communciation by making it more confusing and harder to interpret.

AH. Web 2.0 seems to mean different things to different people...so let's see what the all knowing Wikipedia says about it:

Web 2.0, a phrase coined byO'Reilly Media in 2004, refers to a perceived or proposed second generation of Web-basedservices-- such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies that emphasize online collaboration and sharing among users. O'Reilly Media, in collaboration with MediaLive International , used the phrase as a title for a series of conferences, and since 2004 some developers and marketers have adopted the catch-phrase. Its exact meaning remains open to debate, and some technology experts, notably Tim Berners-Lee, have questioned whether the term has meaning.
The last, compact definition of Web 2.0, according to Tim O'Reilly is this one:

"Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them." (Emphasis mine)

Now we know what THEY think. And some of you seem to have some strong feelings about what it means, if anything too.

Way back in the 96, Akron-Canton was one TWO Roadrunner test sites (the other was in CA, I can't remember..Fremont?? perhaps)...anyhow...
everyone else was on DIAL UP.

Did we have the same Internet experiences? I did a test (might be in the archives somewhere) and I was able to visit about 7 times the numbers of sites in the same period as a person with dial-up, however, if downloads were involved, I was about 20 times faster...compared to what people had, some friends considered that I had Web 2.0 already.

We get new versions of software, each update has version number...we all know about that...anyhow...since 96 most of the world has gotten broadband of some kind. Some reports indicate that dial up is a minority option for Internet access.

On dial up those FLASH intros really don't work. But on broadband they are awesome. (Maybe unnecessary for marketing, but that's a different debate.

In my mind Web 2.0 is simply an UPGRADE. In 96 Charles Prosper told me to lock myself inside for a week and don't leave the house until I knew html...very good advice for back then...

With more and more people having broadband access, it makes more things possible...the early video conferences had streaming...almost unbearable to watch delays...Web 2.0 allows you to communicate directly without delay or streaming...(let's not get technical boys and girls)...

Imagine this. The other night I was on a TELE CONFERENCE...on MY dime I dialed up...punched in a code...and listened in to some BS being slung by one of the 1001 gurus (maybe the one Steve objects to so much??? don't know)...

So how much did that FREE tele seminar call cost me? I'll let you know when I get the phone bill.

IMAGINE a full VIDEO conference. You just go to a website...log in. You can see the presenter...behind her is a screen that appears to be 1000 televisions...NO just video thumbnails of those tuned in. Click on one of them...say MINE for example...and like a PIP (Picture in Picture) during a footballl game...there you have the presenter and ME...and we can carry on a separate conversation while we record the conference...and when Q and A time appears, we can ask questions..

All of this done for FREE. Would that be an improvement over today's TeleConferences? Maybe you don't think so, but I think it is an UPGRADE...something Web 1.0 couldn't do...(hey if we use Web 2.0 we have to call the "old" web something right?)...

The technology you SEE today has been in development for years...and what you will see and do tomorrow on this thing we call the WEB, will be done with all of that research and development exploited to the fullest.

There isn't ever a MANDATE for new technology...some people still have phones you dial LITERALLY...some have really OLD radios...and others have GASP, Vinyl Records...that must have been Portable Music 1.0 but back then if you wanted to steal a song, you really had to steal the thing from the record store...

OK OK.

Some of you feel that Web 2.0 is a bunch of hot air, hooey, baloney nonsense...and that is shared by the guy who most credit with creating the Internet (providing key apps to make it work) and that would be the above mentioned Tim-Berners Lee.

As a marketer, I look for trends, for advancements in technology...for an edge if I can find one. It doesn't bother me what some "guru" says or what BUZZ of the day is happening...most of it I simply ignore...

so you can ignore Web 2.0 if you want...carry on...do as you've always done...there is a guy somewhere around here that still keeps his record store open. It is never a YOU MUST do this or lose out (well, actually it is in some instances)...but as for Web 2.0

I'm very excited about some of the new apps I've seen and I'm making plans to integrate in...but, I may be wrong.

Gordon Jay Alexander 3.1.1 (I've had at least than many UPGRADES and incarnations...HA!

Re: Gasoline on the fire...BUZZ words...interpretations...Marketer's obfuscation
 

GJA,

Thanks for starting this thread.

Web 2. Ahh. Reminds me of those heady days back in 1998. The TV show "The Site" with Solidad O'Brien was a hit. And there was much ado about...

Internet 2.

I've read the pasted Meaning of Web 2. And I see Corporate Speak. Designed to bamboozle - maybe dopey VCs? Nothing that can be Nailed Down. One of those stupid words like Kitch. So those who use it can feel important while saying to those who ask what it is, "if you just don't know you won't understand". Is that like a Zen Thing?

For there to be a True Web 2, then there must be a defining moment when we stopped being Web 1 and became Web 2. And I just do't see that Event. I don't even see those gray Spring or Fall moments were a transition happened.

Everyday - every single day - those who play on the internet playground are coming up with new stuff. So no single defining moment can be seen. Just a Constant Change.

The internet has always been about Affinity and Interaction. And as I look around, I still see the same. Done slightly differently in some instances, but the same nonetheless.

Michael Ross

Okay, last time for me..
 

Jim, et al..

Here is why I feel the way I do about Web 2.0.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Web 2.0, a phrase coined by O'Reilly Media in 2004,[1] refers to a
perceived or proposed second generation of Web-based services..

=======================================

Russell Shaw (On the ZDNet Blog)
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=805

"Well, Web 2.0 is bunk. Not that the elements of this rebirth aren’t
there. I write about some of them, and Richard has them nailed. It’s
just that they cannot be classified under a common umbrella. They are
forward lurches of various standards and technologies, some compatible,
some not. Some revolutionary, some evolutionary, some impractical.
Some are collaborative, others are highly competitive with each other."

============================================

Tim Berners-Lee on Web 2.0: "nobody even knows what it means"

============================================

Then, on the lighter side...

Web 2.0

No Thanks, I'm Holding Out for Web 3.0

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/hogosphere/web-20.php

=============================================

I'm done now. :)

Pete

Re: Okay, last time for me..
 

hi pete...

your link to chia is not working..or at least on this thing it isnt

Thanks, Bob..
 

I "think" I've got if fixed now. :)

I appreciate you letting me know about the glitch.

Pete

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

It's deja vu all over again.

Electronic communities sharing common interests through messages and files...It's the Bulletin Board System with the first one started in 1978.

Re: Web 2.0 marketing. Some food for thought. And your OPINIONS are highly encouraged
 

It is very similar. I was reading an article on the CBC this morning about the social network service that Netscape Communications Corp. founder Marc Andreessen, has created called www.ning.com. In the article he says:


Best Regards,
Steve MacLellan

WEB 2.0- *Big RED Nose Ezine* -PHONE Sale Case Study
 

Hi,

Thanks for raising the topic of Sales.

Anybody interested in the Anatomy of a 2.0 Sale?

Here's a FRUSTRATING Sale:

STEP I - Entertaining and Wacky ideas in my Ezine - get prospects to call. Or email. Then I call Them.

Here's how it works.

A - Got a phone call from Hawaii yesterday. Bill had read an Ezine and wanted More ideas on how to keep his job. (Too soon to report results)

B - A customer in Dubai called to Applaud a BIG RED NOSE Ezine about Getting Appointments. And asked for ideas on how to reach the owner of a chain of Crystal Sculpture Stores. (Called an hr ago)

==================

C - 30 DAYS AGO - A Radio Talk show contact in Florida - ordered my "How to Make $ From Home Reading Books" Book off Ebay.

Then called me. He talked about wanting to lose 100 pounds.

#1 - And said, "NO." When I guaranteed he'd Lose Wgt eating the Special "HEALTHY CHOCOLATE" we use as a referral system.

He asked for a sample. I sent him a Tupperware container.

#2 - He said, "NO." I called him. He said, "Too Expensive." And had the nerve to refer me to a chocolate site where the cost was more than TWICE as high. 15 pieces for 30.00

#3 - "NO" After I sent him my 78 Page "Munny Making Chocolate" book.

#4 - "NO" - I called him with the #3 Chocolate Distr on the phone.

#5 - "NO" - I called to Thank him for an idea he gave me. Told him a funny chocolate sales story. He said, "No thanks."

#6 - I called him 2 more times to Report Pain Relief, Wgt Loss and Sugar Diabetes folks needing less Insulin after eating the chocolate. He said, "NO."

#7 - I called him with a Warped Munny angle one of my readers was using. And he told me he was scheduled for a Stomach Banding Operation. To lose Wgt. I asked him to Try Healthy Chocolate 1st. (You guessed it. "NO"

#8 - While on the phone with a marketing client - he told me 2 horrific Stomach banding and Stomach stapling stories AND that he himself at 5 ft 8 inches - used to weight 240. But had lost 52 pounds.

I asked permission to 3-way call them together.

"YES" - The horror stories did the trick and I sold 2 boxes to the guy. With a promise to eat "Healthy Chocolate" steadily up until the operation date 8 weeks hence.

WHEW.

Sales Stats show that 50% of all sales don't happen until after 14 contacts or more. I'd say that if you counted Emails - we were around 14 contacts.

Since 99% of the folks who order Chocolate from me ALSO begin to order some of the other products or services on my archives site...

I sometimes PACK Lots of Contacts into a short Space of time - combine, email, snail mail, Voice mail and Live contact - to get to the MAGIC # 14 Faster.

Thanks,
Glenn

P.S. - "Here's a link to where this sale STARTS - "How To Make $ From Home Reading Books" book...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=120376155734

Thanks Glenn! That post is a KEEPER!
 

Thanks Glenn... Your post is a KEEPER! Great stuff!

Once upon a time I took on a part time job selling comedy tickets for a few months... I did it mostly for the sales experience. I wanted to get more experience at it.

Believe it or not, we were cold calling to the PHONE BOOK! I couldn't believe it... The "list" was not "selected" in any way, shape, or form...

I got pretty good at it. Every now and then they'd have a competition, and give a bonus to the person who made the most sales that day. I won the bonus multiple times, I'm happy to say.... (Even so, I still quit after a few months, since my plan was to get the sales experience, not to do the job forever.)

Anyway, some people take a long time to get to "Yes"...

The way I figure it, is that everyone needs certain boxes checked before they'll say yes.

- There has to be an emotional desire for the product...

- The price has to seem sensible for what they get...

- They have to feel confident that they won't be ripped off, that it's not a scam - that there's credibility in the product and in the sales person...

- If they like you, all the better! (I'd often "joke around" with customers and put them at ease, and get them laughing...)

Anyway, it was a good experience. However, yes, I did have a few prospects who would umm and ahhh... and keep me on the phone... and eventually buy (or not!). But they sure took a long time to make a decision... The way I figure it, they were going through the check boxes, making sure each box was checked before they'd buy...

Having multiple contacts, I feel, helps people get the opportunity to check all the boxes they feel need to be checked... And the more comfortable they will feel, as long as you treat people well...

Thanks for your post, Glenn! It was a great one! :)

Best wishes,

Dien