The Game & Lifestyle Epiphany

Their 'ad' could be the price label on the shelf under their product and/or the way the box looks compared to the others.

A store's 'ad' could be their physical location (in a high-traffic area).

An 'ad' can be anything that a potential customer sees or experiences, whether they want to -- OR NOT!

Like a billboard -- or a biz's storefront (which is a billbaord, basically).

It is any 'message' that is SENT by the marketER -- and RECEIVED by the marketEE ---- not the other way around!

And that includes the (comparison) price labels on supermarket shelves.

It's grow or die.

Jiffy Mix's growth depends on *changing* the minds of their potential customers (active marketing), not just fielding incoming orders (being a 'magnet'). To do that takes an OUTGOING effort, such as advertising -- in one form or another. Their pricing IS a form of them 'stating their case' in an active way --- imo.

It's not just about having a difference in the marketplace that is 'magnetic.' It's about making sure that difference gets SEEN, UNDERSTOOD, and ACTED UPON by one's potential customers!

If a company has a USP in the forest, will anyone hear it? Does the 'sound' even 'exist?'

-- TW

[GordonJ]

gja

I ask people that all the time.

They all seem shocked when I tell them the real answer.

"How many people does your website reach -- on average?"

Real answer: ZERO.

It's a trick question, in the first place.

Websites don't 'reach' anyone.

They merely wait for others to reach them.

That is backwards thinking, from a marketing perspective.

It's the type of thinking that HELPS one believe in dangerous marketing myths.

It's the type of thinking that led to the dot-com BUST.

It's the type of thinking that I'm sure causes Gary Halbert to roll over in his grave.

-- TW

[GordonJ]

Originally Posted by -TW

It's the type of thinking that I'm sure causes Gary Halbert to roll over in his grave.

-- TW

I see you are a HUGE Gary Halbert fan. I LOVED Gary. HOWEVER, regarding business...he wasn't very good at it. By his own admission. He was great at creating excitement...

but, he died a pauper...his estate unable (or unwilling) to refund the $15,000.00 in cash that people gave to him for work he never got around to doing. It wasn't that he got the money the day before he died, he held onto their money for months without delivering the goods.

I don't think anyone compares to Gary as a person able to capture people's attention and their imagination...but he really didn't offer up much in the way of "permanent" business advice. It wasn't his cup of tea.

So, as for Gary turning over in his grave...I doubt it. He didn't care all that much when he was alive. He knew how to make a buck, often quickly. He didn't know how to keep them, or how to build a business.

But TW, I see this "discussion" has you with a very clear and distinct point of view...you don't believe in "magnetic marketing" in any way, shape or form...is that about right?

gja

GH was a terrible biz person. The only reason he even survived was his instictual knowledge that active mrktng is the way to go.

I DO believe there is such a thing as magnetic marketing -- or, more accurately, there IS an advantage to becoming a 'magnet.'

For instance, having a website is usually a GREAT idea -- and vital to one's success.

What I object to is, people not putting 'being a magnet' into proper perspective. Often, on the list of things to do, it should be placed at the bottom of the list, not the top.

It produces the least amount of biz, not the most. Yes, it produces the EASIEST amount of biz -- the amount that requires the LEAST amount of work, yes.

One could even say it produces the BEST customers. But it almost never produces the MOST customers.

If you are looking to create a marketing MACHINE (which I see as the ultimate goal), then being a magnet -- or trying to -- is a losing proposition.

THAT'S the perspective from which I am jumping up + down ;-)

I just see so many people getting that wrong -- because it's so SEDUCTIVE to follow those who would have you believe in the 'magnet' myth.

It allows one to *abdicate* one's own (true) marketing 'responsibility' -- and smile blindly/ignorantly while doing so.

Cheers!

-- TW

Aloha TW,

Originally Posted by -TW

If you are looking to create a marketing MACHINE (which I see as the ultimate goal), then being a magnet -- or trying to -- is a losing proposition.

I am curious to hear...

1) Your specific idea of a "marketing machine".
2) Why magnetic marketing is detrimental to that.

Aloha,

Jason Cain

Marketing machine: A 'device' in which you shovel potential customers in the top, and customers come out the bottom. Has a gas pedal too. The harder you push the gas pedal, them more customers come out the bottom. A real mrktng machine has this attribute: The gas pedal is under the marketER's control, not the marketEE's control.

I never said so-called 'magnetic' marketing is detrimental to a mrktng machine. On the contrary, it is most often ESSENTIAL to a well-funtioning machine. All I object to is, calling it 'magnetic.' That name is misleading. There's nothing 'magnetic' about it. That's all.

I use strategies like that all the time! I would be lost without them! I just don't call them magnetic. They are not.

Actually, some would say, being 'a magnet,' which I think is the wrong way to go (or to strive for, anyway), DOES NOT include using those so-called 'magnetic mrktng' methods exactly BECAUSE those methods are NOT truly magnetic. They DO involve ACTIVELY contacting the prospect REPEATEDLY -- which is a method that I DO advocate.

So, in summary: I DO advocate what is commonly called 'magnetic' markeitng (a la D. Kennedy), because it IS effective (but not really magnetic). And I DON'T advocate trying to 'be a magnet,' 'build it and they wil come,' etc.

Defining your universe (gather a list of potential customers), then bugging them repeatedly (you reaching them, not the other way 'round) IS the way to build an effective marketing 'machine.' No matter what Seth Godin says.

Make sense?

-- TW

Being a 'magnet' (or trying to become one) isn't 'detrimental' to building a mrktng machine! It can only help!

The question is, how MUCH can it really help? THAT'S the question one has to ask oneself BEFORE spending a lot of time + money + energy making becoming a 'magnet' as a goal. THAT'S what I would caution against -- thinking it's gonna solve more problems than it really will.

Cheers!

-- TW

Aloha TW,

Being a student of Dan Kennedy for many years, I don't see any difference between your thoughts and what Dan Kennedy espouses. It seems to me that we are (I am ) getting hung up on semantics.

I do agree with everything that you have said -- and I think Dan would too.

Aloha,

Jason

What Kennedy says to do is right on -- it's just not 'magnetic,' and shouldn't be called 'magnetic.' That term is misleading.

Conversely what SHOULD be called magnetic (and is 'magnetic') is NOT the way to go, imo.

So, Kennedy, yes. Magnetic, no.

-- TW