couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Miles Fidelman <mfidel...@meetinghouse.net>
Subject Re: the future of couchapp
Date Tue, 12 May 2015 14:36:45 GMT
Johs,

Respectfully, you're just wrong.

Considering that I spend my work day doing business development for 
software products (well, systems built around software products) - and 
have done so for about 45 years, in multiple industries and for multiple 
firms (including a couple of my own) - I think I can speak with some 
authority on the subject.

Marketing brings people to your door, or gets you in their door - but 
after that, it's all about sales.  Two very different activities - but 
something that marketeers never seem to understand (salesmen always do).

Marketing remains the way we find prospects, make them aware of our 
existence, spark their interest, open a door.  After that, it's hands on 
sales - building and maintaining relationships, keeping track of 
specific opportunities as they arise, influencing RFPs, writing 
proposals, and so forth.

Sure, the equation has changed a bit for commodity products - with 
marketing leading directly to "click to buy" - but anything that has a 
serious price tag, or a custom component - remains more about sales, 
than marketing.  Marketing may bring the eyeballs to the "add to cart" 
button, but it doesn't get someone to click the button.  You still have 
to induce someone to click "buy" for your product or service, rather 
than moving on to someone else's offer, or not buying anything.  That's 
all sales.

Re. "No one sells me Mac or iPhone, Apple don't bother turning me into a 
lead. They serve my needs and wants. Same thing with AWS."

Of course Apple turns you (and me) into a lead - they conduct market 
research to understand your (my) type of customer, they make a decision 
to serve customers like you (or me), they manage specifications to 
tailor products to your (my) market segment. Then they let people about 
their current products - through advertising, stores, literature (online 
and off), promotion, and so forth -- all designed to make sure that when 
one is ready to buy their next computer, they either walk into an Apple 
Store, or go to Apple's web site (or maybe Best Buy).  That's all lead 
generation.  Inducing someone to take the next step, and plunk down 
$1000+ for a new PowerBook, rather than listen to one of the other 
voices in their head ("maybe I'm ready to switch to a linux desktop," or 
"boy that MicroSoft Surface is a sweet machine") - that's still sales 
(as is helping one decide which model, with which options, and which 
add-ons).

Miles

Johs. E wrote:
> Hi Miles,
> leads gen is another concept in the sales paradigm of the 1960's that is
> very popular in companies that dont't understand the marketing concept.
> Marketing is really about leaving sales behind.
> No one sells me Mac or iPhone, Apple don't bother turning me into a lead.
> They serve my needs and wants. Same thing with AWS.
> Johs:)
>
> 2015-05-12 14:28 GMT+02:00 Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>:
>
>> I've always preferred the functional view of marketing:  Lead Generation.
>> After getting someone's attention, and getting them to ask for more
>> information, then we're talking sales.
>>
>> Miles Fidelman
>>
>>
>>
>> Johs Ensby wrote:
>>
>>> Jan,
>>>
>>> Hi PMC,
>>> I would like to share my two favourite definitions of marketing.
>>>
>>> 1) the externally oriented:
>>> Create value and extract a fair share of it
>>>
>>> Even if it is the Harvard Business School definition and points at
>>> monetary reward proportionate to the (much bigger) value created for
>>> customers (users), I think it applies. CouchDB developers create value for
>>> users, for which they are rewarded in more than economical ways. Reward is
>>> in the end proportionate to the value created for external parties.
>>>
>>> 2) the internally oriented:
>>> Align resources to meed customer needs
>>>
>>> This is why it is so important to have target groups and distribution
>>> channels in mind. CouchDB has more than one target group, reducing it to
>>> the core developers themselves in a “I do what inspires me” is of course
>>> the extreme, but even reducing the target group to developers with a
>>> specific skill set is a dramatic choice, as is reducing the target group to
>>> developers at large, since they are often not the most influential decision
>>> makers in the selection of technology. When a developer suggests a
>>> technology to a customer or a management team they will be looking at the
>>> challenge of recruiting people as one of their first concerns.
>>>
>>> Imagine the developer who says CouchDB seems like the most promising
>>> NoSql option, and his non-developer peers do this:
>>>
>>> https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=couchdb%2C%20redis%2C%20mongodb&date=1%2F2009%2073m&cmpt=q&tz=
>>> <https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=couchdb, redis,
>>> mongodb&date=1/2009 73m&cmpt=q&tz=>
>>>
>>> Wouldn’t it be nice if a million young developers were playing with the
>>> technology in a way that recruited another million and those two millions
>>> recruited another two millions and….
>>>
>>> https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=couchdb%2C%20couch%20app%2C%20react.js%2C%20angular.js&date=1%2F2009%2073m&cmpt=q&tz=
>>> <https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=couchdb, couch app, react.js,
>>> angular.js&date=1/2009 73m&cmpt=q&tz=>
>>>
>>> What would it take?
>>> You are spot-on re Couch apps here, Jan :
>>>
>>>> On 11 May 2015, at 18:53, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, I don’t think there’d be massive changes, just some rearrangements
>>>> and some additions and some cuts and mostly story telling on our various
>>>> media outlets.
>>>>
>>> What is stopping us right now, is a misconception of what marketing
>>> actually is.
>>> Marketing is much more than promotion -- like language is much more than
>>> speaking French or writing in C. It is fundamentally about 2-way
>>> communication with the audience you choose.
>>>
>>> I am not looking for a Wozniak/Jobs or Straubel/Musk kind of balance
>>> between the developer and marketing discipline.
>>> Jan, your “can play a role” through “figuring out the story” is more
than
>>> enough for me, but I don’t see the point in contributing if the PMC keeps
>>> up the policing against discussions about features.
>>>
>>>   marketing@ can play a role in defining the features of CouchDB through
>>>>> the figuring out the story of CouchDB.
>>>>>
>>> The best part of your take on this is that it is not a one-way street
>>> from communicators to developers or vice versa, which seems to be where the
>>> present misconception is rooted. There needs to be certain portion of
>>> mutual respect between at least those two disciplines for marketing to
>>> happen. Defining features and figuring out the story is an iterative,
>>> dialogue-based process, where starting in one end is not better than
>>> starting in the other.
>>>
>>> Johs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>>
>>
>


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra


Mime
View raw message