|
==================================================
LinkExchange Daily Digest
Moderated Discussion List
"Effective Online Advertising"
==================================================
List Moderator: Supported by:
Adam Audette LinkExchange
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
http://digest.linkexchange.com
..................................................
January 4, 2000 Digest #748
..................................................
.....IN THIS DIGEST.....
==== NEW =========================
...Welcome to the...
~^v^~ SPECIAL NEW YEAR EDITION! ~^v^~
~^v^~Moderator Comment~^v^~
* Welcome! *
* LED Past, Present and Future *
~^v^~THE BEST OF 1999: PART ONE~^v^~
* 10 Predictions for 1999 *
~ Edwin Hayward
* Pitfalls of Going Online *
~ Shari Thurow
* Quantity vs. Quality of Hits *
~ Sam Vaknin, Ph.D.
* Quantity vs. Quality *
~ Andy L. Brock
* Web Marketing *
~ Hollis Thomases
* The Future of Online Advertising *
~ Steven Rothberg
* Small Business & Market Research *
~ John Counsel
==== NEW ==============================================
Welcome LEDer's!
Well here we are, a first in the history of this discussion list. A
long overdue "Best of LED" with commentary; hopefully this will
prove to be a nice break from the standard format. Working on this
project made me come to understand just how much I appreciate the
fact that it is all of you providing the content for this forum!
I'm going to write a bit about the history of the LED, just a
cursory look at its beginnings back in late January of 1997 (don't
worry - the keyword here is "cursory" <g>). I think it's important
to look back in order to develop a picture of where we are now.
Tony Hsieh, one of the founders of LinkExchange (who later went on
to sell it to Microsoft), contracted our company Multimedia
Marketing Group ( http://www.mmgco.com ) to run a discussion list
using the model I-Sales ( http://www.audettemedia.com/i-sales/ )
had at the time. Tony wrote in the first issue of the LED that,
"Our hope is that this list will become a valuable resource for
everyone."
I think it's safe to say it has fulfilled that purpose. It has also
turned into something larger and more valuable than I think anyone
anticipated.
There have been many changes behind the scenes as well. My father,
John Audette ( http://www.mmgco.com/welcome/ ), founder of MMG,
Newsbureau.com, AudetteMedia.com and I-Sales originally took the
job of moderating this group, saying,
"My job as your moderator is to keep your signal-to-noise ratio as
high possible. I'll try to accomplish that by selecting posts for
inclusion in the LE-Digest that offer valuable content."
That goal is still being pursued on a daily basis here on the LED.
Found here are some of the most interesting, qualified and
connected articles that I have read anywhere on the 'Net, and that
is solely due to the prolific contributers that make up our
subscription base.
That subscription base is the largest known for any Internet
discussion list - and by a long shot. Back in that first issue of
the LED, John wrote that,
"... this discussion list is being launched with over *5,000*
subscribers! I recall launching the I-Sales Discussion List with
about 30 subscribers and it's taken over a year to reach 5,000."
Well, we're now at over 140,000 subscibers! In three years this
digest has grown to be 28 times larger. And throughout all of that
monumental growth we have not strayed from a clear focus: a high
"signal-to-noise ratio" and a high degree of quality. Indeed, after
embarking on this project and scouring through hundreds of past
issues, it is my sincere opinion that if anything the LED has only
gotten stronger, with the level of discussions rising markedly from
those published in its earlier years.
Now that we're embarking on another year, a new century and
millennium (I know it's not technically the next millenium - but it
sounds good) we stand at a very opportune time to renovate things,
if necessary. Although I don't want to make any drastic changes in
structure or format, some minor tuning would certainly help.
Tony wrote in that first issue that,
"This digest, just like the LinkExchange service itself, will only
work with your participation and feedback."
It has been true ever since, and many times we have benefited from
your feedback. The section we introduced called "Geek Tips" is an
example of that. This is a user-driven forum, so please don't
hesitate to send in suggestions, criticisms, ideas, praise <g>,
etc. We need that feedback, it is a forum built on the power of its
subscribers... so use it to its fullest.
Feedback: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text76647 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
So, how are we doing? I am confident to say that the state of the
LED is very strong, and I'll list the reasons why below. I'd really
benefit here from some outside perspective; sometimes it's
difficult not to suffer from a bit of myopia when one is so
intimately involved in a project. So with that in mind, following
is a list of our strengths as a forum (from my arguably limited
perspecitive!).
- Power to the People -
The original slogan of LinkExchange, and proof in action here. As
I've already said, working on this issue makes it abundantly clear
to me that without our hard working contributers this digest would
last about as long as a top ranking at one of the "Big Seven"
search engines.
- Give and Take -
The power of this connected world we live in is nowhere so clear as
it is in the success of discussion lists like the LED. Where else
can someone send out an article expressing a particular issue and
have it reach so many people within 24 hours? What other publishing
format allows someone who responds to an issue such immediate
feedback?
- Behind the Scenes Networking -
How many relationships have you developed from participating in
this forum? There is not a day that goes by that I don't meet
someone new and exchange in some way.
- Pure Content -
Not much self-promotional text makes it in this digest. True, there
are times when a contributer may get a bit self-serving, but never
at the lack of adding quality to the discussion - otherwise they
would never be published. Sure, there are times when I slip and let
one in, but never to the indifference of LEDer's!
- Clean Format -
Uniform, clear presentation is probably more noticeable to the
editor (myself) of this digest, but is very important to its
overall appeal. If you've ever subscribed to a digest or newsletter
and been greeted by 35k of sloppy line feeds and empty carriage
returns, then you know what I mean.
- Friendly, Open Atmosphere -
Contradictory perspectives are often published, but never at the
expense of goodwill. An open forum that is conducive to roundtable
discussion is the sort of digest we all try to cultivate here, and
it has more or less been successful. It is rare indeed for personal
issues to enter a discussion.
- Important Issues -
That's why we're all here. When mere book learning won't cut it,
you go to where people converge. It's a very powerful way to learn
key issues. True, the learning curve is steep, but it's to the
benefit of everyone involved.
In the coming year, you can expect more of the same great
discussions, the same give-and-take that makes email discussion
lists so popular and effective. And you can also count on me to
continue to work hard in order to bring you one of the most
successful discussion lists on the Internet.
Now that that's done (thanks for putting up with me if you actually
read the above), we're going to launch into a special "The Best of
1999" feature.
To be honest I only made it through the end of January of 1999, so
it is by no means a definitive list. Compiling a definitive extract
of the highest quality posts would be a monumental task, and would
most likely be about 10 megs in size! What I found as I began this
project was that the LED is chock-full of quality content. There is
enough material in the LED archives to write a book of substantial
size.
Below you'll find seven articles taken from the January 1999
archives. The posts were carefully chosen for their unique
perspective, knowledge, expansiveness, wit, or some other
intangible quality. Naturally I was limited here by size
constraints, so I could not include as many of the qualifying
articles as I originally intended. But I think you'll agree that
these posts are special in some way. After each one I've included a
URL link to the issue it was taken from and the date it was
published.
It was a lot of fun putting this together, and since I didn't quite
make it through all of the '99 issues (only 1/12th to be precise)
perhaps this can be Part One of a twelve part series (but we'll see
about that after I read some of your feedback!).
Thank you for your participation, and best wishes in the coming year.
Sincerely,
Adam Audette, Moderator/Editor
<
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text76647 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
==== BEST of 1999 - JANUARY =====================================
From: Edwin Hayward <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: 10 Predictions for 1999
Here's my list of 10 predictions for this coming year. Does it
match yours?
1. Search engines will focus more on quality over quantity.
Webmasters of poorly written sites will gripe and moan over the
search engines' exclusivity. The rest will smirk and bask in the
renewed attention.
2. Somebody will invent an effective model that makes content PAY.
3. Portals will wither and die unless they can differentiate
themselves.
4. The average "technical level" of web users will go down - and
this will clearly show up in the more basic questions pouring into
support email addresses.
5. "Hits" will continue to be used wrongly to measure a site's
performance.
6. Email will be big! Wait and see... I have some ideas on this one
that will become apparent as 1999 winds on.
7. Y2K hysteria will be overdone, then underdone. At the end of the
year most of us will live to see the dawn on Jan. 1 2000, but some
of us better be packing extra blankets.
8. Major offline news media still won't get the Web!
9. Webmasters in the US will continue to generalise their local
audience into their global market and over-design for the hundreds
of millions of people coming online without fast internet
connections.
10. We will see plenty more lists like this one before the year is
out.
Edwin Hayward
PR2 Free Website Promotion Course
http://www.pr2.com/
This post was published on January 5, 1999 in issue
#507: http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led507
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: Shari Thurow <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: Pitfalls of Going Online
When we begin a web site consultation, the first thing we try to
establish is a good layout and navigation scheme. Believe me, many
of our potential clients have it in their heads what a "logical"
layout should be, but if the clients are web newbies (which they
often are), they are usually not very accurate. If the purpose of a
web site is to sell, then you must make it as easy as possible for
your potential buyers to find the information they are searching
for and to purchase from you from EVERY page of your web site. That
is why a good navigation scheme is so important. An experienced web
designer (or design firm) will help establish the navigation
patterns early in site development.
Second, because search engine optimization is best done as a web
site is being developed, it is very important to get the
optimization specialist and the designer talking early in the
design process so that the best HTML layout can be developed for
that particular business. A good designer and optimization
specialist will work together to create various design template
pages. Both the designer and optimization specialist can give the
pros and cons of the design, and then the client can choose the
design template that will best suit his or her business. Too many
businesses go about this process backwards (develop the site first,
optimize after completion). No one wants to hear that a site was
not designed well for optimum search engine indexing after spending
1000s of dollars on development (hence the increasing popularity of
gateway pages).
Third, as much as I love having content provided to me ahead of
time, good sales copy offline does not necessarily translate into
good sales copy online. In fact, when I write or rewrite copy for
web sites, I eliminate all sales "hype" because it serves no
purpose on a web site. Very few offline salespeople know how to write in keywords.
Lastly, effective promotional material most certainly does require
a good designer to be there early in the development process. Take
Yahoo, for instance. I get 100s of e-mail requests weekly asking
for my assistance in getting listed in Yahoo. 99% of the time, the
problem with the site is the design and layout. No contact
information on every page. No ease of ordering. Slow-loading or
highly pixelated graphics. And I know an offline sales hype when I
read it. So do Yahoo employees.
A good, profitable web site requires a pool of talents. You need a
good web designer and web graphics designer. You need a good online
and offline marketer. You need a good copywriter and content
provider. You need a reliable host. If you have a database, you
need a good programmer. Above all, you need a project manager,
whether it be a company employee or an outsourced expert, who
understands all or most of these aspects of web development. But a
designer is essential to a site's success. Not having a good
designer involved early in the process can cost you in the long run.
Take care,
Shari Thurow
http://www.grantasticdesigns.com/tips.html
This post appeared on January 7, 1999 in issue #509
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led509
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: Sam Vaknin, Ph.D. <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: Re: Quantity vs. Quality of Hits
In LED #508 Steve Hart penned an excellent piece about hits versus
sales. I am living proof of that as my site keeps getting 1500
daily impressions - and keeps generating very minimal sales.
This reminds me of Davidoff. When I was in my early twenties, I
went to Geneva to work for a multi-billionnnaire named Nessim Gaon.
Once in a while, an old, well-groomed, wrinkled, gremlin-like
gentleman would appear and deliver mysterious packages to my boss.
He had free access to the inner sanctum (the boss' chambers) and he
always emerged with piles of cash.
Gradually, I befriended him and we spent many a summer night, he
talking and I listening attentively. He manufactured and sold
cigars for grossly exorbitant prices and he got away with it. The
finest in the world - he bragged with a glint in his eye. He used
to import the most exquisite tobacco (from Cuba, Africa), roll it
into cigars manually and sell them to wealthy Arab Sheikhs, corrupt
dictators and world-weary playboys.
He used to tell me: "You don't need a fancy shop - if you have
loyal clients" ( = you don't need a fancy website, if you have a
loyal, recurrent customer base). "Don't sell perfume, if you sell
cigars", "don't lend your name, it might not be returned to you in
the same condition", "manufacture everything with your ten
fingers", "sell quality AND mystery".
Davidoff had a very modest storefront. "Of a million people who
pass and glance at my windowdressing - maybe a thousand are
interested in cigars and a dozen can afford my prices" - he smiled
- "so, why bother? I go to my clients, I never expect them to drop
by. They won't. And I don't rely on traffic, I rely on selectivity
and relationships".
He used to store his cigars in safety deposit boxes - a whole wall
of them. Each box carried an illustrious name: Prince that and King
this. I was allowed there once. This visit taught me more about
marketing than any book I read. Quality, mystique, choice of
clients, relationships, catering to the client, ignoring casual
traffic, branding through mastering expertise, persistence, refusal
to succumb to fads.
When he died, his heirs began to manufacture cigarrettes, perfume,
neckties. He would have disapproved strongly. I suspect he made
more money from his wall of safety deposit boxes than his heirs are
making today from the combined sales of their "business empire".
Davidoff was niche marketing at its best. He would have been a
great netpreneur had he lived long enough.
Dr. Sam Vaknin
Capital Markets Institute Ltd.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/6297/thebook.html
From issue #511, January 11, 1999
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led511
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: Andy L. Brock <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: Quantity Vs Quality
LED readers,
I have been following the thread on the discussion of quantity vs
quality of hits, being interested in understanding the two sides. I
am a toddler in a land of giants when it comes to the Internet, so
I would like to understand the elements that make up the marketing
and advertising mix. Since I come from the traditional marketing
world, excuse me if I use it as an analogy to understand what each
is saying.
I live in the Washington, D.C. area where we have the prestigious
newspaper giant, The Washington Post. Because of its circulation
numbers, 800,000+ per weekday, and 1,000,000+ on Sunday, it
attracts a tremendous amount of advertising dollars. Now its
readers have various reasons for reading the paper, business,
sports, horoscopes, comics, etc. This is a very diverse market, so
the advertisers, mostly retailers with locations throughout the
metropolitan area, aim their ads to attract on price savings and
many times target seasonal needs. As the retailer's marketing and
advertising consultant I would encourage them to use the Post
because of the quantity of readers.
I have another client who owns an auto repair shop. Now he could
advertise in the Post, and 800,000 readers might see his ad. He
wants to offer an oil change special to attract business. He would
be spending a large sum of money to attract the few who would be
willing to drive to his shop to take advantage of the oil change
special. As his marketing consultant I recommend that he advertises
in the local newspaper, with a readership of about 25,000 per day,
but who have the "quality" of being geographically close to his
shop. He would spend a fraction of the cost of advertising in the
post, and he would be advertising in a newspaper that offered
"quality" readers.
I may be naive, but I believe these same principles apply to the
Internet. Am I wrong to believe that advertising and marketing on
the Internet is as much about who the business is, who the market
is, and who the industry is, rather than about quantity and
quality? Am I off-track?
Best regards,
Andy L. Brock, President/CEO
MRKT INC:The Marketing Consultants
http://www.mrktinc.com
Also from issue #511, January 11, 1999
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led511
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: Hollis Thomases <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: Web Marketing
I recently read a post that struck me as the concise way one ought
to be thinking about web site marketing: "With a web site we're in
reading mode." Think about it, when you read this discussion list,
aren't you likely to more often click on a hyperlink here than a
random banner on some site that you happen to be visiting? With
that said, much of effective web site marketing needs to fall into
the content category, and we ought to be thinking of how we can
better market our web sites through content *on other people's web
sites*.
This is where the Web provides an interesting blend of public
relations and marketing. Much of the online content placement (at
least for ezines) occurs the way off-line media placement does: a
press release is written, submitted, followed-up and a story may
appear. The pros: ezines are often hungry for content and if you're
storyline is a good one, there's probably a greater chance to get
published online than off. The cons: since ezines are updated more
quickly than their traditional counterparts, your story might be
here today, gone tomorrow.
The marketing side of this story is about negotiating with other
web sites for *paid* content placement in the form of "advertorial"
or site sponsorship. Here, your story or information appears,
somewhere housing a link back to your site. The reader may never
know that they're reading what amounts to an unidentified paid
advertisement, and this poses an ethical dilemma to the media
(though they haven't readily shied away from it), but for sites
that are not media-related, this is a bonanza!
Hollis Thomases
Web Ad.vantage, Inc.
http://www.webadvantage.net
Published in issue #513, January 13, 1999
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led513
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: Steven Rothberg <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: The Future of Online Advertising
Since launching our affiliate program in November, I have become
convinced that these programs will have, at the least, a
fundamental impact on the future of online advertising and, at the
most, they will be the future of online advertising.
Traditionally, publishers of newspapers, magazines, websites and
other media have sold advertising space to various advertisers.
Because most publishers face high fixed costs, the incremental
margins on advertising revenue tend to be quite high. Unfortunately
for online publishers, most estimates are that about 80 percent of
available banner advertising space goes unsold, which is a
testament to how difficult it can be to convince advertisers of the
merits of advertising on your site. Imagine the additional revenues
that could be generated if even half of that space could be sold!
For the past few years, many publishers have chosen to sell their
excess banner advertising inventory through middlemen, be they
banner exchange services or brokers. Generally, these arrangements
work quite well for all of the parties because the advertiser can
deal with one middleman which has expertise both in choosing which
sites should be utilized in the campaign and in actually serving up
the banners. That middleman essentially gets paid a commission that
is often equivalent to 30-50 percent of the value of the ad. The
publisher is able to sell most and perhaps all of the excess
inventory for 50-70 percent, which is far higher than the zero
percent they probably would have received had they not used the
services of the middleman.
Now, however, the incredible growth in affiliate programs have
created the opportunity for publishers and advertisers to turn this
model on its head. Rather than a publisher having to convince
advertisers to risk their money by running an ad on the publisher's
website, the publisher need only convince the advertiser that there
is little to no risk for the advertiser to run an ad on the website
because it is the publisher that assumes the financial risk should
the ad not perform well. As a potential affiliate, the publisher
makes a determination as to what advertising programs do or should
perform the best on the publisher's website. The publisher then
goes out to the advertiser's website and applies to become an
affiliate of the advertiser. The advertiser can review the
publisher's website to make sure it is consistent with their image
and business practices and then, if everything checks out, approves
the publisher's application to become an affiliate. The publisher
then starts running the advertiser's banner ads.
If the publisher correctly determined that the advertiser's
products or services would sell well to the users of the
publisher's site, both the advertiser and publisher win because the
advertiser sells more of its products or services at little
additional cost and the publisher generates additional advertising
revenues, also at little additional cost. On the other hand, if the
program does not work well, the advertiser is protected because
their only cost was in the few minutes they probably spent
reviewing the publisher's site. The publisher, which made the
incorrect determination, is the only one to suffer. Isn't that how
it should be?
I believe that the biggest problem in the world of affiliate
programs is that advertisers do not understand how to promote their
own programs. Judging from their miniscule payouts, most seem to
view their affiliate programs as a way of obtaining cheap
advertising. Affiliates are often effectively only paid a few cents
per click through, which is far less than if they sold that same
space to a broker.
Steven Rothberg
http://www.adguide.com
Published January 19, 1999 in issue #517
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led517
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
~^v^~ Best of January 1999 ~^v^~
From: John Counsel <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
Subject: Re: Small Business & Market Research
I think we lose track of the real differences between small
business marketing and big business marketing.
In the mid-1980s it began to dawn on big business marketers that
one-off sales were far too expensive. They began to make the
connection that, if you want repeat, profitable sales you need
repeat, profitable BUYERS. That meant actually focusing on creating
and maintaining long-term, loyal customer RELATIONSHIPS.
"Relationship Marketing" (also known as "Relational Marketing")
became the buzzword.
There was only one catch... nobody has real relationships with big
business. If you receive a sales letter from a big business that
has your name spelled correctly several times, do you REALLY
believe that anyone in that organisation knows you exist, let alone
cares? No... the thrust of big business marketing these days is to
synthesize, using information and communications technology, what
small business has always had in genuine, flesh-and-blood reality.
How does this relate to market research?
Big business market research, no matter how sophisticated,
ultimately comes down to one thing: an attempt to replicate, via
third party employees, what savvy small business owners have always
done IN PERSON, with MUCH greater effect... the simple, powerful
"Seven Hole" Method of Market Research.
That's where you utilise the seven holes in your head to gather
information from your customers (and prospective customers) about
what they need and want. One hole does double duty... you use it to
ask questions to get more information coming in.
Prospects buy for THEIR reasons, not yours. So you need to find out
what those reasons are. You can't do that by listening with your
mouth. You have to use your eyes and ears (and your nose to sniff
out the truth when you suspect you're not getting it, such as when
they're telling you what they think you want to hear). Use your
mouth to get them to tell you the conditions under which they'd buy
from you.
To find out what they need and want, so you can tailor your
marketing and sales to them more precisely, you need to do these
simple things:
* Ask them what they need and want.
* Allow them to tell you! (Don't try to tell them what they need or
want.)
* Refine your questions. Listen to what they're saying. The best
way to get and keep their interest is to be interested in them and
what they're telling you.
* Listen for their existing emotional responses (attitudes) -
fears, concerns, prejudices, values, etc - and target your
marketing and selling directly to those responses.
In summary, the Seven Hole System offers these three huge advantages:
1. It keeps your marketing, selling and advertising simple and
direct, avoiding over-the-top claims and 'death by information
overload'. It also reduces espensive waste.
2. It makes your prospect the focal point of your selling - not
your product or service.
3. It communicates clearly to your prospect that yours is a
business designed to meet their needs - not just your own or your
company's needs. A business that's safe and easy to deal with, that
creates positive emotional responses. A business they could happily
buy from, over and over again - and to which they can safely refer
their friends.
There's an enormous discrepancy in value between the information
obtained when a consumer is talking with the OWNER of a small
business and that obtained by a hired interviewer or focus group
moderator.
Small business can't afford the wasteful, broad brush big business
approach to market research. Fortunately, it doesn't need it. Like
most other aspects of marketing, small business has the real thing,
while the best that big business can ever manage is a pale
imitation. The only reason that big business generally gets better
results is because it actually DOES it. Small business, as a rule,
doesn't. It's far too busy being busy.
It's time to take a little time out and get the information you
need. The Seven Hole Method of Market Research is extraordinarily
powerful. But, like any other tool, YOU have to pick it up and USE
it. One of the great things about the Internet is that it offers so
many ways to do this, easily and inexpensively.
John Counsel, CEO
The Profit Clinic
http://www.profitclinic.com/7hole.html
From LED #523, January 27, 1999
http://digest.bcentral.com/led/led523
Comment: <
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
';
document.write( '' );
document.write( addy_text40644 );
document.write( '<\/a>' );
//-->\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
>
|
