London, Ink isn’t a PR firm but in order to help clients prioritize
marketing/comm initiatives it’s a necessity to be familiar with a wide
range of marketing tools, services, agencies, etc. I’m also always
looking for creative ways to promote London, Ink in cost-effective, targeted
ways.
For those reasons, last year I started using the Vocus
Small Business Edition (aka SBE–a version of PRWeb), an online pr
management tool that is a scaled down version of Vocus’ widely-used
flagship platform. My hypothesis was that, without much investment in time or
money, sending out a series of releases on London, Ink news (client
announcements, speaking engagements, new hires) would increase the number of
quality mentions of “London, Ink” across the web and of course
quality (in the eyes of Google’s algorithm) inbound links to my site.
(A side note: I don’t rely on SEO for inbound lead gen, but ever since
Discovery launched the hit tattoo/reality program called “London
Ink,” my links have been pushed way down.)
Each release took a few minutes to queue up–Vocus allowed me to target
by geography, topic of the release, type of reporter and name of media outlet. I
was also able to incorporate a video interview I participated in with Shashi
Bellamkonda, Network Solutions’ Social Swami. I was able to easily
link the releases to my various online channels, including LinkedIn, Facebook,
Twitter and, of course, my site.
My hypothesis turned out to be correct. After my second Vocus release, the
search engine rankings for London, Ink improved and they continued to do so as I
sent out more releases.
Now for the over-deliver part. As I mentioned, London, Ink doesn’t
typically provide PR services, but I did support a significant announcement by
one of my client’s by doing some basic outreach to my media contacts and
distributing the release via my Vocus SBE account.
My expectation was that the media contacts I selected may or may not actually
receive the release; may or may not see it among the blizzard of releases they
get each day; and/or won’t respond to it. I’m pleased to report that
the client received several great media inquiries, including one from the major
daily paper in their market and another from a key vertical news outlet. Both of
these inquiries resulted in excellent print coverage, which the client of course
loved.
So for resource-strapped organizations that need a cost-effective news
distribution platform, check out Vocus SBE.
(Or the art of throwing the previous regime under
the bus.)
By Bob London
We all know about the so-called honeymoon period in business: the time at the
beginning of a new job when an executive can sit back and absorb and assess the
way things work, who the power players are and where the bodies are
buried–without being expected to make any great decisions or
pronouncements. It’s a no-fault grace period which can last as long as
several months depending on the role and company.
But there’s another less-talked about phase executives can leverage to
their advantage: the Blame Window. This is the period during which you can
hold your predecessor responsible for the challenges you are now facing.
One might naturally ask, as I did, how long after you’ve assumed a new
role can you blame your predecessor? And how would one go about throwing him
or her under the bus?
My research yielded no credible answers to these questions, so I developed
the following handy formula (Fig. 1) to help executives calculate their
available Blame Window:
Here is a fictitious example to show how the formula works. Let’s say
Bill S. takes over as CFO of a venture-backed start-up which has already raised
two rounds of funding and is burning $75,000 per month with profitability two
years away, soonest. After 6.5 weeks on the job, Bill discovers a serious flaw
in the company’s pricing model that requires redoing the model–and
therefore the business plan–from scratch. Bill’s predecessor held
the CFO post for 2.5 years.
Q: Can Bill blame his predecessor? A: Absolutely! Using the former CFO’s tenure
of 30 months, divided by 2 equals 15, which is then divided by the 6.5 weeks of
Bill’s tenure and multiplied by a Problem Magnitude Rating of 5. The
result is a Blame Window of 11.4 weeks. Since Bill discovered the error in under
seven weeks, he can throw the former CFO right under the old Greyhound.
Caution: this formula can be dangerous if not used judiciously. Here are
some important tips to remember:
First, make sure you get the math right. There is
nothing more embarrassing than miscalculating the Blame Window and having the
whole situation blow up in your face. Set some reminders in Outlook 90, 60, 30
and 7 days prior to the expiration of the Blame Window so you will know when to
stop blaming your predecessor.
Second, do your homework before you start laying on the
criticism. Was your predecessor
revered or scorned? Respected or tolerated? Make sure to get these and other
data points before you start spraying around accusations. The last thing you
want to do is tear into someone who is a company legend or, worse, someone who
is deceased.
Third, make sure to select the right way of broaching the subject
with your superiors. Here are some preambles to get you
started:
Jocular: “Gee, if I’d known all this before I
would have asked for a lot more money, ha-ha-ha!”
Nothing Personal, Just Business: “I’m sure
<name of predecessor> was a good guy, but…”
Delicate but Direct: “I don’t want to
cast aspersions on anyone, but now that I’ve gotten my feet
wet…”
Mildly Annoyed: “I have to tell you I’m not
sure what I’ve gotten myself into here…”
Threatening: “If you think I’m going to take
the fall for any of this, you can just find yourself another CFO.”
(Why Would Investment
Bankers Embrace Social
Media During a Downturn?)
By Brad Fleisher, Managing Director, Focus
Enterprises
The recession has hit nearly all industries across the economy and investment
banking, leading the pack, has certainly not escaped the grief. What used to be
the largest and most profitable group of investment banks on Wall Street,
commonly referred to as the bulge bracket, is now the busted
bracket, consisting of just two bank holding companies - Goldman Sachs and
Morgan Stanley.
Although the consensus among mainstream economists is that we’re in the
trough and will see positive growth in Q1-2009, albeit probably mild, M&A (a
lagging indicator) is still weak because of ongoing discrepancies in middle
market valuations Buyers are fishing for distressed deals, and sellers still
have the misconception that an offer should start at 8x EBITDA (and be increased
for average performance) rather than 5x, which is the long-term, broad economy
historical average.
Taking a page from Rahm Emanuel’s book, and not wanting to waste a good
crisis, a few partners and I took advantage of the slow down to re-think and
execute a new business strategy. We’re seeking to capitalize on three long
term trends in the economy.
Social Media Marketing v. Traditional Media Marketing. While
there is still no more effective way to reach 90 million potential customers in
30 seconds than through a Super Bowl advertisement, there is no better way to
communicate an esoteric point on intellectual property valuation to 140
professionals who are seeking this information than through LinkedIn, Facebook
or Twitter. You don’t have to “tweet” every hour to take
advantage of social networks. And the trend has just begun. Social networks are
becoming platforms to distribute customized services to highly fragmented
communities rather than just a vehicle for information exchange.
Applying these trends to investment banking, the hypothesis for our practice
group at Focus is that we can build our brand and grow our business quicker by
leveraging the Internet and social media than through placing traditional
tombstone advertisements in industry magazines and attending industry and
networking meetings.
That’s why, earlier this year we launched Intangible Insights
(www.intangibleinsights.com), which is our online Community of Practice where we
blog, podcast, conduct surveys, publish research, and otherwise communicate with
and expand our target market. We’re even discussing strategies for
streaming video to micro-niche audiences through a branded Internet TV channel,
which may be a number of years out, but is certainly on its way.
Intangible v. Tangible Assets. There currently is an
enthusiastic debate within the Intangible Asset professional community whether
intangible assets compose “upwards of 80% of listed companies’
values” (according to a Brookings Institute report), or just under 50%.
For us, the point is this: Intangible property accounts for a significant
amount of a company’s valuation.
This is a long term trend, if not a permanent change,that will accelerate in
the post-recession economy as developing countries use labor advantages and
decreasing communication costs to offshore commoditized tasks, both
manufacturing and informational. In order to compete, the U.S. will have to
enhance its intangible asset capabilities through R&D, workforce
productivity, distribution networks, and stretch its tangible resources, which
will further diminish the reliance and value of hard assets
Intangible assets compose the largest share of value, by far, in
Internet-reliant companies. Of course, there is significant value in the
intellectual property assets of the knowledge economy company — the
patents, copyrights trademarks, and trade secrets — but the real value
resides at the next layer, in the methodologies that convert the intangible
assets into revenue — culturally-ingrained process to attract and retain
talent, strategic measurement and execution processes, brands, databases, social
networks. Our group is working on a valuation rating system for these intangible
assets so our clients can better understand the intrinsic value of their company
and their acquisition targets. Just identifying and analyzing these assets, not
to mention exploiting them, will help our clients with post-transaction
integration plans or accelerated growth, which is the arbiter of a successful
corporate transaction.
Generalist vs. Specialist. Since its inception in 1982,
FOCUS Bankers has been a middle market, generalist investment bank and has long
debated the generalist v. specialist strategy. There are benefits and drawbacks
to each, but it’s difficult to toe the middle line. During my five year
tenure at the firm, I’ve worked on deals in industries ranging from
highly-engineered manufactured products, transportation and logistics, and
electronic parts distribution to the information industries, including software,
Internet, IT, and digital media, which is where most of my career experience has
been.
The recession gave us the opportunity to transition into one carefully
defined market: the Internet-Reliant Industry with a focus on intangible assets,
and start a practice group within the firm. The key was to define the space
large enough to have an active and growing marketplace, but small enough to have
end-to-end domain expertise. That it’s highly dynamic, indispensable to
information industries, full of cutting-edge growth opportunities, and just a
lot of fun, doesn’t hurt our commitment.
The silver lining in this recession for us is that we took the opportunity
for introspection and execution. Our strategy is fluid, but our practice group
has staked its future on these trends, which we believe will shape future
markets and US competitiveness.
About Brad Fleisher
Brad Fleisher is a Managing Director at FOCUS Investment Banking in Washington, DC and publisher
of Intangible Insights. Brad is an experienced investment banker, entrepreneur
and attorney with over 15 years M&A, corporate finance, and business
development and advisory experience in the Internet, software & information
technology, media, and education industries. Contact Brad at
Brad.Fleisher@focusbankers.com.
Older gentleman sues Facebook and LinkedIn for age discrimination, calling
them “too confusing for some of us older folk.”
Broomville, CO–A 58-year old accounting manager has filed suit against two
of the most popular networking sites, accusing Facebook and LinkedIn of
discriminating against him and millions of older people who find social
networking sites and technologies too intimidating and complicated to use.
“It’s tough enough getting older every single day, but its
downright degrading when you run into a zillion people a day asking if
you’re using LinkedIn or Facebook, as though they’re some sort of
panacea,” said the complainant, Frank Sawyer. “I’ve tried to
use those newfangled things and have spoken to a lot of my peers who’ve
tried also. It just isn’t in our genetics, and it isn’t
fair.”
Added Sawyer’s attorney, Barney Simonton, “You can’t teach
an old dog new technologies. We’ve tried to contact both LinkedIn and
Facebook to make the case that older folk need a simpler process for signing up
and using these sites–and it took us literally a month to find a phone
number where we could reach a live person. Ultimately, our complaints have
fallen on deaf ears, which has forced us to take legal action.”
“I had one older friend who actually figured out how to start using
Facebook,” said Jennette Porteax, a 61-year old home maker. “Just
when he got comfortable using it they changed the whole darn site
around–the way it looks, the way it works, everything. He just
couldn’t keep up–he pitched the whole social networking thing and
took up woodworking.”
Marketing expert and self-proclaimed ‘thought leading social media
demi-guru,’ Bob London of marketing firm London, Ink predicted the social
networking trend may in fact leave the older generation behind. “Age is a
state of mind–on the Internet no one knows you’re old, unless you
forget to suppress your year of birth on Facebook,” said the
forty-something London.
“Old people just need to take a deep breath and try harder. It
ain’t rocket science, and if you need proof of that, just check out some
of the younger crowd’s atrocious profiles. They’re full of bad
grammar, misspellings and illiterate-sounding corporate jargon.”
Both LinkedIn and Facebook declined to comment for this story.
