That What is Old, Trying to be New Again…AOL + MySpace

As the days/layoffs progress, it is interesting to watch the state of two formerly powerhouse [and to be fair, still powerful, just less so] Online firms, both with top-shelf names in the global brand arena.

With their ‘Models’ in question, revenues plunging, employees leaving en masse [willfully or not], I cannot help in my mind but to join at the hip, the current states of being at both AOL and MySpace. I don’t know why, other than maybe timing. Although both come from different times/different places, both have brought in [what they hope to be] game-changer CEO’s, and the going is proving quite difficult.

Both were ‘it’ firms at one point, both have huge Brand legacies, both are now struggling to adapt & adjust to new revenue sources. Both are fading. What is interesting to me, is, in the Online world, there often is no recovery, no coming back. Why is that? To me, the Web is essentially at this point in time, an extremely visible version of Schumpeter’s Creative Destruction concept, writ large.

If you are, say Alcoa Aluminum, Oracle Software, or heck, even Intel…you can have your ups & downs, struggle, adapt, survive. Lose $2Bn last quarter? Shift things around, add a new product line, adjust your staff, boom. Next quarter [or next year] you are back to 12% y/o/y growth again. No, it’s not quite that easy, of course. But those firms DO come back.

How many do in the Online world? Maybe Michael Arrington of TechCrunch, and others, have it right with their ‘DeadPool’ concept. I notice that they don’t also have a ‘Revived Pool’ or a ‘Hey, You Made it Back from the Brink Pool’.

As those on the Sales side also ponder our futures, and the role we will play in securing & achieving Revenues for our firms going forward, these are items we should be paying attention to.

The Chron Sans Caen…Goes to Gloss

With roots in the Bay Area, the news in my favorite hometown, the City of SF, is one I always keep an eye on. OK, so it’s also my ONLY hometown. But truth be told, even before the Hearst-Examiner $66M episode with the Fang family, the SF Chronicle never really recovered after the passing of Herb Caen, the paper’s guiding light & cantankerous columnist for decades. You could just feel the paper slip from that very day, never to recover. Sure, no longer having Mayor Willie’s dapper suits on the front page, Editor Phil’s marriage to hollywood stardom shot down, and the Pink Section vanishing…then reappearing…all contributed.

So, of course, did other things: the Dot-bomb of 2000 [when $50M start-ups no longer ironically used Print to attract an Online audience], the Examiner debacle [mentioned above],  the tech-savvy residents of The City desiring of more & more news online, and the arrival of ‘Darth Vega’ [maligned Publisher Frank Vega, brought in to shake up things...like the Unions].

Today, the fascinating story continues, and it may be a good one: The SF Chronicle will, as of Monday, go to Glossy stock on its outer Wrap pages. Gloss in a Daily edition! Not being in the Bay Area these days, the HuffPo article, [online, yes I know] is > here.

Newspapers do need to innovate, no question. There is question if this move will work or not, but kudos to them trying something new. Anything, to innovate themselves into a new place of viability. The risk is great here, of course, on the Cost side, as Gloss is significantly more costly than Newsprint. The repro/image quality is much better of course, but whether that translates to “ROI” or not, will be closely watched.

This creates both greater pressure on the Sales team, and a great opportunity. Keeping margins higher to handle the higher cost will be key, and theirs is the task to do that. Keeping the focus on ‘Brand Value’, and not on Cost, is the way to go here. I would also advocate maybe that the Sales team take a page [so to speak] from their brethren on the Magazine side, and consider studying some of the Sales techniques of those firms as taught by the MPA.

Good Luck, Chron! We’ll be watching…uh, reading. Perhaps somewhere in the ether, the beloved Mr Caen will be, too.

GM + Opel – A Redux

Dear GM,

A good-to-really-good move this week, to back out of selling Opel to Magna…though it was a little sudden. A bad-to-very-bad move in my view, though, was to then announce 10,000 job cuts the day after that. Did anyone think this thru, or did they just not care how this would sound?

Everybody [except for maybe Magna] applauds that you tabled the deal, since frankly the economics that compelled you into this deal to begin with, have now changed again, towards the better. And Opel is a key Tech/Design partner for you.

But you blew that PR out entirely, if I may, with these job cuts. Europe will not like this, and it creates a lot of ill will. Not something that you need right now. Being that these cuts will come from the same market[s] you sell into, perhaps that news could have been diluted, or delayed just a bit? Obviously not, but I’m just sayin’…

Conde’ Conundrum, or Publishing Pratfalls…

Where CN is concerned, these are the questions that I cannot pass up: Why did Conde’ Nast hire an outside firm like McKinsey to help them fix/analyze their business? Don’t they have the talent in-house to do that? Isn’t there a Consulting firm ‘in the biz’ that would have been better suited to address the issues that CN faces? My all-time favorite newspaper, the NY Observer, has the story.
~~~
As a background observation, it is interesting to note the process that brought them on. In the case of this great publishing giant, it is apparently so that when you arrive into the upper ranks, you are allowed to finally admit your shortcomings, making the case that the ‘fate of the organization’ is at stake [can you say 'Too Big to Fail' here?] and then bring in the “Consultants” to either fix everything, or take the blame later. [To be fair, this is also true with most other firms.] A Perfect System…Sort of.

What the effect is on companies as a result of all this is incalculable. In reality, the questions posed above are valid, clear-eyed ones, being asked in the shining light of transparency, to borrow from a former Supreme Court justice.

[As an aside to the rest of the Media world, the parallel to this of course, is the scapegoating of our beloved Ad Agencies by the corporate Marketing team, which is a given staple of the biz, rightly or wrongly.]
~~~
Now for those of us on the MediaSales side [which is really my main interest here, of course] comes the final question that I see NO ONE else asking. It is this: Instead of hiring McKinsey…instead of closing a now-growing number of Titles…had anybody thought about a “change” to CN’s long-standing ‘No Discount from Rate Card’ policy?

Thought about it? Hell, even suggested it outright? More, did anybody think about analyzing how much revenue that that would have SAVED for Conde’? [Saved in the sense of not going away to another publisher or mag firm like Hatchette.] And, what about going forward? These “lost” revenue streams also cannot be counted on in the future; they are now N/A. Wall Street loves to talk about The Present (Discounted) Value of Future Revenue Streams, a la’ Warren Buffett. Guess what that amount comes to for CN? $0. Zero.

No, I don’t see that discussion anywhere. Had McKinsey’s no-doubt-exorbitant fee been…”absorbed” …by Rate-card reductions or negotiations, what would have happened? Sure, losses would be there, but at what level?

This analysis is not meant to be simplistic, favoring only the Sales effort. I just think the review may not have been fully rounded, and so big money may have been left on the table [albeit at lower margins, true] never to be seen, or to return. Alas, Conde’ Nast, alas.

Retro Reverse: Nielsen Brings PRIZM Data to Online…

Interesting how the wheels turn; it is announced today at OnlineMediaDaily that PRIZM Cluster Data [something I myself have used since my Newspaper days] is being brought to the Online media planning world.

Read more on it > here.

This makes a lot of sense, as I personally had already found that referencing ‘PRIZM Data’ within the context of online Targeting, was a fitting analogy in certain cases. During a sales meeting with a media-savvy Agency near the end of 2008, I was in the middle of discussing the Targeting capabilities that the social media firm I was working with at the time could offer their client[s]. It struck me that it was indeed, a near-miss analogy to PRIZM, and I said so…unsure of the horror I might ensue.

Like myself however, many of the Agency team had also migrated to the Digital world from the TradMedia side. As soon as I put the point into those terms…it stuck. Soon it was even being used at our firm’s Board Meetings!

The point is, is that PRIZM is, and always has been, a valuable set of data points. As Online evolves, there is no reason to have a ‘Chinese Wall’ that separates New Media vs. Trad Media tools, as with Edit/Advertising. The tools work, they now apply, so let’s use them.

Gig2009: A Marathon…And a Sprint

…the Job Search, that is. 2009 is a year many will be glad ends soon; for those ‘in transition’ [myself included], this is probably the most true. I have filed this Post under ‘Things No One Tells You’, for good reason, as these are my kind of unspoken nuggets of the moment. My observations then [some of them anyway] on the new Career Front that is 2009 follow, in no particular order:

• No matter what the people interviewing say while you are with them…if you send an email ‘Thank You’ note, and they do not confirm/respond, fairly quickly, within 24 hours, you are Done. Out. Over. Period. It does not matter ‘how great it went’, or ‘they said I was a great fit’, etc. And it does not mean that the situation cannot get hot again a week/month down the line. Until then, Move On. Why? Because, unconsciously, it’s a scarcity mentality: if they think you are THE person for them…they won’t want to lose you. So they’ll stay in touch within that 24 hours, for sure. Consider this a Litmus Test to Keep Your Sanity By.
• There are many with great Career Advice out there right now, adapted in late-2009 to the many poor souls that are out there looking for a “new opportunity” right now. Unfortunately…this info is kind of like new Investment theories on Wall Street: As soon as they get wide exposure and everybody can use them, their value diminishes, and fast. By the time I have tried what I deem as really great approaches, those on the Hiring side seem to already have digested these, and swatted them aside. So, the level playing field returns.
• That does not make any of these ideas bad, and does not mean that they don’t have value, or won’t work at all. What it REALLY shows, is how high the bar has been raised, and how goofy the market has gotten. Now, despite these items, a week/month down the line, you still might get The Call. If so, take it & run!

So what to do? Well, if the level playing field returns equilibrium on the other side, then maybe that also applies to your side. So a return to basics includes: Diligently pursuing leads/jobs/Job Board postings in your field, AND out of your field. [Having a Plan B only helps you.] Follow protocol with the good Recruiters that may help you. Let the gimmicks & strategies go. Build your Network consistently & diligently. As others have said, consider this your ‘New Job.’ For us on the Sales side, consider it your newest Sales project…Selling You.

Good Luck to All Out There!

Fads, Profiles & Portrayals…The Social Media ‘Sell’

The question has been lurking out there, for a while now, and it is this: What has been started by Social Media…and what will it lead to? Other questions quickly follow: Is the corporate world over-relying on this new tool, with it taking on ’shiny object’ overtones? And…what comes next?

In asking the question as he does, Henry Blodget of SAI, in his article, ‘Is Facebook a Fad?’, hints at the heart of this whole issue, one that will only burgeon from here. Is Facebook [or more, what Facebook represents] a Fad? Can Facebook continue to evolve in an iterative way, to keep users interested and itself viable going forward?

Couple this question in the business world with the ‘Big Brother’ aspects of knowing that your employer, or future employer, may be looking at everything you’ve ever posted, and you have to wonder ‘Where is All of This Going’? I see a kind of closed-loop environment going on right now: You, to be relevant, are expected to have a ‘Social Media Presence’, which is then looked at closely & relied on as an indicator of ‘Who You Are.’ While there is great value in a lot of ways from this [I freely admit to looking at many peoples' online 'Brand'], this situation is fraught with all kinds of interesting implications, and ripe to be taken advantage of.

It does not take a rocket scientist to build a completely selective, skewed “profile” of yourself, a portrayal that, if relied too much upon, could be subject to as much abuse as any other tool out there. Your online Personal Brand is really just a static transfer of data about yourself, as selected by you.

Don’t get me wrong on this: I am a big proponent in many ways, for what Social Media is, has been, and will be. But while ‘Everyone is Still Figuring it Out’, some rationality…and some rationale…needs to be injected. Yes, companies have a right to look at candidates & their employees as best as they can, to determine many areas of their skillset & talents, analyzing every squiggle in that person’s provided Social Graph. But is too much emphasis being placed on this?

For most people, what they portray of themselves, is just a part of them, not the whole picture. This point seems overlooked. To me, Social Media platforms are, or can be in a lot of ways, like going to a party or a Networking event…you only show people the side of you that you wish to show. So building a ‘Personal Brand’ for yourself online has value [as advocated by greats like Dan Schawbel, Brian Solis & others], but it is selective in nature, and yet I don’t see that really being recognized at all out there.

Companies that mistake this one side they ’see’, for the whole person, are likely to do themselves an injustice. In any case, Social Media 2.0 will likely be an entirely new iteration/user experience/ environment, rendering this version quaint & obsolete.

Is ‘Facebook a Fad?’. It may very well be, until they create that 2.0 version of Social Media. Just like we know “they” are, already working on it even as I write this.

VW + Deutsch = Perfect Pair?

Nice work, Deutsch/LA, in landing a nice Car account. It is as simple as that.

While I personally saw nothing wrong with the work being done for VW recently, after an agency review, Volkswagen Motors moved AOR/Creative duties to Deutsch/LA today, per AutoNews > here. [Media is not specifically mentioned, so there may still be some question as to whether Beyond Interactive has kept that part of the account.]

Although Deutsch was not able to keep all of their team on hand after the wrenching loss of the Saturn biz, they still have the talent & internal history worthy of this great car brand, in my view. True, Deutsch is part of one of the conglom’s, the holding company IPG, but from my work with them, they seem to have managed to keep some amount of autonomy, some sense of Donny Deutsch’s identity for the shop.

There’s that element…and the fact of their having worked on a number of other Car accounts; Mitsu, parts of GM, and Saturn. So, they are well equipped to work with [and are well aware of the realities of] an OEM car client, key parts of which include not only distinct Brand creative, but also the ability to parse that creative into chunks usable on a field level, coordinating work across all Regions / DAs, and the constant grind of model launches & Sales events. And…if that wasn’t enough…all of those wheels must churn at once, in sync, and on time. Not easy stuff.

Deutsch can do it. Congrat’s.

Up, Up & Hyundai…

Not sure what planet the point of view for this CNNMoney.com article was gleaned from, on the Korean autos brand Hyundai, also makers of Kia Motors vehicles worldwide. This diligent, aggressive autos group has been poised for several years, to become ‘Top of List’ on the world stage for car buyers. Having worked directly with both Hyundai & Kia in several phases of their Ad/Media budgets from the Sales side, this has been obvious for a while. See it > here.

Their vehicle quality has steadily improved from Yugo-levels, to JDPower Award-winners, over the course of a decade, vastly improving with it, their sales potential.

Why I would then see the comments of a VP, Jesse Toprak, from a site called CarTracker.com in this article, quoted as saying, “They’re definitely considered one of the major automakers today, which was definitely not the case this time last year,” is beyond me. Why? This statement possibly could have applied nearer to 1999, than 2009. ‘Definitely not the case last year?’ Really? They have already passed Nissan in [US] sales, and are within reach of Chrysler at this point. Who exactly is he referring to that didn’t consider them as major players? Certainly not people in the autos biz. ‘Last year’?

So, either Mr Toprak was taken out of context here [very possible]…or his statement in my mind, is not in sync with the history of this OEM. Congrat’s to Mr Zuchowski [whom I have only met in passing], having come over from Mazda, & the rest of the team there, for achieving massive success from the shifting groundwork put in place over time & multiple Mgmt iterations.

Selling On the Video Side…

The following article/discussion on issues facing the Video side of Ad Network buys [part of a continuing series on Online Video Insider by MediaPost], is excellent; short, summarized, and smart. The issues highlighted, when boiled down, are also ones directly facing those on the Media Sales side, as it those folks that will face them first with their Agency/Client partners. Authored by Eric Franchi of Undertone, see it > here.

Given the very real issues at stake, what should the Sales side be doing here? These are some thoughts:

Make sure, before you enter your next meeting [or speak again on the phone], where, to the best of your abilities, your own Site/Network stands on the verifiability issue. Not knowing will damage your credibility in the eyes of those you sell to.

Be in FRONT of this kind of dialogue, as doing so will have the opposite [and desired] effect, of adding to your credibility in your Sales situation.

Also, be in front of the situation, if you find any discrepancies in product/performance/placement…the minute you learn of them. Ideally you are then working to not only fix, or help to fix them internally, and also to inform your Agency/Client right away.

Ideally, though, your Site/Network is one that is delivering in an optimal fashion, so we go back to #2 above, and be in front of THAT as well. The disparity of performance in the industry then becomes your opportunity, and with it your right, to not only ask for more business, but to also expand your access either within the Agency, or Client, or both.