Qualified Lead Generation with Proximity Leads

What can you do when your ideal client is near impossible to reach?

Let’s first identify what is “impossible to reach”. If you can’t physically get to them, get them on the phone. If you can’t get them on the phone, get them in an email. If they won’t respond to your email, try better email content. If that still won’t work, reach them through LinkedIn or Twitter even. If none of that works, try this!

In some cases you can’t exactly get your ideal leads, but you can get to someone. You can’t get to the head honcho, but maybe you can get to the head honcho’s friends, employees, gatekeepers, or peers. It’s up to you to find the proximal point of entry applicable to your scenario.

  • Become a buddy with the gatekeeper. This is not to be taken lightly. Most salespeople won’t even put in the effort to get the name of the gatekeeper. Get the name, and get other point of “talk” too. The second time you call you name can address by name as well as have something else to say. If you really wanted to be prepared, you’d Google them for a bit more information about them and find some common ground. Be a human, don’t treat people like robots, it’s rude.
  • Reach out to the friends of the lead via social media. This doesn’t need to be cynical. If you legitimately feel as though you have something your lead will be interested in, take a shot at this.
  • Interest the peers of the lead with your content. Time and time again we have heard that people care more about there peers opinions than anyone else’s. By this rationale, it makes sense to get those peers talking about you to induce your lead to respond to you.

There’s always going to be some way in, and by taking this type of approach you might catch that qualified lead that keeps on slipping.

P.S. Furthermore, and I’m breaking the common marketing rule of one idea per post on this, there is no one you absolutely can’t reach. Let’s say you have this potential client. There’s a huge potential sale for you. He has a budget. He has a need. You’re solution is superior to all else in this particular application. However, the lead doesn’t know you exist. What would you do? What could you do? We live in a world where information on anyone is accessible. There is no doubt you could track down someone by knowing a bit about them and doing some active detective work if the price is right.

♣ Qualified Lead Generation with Proximity Leads ♠

Patents, Entrance, and TNT

A small company is working on creating a novel platform for a very niche field of research. These researchers traditionally merge or makeshift a combination of overly-robust platforms and self-developed ad hoc platforms to suit the study at hand the best. Due to the inconsistencies of the tools use, and thus data collected, data sharing is virtually irrelevant and severe inefficiencies and inaccuracies emerge at every point. This has been causing research to suffer and progress to stunt. This new platform seeks to be an open-source standard, and they wish to remain untainted by investor money. More imminently threatening to them is the potential of making a slow-growth entrance into the marketplace, catching the attention of a large corporation and leaving them in the dust.

What can you do in this situation?

  1. Utility patents first, before anything else. Understand how competitors may be able to work around these patents. If you can directly protect the very advantage you have with a patent, you’re done. If that’s not possible, build vaguely around it with other patents, and look at number two.
  2. Carefully control the way in which you enter the market. Larger competitors won’t typically catch on or care until they see your profit or their declining sales. While you want your end-user’s to be infatuated with your platform, you want your competitors to see it as unprofitable. If that’s unavoidable, the other option may be to grow to quickly to be imitated, which is outlined in number three.
  3. To grow quickly, you need to take your TNT resources, and light the fuse. TNT resources for a technical crowd such as this will consist of connective persuaders and chain reactionists. Connective persuaders know people in the industry and have the ability to influence. They will have an extensive background in the industry. Chain reactionists are a type of marketer. They will have an extensive background of triggering wide-spread adoption of a products, services, and ideas.

Patents, Market Entrance, and TNT ♠

My Letter to Peter Thiel

Dear Peter,

Today my Google chrome tabs were filled with Amazon.com books searches such as “Innovation, Persuasion, Creativity, and Disruptive Technologies.” One of these searches resulted in your book, Zero to One. Click.

I would like to suggest an idea to be Zero to One’d.

The music industry has been a regurgitation of itself since The Beatles (or whomever you speculate) unknowingly laid out the foundation for the following 50 years of music. This was “1”. Any pop song on the radio follows the exact same formula, they are indeed “n”.

Even the most creative artists, ones placing creative passion over a living wage,  are not truly going 0 to 1. I see plenty of 1 to b.s.

We need 0 to 1 in music, and I know how to get there. I’ll expect your call later today.




Technological Innovation vs. Budget

As Xerox CEO Ursula Burns puts it, we have a few ways in which we can gain more from a process. We can consolidate like processes to specialists, which we may consider a cornerstone of all business. Secondly, we can move these processes to lower-cost areas, out-sourcing. Thirdly, we can use technology to perform the process better. To me, the first is common sense, the second is unethical but practical, and the third is brilliant.

Brilliant as new technologies may be, businesses will only bite if the technology will save time, money, peace of mind, or some other resource. It must be a value greater than the cost itself, plus the cost of implementation.

I’d like to again use Xerox as an example here. A few years ago, there was talk of a IT proximity-based solution. The fraction 1/2 has been thrown around the healthcare industry with respect to the amount of time spent on recording data and communicating the information to other healthcare workers. Xerox has the bright idea (I’m unsure if it’s still being tested or implemented) to cut down on time waste with wireless devices.

Imagine you are a nurse before this technology is available to you. You stop by the front desk, getting word of a new patients arrival, pull out the proper paper work, and walk into a room to greet a patient. You take the data, return to a workstation, log in, pull up the record, find the proper forms to fill out, enter the data and move on.

Now, with the technology. You walk into a room to greet a patient, and your tablet pulls up their exact record, ready for new information. You take the data, done.

In layman’s terms, the technology would require a wireless device attached to each employee and room in the facility.The front desk would enter upcoming patient data to match the rooms data. The data would pull up on tablets, accordingly.

Now, which hospital wouldn’t jump on this? Back to the business side.

Let’s look at some factors that will determine whether or not a decision maker will jump.

  1. How will it look to their peers and superiors?
  2. Will it save time, money or other resources?
  3. Do they care more about the short-term or long-term implementations?
  4. Do they have cheaper alternatives?
  5. How soon will this technology become obsolete, thus ruining the investment?

These questions are important to ask before spending immensely on R&D or manufacturing.

Technological Innovation vs. Budget ♠

How Louis Vuitton Rocks Sky-High Prices

This article takes a marketing practitioners applicable approach to recent research posted in the Journal of Retailing, of which I rarely cover. The original piece is Consumer Perceptions of How Luxury Brand Stores Become Art Institutions. 

To simplify what we can use from the research, we need to understand three things.

1.There is an abundance of rich people willing to make purchases right now.

2. Rich people dislike over-commercialization.

3. Rich people appreciate art.

Let’s face it, once a brand conforms to the usual and begins blasting promotions in your face, it’s no longer as special. Thus, the value of a premium consumer brand judged on prestige and aesthetics inherently drops in the eyes of the elite. We have seen in recent times a growth in high income spenders, and Louis Vuitton has been reaping the benefits.

Now we can comfortably say, Louis Vuitton’s competition is likely not blasting promotions at consumers understanding the principle stated above. So how is it that they are further distinguishing themselves? Have you walked into their store lately?

They don’t have stores they have galleries. Shelled in a story of its more than century old heritage and hand-made dedication, Vuitton makes an effort to distinguish their pieces from others’ products. Their stores look like art institutions, are designed by world renowned artists, and contain their products literally among-st fine art decor.

The point to take away here: Art can be valued however high you like. Because Loius Vuitton can be commoditized, it’s value does not have to drop with the flubbers of the economy like other commercial items.