Who Made You Like This

The very best & worst of my mental dumps

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Migrating over to Quora's blog platform

I'm gonna start posting over there.  See you over there, my two followers!

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Sales & Marketing || Online Dating

Since online dating is all about selling & marketing yourself, why not apply some online sales & marketing practices to your dating life? The Okcupid blog has done a number of studies to understand what matters, but here’s an actionable list.

Build a lead list || mark your favorites.  As the sales saying goes, “plan your work, and work your plan”.  But keep in mind to…

Keep the top of the funnel wide || message more people.  Sure, you should have your standards.  And yes, canned messaging is not as good as something that shows you actually skimmed their profile.  But it’s a numbers game.  Not everybody is gonna convert.  (Yeah, go ahead.   You can define “convert” however you want, horn dog).

Email marketing || messaging.  AB test, baby!  Variables you can test are all the same, if not even better: your profile image that appears, subject lines/ openers, length of text in the body, content of the body (ask a question or make a comment), time of day sent, day of week sent, demographic of recipient, date the recipient joined or last logged in & followup messaging.

Profile optimization || landing optimization.  Less flexibility here because you don’t have full control of the profile page, but there’s room for testing: photos (angle of face, lighting, with friends or wo friends, action shots, in the mirror, with or wo clothes, outdoors, activities) details & text (the copy itself, less vs more completed fields, jokeyness vs seriousness, bulleting items, grammar & punctuation, maybe even have a friend write one for you to see if style matters).

You probably won’t be able to gather enough data for full blown optimization, but hopefully you can get things directionally better and won’t need to.  :)

[whomadeyoulikethis]

“I can out-market anyone who walks through that door.”

Believe it or not, this is what I once said to my former boss at Care.com.  (Don’t worry, ladies!  The charm doesn’t stop there!)  We caught up over coffee the other day, and her astute insights about my startup made me realize that I’ve got a ways to go.  (Of course, that’s independent from my growing up and being less of a cocky punk :)).

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Why Appreciating Life Can Mean More Sales

For a few months now, I’ve taken time every morning to write down 3 things I am grateful for.  It’s a technique for happiness that was mentioned in a TED lecture by Shawn Achor.  He says you relive that happiness when you think about it.  I also think that by stopping to focus on what you do have going for you, you don’t judge your life as much by what is missing.  You’re counter-balancing the feelings of frustration, failure and angst of not having those things.  

Has it made me happier overall?  Honestly, I can’t really tell.  But I can say that I enjoy that 3 minutes in the morning, so I guess I at least get 3 minutes of enjoyment guaranteed every day like Shawn says.

On a seemingly different note, a couple of weeks ago, I started reading Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People”.  One of the supposed keys to becoming that popular guy/gal or killer closer of a salesperson is to show others a genuine appreciation for them and what they do.  The idea is that by human nature, people seek greatness and recognition.  When you can appreciate and show interest in them, you satisfy that need.

But I wonder if you can tie these two concepts together.  Does developing an appreciation for your life help you develop an appreciation for others more?  My rationale goes something like this:

You’re happier, and people like being around happy people,

You start getting good at picking up on things that are a source of happiness and can more quickly spot something that will ingratiate yourself to your audience.

You actually, genuinely appreciate them.  And that sort of stuff shows.

I think a valid counterpoint to this hypothesis is that you can appreciate your own life but simply can’t relate to others.  Maybe your life is too limited in scope.  Or maybe you lack the empathy.  But outside of living in a bubble or being a self-centered asshole, developing an ability to appreciate the world around you seems like it can make you a better salesperson.

[whomadeyoulikethis]

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Brute Force Marketing

I had an awesome chat with a former employee of Docstoc, who reminded me that marketing is oftentimes as much about brute force as it is about coming up with clever marketing hacks.

I had been under the impression that their embed tool, which allows a website owner to display a document on his/her website, was their primary mechanism for building SEO.  Pretty damn smart IMO - create a tool that acts as a distribution channel.  But they also employed some “brute force” strategies/ tactics:

Hiring writers to compose documents, specifically lawyers and law students, rather than wait around to get organic sharing of those types of documents.

Splitting revenue on Adsense ads with the uploader of a document to encourage sharing of docs.  Maybe you’d call this a clever marketing hack, but giving people money seems like the bluntest of all instruments when it comes to incentivizing somebody.

Scrapping government documents and manually re-titling and re-labeling them to be more SEO friendly.  I would say the strategy is clever but implementation very grunt work-like.

TL;DR Working smarter matters, but sometimes you just gotta get shit done.

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Why Share

Lately, I’ve been using Quora for casual reading.  In part, it’s an easy way for me to be more curious about the world by piggy backing off the curiosity of others.  Hahah.  But also, I’ve always been amazed by websites that rely on user contributed content where there’s no financial motivation for sharing.  

I know, I know; Wikipedia and Reddit have been around for like a decade each and have proven that sharing can work.  And I’ve done quite a bit of “pro-bono” sharing myself, filming free SAT Math lessons on Youtube way back in the day.  But it surprises me still, and I’ve been hypothesizing about why…

Sharers have to love what they are sharing.  I draw this conclusion from a couple of experiences: 1) trying to get kids to teach each other vocabulary at Gotbrainyand 2) trying to get consumers to share deals on products they just purchased during my time at Curebit, a company that builds tell-a-friend widgets.  In the former case, kids didn’t seem to care enough to share unless prodded by their teachers, which makes sense in retrospect: who would teach vocabulary for fun instead of play videogames?  (Facepalm).  In the latter case, people shared products they loved, but financial incentives couldn’t compensate for mediocre products (at least margin-friendly ones because I’m sure outrageous incentives could make anyone share).

If they can’t have fortune, then how about fame?  Motivation still needs to be present, and recognition can be a powerful motivator.  Maybe not everyone is like this.  Certainly, plenty of philanthropists make generous donations anonymously.  But at least, I can attest to wanting it, and it seems to be the rationale behind badges.

Sharers need to be able to empathize with the recipient.  I originally thought that some folks are more likely to give than receive, and they would fit the profile of a sharer.  But then I thought, would even the most giving person share with a dickhead?  Maybe not.  So sharers probably need to have a capacity for empathy, and the more they can relate to the recipient, the more likely they are to share.   

Something I’m leaving off of this list is that the process for sharing needs to be easy.  My business partner has argued that the fact that Youtube made uploading simpler than any of their competition was a big reason why they became the world’s top video sharing site.  And I concur that it does matter.  But making sharing easier seems more like a multiplier effect than a driving factor.

I can’t think of a good way to conclude this blog entry because it’s really not a fully formed thought.  So lemme just say, I’ll edit/add to this as I ponder the topic more…

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Can you build a marketplace wo raising/spending lotsa money?

I’ve been trying to think of one that hasn’t needed to spend its way to the top.  Maybe Craigslist?  But I guess they were one of the very first marketplaces… er, websites ever.  Anyone, anyone?  Bueller?

[whomadeyoulikethis]

A Response to Andrew Chen on Business Models

TL;DR Your business model is not trivial.  Dropbox wouldn’t have distribution wo being freemium.  Netflix killed Blockbuster because of its.  NYTimes creates value but has struggled to monetize til recently.

The zeitgeist in SV these days is to get users first and deal with monetization second.  Thought leaders like Andrew Chen think you can plug and play business models as long as you have an audience.  Facebook certainly followed that route, we all know the Instagram story, and the FB alum companies of Quora and Path seem to believe so, too.  I disagree.

Business models matter a lot for ecommerce.  Warby Parker is basically innovating on the business model for eyeglasses by cutting out all the middlemen between the manufacturer and consumer.  They’ve clearly spent a lot of time on brand and design, but I’d say the business model is on equal footing as a reason for their success.  (Their ads emphasize $95 for a reason).  And back in the day, Netflix put Blockbuster and every other brick and mortar video rental store out of business by sending DVDs through the mail.

You might argue that plug and play business models apply for products that are purely bits.  Dropbox and Weebly come to mind as companies with massive user bases who are doing gang buster revenues using freemium subscription models.  But it seems like freemium is essential to their value proposition and distribution.  I can’t really see them being as popular if they were to say, show ads or charge every user.

Having the right business model also means you can make a lot more money out of a user than your competitor and thus spend a lot more to acquire one.  In the past few months, I’ve spoken to a couple startups creating marketplaces for senior caregivers.  Both make money by taking a cut of the transaction between families and caregivers.  Care.com, on the other hand, charges a monthly subscription for families to find caregivers.  They just slapped on the same model that they used for their babysitter product.  Guess which model makes more out of each user?  

Having an audience seems to be far from a cure-all.  Content publishers like The New York Times have been struggling for years.  They are most definitely creating a valuable product and have the pageviews to prove it.  But massive audience + quality product <> financial success.  Wikipedia is another example.  My guess is that Jimmy Wales does not enjoy needing to ask users to donate.  We will see if social networking sites like Facebook and Path can be more than display ad publishers.  (Quora has it easier because JustAnswer is killing it and has paved the way for monetizing Q&A).

Don’t get me wrong: building a great product matters.  But if it’s not financially viable, then it doesn’t make sense to base a business off of it.  After all, creating value in the world doesn’t always mean there is money in it.  If your goal is to build a business though, then the business model shouldn’t be trivialized.

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Fundraising Hack

I once heard a story about a major travel site flooding New York City with TV ads to get investors on Wall Street excited right before its IPO.  I’m not sure if it worked, but it inspired me to be a little mischievous.

At one of the startups I worked for, we built a landing page for investors to learn more about the company.  Aaand we stuck a retargeting pixel on it so that they’d see our display ads afterwards and think we were much bigger than we actually were.  (For those of you who aren’t familiar with retargeting, basically you cookie your visitors and show them your ads whenever they go to a publisher who is in the ad network of your retargeting provider.  The goal is to make them return and convert).  It was tough to measure if retargeting investors worked or not, but one did blurt: “Man, ever since I spoke to you guys, I am seeing you everywhere!” :)

I realize that admitting to this probably means I can’t do it in the future, but maybe I’m feeling a little bad for those new, inexperienced investors out there who are in for the world of hurt that is crowdfunding.

[whomadeyoulikethis]

I recently saw a post in my Facebook newsfeed that said onemillionmoms.com should be called onemillioncunts.com after onemillionmoms.com said it wanted to take action against DC Comics and Marvel for their gay characters.  Guess where Onemillioncunts.com redirects to???

It made me wonder if there is a good marketing ploy out there where you own a *distinct* url and redirect it to yours or a competitor’s.  Hmmm… thoughts!

[whomadeyoulikethis]

Inefficiency Is Your Friend

You want to find inefficient marketing channels because you need an advantage.  

Maybe the channel is overlooked by other advertisers such that market inefficiency exists.  Back in the early 2000’s, Tripadvisor got its break from search PPC advertising, which at that time delivered high volume traffic for cheap.  Costs eventually rose as more advertisers entered that channel, and chances for gaming disappeared as Google refined their algorithm.  But that initial traction gave Tripadvisor the time to build up their brand and to gather user reviews, which led to free organic search traffic.  (Note that this is second hand info I heard in passing from an investor and early employee, so if I screwed it up and you know the details better, please message me and I’ll update). Or maybe the channel doesn’t have rules and regulations in place.  For example, when I was marketing a video contest for Gotbrainy.com, I was able to take advantage of poor monitoring in Ning.com educator communities and message every member… Ok, ok.  I spammed them.  Don’t judge me! Or maybe the channel is just new, and you get there first.  I’m a fan of Hellofax.com and their founder Joe Walla.  They made an app for Google Drive, which launched recently.  I’m not sure how well Google Drive is working out for them, but it seems like the kind of play of a marketer who is hustling to test out channels with inefficiencies. Be the one to figure out that marketing channel.  If you wait for someone else to do it, you’re probably too late. P.S. - You’ll try and miss a lot more than you’ll hit.  But that’s pretty much the nature of testing out marketing/distribution channels.  So don’t be discouraged!  And keep in mind that all you need is for one to work, at least according to this smart guy. TL;DR Inefficient marketing channels can be poorly regulated, immature markets, or simply new.  If one doesn’t work, don’t be sad.  Just keep trying.

[whomadeyoulikethis]

“When there’s blood on the streets, buy property.” - Inside Man

For a long time, I’d never thought of opportunity this way.  I just hadn’t connected the dots between opportunity and inefficiency; and inefficiency and chaos.  In other words, opportunity occurs when things aren’t established or aren’t running smoothly.  There is inefficiency to exploit.  

For a long time, I’d never thought of opportunity this way.  I just hadn’t connected the dots between opportunity and inefficiency; and inefficiency and chaos.  In other words, opportunity occurs when things aren’t established or aren’t running smoothly.  There is inefficiency to exploit.  

I’ve been hypothesizing why opportunity is tough to recognize, and here is the conclusion I’ve reached:

Pattern recognition is hard to develop on something that is inherently rare and fleeting.

Opportunity comes about when things get messy, and messy things are “ew”.  

Let me try to explain these points using a real life example.  (And please bear with me, as I try to make this story vivid while keeping individuals anonymous).  Back when I worked at Dunder Mifflin, one of our managers turned in his resignation and caught the management team by surprise.  He was a key player responsible for the majority of the company’s growth the previous year, so they went into a scramble trying to find his replacement.  But from that mess, an unlikely fill-in appeared: a junior analyst applied for and was promoted to take over his duties.   The analyst made a savvy career move, but quite a number of other capable individuals just stood by.  Why is that?

My guess is that he had a coaching advantage.  I know, that sounds like I am downplaying his merits, but this is my evidence:

If you take what my CEO had said about the shortcoming of young people at face value, chances are this analyst should not have recognized this as an opportunity.

Personality-wise, the analyst is/was risk averse and non-confrontational by nature.  This bold maneuver seemed out of character.  

His father is an uber-successful businessman (and by “successful”, I mean get-buildings-at Harvard-named-after-you successful).  So my theory is that the analyst benefited from his father’s pattern recognition.

His father also probably talked him through how to mitigate any damage to his reputation.  By nature or nurture, I think most people tend to believe things are earned off of merit, and a few of us felt that what the analyst had done was opportunistic.  (I suppose that is why the word “opportunistic” has a negative connotation.  You don’t get as far ahead when you don’t have an edge).  After getting the position, the analyst held private meetings with coworkers to inform them of what had happened and perhaps do a bit of campaigning.

All that said, I actually believe the junior-analyst-turned-manager did deserve the promotion because… well, he was the one who went after it.  And upper management wouldn’t have given it to him had he not shown great competence.

The reason I tell this story is that I’d like for those of you who don’t have a mentor to start developing that pattern recognition on your own.  It’s too bad your family name isn’t on buildings at Harvard, but that’s out of your control.  If you start to look for those chaotic situations though - ones you might otherwise shy away from - you might start seeing obtainable opportunities.  

This theory about chaos breeding opportunity applies to finding new marketing channels.  Since this entry is getting long though, I will leave that for my next post.

P.S. - I’m not saying you should disregard the social costs of being opportunistic.  That matters, and you should weigh those carefully before making your move.  And I’m not saying that you should stop believing in merit.  You still have to be good.  But if you aren’t a jerk, you might overestimate the social costs.  And if you have been raised to work hard and keep your mouth shut, you may overlook/get overlooked.

TL;DR Chaos = inefficiency = opportunity.  Pattern recognition for opportunity is tough because it’s fleeting and people gravitate towards situations where reward is based on merit.