“1.2 million uniques in 18 months.”
Sounds impressive.
Looks amazing at first blush.
Until you start reading. Until you start listening.
And then you see it. Spot it from a mile away.
“Raised $XX million from Joe Schmo venture partners” in fine print towards the bottom. Like it was insignificant. Like it didn’t change anything.
Immediately you should see red flags. Instantly you should be put off.
It’s not just the money. It’s the access. It’s the network. It’s the one-line email to a friend of a friend that gets you in touch with every top media property on the ‘net.
I’m not hating. Neither should you. It’s just that the numbers and therefore, the article, become farce. Those “tips” they used. Those “hacks” they employed.
Writing “really great content” isn’t the reason they hit 1.2 million uniques in 18 months. Going from $zero to $millions overnight is. Going from from 10 beta users to 10,000 the next day is, too.
Talent starts listening. Prospects start buying. Journalists start taking notice. Instant credibility hits as a byproduct.
All of those things are great. If you can get them. But you can’t. Because you’re un-funded.
So here’s what you should be doing instead.
The biggest problem facing the unfunded
Raising money isn’t the end goal. It’s also the exception in most cases.
You wouldn’t get that from reading most tech sites. But in reality, out there in the real world, it’s true.
The problem is that if Paul Graham ain’t on your speed dial, you’re gonna need a second approach.
‘Cause the things that work in that tiny, miniscule, subsection of a market won’t work for you. Or me. Or most.
The context is completely different. Which means the strategies, tactics, and campaigns are, too. Or should be, at least.
Here’s an example to make this crystal clear.
Let’s go on a new trip. Pick anywhere at all. New York City sounds fun.
So what do you do first? You don’t go to “Hotel XYZ.” Not initially, anyway. Instead, you go to Expedia or TripAdvisor or Yelp or Hotels.com or Google Travel or wherever.
And what do you look at first, before price?
Names you recognize.
That’s because 59% of people buy from companies they recognize.
Another study from a different source found the same exact findings.
“70% of US consumers look for a ‘known retailer’ when deciding what search result to click.”
“Brand bias” is way out in front, before pricing for most people.
How about one more for the skeptics out there?
MarketingExperiments.com ran a simple conversion test. They did all the crap A/B tests you hear about on most sites.
They did the headlines the buttons the CTAs the colors and the rest of the junk “experts” say you should be doing.
TL;DR? None of that stuff moved the needle. Not significantly. Not permanently.
One test, however, did.
Except you’re probably not going to like the answer. Not if you’re unknown and unfunded, anyway.
The test the moved the needle on subscriptions by 40%?
“There was no significant difference between any of the treatments. The Boston Globe audience is highly motivated, and putting a button above or below the fold didn’t matter as much as the newspaper’s respected journalism.”
That’s it. All it took was the brand name. Because it’s known. Because it’s respected. Because people can trust it.
Because it’s been established over the past century.
This is the part no one tells you online. This is your biggest problem.
It’s not Skyscrapers. It’s obscurity.
Funded companies (usually) get instant credibility. By association. If they don’t completely suck.
But you gotta get it any way you can get it.
The unfunded doesn’t. There’s no awareness. Which means there’s no trust. Which means nobody’s buying.
Social proof ain’t a gimmick. It’s validation. And you need it. So here’s how you go about getting it.
First, here’s what won’t work for you
All companies have constraints.
It’s time for the funded. They need to go big, fast, now.
It’s money and notoriety for the unfunded. Time? You should have loads of it. You don’t have many customers distracting you, right? 
https://blog.kissmetrics.com/guide-to-getting-customers/
No comments:
Post a Comment