Blame the Marketers

Ever since the spring 2000 dot-com meltdown, the "talkaloti" have rolled their eyes and nodded knowingly that they all saw this coming. It's open season on the dot-coms, with sites like FuckedCompany.com making a sport out of kicking 'em when they're down. Everyone has his or her opinion on why things have soured. Some say it's a natural selection process that is good for the long run. Some say it's greed. Others blame the marketers.

There seems to be a lot of finger-wagging and “I told you so’s” out there these days. Ever since the spring 2000 dot-com meltdown, the “talkaloti” have rolled their eyes and nodded knowingly that they all saw this coming. It’s open season on the dot-coms, with profane web sites making a sport out of kicking ’em when they’re down.

In February 2000, Forrester Research predicted that drkoop.com would dominate the online health market by 2002. While there can be dramatic comebacks (see Apple Computers), it’s clear that drkoop.com is in critical condition and on life support, and the prognosis is not good.

Everyone has his or her opinion on why things have soured. Some say it’s a natural selection process that, in the long run, is healthy for the online economy. Others are saying it was greed beyond imagination that left investors holding the bag. And then there are those who blame the marketers.

The new market meant new marketing rules, a new way of looking at customers. It wasn’t “word of mouth,” it was “viral marketing.” It wasn’t signing up for a newsletter, it was “permission marketing.” It wasn’t putting the customer first, it was “CRM.”

Got Calculator?

Meanwhile, as the experts were evangelizing the targeted appeal of the Internet, the dot-coms were flooding the market with their commercials, direct mail, and other marketing banter. Companies like Monster.com made headlines by blowing their wads on one Super Bowl commercial. TV viewers felt that commercials were more like an inside joke who was the hippest advertiser with the most obscure ad? rather than an attempt to communicate to the public.

The whole thing has been a marketer’s wet dream: Spend as fast as you can. Reports from Competitive Media Reporting revealed that companies such as AltaVista were spending 20 cents out of every dollar they earned on promotions, marketing, publicity, public relations, and advertising. Another report showed that companies such as drugstore.com were spending $100 to gain a customer who would spend less than $30 on their sites.

You do the math.

The Public Relations Cavalry

Traditionally, executives have considered public relations as “free advertising.” But at roughly $50,000 per month for a PR firm, suddenly free is very expensive. In headlines like “Make Noise or Die,” the industry press has reinforced the notion that noise, buzz, whatever (or the lack of it) will be the determining factor in a start-up’s success.

Even the beleaguered drkoop.com blames the bad publicity among other things over the last few months for its stock’s free fall. So, despite the questionable timing of the top executives selling their stocks and the fact that first-quarter revenue was $4.7 million against its loss of $24.8 million, it was the bad press that did drkoop.com in.

Even the best PR guru can’t save that.

Perhaps it’s time to go back to the basics. Let’s crack open our marketing textbooks and review, shall we?

First of all, even the most creative marketing talent and astute public relations professionals can’t salvage a bad business plan or bad management. What they can do, however, is advise the geniuses who develop those business plans on whether or not the audience will buy the idea. It’s called market research. Remember the adage: Marketing fills a need; it doesn’t create it.

Second, “relationship marketing” is redundant.

Third, branding takes time. Even Internet time. And branding exists in the minds of consumers, not the marketing department.

The major fallout for marketers and professional communicators over the last few months has been to put our roles in perspective. We definitely have the attention of the CEO which is a big difference from the old days. This is a good thing. Yet we have run the risk of giving ourselves more credit than we’re due and, also, more blame, too.

Subscribe to get your daily business insights

Whitepapers

US Mobile Streaming Behavior
Whitepaper | Mobile

US Mobile Streaming Behavior

5y

US Mobile Streaming Behavior

Streaming has become a staple of US media-viewing habits. Streaming video, however, still comes with a variety of pesky frustrations that viewers are ...

View resource
Winning the Data Game: Digital Analytics Tactics for Media Groups
Whitepaper | Analyzing Customer Data

Winning the Data Game: Digital Analytics Tactics for Media Groups

5y

Winning the Data Game: Digital Analytics Tactics f...

Data is the lifeblood of so many companies today. You need more of it, all of which at higher quality, and all the meanwhile being compliant with data...

View resource
Learning to win the talent war: how digital marketing can develop its people
Whitepaper | Digital Marketing

Learning to win the talent war: how digital marketing can develop its peopl...

2y

Learning to win the talent war: how digital market...

This report documents the findings of a Fireside chat held by ClickZ in the first quarter of 2022. It provides expert insight on how companies can ret...

View resource
Engagement To Empowerment - Winning in Today's Experience Economy
Report | Digital Transformation

Engagement To Empowerment - Winning in Today's Experience Economy

1m

Engagement To Empowerment - Winning in Today's Exp...

Customers decide fast, influenced by only 2.5 touchpoints – globally! Make sure your brand shines in those critical moments. Read More...

View resource