Knuckle Sandwich - Latest Comments

Re: I Kickstarted Diaspora – Step 1 in Quitting Facebook

JL — Thu, 13 May 2010 07:52:14 -0000

Posted this morning on CNN.com http://scitech.blogs.cnn.co...

Re: The Apple iPad – Turn On’s and Turn Off’s

Peter Erikson — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:26:15 -0000

By the way, it's turn-ons and turn-offs ... the apostrophe makes it possessive ...

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

andy t — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:43:12 -0000

nice post dude

Re: If I Ran Product for Nissan Leaf (@NissanEVs)

garzag — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:16:22 -0000

Ah so true, it's the inevitable. We wait in our family for the technology to get better so we can make more of an impact (like an all electric car with a five-star safety rating). But there's a point where waiting for solar panel technology to improve so we can not use so much electricity just doesn't pay off (literally and figuratively).

Thanks for the post.
Oh, and I"m going to take my If I... back and write a post on If I Were Mayor of Willow Glen

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

Scott Schnaars — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:33:58 -0000

I agree that most people are boring, but not always. I think that everyone is really fascinating some percentage of the time. Everyone has something that they are passionate about and there is an audience for people who share similar passions.

Dru, who commented above runs a company that helps monetize gaming. Ryan runs a company that helps large companies monitor their social media engagements. He is also a good friend and neighbor of mine. I'm really interested in the things that both of them do sometimes, but not necessarily all the time. I'm interested in hearing about how you do in a marathon, but I don't need to know your daily step count.

Most people are, boring isn't the right word, but consistent. I go to the same coffee / yogurt place everyday. There is no need for me to tell the world that. It isn't unique, it isn't exciting, it is boring.

I love keeping up with my friends and what they are doing, but I worry that we are going down a path where the consistent broadcasting of the trite simply becomes noise. I'm waking up, I'm getting out of bed, I'm shuffling to the bathroom, my shoulder hurts, etc. There is no value add to these things.

The sociological theory is that we are all closet narcissists. This just lets us expose that a bit.

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

JLukens — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:07:56 -0000

I love this post. Reminds me of a David Sedaris comment on his dismay at the ubiquity of video cameras. Something like: the reason most people don't have the means of [media] production is because we are fucking boring. Anyway, i think about this every time I post on FB about my uneventful day. That said, ryankuder is correct--I like keeping up with my friends, and mostly, they seem to like keeping up with me. Alternatively, they may just be a bunch of patronizing a-holes.

Nevertheless, if you give me enough time, I am sure I can dig up a sociological theory that explains all of this.

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

Scott Schnaars — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:57:56 -0000

Dru, thanks for the comment and the RT. I'd love to see your post when you're finished.

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

Scott Schnaars — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:31:22 -0000

You got me, Ryan. Checking in at SpaceMountain is that one location that I failed to think about where you are neither boring or a rich dick. That is pretty cool.

I've been thinking about it for a while and it kind of threw me over the edge this past week as many people were checking in at the Four Seasons. After a while, the person checking in at the Four Seasons becomes that guy that never fails to mention that he has a Mercedes (Porsche, Ferrari, whatever). I think that it is cool that some people I know were checking in there. You're right, it does give something to talk about, but after the 3rd or 4th time of someone telling me that they are staying at a $500 a night hotel, it just becomes overly ostentatious.

Likewise, and you know I think the world of you, but I'm probably never going to ask you about a trip to Safeway. Even if you are mayor. IMO, being at Safeway is one of those routine trips that everyone in America makes. It's like checking in at a gas station or dry cleaner / laundry mat. No offense, but it's boring.

Maybe I'm old and crotchety and I just don't get these social networks that you kids are using these days. The future that Jesse Schell predicts (http://g4tv.com/videos/4427... terrifies me. I see no need to check in and get points for brushing my teeth, kissing my wife, hugging my kids or anything like that. I fear for the day that we go down that path.

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

ryankuder — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:34:26 -0000

If you're grocery shopping at Whole Foods, you're boring AND a rich dick.

But in all seriousness, I disagree with you Scott. You have to realize that the only people who will receive your checkins are people who have requested to get them. I actually kind of like seeing where my friends are and if I'd seen your check in from that snazzy hotel, I'd have thought, "Cool. Scott and Holly must be having a fun night out without the kids. I wonder what the occasion is. Maybe I'll ask him next time I see him."

I think that this line of thinking projects upon others what you THINK they might be thinking. Not what they're really thinking. If you really didn't care that I checked in at Whole Foods (or more likely, Safeway, where I was briefly the mayor), you wouldn't have asked to be my Foursquare friend or accepted my invitation to you. Because you and I agreed mutually to get these notifications, I think it's fine to check in wherever and whenever. I've checked in from Space Mountain at Disneyland not because I was rubbing it in anyone's face, but because I thought it was cool and people subscribe on Foursquare to find out when their friends are doing something cool. At least I do.

This whole thread reminds me that I gotta go clip some coupons for my next grocery store trip now. I'll check in when I get there.

Re: Checking In – You’re Either Boring or a Rich Dick

Dru Wynings — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:23:05 -0000

Scott,

You've just hit on a draft of a blog post I'm working on called "The Attention Wh*re Paradigm." I have similar feelings.

Re: Where Do You Eat?

familieferie — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 05:46:43 -0000

Hi it’s a nice post here. It is very important to know where we are eating food. We should not eat out side food. It is good to eat food made in home. Outside food sometimes create lot of problems.

Re: Sponsor My Son’s Cast!

Derek K. Miller — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:55:26 -0000

I can tell you used to live in Canada. :)

Re: 5 Reasons That Google ChromeOS Should Focus on SMB, not the Enterprise (at first)

corporate video — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:06:35 -0000

i suppose now gmail will be coming out of beta

Re: 10 iPhone Apps For Sales People That Travel

Stephen Hedden — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:05:18 -0000

urbanspoon rules!

Re: Making Bluetooth Headsets Embarrassing One Photo At A Time

Brian — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:16:33 -0000

HEY! Thanks for the shout out, glad you like the site. I had this idea for a few years but just recently reached a tipping point with my disdain for bluetooth headset wearers. Once this site takes off I'll be doing the same thing for Ed Hardy & the Prius

http://EnoughWithTheEdHardy...
http://PompousPrius.com

Re: Thank Your Supporting Cast

paulcastain — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:44:12 -0000

Scott:
Thank you so much for including me on your list.
I am honored to say the least!
Respectfully,
Paul Castain

Re: Twitter, Voyeurism & Small Towns

Garza Girl — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:36:24 -0000

Welllll, Friendster was DOA -- between no business plan and a massive south east Asian contingent, it was going to be hard to make money in the long run. Then, of course there's the personality issues that ruled Friendster.

That aside, I agree that micromessaging is here to stay. Twitter, specifically, is here to stay. How it's going to be profitable is another story. And we'll chat again when they're acquired by Turner or (godforbid) Fox. Then it will be a marketing tool and only a marketing tool and we will find a way to micromessage somewhere else.

One that you didn't mention is FourSquare, which I found highly addictive. Until I started checking in at my neighbor's house every day (and his wife didn't think that was so funny). And it's a bit stalkerific. The community piece of it -- your real hometown -- is the part that makes it particularly uncool for me. Is FourSquare micromessaging or a Human LoJack?

Oh, and by the way, I frequently look up the small town that you (and I) live in. It's amazing to see what life is beyond my own in a town I thought I knew so well.

Re: Thank Your Supporting Cast

Doyle Slayton — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:07:40 -0000

Scott,

This is one of the best Thanksgiving posts I've read all week. Your heartfelt sincerity resonates with every word.
Thank you for including me among this list of great names. It means a lot.

Sincerely,

Doyle Slayton

Re: Thank Your Supporting Cast

Keenan — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:14:36 -0000

Mr. Schnaars, thanks for the blog love. I'm flattered to be on a list with your family and friends. It's an impressive list. Best one I've made in a long time.

I appreciate the compliment.

Happy Thanksgiving Scott to you and your family. See you on the net!

Re: Thank Your Supporting Cast

Jen — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:42:20 -0000

Hey, what a great idea for a post. It was a pleasure to have you guest blog. Consider yourself the owner of an open invitation to write any time you have a topic you think is a good fit. You write great stuff, and more important, you know your stuff. I hope you and your family have a very good holiday weekend.

Re: What’s With All The Chatter?

Daniel J. Pritchett — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:55:28 -0000

The wildest part of yesterday's keynote was when @salesforce tweeted "Why is there not a Twitter for the enterprise?"

Good thing I wasn't drinking coffee when I read that! Clearly what they meant to say was "We don't want to be left out of the enterprise microblogging market". Benioff is already on record having an interest in buying Yammer back in 2008.

Re: What’s With All The Chatter?

Larry — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:26:59 -0000

The chat or IM aspect of Socialtext is most useful because it gets people online using the more important aspects of the software such as the wiki. It's hard to put access to a wiki on someones desktop and say "Go here to exchange information" but show them a chat client that they can use to make announcements to the company and individuals and they take to it like white on rice. It's like tricking them to use a wiki : )

Re: Will SaaS / Enterprise 2.0 Migrate to Value Based Pricing?

David Winch — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:33:19 -0000

Scott

I suspect that the example you quote is not truly one of Value-Based Pricing!

You state “... difficult to predict, budget early on, or budget consistently”. Value-Based Pricing is all about giving a fixed-price quote for a fixed-scope ‘project’. If this is done, it is impossible to claim that budgeting is difficult - the purchaser knows precisely where they stand, with no hidden extras!

You state that “... they (Salesforce) can easily see how much value your(sic) getting from the system and could potentially price their platform in a way that relates to that value.” Value can only ever be in the eye of the beholder. This has always been and will forever be true! In this case they (Salesforce) seem like they are not implementing Value-Based Pricing. They are just implementing a new way to charge the customer an unpredictable amount, of Salesforce’s choosing!

Ian Hendry’s post asks “Why doesn’t SFDC bill based on the tangible difference it has brought to the performance of a customer sales team?” This is almost precisely the nature of Value-Based Pricing. The skill in applying it, in a sales context, is the skill to help the customer understand and articulate for themselves the full value of no longer having their problem and thus no longer suffering the pains it was causing. However, I would take issue with Ian over his phrase “has brought”. Value-Based Pricing is about the value the purchase “will bring”.

You attempt to counter Hendry’s assertion with “... most sales reps would be hard pressed to say that they get $65 a month in value from their SFA tool. This is obviously not something that Salesforce wants to hear.” Salesforce would only not want to hear it if they were charging after the event, based on results! Remember, the term is Value-Based Pricing, not value-based billing!

Pricing happens before the deal is struck, not afterwards. Pricing must be based on the value that will be delivered as a result of making the purchase. This requires trust - of the supplier, by the purchaser. If a supplier cannot engender this trust, they will not get a deal! If you believe that Salesforce “... doesn’t close business for you” then the value you believe you will be getting is small and the amount you are willing to pay is even smaller.

Your next comment that “... if you tie the price of Salesforce back to actual revenue generated, a bad quarter for a customer could sink a sales rep at Salesforce.” Again, only if they are implementing value-based billing. With Value-Based Pricing correctly applied, this is not relevant.

As you would expect, I totally refute your suggestion that “... selling value-pricing is an even bigger pain in the ass because you have to convince your customers that the tool is going to transform their people into something that they aren’t.” Applying Value-Based Pricing in the context of the entire sales conversation is a matter of allowing, and helping if necessary, the customer to convince THEMSELVES that they are being offered the opportunity to make step changes in their businesses. This is done honestly, ethically, morally and legally, without illusion, chicanery, deception or lies.

Why are you so negative, Scott? “... you not only have to sell on the merits and the value of the product (already hard), but you also have to convince your potential customer that they are going to be able to change the way that they do business so dramatically, so immediately, that they will want to pay a premium ...” If you are selling a product or service that really works, and is not ‘snake oil’, then this should be a welcome course of action!

“This is a really, really tough sell for limited upside to the vendor.” No it isn’t! The correct application of Value-Based Pricing results in customers saying “That’s a bargain! How soon can you deliver?” while simultaneously salesmen are thinking “I’ve rarely done such a profitable deal!”

You go on to say “... the vendor shouldn’t be penalized based on a customer not being able to create good content ...” and at last I can agree with you! But the vendor should not be charging later, by results. And these guys like Vertical Response and Constant Contact aren’t! They are charging up-front for the value that is expected to be delivered. They offer massive amounts of assistance to customers to help them create e-mails that will achieve the desired results, but ultimately the use of the tool is in the hands of the customer!

Your concluding paragraph yet again shows you are indeed “... missing the value based pricing sales model”!

“... The problem is that as a vendor, you need to defer your revenue for a long time – until you and your customer agree that value has been seen.” NO YOU DON’T! In fact Value-Based Pricing, applied skilfully and correctly, enables you to ask for a very high proportion - 50% as a minimum, I would suggest - of the payment in advance.

“...you have to sell twice as hard. And as a customer, you need to predict the future and expect that people will change. Combine all this and you have three strikes to value-based pricing never catching on.” NO! The application of Value-Based Pricing, within the context of the entire sales conversation, makes it EASIER to sell; the customer is entirely CERTAIN about the future; and people can see the BENEFIT OF CHANGING and willingly do so. These are THREE PROVEN REASONS why Value-Based Pricing is the fairest way of selling!

David

Re: Will SaaS / Enterprise 2.0 Migrate to Value Based Pricing?

Manuel Martin — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:25:24 -0000

Hi Scott,

You raise some very valid points. I think value-based pricing fits certain applications better than others. As a SaaS vendor of predictive analytics I am a big proponent of value based pricing because we can measure the value and predict the impact. Whether you are looking at sales optimization, marketing performance or risk management, our predictive models tend to deliver measurable ROIs in quadruple digits in a just a few months. The types of problems we address are very specific and we are able to measure change very effectively because we dive very deep into the data. The challenge we face when proposing value based pricing is that the actual value might be too large and most customers actually feel more comfortable with a predictable monthly fee. I can only hope for that to change.

Cheers,
-M.

Re: Odd Fact - Fastest Growing Sport in the World

seo company — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:02:51 -0000

where do i get more information on this

Thanks
jenny glab
______________________________________________