The magazine for every B2B Marketer

BtoB Magazine has its hands full, trying to offer content for different types of B2B marketers: Agencies, technology companies, big companies, small companies.

The August 16 issue has a two-page feature on ‘manufacturing marketing’ with three articles and a list of manufacturing trade pubs. (Barely a feature, but it did pull a full-page ad from Penton Media, see it below.)

Okay, I thought, this is my vertical … let’s see what the latest and greatest is.

Marketing like it’s 2002.

The articles all talk about online marketing like its something new. Here are the articles and a taste of what they had to say, and my reaction:

I shouldn’t be so cynical

So manufacturers are increasingly relying on online marketing tactics? That’s been going on for a decade. I admit we still have a long way to go in improving and maximizing the value of the internet. But we have all committed to online marketing at some level, which makes these articles sound patronizing, thus my reaction.

Like we do any better with print…

Bonus: I also received BtoB’s annual reader survey that highlights a few ads for our opinions. This year was no, different … they were mediocre at best. (See my 2006 comments.)
(Hover for my snark, click for a closer look.)

First my rant:

I know there is a fool born every minute, but how do these companies survive? Are B2B marketers that stupid? Or are we so egotistical and inbound-link hungry that we’ll pay to have our name plastered anywhere?

I can claim being duped by Yahoo Search PPC was a scam because Yahoo was hiding what they were doing … but the email I got from Expo-Guide was as obvious as it was deceptive. In that sense, I’d call it spam rather than a scam.

Regardless, I appreciate when the show organizers treat this as an encroachment on their customers, and warn us.

Email from the show organizers:

Dear exhibitors,

It has come to our attention that the company “Expo-Guide” is currently contacting Intersolar exhibitors. In its correspondence, “Expo-Guide” requests that you check your company details against those shown in an attached order form, and that you provide further information where your company details are incomplete. The company claims that this is necessary in order to update the existing details in the exhibitor catalog, so that potential customers can easily establish contact with your company.

Please note:
If you comply with this request, you will be concluding a three-year contract with “Expo-Guide” for the publication of your company details. This contract entails annual costs of Euro 1,181.00.

The Intersolar North America organizers, Solar Promotion International and Freiburg Management and Marketing GmbH hereby explicitly state that they have no commercial or contractual relationship with “Expo-Guide”. The company “Expo-Guide” was neither authorized nor in any other way prompted to contact our exhibitors for the purpose of updating information for an exhibitor catalog. If, in individual cases, any information does need to be updated, we would request that you contact Freiburg Management and Marketing GmbH or the responsible project manager directly.

If you have already signed the Expo-Guide order form and have thus concluded a contract with the company, please consider whether you wish to immediately contest the validity of your declaration on grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation. You can also terminate the contract in order to ensure that you will not be subject to a purchasing obligation in the future. In this context, we refer to the decision of the District Court of Cologne of July 4, 2007 (Ref. 9 S 44/07), pursuant to which the acceptance of an offer of entry into an online catalog can be contestable on grounds of fraudulent misrepresentation, even where the monthly costs for this service have been stated, if the presentation and wording of the offer are deceptive. We recommend that you seek legal advice.

Do not hesitate to contact us for further questions.

Ugly brochures should be double-bagged for safety

Who doesn’t love to see an ugly brochure … as long as it isn’t ours?

B&Z Marketing is running a promotion to find the ugliest B2B brochure. The prize? A complete re-do. With a prize value of $5,000, you might call it the ‘What Not to Wear’ of marketing.

What is ugly? From their rules:

“For the purposes of this contest, an ugly brochure is one that is unbalanced, unfocused, cluttered, distracting or otherwise visually off-putting, subsequently making it an ineffective delivery vehicle for the marketing messages contained within it.

There is no scientific measure for ugly, making it impossible for B&Z to offer criteria for determining what ugly is and what it is not. However, if looking at your brochure makes you or others physically ill, we highly recommend you submit it.”

Physically ill? Can I submit a few I’ve seen? Unfortunately, the submissions are supposed to be from the owners (and printed copies only).

I don’t know how successful their campaign is going to be, but I imagine landing even one client due to this promotion may pay off for B&Z. I’ll be looking forward to seeing the before-and-after results.

(I don’t mean their content network, I knew that was worthless years ago, as is Google’s.)

I’ve been an advertiser with Yahoo since the GoTo.com days of 1996. Later, as Google gained prominence (and bidding on Yahoo got out of control), I effectively ignored Yahoo. I think most marketers have. Getting billed a hundred bucks by YMS every so often was tolerable, especially as AdWords started sucking in thousands.

Earlier this year, the frequency of billing notices from Yahoo was noticeably increasing. I knew something was wrong, but couldn’t figure it out, or prove it. Today I noticed something in my site analytics that clued me in! I’m shocked, and my YMS campaigns are now paused indefinately.

The short of it:

Yahoo has been adding ‘search partners’ indiscriminately. The partners remain largely invisible to us advertisers, but we are billed for the very low value clicks they generate. My investigation found that in the last twelve days,  just 2.5% of the 243 clicks I received via YMS have been from Yahoo.com, the site. The rest have been from 59 other ‘search partners’ which are junky, spammy websites.

Worse than that, looking at the data, I see sure signs of click-fraud from these partners.

The proof of it:

There is a ton I could say about what I saw when comparing data in my YMS reports and Google Analytics, but the amazing thing is how real the activity looks, and how well it is un-noticable. But when Yahoo reports the same amount of clicks as AdWords over the same time-frame, I knew something is up!

1. Over-extended search partners:

Once I figured out that most of my YMS traffic wasn’t being logged as coming from Yahoo, I knew why I’d been deceived: Lots of onesy-twosy clicks from sites that I don’t even see in the bottom of my Analytics referrer list. Someone got greedy and created enough traffic for me to notice (especially when their conversion rate was 29%). I went to their site and saw my Yahoo ad. Bingo!!

I found this very insightful post next: Improve your Yahoo Traffic Quality NOW with A New Ad Delivery Report by “Search Marketing Sage” Tad Miller, posted 9/11/09. He described a new report that Yahoo enabled so you could see where your search-ads were being shown. The rather tame title covered this scathing commentary:

After running my first Ad Delivery Report, all of what I believed about the quality of this traffic has been reconfirmed (a lot of this traffic is CRAP).  I would encourage All Yahoo Sponsored Search Advertisers to check out the Ad Delivery Report ASAP, and actually go the URLs that are delivering clicks and impressions.  I’m finding lots of questionable sites that look like they are designed more for getting revenues off of sponsored search than actually helping searchers find what they want.

It’s bordering on criminal where Yahoo as looked the other way for years on this revenue stream.  I’m seeing several foreign language websites that my clients would never want to have their ad show on.  I really wonder if they are cleaning up their act with this traffic as part of their future search deal with Bing.

Bordering on criminal? Yea, I’d agree to that. (Check out the links at the beginning of  Tad’s article for more on the subject.)

Oh, I guess I knew that Yahoo had ‘search partners’. So does Google. But I’ve never really thought about those filling up the long-tail of my website’s referrer report with junky clicks.

So, I ran the Ad Delivery Report … and instantly felt like a shmuck. Just 12 days worth of data, but Yahoo looks like they are running the mother of all click farms. In twelve days:

• 417 different domains and sub-domains displaying our Yahoo PPC search ads, with a total of 6,095 impressions.
• 59 of those domains showed click-thrus, with a total 235 clicks.
• Six, just six, of those clicks came from search.yahoo.com.

This all comes from Yahoo’s own report. Here is the original CSV export of the list of websites, impressions, and clicks (less my company name and account number).

Side note: This report apparently only works if you have YSM’s analytics/conversion tracker set up properly. The report also only works … if you know it exists!

2. Sure signs of click-fraud

What got me looking at Yahoo this morning was Google Analytics showing ‘conversions’ that were hitting my thank-you ‘goal’ page first, the one that is supposed to show after a quote request is submitted. That page should not be an entrance page!

So I traced conversions on a Sunday when Yahoo’s and Google’s reports showed multiple conversions, yet I had only one email-submitted lead. After dropping the one AdWords-generated visitor (matched to the legitimate lead), I could focus on the activity of the other ‘conversions’. Two hit the goal page, then another random page and left … total time on-site? Five seconds!

At least that activity is traceable. The top three most expensive converting sites, yampot, thinktarget, and ecocho don’t even show up in Analytics as having any traffic on my site. Did Analytics miss 133 visitors and 24 conversions? Or did a click-bot do all the dirty work? Hmmm. One thing for sure, Yahoo got paid for those visitors. Damn!

Taking it in the shorts

My research showed that activity from Yahoo.com jumped up last November, and I suspect these partner sites might have gained prevalence around the same time. Here is my Analytics filtering just Yahoo cpc conversions (not including other possible spammy partner sources):

Conversions from Yahoo cpc

Unfortunately, ignoring what used to be ignorable has cost me a decent amount of my search budget. At first it looked productive, but now I see all the numbers and activity simply don’t add up. The Ad Delivery Report was there for me to use, if I had known it existed, and if I had an idea this was a problem.

I wouldn’t be posting this if I didn’t think that what Yahoo was doing to me and other marketers was deceitful and wrong. Loading up their search network with spammy sites (and with obvious click-fraud) is unconscionable. The Yahoo brand is morally bankrupt in my eyes now.

Sue them?

Well, Yahoo settled a class-action lawsuit for just such practices last fall. Did adding the new report and documentation required relieve them of liability for still using “spyware, domain name parking sites (bulk registration sites), pop-ups, pop-unders and typosquatting sites”? (The lawyers got $4M, the advertisers basically nothing, which is a whole ‘nother conversation about criminality.)

So the best I can do is drag the Yahoo name in the mud on my tiny little corner of the interwebs, which I set up long ago to write about just such experiences. Yahoo PPC may be old-school for discussion on blogs, but in this case, I think everyone needs to take a fresh look at what they are doing!

There is more to a show than 'look-e-loos'

I read a lot of marketing blogs every day (and I really need to contribute to the blogosphere more myself). One post I saw recently attempted to justify ‘virtual’ trade shows as an acceptable alternative to the real thing, given the much lower cost. The ROI is higher, apparently.

I was suspicious … virtual trade shows are right up there with webinars in my do-not-like. Are they worthwhile? Are they a worthy substitute?

After being at a major trade show all last week, I feel justified in my reaction: Virtual/online events may be good to get some fresh sales leads … but that’s about it.

There is no engagement. There is no socialization. There is no serendipity. There is no communal experience.

Take the number of leads (so easy to count online) and divide by the cost (one fixed number to a vendor) and the CPA (cost per acquisition) does look good, I’ll agree.  However …

The real thing is better …

At the show I was at (as a first-time exhibitor in a growing industry), I really felt like we solidified our position in the market, and opened opportunities for the future.

Sure, I can count up the leads on the thumb-drive from the badge reader (that alone cost me $299). But how do you count these activities and results:

• We partnered with one of our top customers to promote both of our businesses (and now they are more than just a customer).
• Our independent sales rep found some potential clients for another line he reps. (Line synergy, isn’t that why we have these guys, instead of direct sales staff?)
• We had a huge belly-laugh with a customer meeting her salesperson IRL for the first time.
• Another customer slapped our salesperson’s shoulder in front of others from his company and said “Yoshi is awesome!”
• I talked to a complementary vendor about a potential joint product. And maybe a targeted marketing event, too.
• Walked into several booths and found people very interested in the products we sell, and also found a major decision maker on a larger project.

I could go on, but you get the point. The salespeople and I were able to take our business somewhere it couldn’t go without being at this event. Forget ROI … it’s value is priceless.

Not all trade shows are like this, but this is the way they are supposed to be. If all you get out of a trade show is leads, you’ve missed the point of being there. And that would be more than a virtual waste.

The marketplace, a crossroads?

No one will argue as of 2010 ThomasNet has survived the cross-over to a web-based directory service. No simple feat!

However, even though ThomasNet has thousands of advertisers and users, but it was never leveraged into a marketplace.

(Of course a lot of dot-com B2B marketplaces have come and gone, showing that this may have just been shrewd experience showing.)

I never noticed this lack of a marketplace service until I received an email yesterday announcing a partnership between ThomasNet and marketplace website Ketera.

Not knowing much about Ketera, I googled a bit and found a commentary at SpendMatters.com discussing the rise of marketplaces MFG.com, Discovery.Ariba.com, and Ketera.com here in 2010.

About ThomasNet’s new partnership they wrote:

Our cursory research suggests that there was material thought put into this relationship and approach. If it proves successful, it will be an example of a clear win/win for both Ketera buy-side and Thomas sell-side customers. … Still, given that Ketera has focused historically on indirect materials trading enablement, the direct materials flavor of the Thomas deal should help broaden its providers’ overall sourcing appeal if they can get additional manufacturers to sign on the buy-side dotted line.

So the pressure is on Ketera to make this work. Maybe ThomasNet is continuing to show their smarts by adding value to their advertisers with no cost or real risk. Isn’t that what “win/win” partnerships are about, usually?

How does Ketera work? They are a business directory, but you can also select companies to send anonymous RFPs (requests for proposals) in a competitive atmosphere, or even run a *ugh* reverse auction. Judging by the picture of a boat on their home page, I’d say they were trying to specialize in transportation services and other commodities where excess capacity can be bought and sold.

These ‘soft’ products are way different than the variety of hardware the average ThomasNet advertiser has to offer. Industrial hardware (and services) is very specification specific, and I have not seen an formal RFP yet that hasn’t made my eyes roll because it so poorly codifies the actual need. For one-off purchases like I sell, I don’t think it makes sense.

MFG.com seems to have found a sweet-spot of materials services (tool-and-die, fabrication) that can be bid more easily by RFP, and buyers have ongoing needs that make the marketplace attractive.

Ariba Discovery has a long way to go yet. It looks more like ThomasNet with an RFP button next to each listing. Their search results showed just 45 active public RFPs.

Ready for the Marketplace?

Or should I say, is the marketplace ready for your industry? Or is the online marketplace ready for primetime, even in 2010?

The theme this year is ‘Engage!” And while I don’t expect anyone to drop on one knee, I do expect we’ll be talking about how to woo … the customer.

I was there last year (link to 4 posts) as part of a panel discussion on blogging. This year, I’ll be testing my blogging chops as part of the Social Media team for the event.

A social media team is an interesting concept, and I’m not sure how common it is. I’ll be with some top B2B SM talent; documenting, commenting, and socializing the event. Based on my experience last year, this type of team raises the buzz, the engagement, and the overall learning at such an event.

My goal going into this, essentially a reporter, is to be a bit of a reality check. Engagement only happens when you aren’t blowing smoke. What is sustainable marketing that engages, and what is just the ‘flavor of the day’? What is stuff that can really be pulled off for the average company?

That, of course, requires me to be an engaged listener. But if the speaker is hitting the topic right, I’ll probably end up sounding like a fan-boy anyway.

I almost didn’t go…

I am busy this year working on building up our ‘vertical’ markets, and keeping up with important shifts in product. So I felt heavy-hearted when I got the mailer for the event and couldn’t see how ‘Engage!’ fit into my focus this year. As bad as it sounds, customer engagement is just way off the radar for me right now. That’s our salespeople’s job, right?

So when I was invited to join the SM team, I reconsidered. Yes, it’s not what I’m working on, but ‘engagement’ is a part of the awareness, if not tactics, that a marketing manager should be mindful of. And of course the blogger in me was excited to have the chance to put my own spin on things!

Engaging the engaged:

If you’d like to follow the event as it happens, you can use www.bmaengage.com with all the bells-and-whistles. Or if you’d just like to see what I’ve got to say, follow me (B2Btw) at Twitter or everyone else via hash-tag #bmaengage.  They’re going to be trying to expand the SM coverage into a LinkedIn group, to generate discussions and lock-in those all-important business contacts.

Or just wait till I get back and put together a summary blog-post.

As the web became a stronger lead-generator, I streamlined the inquiry-path, and eliminated the map. All inquiries would go to one email address and phone number. The outside reps complained, of course, but it worked pretty well.

Now, ten years later, I am adding back a rep-locator map. Why? Well, that’s complicated, but essentially it is a feature that remained in demand since I pulled it, both by customers and reps. The rest of this post will describe the work required to do this in 2010.

Steps to adding a rep-locator map

My completed map

1. Figuring out what you want - I already knew I didn’t just want a list of reps (or a pull-down list of states), so a map seemed like the best user interface, if it could be done right. I started googling and the term ‘sales rep locator map’, which brought me to some interesting examples of the way other websites are doing this. Some bad, some overkill, and a few just-right.

2. Figuring out you can buy the solution – The beauty of the internet: someone has a solution for free or paid for about anything you can think of. A true “cool” moment when I realized I didn’t have to have a lame locator tool.

3. Selecting a solution – I settled on the FLA-Shop’s USA map tool because it seemed easy to work with without messing with the flash file. I especially liked that the map was interactive, so the page doesn’t reload … and the visitor still has access to real text so they can copy/paste email or phone numbers.

4. Setting it up – I had some quality geek time setting up the XML file and making the HTML work within my existing website. I added text links to the bottom for Canada and Mexico and made them work within the tool. But then the code started misbehaving …

5. Get your developer involved – Okay, I’ll call my version “proof of concept”. But Mike Boyink was able to use Expression Engine (already in place as the site’s CMS) to manage the reps’ contact info data, which I was thrilled he did.

6. Go live! – and get on to other projects!

Bonus:

One other improvement to the site done about the same time was to add filters to the product-listings tables via jquery tools I had read about. For some product lines with over 30 models, this was a god-send. Thanks to Mike for doing the dirty work on that.

As I’ve said over and over on this blog, even if you aren’t technically able, just knowing what it is possible to make your website do will get you light years ahead of the competition.

Well, the company and owners have finally been criminally charged by the Canadian Authorities:

OTTAWA, April 12, 2010 — The Competition Bureau announced today that criminal charges were laid against three Montreal brothers and six companies allegedly involved in deceptive telemarketing activities related to business directory scams…

The charges stem from a Bureau investigation into criminal deceptive telemarketing by a group of corporations led by the Frank brothers, collectively known as Infotel… These activities are estimated to have generated approximately $60 million in revenue between 1999 and 2004.

The United States’ FTC sued the company(s) last June and won an injunction as well as getting the Competition Bureau to raid their offices (couldn’t find original news on this so relying on posting at Rip Off Report):

The FTC has been granted temporary restraining orders … doing business as Reed Publishing, halting the deceptive practices and freezing the defendants’ assets….

Canadian Press, Tue Jun. 02 2009 3:55:38 PM (Competition Bureau of Canada) About 150 investigators executed 10 search warrants in and around the city of Montreal today but deputy commissioner Andrea Rosen says no arrests have been made yet. The newly amended Competition Act which carries significantly higher penalties for those who are convicted could finally bring justice to the FRANKS, Gordon, Ted, and Sean who have run the largest and longest B2B Telemarketing Scam in Canada.

The Rip Off Report also shows that their offices had been raided as early as 2004. Why does it take so long to shut these guys down? If they made $60M in five years, imagine how much they made since 2004. And how many B2B companies they called and nagged to get that money.

Reed Business Information’s Shocking News (Russ Green @ godfrey.com)

“Friday’s news that Reed Business Information is closing many of its US trade publications and web sites – without warning – is truly shocking to B2B marketing professionals who have relied on these vehicles to reach technical audiences.”

Wholy crap! (Read the news & list from the RBI site.) Looks like they sold about half their pubs, and finally gave up on selling the rest (looks like 23). I know one of those shuttered, and I can say it was not doing well, but wow. A big gap in the trade pub world for sure.

Russ continues in his posting encouraging B2B marketers to develop their own content and audiences. Interesting that we should start calling our customer base ‘audiences’ and not ‘prospects’ any more. Maybe that’s the other part of this paradigm shifting.