Andy Vogel // Andy Vogel has dedicated his career to developing the skills, experience and results required to be a superior strategist, sales leader, and marketing tactician for existing and new businesses seeking to grow revenue online.
He has extensive experience in sales management, internet marketing, technology operations and business development, and knows how to impact businesses profitability fast.
Specialties:
Mobile, Local Digital, and Social Media Revenue Leader; Founder of the Milwaukee Interactive Marketing Assoc.; Mobile Marketing Assoc. BOD/Mobile Publishing Cmte. Chairman; IAB Mobile Center of Excellence BOD; Vice Chairman BOD of the Wisconsin Sports Development Corp; Social and Local Media Expert quoted in the Financial Times, Fox Business News, AJR, Milwaukee Magazine, local newspapers, WTN, WJR-AM, Presstime Magazine; Frequent judge for creative awards and local media industry speaker.
For decades, salespeople have practiced something called an "elevator pitch." The idea was that they had to sell themselves and their product or service in the time it took to ride an elevator from the ground to the top floor. Every good salesperson had an "elevator pitch" and could perform it flawlessly at a moment's notice.
Today, elevators are much faster and attention spans are much shorter, so you've got to amp up your pitch. You've got to have a 118.
The 118 Pitch is my modern term for the old elevator pitch. It's based on the fact that 118 seconds is the length of the average elevator ride in New York City. The first 8 seconds are "the hook"—the time you have to get the "lean in" factor, to snag your prospect, to catch their interest.
Those first 8 seconds are the key. In researching the idea I discovered that the length of time the average human can concentrate on something and not lose some focus is as little as 8 seconds. Eight! (It's true--I found it on the Internet!) Thirty seconds, then, was way too long for getting that lean-in factor for your pitch. You know how you hear something in a conversation and you lean in because you want to hear the rest of it? That's what you want from your prospect in those first 8 seconds of the 118.
If you accomplish that in those 8 seconds, they'll give you the next 110 seconds to drive your message home with no bull. It's not about name dropping. It's about what's in it for the recipient of your pitch.
Your 118 must:
•Grab the attention of your prospect
•Convey who you are
•Describe what your business offers
•Explain the promises you will deliver onYou need speed and immediate relevance. A compelling, attention-grabbing 118 tells who you are, the value of what you do and sells that to anyone, internally and externally. Used correctly, it helps your business grow bigger. Your 118 should also describe the thing that separates you from everyone else that sells the same thing. I don't care what businesses you are in or what other services you offer; tell me how you are different, your story and how that story connects to your prospect.
Leaders need to get away from bland pronouncements that say, "We do this" and focus on "what we do for you." You're supposed to understand not just what you're selling, but what it offers to your prospect.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of 118 Pitches:
The Good: Mentions your product or service and tells how it will help your prospect. "In less than two minutes, I will tell you how the use of me, my company, or my service will grow your development department 115%."
The Bad: Mentions what you're offering, but lacks any reference to what it offers your prospect. "My name is Sam Maybe-Somebody, and my company The Hopeful-Who Knows wants to work with your company using our We Think Super Service."
The Ugly: Makes no mention of your company or service and how the prospect will benefit. "My name is Sam Nobody, and my company wants to work with your company because we think we can help you."
Eight seconds goes by in a heartbeat and you don't have time for anything that's flabby or ambivalent. Cut to the chase, make them lean in, and then don't let go.
Start your 118 with a rough draft. Then, do another draft. Then, put it down for a while and come back to it. Does it still ring true? Repeat the process. When you finally arrive at a 118 that best suits your business, you'll know it. The vibe will be there. It'll feel good rolling off your tongue. You'll wake up in the morning reciting it and go to bed at night doing the same thing.
You'll believe it.
After all, if you don't, nobody else will.
118 seconds seems like the perfect length for a video!
Editor’s Note: When the members of the class of 2010 entered business school, the economy was strong and their post-graduation ambitions could be limitless. Just a few weeks later, the economy went into a tailspin. They’ve spent the past two years recalibrating their worldview and their definition of success.
The students seem highly aware of how the world has changed (as the sampling of views in this article shows). In the spring, Harvard Business School’s graduating class asked HBS professor Clay Christensen to address them—but not on how to apply his principles and thinking to their post-HBS careers. The students wanted to know how to apply them to their personal lives. He shared with them a set of guidelines that have helped him find meaning in his own life. Though Christensen’s thinking comes from his deep religious faith, we believe that these are strategies anyone can use. And so we asked him to share them with the readers of HBR. To learn more about Christensen’s work, visit his HBR Author Page.
Before I published The Innovator’s Dilemma, I got a call from Andrew Grove, then the chairman of Intel. He had read one of my early papers about disruptive technology, and he asked if I could talk to his direct reports and explain my research and what it implied for Intel. Excited, I flew to Silicon Valley and showed up at the appointed time, only to have Grove say, “Look, stuff has happened. We have only 10 minutes for you. Tell us what your model of disruption means for Intel.” I said that I couldn’t—that I needed a full 30 minutes to explain the model, because only with it as context would any comments about Intel make sense. Ten minutes into my explanation, Grove interrupted: “Look, I’ve got your model. Just tell us what it means for Intel.”
I insisted that I needed 10 more minutes to describe how the process of disruption had worked its way through a very different industry, steel, so that he and his team could understand how disruption worked. I told the story of how Nucor and other steel minimills had begun by attacking the lowest end of the market—steel reinforcing bars, or rebar—and later moved up toward the high end, undercutting the traditional steel mills.
When I finished the minimill story, Grove said, “OK, I get it. What it means for Intel is...,” and then went on to articulate what would become the company’s strategy for going to the bottom of the market to launch the Celeron processor.
I’ve thought about that a million times since. If I had been suckered into telling Andy Grove what he should think about the microprocessor business, I’d have been killed. But instead of telling him what to think, I taught him how to think—and then he reached what I felt was the correct decision on his own.
That experience had a profound influence on me. When people ask what I think they should do, I rarely answer their question directly. Instead, I run the question aloud through one of my models. I’ll describe how the process in the model worked its way through an industry quite different from their own. And then, more often than not, they’ll say, “OK, I get it.” And they’ll answer their own question more insightfully than I could have.
My class at HBS is structured to help my students understand what good management theory is and how it is built. To that backbone I attach different models or theories that help students think about the various dimensions of a general manager’s job in stimulating innovation and growth. In each session we look at one company through the lenses of those theories—using them to explain how the company got into its situation and to examine what managerial actions will yield the needed results.
On the last day of class, I ask my students to turn those theoretical lenses on themselves, to find cogent answers to three questions: First, how can I be sure that I’ll be happy in my career? Second, how can I be sure that my relationships with my spouse and my family become an enduring source of happiness? Third, how can I be sure I’ll stay out of jail? Though the last question sounds lighthearted, it’s not. Two of the 32 people in my Rhodes scholar class spent time in jail. Jeff Skilling of Enron fame was a classmate of mine at HBS. These were good guys—but something in their lives sent them off in the wrong direction.
The Class of 2010As the students discuss the answers to these questions, I open my own life to them as a case study of sorts, to illustrate how they can use the theories from our course to guide their life decisions.
If you like this I'd also reccomend reading: Mastering the Art of Living Well - http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2011/12/mastering_the_art_of_living_me.html
This panel took place during lunchtime at the 2011 Siemer Silicon Beach Summit. Panelists included: Shawn Colo, Co-Founder and EVP, Corporate Development, Demand Media; Michael Jones, Former CEO, MySpace; David Krantz, President and CEO, AT&T Interactive; Michael Paull, EVP Global Digital Business, Sony Music; Michael Smith, SVP, Corporate Development, AOL; and Andy Vogel, SVP, Tribune Company. The panel was moderated by T. Hale Boggs, Partner, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP.
Panel: Digital Convergence Across Global Media from Vanessa VanderZanden on Vimeo.
The IAB Mobile Marketing Center of Excellence held our second tablet event in the IAB Ad Lab last week. A breakfast session focused on the theme of creativity, this event included some intriguing data from Nielsen, inspirational examples of ads and content pushing the bounds of tablet creativity, and a spirited discussion on what 2012 holds for the tablet.

That part of the conversation focused on looking ahead particularly caught my attention. The answers varied broadly and included:
All great food for thought, and beyond that ongoing issues like the race to be the number 2 tablet, what Apple does next, and how tablets influence and affect overall consumer media consumption behaviors, virtually assure that we’ll have a lot to watch and learn from in the coming year.
The thing that intrigues me about tablets is that, more than any other device today, people see in them any and every device or medium they want to see. For people with a TV heritage, tablets are TVs you can hold in your hands. For people coming from the print world, tablets are the ideal, interactive magazine. And for those from the Internet universe, tablets are the perfect, tactile, portal onto interactive content. And all of these seemingly incompatible views are correct. Tablets really can be all these things, and more.
But given this wonderful, amazing diversity, how do content owners and marketers make sense of the tablet opportunity? As with previous interactive media, this is a place where the IAB can help.
The IAB Mobile Marketing Center of Excellence is turning the Tablet Task Force group into an official Tablet Committee, taking its place alongside the other platform-specific IAB committees. This group will be open to any IAB member company that wants to participate, taking on projects to grow the tablet advertising market and providing an industry-wide forum for discussing how the tablet is evolving as a medium. Interested in joining the Tablet Committee? IAB members please contact Luke Luckett in the IAB Member Services group - we’d love to have you aboard.
About the Author
Joe Laszlo
Joe Laszlo is Deputy Director of the Mobile Marketing Center of Excellence at the IAB.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Join the MMA and Tribune Company for a free webinar on Wednesday, November 9th | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gannett (NYSE: GCI), the biggest newspaper publisher in America in terms of circulation, released an ugly earnings report today, sending its stock plummeting more than 8 percent.
Gannett posted an 8.5 percent drop in its third-quarter advertising revenue, an earnings report revealed this morning. Gannett’s ad revenue has now fallen every quarter since 2006. In June the company laid off nearly 700 employees, roughly 2 percent of its work force, due to the ongoing decline in ad revenue.
As someone who spent most of his career as a newspaper reporter prior to arriving at Wyatt Investment Research, it’s disheartening to see the decline of the newspaper industry. But it’s certainly no surprise. Technological advances have enabled people to get their information too quickly for newspapers to keep pace. Mobile phones, news websites, Twitter, Facebook and, yes, even blogs like this are where people get their news now. When – or if – people get around to picking up a newspaper, most of what they’re reading is the equivalent of yesterday’s news.
Like newspapers themselves these days, this too is old news. People have long forecast the demise of the newspaper industry. Gannett’s poor third-quarter earnings are only the latest reflection of that.
That said, now may be the best time to buy newspaper stocks. Stocks like Gannett ($10.01 per share after Monday’s closing bell), the New York Times Company (NYSE: NYT) and Media General (NYSE: MEG) are dirt cheap at the moment. And some are managing to generate earnings in other areas.
They’re doing so by getting more tech-savvy.
Delve deeper into Gannett’s third-quarter earnings report and you’ll find that its digital revenues were up 10 percent when compared to the third quarter last year. Gannett still has considerable assets, including a foothold in the online world that is the very reason for dropping ad revenues in its 82 print publications. Gannett has a 51 percent stake in CareerBuilder.com, a leading online job-searching site, as well as 23 TV stations across the country.
The New York Times Company, meanwhile, includes About.com among its many assets. The Washington Post (NYSE: WPO), though a far more expensive stock than the New York Times or Gannett, owns Kaplan, which remains profitable and has a growing online higher education presence.
Like the rest of the world, those newspaper companies are changing with the times. Instead of thumbing their noses at technology, they’ve embraced it.
So with the New York Times, Washington Post and others about to release their third-quarter earnings reports, don’t be scared off if their ad-revenue numbers are as dismal as Gannett’s. Pay closer attention to what their digital revenues are. If those numbers are in the black, then that’s a positive trend. While those companies are still dominated by print ad revenues, as they continue to build their online presence, eventually their digital advertising revenue will make more of a dent in their overall earnings than it does now.
Disclosure: None
| If you have trouble reading this email, go to the online version. |
|