Marketing to Average Joe and Plain Jane

Marketing
41

@piluso I think you’re being unnecessarily cynical. Your first point doesn’t necessarily suggest the second.

Success in pitching simple tangible benefits, I suspect follows more from that each person has their own idea and opinion; trying to anticipate those will usually be off target. It is more effective then to point out what are unique characteristics and provide accurate information and let those others then imagine how that will satisfy their wants and needs.

Everyone has a dream… but guessing at those is hit and miss, where promoting the function of a product will create hooks for them to pin their dreams on.

42

The question here was how to approach to average joes. I invite you to make a survey in the streets and see what the interests of the average people are.
It sounds logical that each person is different, but empirically you will find out that it is not so.

Adult dreamers and idealists are a rare breed.
Idealism usually dies off with the hardships of life in our adult life turning into pragmatism in our struggle for survival, those who are still clinging to their ideals in their midlife are a rarity and a true gem.

In social psychology you will find that masses of people generates phenomenas that allows you to predict their collective behavior towards mediocrity, for instance groupthink, conformity and diffusion of responsibility.
Those who can break through these strong social influences, are also a rare breed.

So if we want to target the mass a rule of thumb in commerce is to create a product that is “good enough”, and not waste time targeting excellence.

But here in MaidSafe we have the luxury of targeting excellence because we are a rare breed of idealists who got funded from another rare breed of idealists.
Its development is not restricted by some businessman who is pushing the dev team to cut corners to make a product more marketable.
If Nikola Tesla was alive, he would have been able to fund his Wardenclyffe tower through crowdfunding, unfortunately he was a prisoner of the market and he was too ahead of his time.
We have the luxury of being able to be ahead of everybody’s time thanks to the existence of the internet and its power to nucleate likeminded idealists who “gets it” and allow funding from this niche.

But we mustn’t forget the nature of the masses for its widespread adoption.
It is really hard to sell people the idea of bitcoins, explain what the blockchain is and it gets even murkier if we have to explain about smart contracts.
Not everyone is a lawyer or a finance expert, the learning curve is quite steep for the average guy.

Fortunately we are not building bitcoins; with MaidSafe its benefits are quite tangible to their everyday lives: how it will affect their bottom line, how much money and time they will save by not having to schedule backups on and off site, how their files will be in the cloud like a cooler unlimited Dropbox, etc…
By mentioning how it will enrich and ease their lives you can have the guy jumping aboard to try it out in just three minutes.
Once you got the average people hooked at its cool functionalities, you can THEN explain to them that it is not only a cool network for sharing and storing files, but that it is also absolutely secure and you might preach about the differences between security, privacy and anonymity, and how the NSA undermined our constitutional rights of individual freedom, etc…

Let me finalize with a masterclass of how to address the average joe, must watch it until the end:

4 Likes
43

I didn’t suggest all people are idealistic.
Suggesting that all other people are dumb, is dumb.

People have their motivations, however noble or idealistic or base. The point you made that is valid, is known as KISS in marketing Keep It Simple Stupid. There’s a reason that method works… and yes, obviously we’ve all seen that video and it’s a useful example of how most people are not obsessing about the same problems in the same way.

Give people the reality and good detail about what SAFE can do for them, and it’ll sell itself… if they ask for more of the idea, then they can go as deep as they want.

44

I wonder why I spent time typing my response to you if what you get from my reply is that “all other people are dumb”.

45

Not to be flippant but a lot of people take actions that they hope will bring some form of reward - a selfish action perhaps but also natural. People want power and control in their lives and we shouldn’t forget that when promoting SAFE.

1 Like
46

Yes, of course, people are selfish, it is an evolutionary necessity for survival.
About having power and control of their lives, it also sounds logical, but the reality -for average joes- don’t give a damn about it in our digital realm.

Check how many people have Facebook installed in their phones siphoning all their private information without even reading the terms and conditions.
How many people really know or care about the EFF?

We are currently living in a very manipulative stage where governments and companies want the people to get accustomed to trading freebies for their souls.

You and I, and everyone else here know about it and we get scandalized when a government or a private company undermines our freedom.
But as I said before, only the slaves who are aware of being enslaved will revolt against it.

4 Likes
47

People are not always selfish, that’s a common fallacy.

Your commentary on the average Joe’s, is projecting your own expectations; it’s not the case that people do not care but rather than they have a capacity to compromise. They settle for that which is not ideal, because pushy for more is too much effort to be practical or worthwhile. People suffer the rough edges of religion for the same reasons, that they prefer stability and security than conflict and stress; so, they tolerate a certain amount of nonsense and imperfection in order that they get what is overall a positive for them. People use Facebook because its convenient not because they think it’s ideal. Where a better alternate appears, they will move to that if, on balance, it is a good move relative to what they value as important. People will move to SAFE in the same way. The point to take away from that, is that making a product simple to adopt, having an on-ramp that is trivial, works. People want change and they don’t want more hassle and worry; so, important to keep everything clear and simple to enable that transition from what they know.

It doesn’t matter that people are unaware of the EFF… the point that matters is that it exists. It’s like Wikileaks, its supporters were getting frustrated but it’s a tool. People will use the tool, when it’s useful.

Being cynical about Government and companies, is too easy. You have to understand their motivation, especially with Government - it’s not a conspiracy, the error is systemic and that’s more like incompetence.

People will push for what they want, whether that counts as revolt, I don’t know. Change happens at a point where the status quo isn’t able to resist those wanting change. SAFE and other progressive technologies, change the balance of power in favour of the individual and that is why it’ll be so useful for making positive change.

1 Like
48

I think you are confusing “collective” and statistical phenomena with uniformity. Within that collective is incredible diversity. So both are true and both approaches are valid. However, I can say with confidence that the killer app will not be written for “the average Joe” as a mono-personality based on statistical averages. Like facebook, twitter, Windows, Linux, Email, www etc. etc. it will be something that enables the diveristy and uniqueness of all those very different “average Joes” to be expressed in some way.

The killer app has value for large numbers of people, but it achieves this by having appeal across a diverse spectrum, and finding uses that its designers never imagines. That’s my experience, from working on products that people used.

1 Like
49

I was more descriptive of its symptoms, you described its etiology.
I agree with what you said.

But one comment on selfishness: it is not a fallacy.
(Also it sounds quite contradictory that you critizise my acknowledgement to what you previously stated)
From a purely deductive perspective empirical discoveries might seem fallacious or illogical.
Never confuse validity with truths.
There is a balance and a spectrum of selfishness and altruism in nature depending on the survival of oneself, to survival of the clan, to survival of the species.
You will never risk your life unless it is related to you or you feel empathy for him/her.
Let’s make a thought experiment: you are in the bank and there is a robbery. You have your child with you, a friend and a total stranger to save.
He shoots all three at the same time, you jump to save one life, who would be saving at the cost of your life?
If your first choice isn’t your child, you would be lying.
Let’s say that you miraculously survived the hit, there is your friend and a stranger left.
The robber shoots again, who would you be saving again?
Very probably you would try saving your friend.
You survived again to the hit, now it is you and the stranger left.
What would you do, would you try to save yourself or save an absolute stranger?

Go try these questions to your friends, family members and if you dare in the streets with total strangers and see what their response is.

50

We may find someday that the NSA was the author and sponsor of Facebook as a cover for stuff like PRISM. Everything about its rise and continuation including its IPO and its treatment by the legal system and media screams manipulation. SAFE and systems like it have a killer app in their ability to limit and reduce power by making it transparent. For instance if the suspicion is accurate what happens to FaceBook, its investors and potential for other shill projects.

1 Like
51

Actually I am not saying anything on mono-personalities, what I am stating is that within that diversity there are common needs.
And such common needs for the common people are usually based on its immediate usefulness, practicality and intuitive user friendliness.

BTW the social phenomenons that I mentioned happens every time in any heterogeneous group of people that are bigger than 5 in average.

52

This is practical American Foreign/Domestic policy

In the Oliver clip about about the dick pics that seems to describe what happened to Anothony Wiener to distract from his investigation of Clarence Thomas for a conflict of interest or really bribery in Citizens United as a way to get reversed. Smear the investigator, fire the whistle blower, make examples of them. Its Nixonian. It seems like nonsense to think that this is not blanket type stuff that is aimed at all US citizens all the time. Also non sense to think that PRISM was around during 911 and used to blackmail members of Congress or bully them into keeping quite. Its just what Snowden said it was a gun aimed at our heads that they say trust us we wont use it. But even with the understanding of the breach of peace concerns we now have to move a system of total transparency, no state or large business entity can be trusted with anything resembling a secret. They must be made to operate with the assumption that everything they do and say will end up in the lime light.

The first part of the Oliver interview was slightly annoying but it seems he was using the propaganda point to disarm. The redacted bit about Al Qaeda being ISIS being info is a laughable. Also possibly a paid for attempt on the part of the Times to perpetuate a scam that allows Republicans to steal votes from people who if informed would never vote for their own enslavement at the hands of Republicans.

53

Wow. This conversation has become great.

Some random thoughts on the subject from me.

Many people do not find privacy and security sexy. It’s just not that hot. Although it is gaining more attention with all the recent news in the last few years.

How does one sell the core ideas of privacy, security and decentralisation to Average Joe?

Simple. Make it sexy and sell that sexy appeal to a few core people with a level of authority like @nicklambert has said and then let them run with it. Let them preach to the masses. Let them wet the minds of the collective.

Maidsafe will never door knock its idea house by house, person by person, node by node. Even if it could it would be tough resources wise (although controlled).

There is a term in some marketing circle called the “Fire Hydrant” approach. The city’s plumbing systems, hoses, taps and shower heads included are like the ideas and minds of the people you want to capture and let run to wet the minds of others and hence create a type of viral message. Instead of using your resources to find many small taps and hoses, find the biggest fire hydrants you can, crack the lids and let them spew as much water as they can. One fire hydrant will wet more surface area than 100 single hoses ever could.

The fire hydrants in this regard are the technological opinion makers, the movers and shakers of tech and privacy industries.

People for the most part are very similar. And so hence very easy to divide and manipulate. The media, governments and corporations have known this for a long time and there will be people that will fight those fire hydrants in favour of Maidsafe technology.

I once heard the quote (cant remember from where or from who) that there are really only around 28 types of people globally give or take a few. By types this represents, personality traits, tastes, decision making, voting, intelligence etc.

I am not sure how accurate that para-phrased quote is or not but in any case I like it, it resembles as somewhat true to me personally and I suspect most social scientists and psychologists would say similar things.

With that said, marketing and media can and does polarize people. They will attempt to create a black or white discussion. Them Vs us. So we need to direct as much of those fire hydrants in the right way.

Maidsafe and early adopters need to be prepared in any type of marketing or social discussions to also discuss the arguments against Maidsafe technology and one of the main arguments I see is that Maidsafe technology will allow paedophiles and terrorists to tun rampant. They already tried that argument against Bitcoin for example.

The simplest argument towards this is the best in my opinion. Anything can be used for good or evil. A letter can be used to threaten, blackmail or exchange information that leads to death and destruction, a letter can also send a message of love and unit people. A knife can slice bread and it can kill.

Humans by nature fear that which they do not understand and If we locked down technologies like the aeroplane for fear of them falling from the sky where would we be? We have to let technology flourish and we have to take back control of our own privacy and our natural human rights to socialize and communicate with fellow human beings without other people, governments or companies being involved willingly or unwillingly in that.

The fire hydrants should be talking to Average Joe with information he can grasp and can align his current belief system with e.g. Freedom is good, privacy is good, security is good. Talking with Avg Joe: “For the very same reason you wouldn’t let a random stranger place a camera in your living room or worse your bedroom or child’s bedroom you shouldn’t let a digital party to do this… and guess what? Now you don’t have to. Now you have options. You no longer have to give up your personal photos and information to companies like Google and facebook and you can talk to whomever you want securely and privately”.

“What are these options?” Asks average Joe. And then eventually we should be able to say “Well here you go Joe here is a private social network 10 Private Social Networks for Discreet Interaction | Mashable”

I can see networks like the ones in the link above literally racing towards SAFE network.

2 Likes
54

The leaks are the best PR possible. A Sony style leak for every gov and corp. If they are honest even comparatively they will do well. Either way transparency gets will drive SAFE and privacy/security.

55

A guy I met ata pitch training event has put me in contact with you. We have a route to market using a gift mechanism.

I have thought our system might lead to a distributed internet, but planned for years ahead. I have gone for producing a minimal p2p value-tracking and gift-economic so we have the money to pursue these things.

What’s the best way to interact with safenetwork?

56

What’s the best way to interact with safenetwork?

In what sense?

57

I don’t want to take up space on a forum for marketing, suffice to say I am a people person and an audio person, I need people in front of me to make things sensible. Is there someone in Scotland I can meet?

58

The cynic in me wonders that a good product markets itself. :imp:

2 Likes
59

C’mon, really? Your not nearly as cynical as me…

Haha

I agree with you and just look at us. Dozens of us here on this forum, hundreds, maybe thousands all over the world already discussing and and adopting these ideas. I think the proof is in the pudding.

If enough people believe in the idea, it will take off. And just tonight I was watching a popular show on privacy and security where normally the guests on the show are discussing things like who us shagging who and tabloid style news but yet here they where discussing security and privacy. The one comment that got me was when one of the guests said “I myself am not that concerned because I use a VPN and I use the TOR browser, I can see companies that offer security and privacy being the next big thing…” and her opinion is correct, we all know, hell even the public all know it, they just dont, yet… hehe.