As you said, competitors come up in marketing conversations. It's
how they are discussed that determines if the conversation is productive.
There were comments like "I wouldn't mention money in relation to OpenOffice
because people believe they get what they pay for." This is good. It takes
the "which one is really cheaper" argument and turns it into a statement
about how to market our product. It did not seem that most of the
discussions were headed toward any marketing goals. They were more of a
moral high-ground vs real world application sort of head-butting.
I sent out an email early on in the "OOo is obviously better than
MSO" argument proposing a couple of questions. I don't know if any of them
have been answered in the past, but if so, people don't know about it now.
For example, I asked if there was a chart written up anyway that someone
could show a company the cost benefit over time of using OOo over MSO. It
seems unclear if there even is a cost benefit, but that shouldn't stop a
marketing department. It may be that, upon examining the issue, money
should, in fact, not be talked about. Or maybe we can present the whole
issue in a way that makes it look beneficial to companies without invoking
the software-change anxiety that we've all run into.
Perhaps I'm simply on the wrong list for this type of conversation,
but I can't imagine conversation getting any more general in marketing than
basic marketing initiatives.
As I said before, the petition's only relation to marketing is
whether or not OOo should perhaps spotlight it and try to draw signatures to
it. I suppose all of the arguments made about whether or not each of us
individually would sign can be applied to whether or not OOo should draw
focus to it, but the emails didn't seem to be making any progress toward
that end.
Many of the topics and argument made would probably be seen in a
good marketing discussion too. The difference is whether, when the flag
goes up and the discussion is over we're left with an initiative to work
with or just a bunch of headaches.
-Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Lynch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 6:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Marketing] Proposals
On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 20:24 -0400, Daniel Lynn wrote:
> All lists go off on tangents and I haven't been around long.
Its probably not possible to have a list as generic as "marketing"
without discussion and debate of associated issues. At least that seems
to be the case here the few years I have been on it. MS is going to come
up from time to time since it has the main competing product. I'm sure
Ford discuss GM products in their marketing development.
> I will
> assume that's exactly what this was, but either way, I'm being the voice
of
> reason to please gear conversation back to marketing OpenOffice.
So what do you suggest we need to do to maximise the marketing effort of
2.0? Or have you a specific proposal to further something in the
marketing plan?
--
Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ZMSL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
