Ok, right, inbound marketing is a good copy but was it designed by a person actually working? Probably not

tag graffiti display publicité vandalisme media

Here’s an interesting deck even if it basically says what every marketing PowerPoint has been telling for a few decades.

All about inbound marketing is true, compelling and engaging. Why shouldn’t we follow religiously these principles?

Because inbound doesn’t live on the real world. It could at best describe the philosophy of digital marketing but siloing online and offline is properly weird (in 2014).

How many brands could go for a fully inbounding approach? 10? 20? Even the most iconic need to interrupt peeps – even brilliantly – to talk about new products, new signature, new packaging, new recipe…

Inbound marketing in perfect for well-established propositions. Yet the market is driven by innovation. I’d be delighted to get some figures but I could bet on a 50/50 split between old selling propositions and new ones, minimum.

We shouldn’t try to be radical. It’s unrealistic and useless. The Holy Grail is about coexisting the 2 forms: inbound and outbound.

Dividing them following a consumer journey (start by interrupting then let people look for you), a structure of portfolio (new products on TV, old ones inbounded) or a consumer base (talk to drive penetration, milk to drive share of wallet)… Whatev.

Stop falling for these fake revolutions.

Une réflexion sur “Ok, right, inbound marketing is a good copy but was it designed by a person actually working? Probably not

Qu'en penses-tu?

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s