Archive of posts from April 2025

I’ve long felt that the primary export of ‘sales’ shouldn’t be ‘sales’, but ‘movement’.

To move them forward. With you, or someone else, or with themselves, doesn’t matter.

And that similarly, it doesn’t stop with the ‘close’; that movement needs to continue and continue and continue.

Where there should be movement, there should be sales.

Where there is no new movement, there is inertia.

What if the enemy of sales isn’t “not selling”?

What if the enemy of sales is actually “inertia”?

‘Better’ is easier for others to disrupt.

‘Better’ requires explanation.

‘Better’ is more subjective.

‘Different’ is a competitive moat.

‘Different’ is self-explanatory.

‘Different’ self-evident.

Me-likey Different more.

I like the idea of computers helping me organize data and assist in busywork.

But I also think AI is, broadly speaking today, built on theft and plagiarism.

I like the idea of well-made products, services and tools - things made with care.

But I also think ‘made with care’ is sometimes conflated with ‘fancy’, which I don’t like.

I like listening to my son’s nursery rhymes in the kitchen, or the car, when he wants it.

But I also think ‘music everywhere’ subscriptions services are silly.

These thoughts may sound like they’re at odds with each other.

That’s OK. You’re allowed to do that. The thought-police won’t come after you about that.

For my examples, I’d prefer to do the busywork myself if it releases me from associating with plagiarised works. I favor ‘made well’ over ‘impresses others’. I take music files with me. That’s fine.

We don’t have to ‘pick a side’. We can decide for ourselves.

If you think business is hard, try art.

Those first few brush strokes? Look look at them and think “lol what a fail”, as will nay-sayers.

Practice daily for a year? You’ll look at them and think “hey I’m pretty good”, and your nay-sayers will still laugh, because it’s still unlikely to be all that good. And they’ll be right.

Practice daily for many years? It’ll start coming together. You’ll find your style, your voice, your work. And while your nay-sayers won’t be any quieter, you won’t be able to hear them over the sound of how awesome you are.

Now apply that to your business.

Your competition thinks this is a great ad.

So it begs the question…

1. Why not create what buyers want to learn?
2. Why not create what buyers enjoy seeing?
3. Why not blend 1+2 to leapfrog competitors?

The biggest players in your space are afraid of crazy-good experiences you could make.

Make ‘em sweat.

We hate when brands do:

1. Sensational webpages with ‘killer offers’
2. Emails trigged by browsing behavior
3. Follow-up emails that add no value
4. Sales calls that try to sell vs help
5. Pitchy content on social media
6. Silly false-scarcity tactics

We love when brands:

1. Make a superior product/service
2. Make a great buyer experience
3. Let us try that experience
4. Help us if we ask for it

That’s it.

The Internet would be a pretty awesome place if more businesses behaved that way, huh?

Businesses should give more gifts, instead of more offers.

“Giving gifts” up-front as a marketing vehicle is spiritually aligned with the Japanese business philosophy of 三方よし (“Sanpō yoshi”) which looks for a three-way good (for you, for them, and for society).

It makes peace with the idea that, today, I lose. Tomorrow, you lose. Together, we both last 1,000 years.

It’s that idea of give and take, of investing more deeply into relationships than others are prepared to.

Isn’t that better?

SEO is in a strange spot at the moment.

On the one hand, you might ask AI about a recipe to avoid the 1,000 word padded article, where you have to hunt for the answer somewhere in there.

On the other hand you trust the recipe site’s reputation if you’ve cooked nice meals with their recipes before.

Perhaps the battle isn’t between AI answers and Google SERPs…

The battle is between AI answers and the sites those SERPs direct to.

Choice 1 is to have a great experience on a great website you trust.
Choice 2 is to talk to a sterile chat system (hoping it’s correct).
Choice 3 is to wade through tedious websites for what you want.

In that order.

So the opportunity is two-fold:

1: Make more enjoyable site experiences.
2: Make more trustworthy chat experiences.

Both are still viable.

‘Great’ is still a competitive advantage.

A good leader delegates the goal, and casts vision for the path ahead so it’s clear how they can get there.

A bad leader delegates the task, resulting in a team member stumbling around in the dark wondering what success even looks like.

A good team member wants the goal and the vision so they can do their best work.

A bad team member just wants to get the task done and off their plate already.

The good leader + the bad team member = never going to get it done.
The bad leader + the good team member = never going to get it done.
The bad leader + the bad team member = never going to get it done.
The good leader + the good team member = dangerous.

What your business can do, but your market’s biggest players can’t:

• Listen deeply to your specific target audience
• Learn what they want to learn, specifically
• Learn what they enjoy, specifically
• Combine the two for them

The biggest players can’t craft a world-class experience like that.

Too many audiences, too many products, too much at stake.

But you can.

World-class experiences?

They’re down to you.

Design is there to make what we want to do, easier to achieve. It’s about creating answers. It’s a means to an end.

Art is there to make us stop, and think, and feel. It’s about creating questions. It’s an end in itself.

Looking at good design, you can feel a mix of the solution being posed, the designer’s personality, and the experience you might have using it in your own projects.

Looking at good art, you can feel a mix of emotions from your own life, arranged by the artist’s feelings, and the experience reveals something to you, about you.

Sometimes, we can mix the two.

But it’s always worth knowing the answer to this question: Am I being a designer, or an artist, in this work?

There’s a huge difference between being hard-working, and being a disciplined worker.

The hard workers among us show up on time, fill the day with as much work as they can possibly do, and maybe even clock out late.

The disciplined worker also shows up on time, but relentlessly culls the to-do list so they can focus deeply on the few tasks that truly matter.

Which, of the two, gets more done?

My iPod Hi-fi gave up the ghost.

We had a power surge in the house following a flurry of power cuts, and since then it’s rested in peace.

My first thought was: Ahh that’s a shame, I’ve had this with me since 2006, maybe I’ll get a chance to fix it sometime. My second thought was: That’s 19 years I’ve had the same speaker. It’s rare for any technology to last 19 years anymore. And it’s just the power supply that’s bad, the rest of the entire unit is still in great working condition.

Not to mention, my iPod from 2005 is still going (despite two battery replacements).

Most brands don’t make things that last anymore.

Yet here I am, writing about Apple, precisely because they do.

Make products that last. Make services where the positive effects last. Let people remain thankful for your contribution for many years to come.

It’s not “bad for business because they won’t buy again anytime soon”.

It’s good for business because they’ll know exactly where to go when it breaks.

And they’ll have sent countless other buyers to you in the meantime.

Follow-up doesn’t work.

They say it’s where sales happen, but in reality:

More of what you don’t want, doesn’t make you want it.

We don’t want you to ‘check in’ or ‘circle back’ with us.

What we DO want, is ‘draw-in’.

I recorded a cartoon video where I explore ‘draw-in’ and how it’s a superior, drop-in replacement for ‘follow-up’: https://mredutainment.com/otherworldly/resources

Enjoy!

Good sales isn’t:

1. Convincing people to buy,
2. Chasing leads forever,
3. Optimising for closes

Good sales is:

1. Giving them what they want,
2. Giving it how they want it,
3. Optimising for delight

Which would you rather buy?

Why do brands limit creativity to April Fools?

They’re missing out on:

• Delighting buyers year-round
• Shipping share-worthy experiences
• Building a personality to be known for

Take FigPals for instance, a little pet that follows designers around while they work in Figma. Designers loved it, and took to social to beg for it to stay, after they revealed it would only be available for one week.

It took the spotlight off recent questionable AI decisions, and focused on what they’re about: multiplayer creativity.

They established lots of new brand equity.

The question is… Why wait for April Fools?

Why not make great experiences that delight your user base year-round?

Isn’t that better?

The Algorithm is our Ally.

Here’s why.

If the algo shows people…

• What they want to see
• How they want to see it

And if you want to make…

• What they want to learn
• How they enjoy consuming

…It’s a perfect alignment!

Doesn’t mean it’ll reach a zillion people.
A zillion people aren’t in-market.

And many of them are lurkers.But it doesn’t mean the algo’s on your side.

That’s reassuring, isn’t it?

Sending cold emails?

Remember this one thing:

Good pitches get you blocked.
Good gifts get you thanked.

Not getting the outcome you’re looking for?

Learn to give better presents.

(What could be better than that?)

Brand loyal?

To a phone brand, auto brand, or something else?

Spend time reading reviews, watching videos, checking forums?

What if you were to replace ALL of that time… with loyalty toward your own brand?

You can still read what people think… research and engage conversations…

…Except they make your work better, your brand better, and your ROTI greater.

Isn’t that better?

You’re selling tickets for a swimming pool.

Which of these 2 marketing techniques do you choose?

Option 1:

• Be billed before entering (no value up-front)
• Enter via the top diving board (uncomfortable start)

Option 2:

• Get to try the pool for free (value up-front)
• Get to play with the floaties free (enjoyable start)
• Pay to access diving boards & slides (upgrade)

Which do you think:

• Gets more people in?
• Spreads the word more?
• Makes swimmers happier?
• People will enjoy paying for?

Imagine: You receive an Amazon parcel.

But instead of an Amazon logo on it, you see…A giant photo of Bezos’ face.

Odd…?

Like it or not, the PFP is the new Logo.

Bezos’ brand affects how we see Amazon.
Cook’s brand affects how we see Apple.
Elon’s brand affects how we see Tesla.

Elon stumbles? Tesla stock tumbles.

But it’s a good thing, really.

Because it means:

• Brands get personalities (someone we like)
• Marketing is like getting to know a new friend
• Sales is like deciding to go on an adventure together

So optimize for that:

• Learn WHAT your buyers want
• Learn HOW they enjoy receiving it
• Produce an amazing experience around the two

As far as marketing and branding goes…

It sure beats “put logos on boxes”, doesn’t it?

Everyone knows how to do a Google Search.

So this is how Google does marketing for Search:

• Search “Google in 1998” and you get retro Google
• Search “Google Pacman” and you can play Pac-Man
• Search “Atari Breakout” and you can play Breakout
• Go offline and Chrome gives you a dinosaur game

See a pattern?

They’re doing 2 things:

• Adding value (learn about those things in really visceral ways)
• Adding enjoyment (they’re all entertaining and enjoyable)

So we love to Google things.

We love the surprise of finding new ‘easter eggs’.

We love to tell our friends when we discover a new one.

If boring activities (like searching things) can be delightful…

…How much more delightful can YOUR product/service be?

Collect No’s like you collected Pokémon.

A business case for falling in love with ‘No’:

• ’No’ from a bad-fit refines your targeting
• ‘No’ from out-of-market refines your pre-sale
• ’No’ from in-market refines your lead nurture
• ‘No’ on a sales call refines your qualifiers

Bad news: it leads to hearing No a lot.

Good news: it leads to building amazing buyer experiences, easier sales, and long-term growth.

Gotta catch ‘em all.

Afraid of selling?

I figure it this way:

No one has ‘jitters’ when they give someone a gift.

They just feel really cool about it. They’re doing something awesome and nice for someone, and there’s no pressure to ‘do’ anything, other than say “I got this for you” and that’s it.

Jitters could be a sign you showed up without a gift.

So go get one - be it your excellent service, an extra something you included gratis, a starbucks gift card, or simply the energy you decided to show up with today.

It doesn’t matter what the gift is. Just show up with one.

Whoever named “demand gen” had a superiority complex.

We don’t ‘gen’ demand. Or even revenue.

We only get to ‘gen’ great experiences that people thank us for, what they’d miss if they were gone.

We’re in the “lead the horse to water” business.

Not the “make it drink” business.

We don’t win by whipping the horse to drink.

We win by making the water tastier.

Do not. fear failure.

The funny thing is, if you fail, unless it was a colossal failure, no one will even notice.

It’s like skiing.

If you get to the bottom standing up, great, you win.

If you get to the bottom on your butt, fine, go again.

The goal is to get to the bottom without failing so spectacularly that you’re carted off in an ambulance.

Every other eventuality is totally fine.

While companies race to…

• Replace humans with bots
• Slash customer support spend
• Automate onboarding & service

Your opportunity is to…

• Make experiences more human
• Let customers feel seen & cared for
• Roll out the red carpet for every buyer

They’re making their buyer experience WORSE to save a buck. Make your buyer experience BETTER and let them switch to you.

People just want to be invested in, cared for, and shown a good time.

Is that too much to ask?P.S. Which side of this coin are you on atm?

Selling to the wrong market can ruin everything.

If you have a Ferrari for sale and you’re pitching it to people who you thought would like one (kids who pick Ferraris in their favorite racing videogames perhaps) then you’re going to hear a lot of Nos.

And maybe Ferrari thought, “Right, let’s just try to sell these with no profit at all, zero, let’s just see if anyone will buy because now we’re feeling insecure about ourselves”.

They’d still hear no (still can’t afford it).

And maybe Ferrari would think, “Oh man, let’s try to give it away for free and see what happens”.

And they’d still hear no (don’t have drivers license).

And maybe Ferrari would think, “Oh man we’re worth less than free, we’re an absolute abomination and should quit”.

All because they spoke to the wrong people.

Did AI change marketing, or just reskin SEO?

Before, SEO was ‘go for quality backlinks, absolutely avoid blackhat tricks’.

Now, people are confused: it’s “go for ___, absolutely avoid ____.”

The fact that both boxes are blank is making many people nervous.

Folks can appropriate the essence of past best practices (“do the right thing, don’t look for shortcuts”), but “the right thing” feels ambiguous.

I suspect most of the ambiguity comes from a lack of understanding about how LLMs actually work.

In reality, they’re sourcing information in very similar ways. It’s not the data ingested that is changing, it’s the SERP that’s changing.

Instead of 10 blue links, you might get 1-2, unless you specifically ask for more. Pagination isn’t a button, it’s a follow-up question if you’re unsatisfied with the first few.

Really fascinating, isn’t it?

I called Apple Support last weekend.

I never expected how it went:

• I said I’d scratched my iPhone16 case
• Expected nothing (it was a research call)
• Chatted about parenting with the rep for 10mins
• They shipped a new case despite it being my fault

The interaction was genuinely enjoyable & value-packed.

How often does that ever happen!?

Edutainment isn’t just for pre-sale.

It’s also for post-sale.

They invested into me:

• A good experience
• £40+shipping

They’ll get out of me:

• Thousands of dollars of future phones
• Thousands of dollars of future computers

Pretty good trade, huh?