June 15, 2006

the corporate wine blogging manifesto

zzzzzz7654223.jpg
I’ve been asked to write this piece of mar­ke­ting colla­te­ral for Stormhoek, explai­ning the Stormhoek story : The blog­gers’ wine free­bie, The 100 Geek Din­ners etc etc.
Part of the remit is that the docu­ment is aimed at peo­ple in the wine trade who are not only NOT web savvy, but down­right hos­tile to all thing inter­net in gene­ral. These peo­ple have never heard of blogs or The Clue­train, let alone Clay Shirky. Even AOL is a bit too “out there” for some of them.
It’s easy selling the idea of social media to peo­ple who like the inter­net in the first place. But to peo­ple who don’t?
Any­way, I had a bash at wri­ting Page One:

The Stormhoek Story: A inc­re­di­ble glo­bal con­ver­sa­tion is taking place that will deci­ded the future suc­cess or fai­lure of all pro­ducts, not just in the wine trade, but in all indus­tries.
So you’re in the wine busi­ness. You’re pro­bably won­de­ring what the future of the wine busi­ness is (at least if you’re smart, you are).
Guess what? The future not about the usual bumph: terroir, vin­tage, cork vs screw­cap, Sau­ving­non vs Pino­tage, Aus­tra­lian vs Argen­tine, hips­ter labels vs old-fashioned labels etc. Nobody cares.
The future of the wine busi­ness is– actually– the same as the future of all busi­ness.
The future is, of course, the inter­net.
But when we say ‘inter­net’, we’re not tal­king about the usual sus­pects: Inter­net retail. Vin­yard web­si­tes. All the stuff we’ve seen before. Those are just vir­tual sto­re­fronts. Little more than elec­tro­nic brochu­res. Those are irre­le­vant.
The web is not about techo­nolgy. The web is not about a new media to mar­ket one’s wares in. And the web is cer­tainly not about you.
Remem­ber the follo­wing line, first coi­ned by Jeff Jar­vis; you will need to rely on it for the rest of your life:

The web is about people.

in more layman’s terms, con­si­der the words of Clay Shirky:

The cost and dif­fi­culty of publishing abso­lu­tely anything, by anyone, into a glo­bal medium, just got a whole lot lower. And the effects of that inc­rea­sed pool of poten­tial pro­du­cers is going to be vast.
[www.shirky.com]

The end result of this is, wiith the advent of the inter­net and various forms of social soft­ware, sud­denly highly savvy net­works of peo­ple are sprin­ging up in their millions. They’re tal­king to each other. With or without your per­mis­sion.
It used to be, you could buy a piece of media, hire some adver­ti­sing pro­fes­sio­nals to polish the mes­sage till it was nice and shiny, and deli­ver it to as many peo­ple as you wan­ted, in wha­te­ver form you wan­ted.
But sud­denly, you’re now irre­le­vant.
Now, peo­ple can simply ignore you. And they’ve got­ten very good at igno­ring you. Nobody cares about you or your wine. They’d rather talk to their friends and con­tacts about wine, they don’t need to hear it from you. They pro­bably think what you have to say is just a lot of advertising-induced lies, any­way. They have bet­ter sour­ces of infor­ma­tion. And lots of them.
This is a pretty daun­ting enough pros­pect, if you’re a large pla­yer in the wine mar­ket, with millions of cases ship­ped annually, and a mar­ke­ting bud­get the size of the GDP of Lithua­nia.
But what if you’re like us, Stormhoek, a small South Afri­can vine­yard in the middle of nowhere, thou­sands of miles away from your mainly Bri­tish and Ame­ri­can cus­to­mers, with no mar­ke­ting bud­get to speak of, with sco­res upon sco­res of worthy com­pe­ti­tors, all figh­ting like hungry rats for ever-decreasing share of the mar­ket?
What do you do?

This is just a very rough first draft. It needs to be shor­ter. But it’s not a bad start. More later…

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

23 Responses to “the corporate wine blogging manifesto”

  1. I like where you’re coming from in terms of desc­ri­bing the rise and suc­cess (in pro­gress) of Stormhoek as a blogging-branded wine.
    Do you see the “Cor­po­rate Wine Blog­ging Mani­festo” wor­king for the second, or third, or tenth winery that wants to enter the blog­ging space?
    You and Stormhoek defi­ni­tely have first-mover advan­tage here. The in-the-know blog folks asso­ciate ‘wine blog­ging’ with Stormhoek, but how can a com­pe­ti­tor take advan­tage of this?
    So far the pro­duct dif­fe­ren­tia­ting fac­tor I have seen for Stormhoek is that “Fresh­ness mat­ters” — this is arguably the most impor­tant fac­tor for a wine drin­ker. If anything, your blog-marketing-word-of-mouth approach is bet­ter known that ‘fresh­ness mat­ters.‘
    I put it to you then — can other wine­ries do what you’ve done using a simi­lar blog­ging pro­mo­tio­nal method but other dif­fe­ren­tia­tion? Or will they have to come up with a whole new chan­nel and approach as well? :)

  2. Nick says:

    I love it! But I love the inter­net and I’m not in the wine trade. I sus­pect your audience will find it aggre­sive, arro­gant and from another pla­net. If you’re really loo­king to take the first step in a dia­lo­gue with them I’d be a little less “you’re irre­le­vant” and a bit more “Look over here. This is where the action is”.

  3. John Dumbrille says:

    I love the article and its tone. I am of course a fan of yours Hugh, great work.
    I live in the sta­tes, and the thing is, peo­ple here love pro­pa­ganda. Coo­ked up right it feels good and rea­su­ring and fami­liar, like a good dose of “promotion-free” Oprah or a sloppy bur­ger laced with je ne sais pas. Case in point, the per­sis­tent sup­port here for current US foreign policy.
    Peo­ple are tal­king, but peo­ple like to be tal­ked at too. And peo­ple with the new tools may be par­ti­ci­pants in the con­ver­sa­tion but they aren’t equally loqa­cious or influen­tial. So it seems the wine folks might know that their pro­pa­ganda can also find a home on the inter­net, and for much less money if it’s done cle­verly. And of course, democ­racy is also avai­la­ble for those who crave it.
    Long com­ment, sorry.

  4. Dave Duarte says:

    Spot on timing Hugh: I’m giving a talk at Bar­Camp Cape Town tomo­rrow, and will be using Stormhoek as a case-study… this will be most help­ful!
    BTW: It really helps that there is sin­ce­rity behind the people-oriented inter­net pro­mo­tion — I was really impres­sed that Graham Knox from Stormhoek drove all the way out from Welling­ton to per­so­nally deli­ver a case of Stormhoek to my office in town yes­ter­day.
    “Rock on”

  5. hugh macleod says:

    Jonathan: Believe me, I would love nothing bet­ter than to get peo­ple to talk about “Fresh­ness”. But that’s not where the con­ver­sa­tion seems to be going. [Clue­train 101: You do not con­trol the con­ver­sa­tion].
    Nick– point taken, but “You are irre­le­vant” cuts dee­per than “This is where the action is”.
    Besi­des, “aggre­sive, arro­gant and from another pla­net” wor­ked won­ders for Steve Jobs ;-)
    John: “And of course, democ­racy is also avai­la­ble for those who crave it.” Wow. I LOVE that line!!!
    Dave: Yeah, Graham’s a sound guy. Doesn’t sur­prise me at all that he would do do that.

  6. john dodds says:

    Just an obser­va­tion, but my reac­tion was that your web-hostile audience might be tur­ned off by the pre­va­lence of web-speak in this draft.
    I don’t mean tech­ni­cal jar­gon, but the sort of phra­seo­logy which all of us buy into (and thus write without rea­li­sing), but which all of them may use as a rea­son not to read on. Phra­ses like glo­bal con­ver­sa­tion pro­bably won’t mean much to them.
    For what it’s worth, I think your ope­ning sen­tence is in fact a great finishing sen­tence (effec­ti­vely thro­wing down the gaunt­let at the end of explai­ning what’s been going on) and that the ope­ning should be about the con­ver­sa­tions that they do unders­tand (namely the per­son to per­son recom­men­da­tions) and how the stormhoek story has been about gene­ra­ting thou­sands of those con­ver­sa­tions without recourse to the usual bullshit.

  7. Harry Joiner says:

    So far, so good.
    PS — I thought the word was “Argentine”

  8. Steve Lacey says:

    Good start. One com­ment. You start off tal­king about the inter­net, then switch to calling it the web.
    Tech­ni­cally, they’re not interchan­gea­ble nouns, although the gene­ral public thinks they’re the same thing. If this piece is aimed at internet-phobes, you might want to keep the ter­mi­no­logy con­sis­tent.
    Cheers — Steve.

  9. hugh macleod says:

    Well spot­ted, Harry. Typo fixed. Thanks.
    Steve: Web vs Inter­net. The debate continues…

  10. Hugh
    I see two sta­ges; (1) get­ting atten­tion and (2) good follow through. Back in ’95 and onwards an agency I star­ted put a big load of sin­gle malt scotch brands online. The brand owners were taken there by us ‘kic­king and screa­ming’. Each brand that embra­ced each new web oppor­tu­nity first got an advan­tage. How did we sell it to them. Told them to shut up and lis­ten and do as they where told (they were clue­less mar­ke­ting peo­ple — almost)
    So (1) is doing something first and do it well.
    But you need (2) and that is you have to follow through with great pro­ducts, good ways to find and buy the stuff, keep on all the other con­ven­tio­nal inno­va­tions that are not pure mar­ke­ting. The mix is big. A dif­fe­rent mix will work for dif­fe­rent types of peo­ple.
    To sum­ma­rise — Stormhoek have got all these wine mar­ke­ting guys chat­te­ring and also a whole lot of cove­rage and buzz in lots of new con­su­mer pla­ces. All they need to do is further unders­tand the peo­ple who are buz­zing and look after them with more new cool stuff — both wine and ways to com­mu­ni­cate about their wine and their com­pany. As for the ‘other’ wine pro­du­cer guys — Stormhoek just have to be bet­ter than they are and keep ahead. Peo­ple love to copy ideas.
    So Stormhoek need more Hugh — and while they ‘give good hugh’ they should not for­get to also give out more wine
    James (who now loves Cumbria)

  11. kim says:

    I like the aggres­sive tone.
    Howe­ver, I think you could make it more con­vin­cing, by adding to the ‘shock value’, with an addi­tio­nal sen­tence:
    (Put in your real metrics here, but you get the idea):
    What do you do?
    You use these net­works of millions to cir­cu­late 500 bott­les of wine to 100 din­ner par­ties to gene­rate 400 reviews, 10 baji­llion links, and a sales growth of 4000%. And you do it on a bud­get of $200,000. That’s what you do.
    Pro­vi­ded you have real results that prove your point, I think this will get the atten­tion of your most skep­ti­cal wine readers.

  12. hugh macleod says:

    Kim– I don’t think a 4000% inc­rease in sales by the time we’re done is out of the ques­tion, by the time we’re done.
    Of course, by that time I’ll be on my yacht, ergo not really giving a hoot whether I have their atten­tion or not ;-)

  13. another winery trying to enter the same game
    http://www.mankashills.com/blog/?p=13

  14. Tim says:

    Yea, imi­ta­tion of a great idea is the sin­ce­rest from of flat­tery, etc., but if their wine sucks, they have done more harm to their brand than good. I’ve sig­ned up to try Man­kas Hills just like I did for Stormhoek; I don’t see any issues with others using this stra­tegy and hope more wine­ries will follow…
    The bot­tom line is the per­so­nal con­nec­tion with cus­to­mers who dig your wine. The trick is making those con­nec­tions. Hugh is onto part of the solu­tion here, but it’s still evolving.

  15. futuregirl says:

    I’ve been rea­ding your blog for months. I found you with a goo­gle search for “edgy blog wri­ting.” I imme­dia­tely loved your comics (and still do). And, as a web pro­gram­mer, I am blown away by your mar­ke­ting ideas.
    I love what you are doing for Stormhoek. I love what you are doing for mar­ke­ting. But most of all, I love what you are doing for the inter­net and blog­ging.
    The future is messy — we should all just dive in.

  16. Josh says:

    I like it. I agree with John Dodds above. Does your audience care about Clay Shirky and Jeff Jar­vis? If they lis­ten to you, they will tomo­rrow. Today their names are just so much incom­prehen­si­ble Inter­net noise…

  17. Roger Wilks says:

    I love the­plan­ned book or what have you. Whilts I don’t feel offe­ned by your aggres­sive tone I won­der if tal­king to wine peo­ple remin­ding them that at the retail level the public walks into the wines­tore that makes them com­for­ta­ble, the mana­ger is plea­sant, helps them with good wines knows the latest foot­ball sco­res ot cric­ket sco­res you name it there is a rela­tionship that extends beyond just buyinga bottle of wine or a case. Isn’t that what we try to do in a blog build a rela­tionship not just grab a cus­to­mer.
    keep on kee­ping on some peo­ple are out there lis­ten even lear­ning.
    B;ess
    Roger

  18. Mary says:

    You’re right. I guess even though the Inter­net is begin­ning to sur­face as the pre­mier means of com­mu­ni­ca­tion, still, many have not rea­li­zed the power it can do when it comes to busi­ness. The Inter­net has a lot of nega­tive hear­says that peo­ple who are not fami­liar with the whole media is not get­ting the point.

  19. Paul Mabray says:

    Hugh,
    We agree on many points — the inter­net is scary to most wine­ries and they don’t yet unders­tand that that the inter­net is their DIRECT link to their cus­to­mers (con­su­mers, res­tau­rants, retai­lers, press, who­le­sa­lers, etc.). It has extreme power when leve­ra­ged pro­perly. Moreo­ver, the wine industry has been con­di­tio­ned so long to the three tier sys­tem that only since con­su­mer direct star­ted (about 15 years ago and only really aggres­si­vely 5 years ago) has the con­cept of cus­to­mer cen­tric mar­ke­ting star­ted to become mains­tream. We appre­ciate you hel­ping com­mu­ni­cate the power of the inter­net and tech­no­logy to the entire industry.
    —Paul Mabray — CEO

  20. Smith says:

    The more “you are there” an expe­rience is, the less immer­sive. It’s why a movie can’t involve a user to the extent that a prin­ted book can. It’s why TV news can’t keep peo­ple rive­ted on a sin­gle sub­ject for more than a cou­ple minu­tes whe­reas news­pa­per or maga­zine artic­les can grab them for 15 minu­tes or more.

  21. Jenny van Niekerk says:

    I was for­tu­nate enough to lis­ten to Graham Knox tell his story on Stormhoek and was ama­zed but as Joh­nathan Cohen asked … is this a once off or do you think there is oppor­tu­nity for other winery’s to do the same and expect the same type of success?

  22. hugh macleod says:

    I think there are other oppor­tu­ni­ties, Jenny, just not quite the same oppor­tu­ni­ties as ours.
    The sec­ret sauce is not so much the blog per se. The sec­ret sauce is having the willing­ness to try out new expe­ri­ment, with the goal of rai­sing cus­to­mer enga­ge­ment etc.

  23. Jo Diaz says:

    What you do is still craft your mes­sage. You’ve got to make the ini­tial imprint, and then let the chips fall where they may.
    What’s you’ve writ­ten is very pro­vo­ca­tive. While I agree with most of what you say, I also know that mar­ke­ting is not all-or-nothing; i.e., “It used to be, you could buy a piece of media, hire some adver­ti­sing pro­fes­sio­nals to polish the mes­sage till it was nice and shiny, and deli­ver it to as many peo­ple as you wan­ted, in wha­te­ver form you wan­ted.
    “But sud­denly, you’re now irre­le­vant.“
    Mar­ke­ting has life cyc­les, from being crea­ted, to mar­ket dec­line, to near obs­cu­rity.
    Exam­ple: Foot sizing appa­ra­tus — which my uncle Harold Clarke inven­ted to pro­cess sol­diers quickly for WW II expe­diency. It went into mar­ket matu­rity — when, if you were buying shoes, you first had to have your foot sized. Then to mar­ket dec­line — still in shoe sto­res, but with self ser­vice, peo­ple just try on shoes from the rack. They either fit or not, but there’s at least one per store, if not two.
    While I believe that many sto­ries are now coming from others on the Inter­net, there’s still plenty of assign­ments out there to write inter­nal copy, because if we all just rely on what others are saying on the Inter­net, chao­tic sto­ries about us all will reign. I don’t see that in the near future.
    That said, I do see the pro­li­fe­ra­tion of Inter­net social exchan­ges adding to the truths and per­cep­tions (which are also truths of a kind)of every sin­gle brand that exists in the world, and they’re are thou­sand upon thou­sands of them, so it’s craf­ting the best sto­ries, now, not thro­wing up one’s hands in a “What are we to do?” just yet.