Archive for September, 2009

Business Development: Focus, then be Flexible

Unsolictited blog follow-up on the topic of business development (from Seth Godin’s blog)


This blog is an unsolicited addendum to a blog post that Seth Godin published yesterday on Understanding Business Development (original post on Seth’s blog here). I respect Seth quite a bit, I just don’t typically read his posts since I find that we tend to have a lot of the same ideas (sometimes at nearly the same times- check out his blog from today here on customers and compare it to my video response to Thad, searchable by the name Thad at http://carolroth.com/spiyt/ and you will see that we are clearly on the same wavelength!). 

I have given up posting several blog topics because Seth posted generally the same thing before I had sorted out all of my thoughts on paper.  However, when I saw the business development topic in my inbox yesterday, I had to look.  Given that I have done dozens of “business development” type deals over the past 14+ years, ranging from mergers and acquisitions to joint ventures to licensing deals, I was tempted by the headline and had to read the post.

Surprisingly, I was in agreement with virtually all that Seth said.  I did find one key element missing and I thought I would expand upon it here.  That is focus, then be flexible.

While in an ideal world we would all engage in great collective brainstorming meetings where we start with objectives and use creativity to backtrack into a win-win partnership (and get warm chocolate chip cookies and milk as snacks), that usually doesn’t happen in the real world.  Most companies (and by companies, I mean the people who hold business development and C-level decision making titles in companies) don’t do well with unlimited options and ambiguity.  They need concrete ideas, examples and levers. 

The deals I have seen go nowhere all have this in common: they were approached with too much flexibility.  One side saying, “We can do anything you want” is usually met with blank stares.  If you have a partnership to propose, put some specifics and structure around it.  You can present a handful of options (one, two or three- not 18) to get across the breadth of your capabilities, but start out with something specific.   Then find out where the barriers are and demonstrate your flexibility in revising and tweaking the deal to meet each party’s needs.  Most people will do better (and you will have more success) if you give them specifics to comment on rather than general ideas.

For example, one client of mine that had a very large enthusiast base was approached by another company that made collectible products and wanted to do a partnership.  We asked what they had in mind.  They said they could do anything- they could produce any number of potential products and it could be sold anywhere by either party through a number of channels.  My client was completely overwhelmed and with so many options, nothing happened.  If the company had presented mock-ups of a few potential product ideas and said that they could have licensed my client’s name and sold them through retail stores OR that they could sell them to my client at wholesale which in turn my client could sell directly to its customers, the outcome would likely have been very different.  Even if neither deal was exactly what my client desired, at least it would have been a starting point to move the discussions forward and tweak the deal so that it made sense for both parties.  The endless options and lack of a focused discussion starting point was just too darn flexible.

Bottom line- flexibility is great, but also can kill a deal.  Be flexible only after you are focused, or else you may never get past an introductory meeting.   



Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009
Posted in Business Strategy | 3 Comments »

Down With the “Chick Shake”

Either shake hands properly or don’t do it at all

As a female in business, I have shaken a lot of hands. I’ve used a handshake greet someone new, to say goodbye after a long meeting, to congratulate someone on a job well done and to tell someone to ‘piss-off’ in a polite way. At any rate, a handshake means business.

What I have noticed is that many men do not know how to shake a woman’s hand properly or perhaps feel weird doing it.  They do instead what I refer to as the “Chick Shake”.

The Chick Shake is horrible.  Instead of taking your right hand palm to palm with the other person’s with the thumbs overlapping, the Chick Shake is performed like this: the man grabs the woman’s fingers above the knuckles and lightly holds those upper fingers in his hands in a way that make her palm and wrist flap out and so that her hand looks like an upside down “V”. From the recipient’s perspective, it feels as if your hand is a wet rag and the other person is lightly shaking it to remove a few drops of wetness.

I am not suggesting that you need to have such a firm grip that you crush every bone in the woman’s hand.  You can do as firm as a shake as you would normally do with a man or you can lighten the pressure a bit, but lightening the pressure doesn’t require a new form or method.  You can even add your left hand into the mix if you want to signify an additional level of warmth, but keep the palm flesh pressing together.

If you don’t want to shake someone’s hand or protocol doesn’t require it, then do something else entirely; kiss her cheek, pat her on the shoulder or arm, do anything else- but don’t do the Chick Shake.  And women, some of you are just as guilty here, offering part of your hand for a partial shake.  Sorry, that doesn’t qualify as a handshake at all.

To those of you who have been shaking hands properly, kudos to you.  If you are confronted with the Chick Shake, then call the other person on it and retry with a proper shake.  Hopefully together we can eliminate the Chick Shake from the world of handshakes.


See below for a quick demonstration of a hand shake and a Chick Shake:

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009
Posted in Homepage, Random Musings | 13 Comments »

Check out Carol’s Podcast with Jason Seiden

Listen to the archive of Carol Roth’s appearance with leadership expert and author of How To Self Destruct Jason Seiden on his Blog Talk Radio podcast.  Link here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Seiden/2009/09/17/Up-or-Out-Do-you-have-what-it-takes-to-run-or-start-a-business

Friday, September 18th, 2009
Posted in Business Strategy | 1 Comment »

Customer Service: Who’s Your Gladys?

A new book to deal with your toughest customers


In a down economy, consumers are more aware than ever of their power. They are more demanding, have higher expectations and are more sensitive to service issues than ever before. Sound familiar?  Well, now there is a book to help you serve this new genre of customers (aka the “Gladys”) to maximize your sales.

Marilyn Suttle and Lori Jo Vest’s new customer service book, Who’s Your Gladys? that can help you manage this new breed of consumer.  As a special incentive, when you order Who’s Your Gladys?now, you get a special package of 40+ electronic bonus gifts in customer service, sales, marketing and professional development. Since I believe that customer service will be the key to business survival in the next decade, I have offered a bonus gift as part of this package- my whitepaper From the CCA to Firing Your Customers: Five Customer Strategies to Grow Your Sales and Profits.   Get your copy of Who’s Your Gladys?and all the goodies (including my whitepaper) at www.whosyourgladys.com

Tuesday, September 15th, 2009
Posted in Business Strategy, Customer Service | No Comments »

Unsolicited Business Advice: Perez Hilton & PerezHilton.com

Risking a valuable business on a “key man” issue

Love him or hate him, Perez Hilton (nee’ Mario Lavandeira) is living up to his self-proclaimed “Queen of All Media” moniker. If you aren’t a pop culture fanatic like moi, then you may not know that his website PerezHilton.com is, according to recent rankings on Alexa.com, the 146th most popular site in the US and the 437th most popular website in the whole world.

While he has picked on some of my personal friends and clients, I still do enjoy taking breaks and browsing his site. I also applaud him for being proactive on the business front. He has leveraged his valuable audience into brand extensions including a record label, music tour, books and more. Most recently, he announced a new “sister” platform site, CocoPerez.com, focusing more narrowly on fashion and celebrity.

So what’s the problem? The problem is his brand. The same brand that has allowed him to become successful also creates a ton of risk for his business.

This may sound very pot-calling-the-kettle black coming from a site called CarolRoth.com, but trust me, I have a strategy. However, all of the Perez Hilton endeavors are branded and associated with Mr. Lavandeira’s alter-ego, Perez. While having a person behind the brand has created a connection with his audience (and made him a celebrity in his own right) it creates a lot of business strategy issues. This issue is known as a “key man issue” and is exacerbated because he IS the brand.

If Perez gets hit by a bus, the brand loses a lot of weight (and by weight, I mean value). If he personally falls out of favor with his core audience (which is a possibility; he has suffered some backlash from celebrities including his high-profile fight with will.i.am from the Black-eyed Peas), he can risk his company. And possibly most importantly, because he is the brand, he jeopardizes the ability to monetize his “media empire” through an acquisition.

The Daily Candy, a competitor in the blogging space with a similar demographic, was sold for $125 million to Comcast last year. The Daily Candy brand is personality agnostic; not being tied to any one person made it an easy property to integrate. Potential acquirors would have a very difficult time integrating a brand that is person-centric.

To further demonstrate the key man risk, you need look no further than Martha Stewart for a perfect example. When I worked at Banc of America Securities, we were one of the investment banks that participated in the Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia IPO. I was on the team that helped secure that transaction for B of A. All of the investment bankers involved in the IPO realized that Martha Stewart was key to the success of her business. Even though it was a large company, her name was attached to it and she was important to the brand.

If you look up the IPO registration statement, you will see a disclaimer about this very issue. This risk was proven to be significant a few years later. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia’s stock was close to $20 per share in early 2002 when the news broke about Martha Stewart’s alleged securities fraud (for those of you asleep during the early 2000s, she was accused of selling an unrelated stock based upon illegal “inside information”). The issue of Martha- the founder and key person at her company- potentially going to jail, sent the stock to a low of approximately $6 per share and it didn’t recover for several years, well after she was convicted and served time in jail.

The value of the business significantly declined and was seriously impacted by this unforeseen issue affecting Martha Stewart.

The same risk is present for Perez Hilton. When he launched his new CocoPerez effort, he could have used it as an opportunity to extend the brand away from himself (i.e. Perez Hilton presents “XXXX”). Heck, he could even start transitioning his beloved dog Teddy Hilton to be the key anchor of the brand. There is much less risk in that (think of how many “Morris the Cats” have pimped out 9Lives cat food?). Instead of taking the opportunity to diversify his risk, he created more risk.

What Perez Hilton needs to do now is focus on high-level business strategy. His celebrity is solid, but a business’ value is fleeting. If he wants to make sure that he captures the value he has created before that value changes, he needs to hire someone well-versed in business strategy who has an eye towards an end-game like an acquisition (like me or one of my colleageus) to make sure he is maximizing his chances to get paid for what he has created and all of the work he has done to date.

Tuesday, September 8th, 2009
Posted in Business Strategy | 3 Comments »