<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Forget Audience Segmentation  &#8230;.  Segment by Conversation!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation</link>
	<description>Opinions. Commentary. News.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:23:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Paul Dunay</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-42267</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Dunay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:11:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/#comment-42267</guid>
		<description>@ Nick - I am not debating SEO - its more SMO than SEO
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Nick &#8211; I am not debating SEO &#8211; its more SMO than SEO</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Horne</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-42266</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Horne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/#comment-42266</guid>
		<description>This of course is the problem with cute methodology acronyms like &quot;POST,&quot; especially when they originate from nonpractitioners like Forrester.
I agree with other commenters so far that you still need the &quot;P&quot; for people. Your Avaya situation is a perfect example. Yes, different parties came together for one conversation, but it&#039;s really doubtful it was the specific VAR who could help the specific employee who could help the specific prospect (readers would have to understand go-to-market for IT to get what i mean here - too long to explain).
The good news is you&#039;ve drawn in a great crowd to the convo - now the challenge is to develop a way to draw each in his/her own lane further toward Avaya...according to their specific needs. Not as easy as it sounds. And marketing consultants everywhere are thankful for that.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This of course is the problem with cute methodology acronyms like &#8220;POST,&#8221; especially when they originate from nonpractitioners like Forrester.<br />
I agree with other commenters so far that you still need the &#8220;P&#8221; for people. Your Avaya situation is a perfect example. Yes, different parties came together for one conversation, but it&#8217;s really doubtful it was the specific VAR who could help the specific employee who could help the specific prospect (readers would have to understand go-to-market for IT to get what i mean here &#8211; too long to explain).<br />
The good news is you&#8217;ve drawn in a great crowd to the convo &#8211; now the challenge is to develop a way to draw each in his/her own lane further toward Avaya&#8230;according to their specific needs. Not as easy as it sounds. And marketing consultants everywhere are thankful for that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Stamoulis</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-42265</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Stamoulis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/#comment-42265</guid>
		<description>Audience is probably the most important aspect of SEO.if you pull in the wrong audience what good is all that traffic?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Audience is probably the most important aspect of SEO.if you pull in the wrong audience what good is all that traffic?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Dunay</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-42264</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Dunay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:54:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/#comment-42264</guid>
		<description>@ eskimon - I totally agree the tide has shifted perhaps forever toward the the customer and not the brand - if you want to get people to be interested in you - be interesting!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ eskimon &#8211; I totally agree the tide has shifted perhaps forever toward the the customer and not the brand &#8211; if you want to get people to be interested in you &#8211; be interesting!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eskimon</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-42263</link>
		<dc:creator>eskimon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:07:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/forget-audience-segmentation-segment-by-conversation/#comment-42263</guid>
		<description>You need them both - social is all about interaction, so conversations are critical, but they serve little purpose if they&#039;re not engaging the people that matter to you.
POST (and COST) are also very brand-centric; in normal conversation, you need to add something to the discussion before you&#039;ll be welcomed by the other participants, and it&#039;s no different in social media.
We (marketers) have to stop thinking that people are interested in what our brands have to say; they&#039;re not, they&#039;re only interested in what we can add to their lives.
In other words, it&#039;s all about them, not you - more on that here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://eskimon.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/think-outside-yourself/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://eskimon.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/think-outside-yourself/&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You need them both &#8211; social is all about interaction, so conversations are critical, but they serve little purpose if they&#8217;re not engaging the people that matter to you.<br />
POST (and COST) are also very brand-centric; in normal conversation, you need to add something to the discussion before you&#8217;ll be welcomed by the other participants, and it&#8217;s no different in social media.<br />
We (marketers) have to stop thinking that people are interested in what our brands have to say; they&#8217;re not, they&#8217;re only interested in what we can add to their lives.<br />
In other words, it&#8217;s all about them, not you &#8211; more on that here: <a href="http://eskimon.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/think-outside-yourself/" rel="nofollow">http://eskimon.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/think-outside-yourself/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

