Marketing 2006 : IM Conference

Anyone else ?

I guess I’ll PM everyone, will be easier to have a yes/no for one of those two dates...

email me please: [email protected]

I’ll work on the summary tomorrow and send this via the Marketing mailing list.

I’ll close this thread at the end of the week, just wanted to say it has been a great conference, lots of nice ideas and infos !

I’ll do my best to do a quick follow up and we’ll work the actual planning via the mailing list...

An exciting year with lots of ammos and challenges to come, again : glad to be on board with such dedicated and talented people !

@Carsten : Real sorry you couldn’t be there today. You can subscribe to the Marketing Mailing list at http://lists.modxcms.com/mailman/listinfo/modxbiz. I’ll make sure to forward you an email about all this, as well as the conference transcript.

Good going here guys.

While I might not be too involved in the marketing efforts my only concerned is rebranding.

Do you think it’s a good idea to rebrand the product at this time due to it’s growing popularity?

That’s the only part I have big concerns about.

The PHP 4 vs 5 distinctions and requirements are enough to completely make them distinguishable from one another. Tattoo will be tremendously overshadowed by MODx for quite a long time.

Regardless, I think they will most likely feed off each other in a beneficial way. I certainly hope there will be links a plenty between the sites. DB2 had a pretty outstanding name, reputation and legacy, and yet IBM released Cloudscape. Similarly, General Motors has Chevrolet, GM, Hummer, Cadillac and Saturn brands ...

The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced the whole will exceed the sum of the parts! And in the "worst" case, the marketing for one will surpass the marketing for the other, but in the end, it’s all going towards the same ultimate goal.

Quote from: xwisdom at Feb 01, 2006, 08:25 PM

Good going here guys.

While I might not be too involved in the marketing efforts my only concerned is rebranding.

Do you think it’s a good idea to rebrand the product at this time due to it’s growing popularity?

That’s the only part I have big concerns about.

My take on the rebranding is this...

If anything, rebranding MODx into Tattoo would give us an opportunity to give MODx an identity that would stick in people’s minds. One of the things I never understood with alot of CMS’s is the names for some of them. Mambo is a good name...but Joomla? Not exactly the kind of name that most people would grasp onto. e107? Err...right...think I’ll pass! Xaraya is ok...but just doesn’t mean anything to me. I’ve always hated the name "PHP-Nuke"...it just sounds like something that’s liable to blow up! Typo3, Geeklog, and Drupal...those are good names for the most part...still don’t understand the meaning behind Drupal though. Anyways...

The point is that, although MODx is a great name, it really isn’t something that the general public can identify with. For instance, imagine walking into a meeting with a small group of managers for a small business. They don’t know Jack about web technology except the terminology, buzzwords, demonstrations, and applications you show them. Say the word "MODx" to them and they’re likely to say, "Huh? What did you call it?", followed by the usual, "MODx? What the hell is that?". I’ve introduced MODx to alot of people and I can tell you this...you can’t simply just tell people the name and describe it to them; you have to show them! The name alone is not enough to spark their interest.

Which is where Tattoo comes in! If we rebrand it, not only would we have a name that is far more relative to the average user...but we would have one hell of a new image to boot! New logo, new look...all just icing on the cake to capture a much larger audience than just your tech-heads, wouldn’t you say? Now, imagine this new look...same application, same functionality...just a new name and a new look! The result would be something you could introduce to a new client without fear of them say, "Huh?". Once you say the name "Tattoo" to them, you’ve already perked their interest..."What’s this Tattoo thing you’re talking about?". Tattoo is a much easier name to remember than MODx...that too plays to our advantage.

As far as the worries of whether it’s a good time to rebrand...believe me! If we wait too long then it’ll only get worse! I doubt there will be too many currently using MODx who would really be disappointed in a name change and a new look. It benefits everyone in the long run because it would be something so much easier to market to your average layman...which is, to me, a very important piece of the puzzle.

Sorry for the long long post, but so many nice inputs there, I had some ideas coming...

Quote from: xwisdom at Feb 01, 2006, 08:25 PM

While I might not be too involved in the marketing efforts my only concerned is rebranding. Do you think it’s a good idea to rebrand the product at this time due to it’s growing popularity? That’s the only part I have big concerns about.

Thanks Raymond for joining the conversation

I think we have to make one thing clear, at least this will be very important if I am to do a good job of giving an impulse to our marketing efforts : will MODx be rebranded as Tattoo ? Or will both MODx and Tattoo coexist, with different markets and different code ? If so, what will be the common "parts" (parser ? API ? ...) ?

A recent post from Jason had me confused since I initially thought MODx would indeed become Tattoo. Now this post : Competitive intelligence for MODx and Beyond has a different take. MODx would co-exist with Tattoo, and be built to enter the ECM market in the long run (Jason, if I am misunderstood please tell me)

The GreenCore post is another thing that I am trying to fit into the picture : what parts of GreenCore, BlueLemon, GreenFuse would get into MODx ? What parts will only be available in Tattoo ?

Quote from: rthrash at Feb 01, 2006, 09:16 PM

The PHP 4 vs 5 distinctions and requirements are enough to completely make them distinguishable from one another. Tattoo will be tremendously overshadowed by MODx for quite a long time.

I still have to grasp what it will mean to have MODx associated with PHP4 and Tattoo with PHP5 (and if I understand correctly, more object-oriented).

Also my concern here is : will this entail two development branch ? If so, does the dev team have enough resources to do "double work" ? Will MODx remain community based business model while Tattoo will run a commercial one ?

Lots of questions there... at least for me !
If Tattoo is PHP5 and more powerful, why should it be overshadowed by MODx ? I mean, if we have Rails as competition, would it not make sense to go all the way to PHP5 rather than stick with PHP4’s limitation ? (asking layman’s question here...)

Quote from: rthrash

(...)The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced the whole will exceed the sum of the parts! And in the "worst" case, the marketing for one will surpass the marketing for the other, but in the end, it’s all going towards the same ultimate goal.

Sorry but I still fail to see how all this fits right now, unless MODx and Tattoo have different target market and possibly different business models...

Quote from: Bravado at Feb 02, 2006, 12:10 AM

My take on the rebranding is this... If anything, rebranding MODx into Tattoo would give us an opportunity to give MODx an identity that would stick in people’s minds. (...)The point is that, although MODx is a great name, it really isn’t something that the general public can identify with. (...) If we rebrand it, not only would we have a name that is far more relative to the average user...but we would have one hell of a new image to boot! New logo, new look...all just icing on the cake to capture a much larger audience than just your tech-heads, wouldn’t you say?

This is true only if MODx is to become Tattoo, if they co-exist, this can non longer apply...

That said, I think MODx should change its name no matter what => we have to loose the reference to being an etomite Mod. I think image-wise, it would be better to "sever" Etomite links, as soon as we get the new manager take the opportunity to rebrand. But not before that, or people will say, "it might have changed names, but it’s an etomite fork no matter what : it looks like it !".

A possible take on this would be to rebrand MODx and have two version of Tattoo : one aimed at the second and third tier markets, and one aiming at the first tier / ECM market.

One thing comes to mind : I think Tattoo is a name better aimed at second&third tier rather than first tier. It has a "rebellious" touch and the "Leave your mark" slogan fits better with webdesigners and end users than corporate world. I might be wrong though, it’s entirely subjective...

Quote from: Bravado

(...) As far as the worries of whether it’s a good time to rebrand...believe me! If we wait too long then it’ll only get worse! I doubt there will be too many currently using MODx who would really be disappointed in a name change and a new look. It benefits everyone in the long run because it would be something so much easier to market to your average layman...which is, to me, a very important piece of the puzzle.

I agree with you Jeff, even if we have set our goals toward the second tier for 2006, and we’ll really aim third tier in 2007 (I’ll do the IM Conference summary today, so you’ll have some input on what has been said during the conference yesterday about this).

Keep in mind that in order to properly market to the first tier (ECM market), we really need to consider what features need to be in place in order to effectively place MODx/Tattoo in that arena. There are really very few CMS’s that cater to the ECM market properly. One of the primary features that separates an ECM from your typical CMS is the different levels of authentication...namely LDAP supported authentication. There are a few CMS’s that offer this: Geeklog has a plugin for this, Typo3 I think has this, and maybe Drupal. Mambo has had a component for this and I think Joomla has followed suit.

The thing to remember is that business owners and managers can be quite fickle. If a particular CMS doesn’t meet their needs or doesn’t make sense to them then they’ll go elsewhere. Also, how you market a product to them is also important. Even the name of the product can be something that they can get fickle about. I think Tattoo is a good name even for the ECM market. Alot of your typical business users are laymen and I just think that marketing the "Tattoo" brand is something they’re more likely to get their head around. In a sense, you market it to them the same you would to hard-core developers but without all the techno-babble. Instead you use the name to provide symbolism into how it works and what it will do for them. Much easier to market from that perspective than anything else...at least that’s what it looks like for me.

*ahem*

Tattoo
leave make your mark

;)

Quote from: davidm at Feb 01, 2006, 05:17 PM

I’ll work on the summary tomorrow and send this via the Marketing mailing list.

Sorry, it took more time than expected. I didn’t get started until today. I just finished summarizing and ordering ideas.

You’ll get the mailing list later today or tomorrow morning