Re: Food for thought...
Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: > >> well for them ( and notice Obama used the same strategy? ). > > Ah, the delights of marketing: > http://obotheclown.blogspot.com/2008/12/deconstructing-one.html > > Obama's campaign did receive an unprecedented number of small donations > ' 49% of its money came in donations of $200 or less, compared with only > 32% of George W Bush's 2004 campaign. But many of these donations were > from people who donated repeatedly. As a result, only 26% of his funds > came from donors who in total gave $200 or less, *a mere 1% up on Bush's > 2004 25% figure*. > It wasn't just about campaign contributions. It was and is about grass roots. Even AFTER the election Obama is sending out emails for grass roots activities. If Obama were running Informix we wouldn't be having the discussions we have because grass roots works. Contributions are one thing, mind share and eventually market share are another. Obama pushed from the ground up not the top down. He won. He was able to share his vision and get others to believe in it enough to make the choice--the only choice they could make. MySQL has done the same thing and is succeeding. Nobody is saying MySQL isn't a good enough choice. And nobody at all is saying Informix is a good enough choice because it doesn't have wide enough appeal. There's no motivation to pay for something that doesn't have a big enough difference from what you can get for free. Informix needs to be bootstrapped into existence before it can be considered a choice. Until that process occurs it will never go anywhere. Trying to sell something nobody knows about or cares about it to miss how the current market works. Pushing a developer version and doing nothing to leverage its existence is a complete waste of opportunity. IBM should just dump Informix and move on. -ID-
InDeep wrote: > > Obama pushed from the ground up not the top down. If you say so. -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com
Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> >> Obama pushed from the ground up not the top down. > > If you say so. > What's that supposed to mean?
InDeep wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> InDeep wrote: >>> Obama pushed from the ground up not the top down. >> If you say so. >> > What's that supposed to mean? Obama's campaign was not really any different than any previous campaign. His spin doctors just presented it as a national upchuck at grassroots level. -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com
Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > InDeep wrote: >> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>> InDeep wrote: >>>> Obama pushed from the ground up not the top down. >>> If you say so. >>> >> What's that supposed to mean? > > Obama's campaign was not really any different than any previous > campaign. His spin doctors just presented it as a national upchuck at > grassroots level. > Really? All the states that Obama won in were taken because of the work at the local level. All the states that John McCain lost were because of his lack of work at the local level. McCain appealed to a national base, Obama appealed to a local base. It was dramatically different from any other campaign. Despite McCain showing up in different locations he didn't think doing the groundwork was important. He thought he could show up, spew a bunch of sound bites and that would be that. To Obamas' credit, he learned from previous and current winners. Something that IBM / Informix has not done. IBM wants to just play the same old song and expect success. They sing the same old shit to their base, but do they get any new customers? Doubtful. As IBMs' base shrinks so too will their company--just like John McCain and the Republicans. Happy Holidays! *<8o)