Perhaps because Chinese businessmen are so smart. (Freedom does that to you.)
As I search the net for suppliers, I avoid alibaba and other such portals like the plague that they are. I do love the HKTDC.com, for its rational limits on what it offers. Good work there by an independent industry association. If states are to fund portals, they might do well to study the HKTDC.com.
As I come across Chinese B2B websites, they are rather slapped-together affairs, not much time or money put into them methinks.
Are they making a mistake? I think not. Most B2B websites I see out of Europe and USA are a total waste of time and money. Pretty, engaging in a way that suits people raised on the mind-disabling Sesame Street quick cut technique, but nothing that will generate the sales to warrant the investment in the website. I'd like to see proof of ROI on websites.
The ads and websites-as-ads violate all advertising fundamentals, and I think they are driven by a false economy. A reliable source told me that he was awaiting his paycheck from Gawker because GM was awaiting their bailout money from the taxpayers to pay for the ads Camaro placed on Gawker.
If you were to withdraw the advertising paid for by banks (Ally = GM), the military, food, and all of the other heavily subsidized and false-economy players, what would the internet advertising look like. I believe the amount of false-economy advertising is effectively driving bad advertising practice on the web.
I do not doubt people are making money with bad advertising, Gawker did get paid, but it was thanks to taxpayers, not thanks to customer demand.
I cannot waste money on advertising. Every cent has to return. I have experimented widely, and failed to make online advertising pay. Now that could very well be my own incompetence. But I've also spent 15 years challenging self-described experts to prove to me that can make online advertising pay. No takers yet, in spite of the fact I offer a $47.50 affiliate fee on a $95 sale. So far no one can bring in a $95 dollar sale for less than $95 from web advertising. I defy any and all developers and online ad agencies to prove me wrong. (Being proven wrong would mean new income for me, so I earnestly desire to be proven wrong.) The years go by, zero takers on my offer.
Sure, I can buy an increase in hits, but a hit is not a sale. if I pay for advertising, it must repay itself and bring in new business. I cannot afford to waste money on advertising, or worse, pay to bring in time-wasting unfruitful inquiries.
At the same time, ads placed in the ancient paper medium still brings in customers at about $7 each.
With their relative freedom, Chinese B2B sellers cannot depend on a bailout to fund their "advertising" adventures. Therefore, when offered spurious website claims, they wisely reject them and put up any old thing. It does not matter.
If and when someone offers them a website that DOES bring in business, a website that is more valuable to them than what it costs, then maybe they will listen. I know of no web developer anywhere that offers a website that is worth the investment.
Prove me wrong.
If you want an orientation on proper attitude on advertising, read Oglivy on Advertising.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
As I search the net for suppliers, I avoid alibaba and other such portals like the plague that they are. I do love the HKTDC.com, for its rational limits on what it offers. Good work there by an independent industry association. If states are to fund portals, they might do well to study the HKTDC.com.
As I come across Chinese B2B websites, they are rather slapped-together affairs, not much time or money put into them methinks.
Are they making a mistake? I think not. Most B2B websites I see out of Europe and USA are a total waste of time and money. Pretty, engaging in a way that suits people raised on the mind-disabling Sesame Street quick cut technique, but nothing that will generate the sales to warrant the investment in the website. I'd like to see proof of ROI on websites.
The ads and websites-as-ads violate all advertising fundamentals, and I think they are driven by a false economy. A reliable source told me that he was awaiting his paycheck from Gawker because GM was awaiting their bailout money from the taxpayers to pay for the ads Camaro placed on Gawker.
If you were to withdraw the advertising paid for by banks (Ally = GM), the military, food, and all of the other heavily subsidized and false-economy players, what would the internet advertising look like. I believe the amount of false-economy advertising is effectively driving bad advertising practice on the web.
I do not doubt people are making money with bad advertising, Gawker did get paid, but it was thanks to taxpayers, not thanks to customer demand.
I cannot waste money on advertising. Every cent has to return. I have experimented widely, and failed to make online advertising pay. Now that could very well be my own incompetence. But I've also spent 15 years challenging self-described experts to prove to me that can make online advertising pay. No takers yet, in spite of the fact I offer a $47.50 affiliate fee on a $95 sale. So far no one can bring in a $95 dollar sale for less than $95 from web advertising. I defy any and all developers and online ad agencies to prove me wrong. (Being proven wrong would mean new income for me, so I earnestly desire to be proven wrong.) The years go by, zero takers on my offer.
Sure, I can buy an increase in hits, but a hit is not a sale. if I pay for advertising, it must repay itself and bring in new business. I cannot afford to waste money on advertising, or worse, pay to bring in time-wasting unfruitful inquiries.
At the same time, ads placed in the ancient paper medium still brings in customers at about $7 each.
With their relative freedom, Chinese B2B sellers cannot depend on a bailout to fund their "advertising" adventures. Therefore, when offered spurious website claims, they wisely reject them and put up any old thing. It does not matter.
If and when someone offers them a website that DOES bring in business, a website that is more valuable to them than what it costs, then maybe they will listen. I know of no web developer anywhere that offers a website that is worth the investment.
Prove me wrong.
If you want an orientation on proper attitude on advertising, read Oglivy on Advertising.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
7 comments:
What percentage of retail sales are occurring from internet retail web sites? Is it still very low (like 2-3%)? Is it growing?
The misleading notion that exposure will somehow lead to sales is widespread in the advertising/marketing industries. The practice of having an expensive, beautifully designed website and no customers is also extremely common.
What do you think of advertising in magazines? A few years ago, we advertised in a local luxury home magazine. We do architectural cast stone. Anyways, after 6 months (3 magazines issued) and $2000, we got neither customers or at least inquiries. Not one! The magazine owner told us that to get a response, you usually have to advertise for longer. Of course he would say that!
Can you give an example of these badly designed Chinese B2B websites?
http://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-advertising-doesnt-work-on-the-web/
Interesting article.
Business ignoramuses believe that marketing works - I believe this is what is still taught in MBA business schools - This is a very persistent fallacy, just like the need for IPR. Nope - you still need a product that customers want. With marketing you get exposure and awareness of the product - If the product is not wanted, it just informs the public that it is a bad product - one to avoid. Even "good" marketing won't save a bad product.
For Q1 of 2013 online retails sales is at 5.5%.
http://ycharts.com/indicators/ecommerce_sales_as_percent_retail_sales Still no place to start a business... 15 years in...
Seattle Times had an 80% off sale that I could not pass up to try newspaper ads again. Two 1/4 page ads, zero sales. The newspaper used to sell ads as news "this small business has this sale today." Small business and the USP is gone due to regulation and inheritance taxes. Newspapers cannot survive without small business local ads. The divide between mass market and specialty just gets wider. The department store is toast.
As to bad Chinese B2B websites, just go on alibaba and click through to any Chinese B2B website. And by the way, my point was, as opposed to western businesses, the Chinese are too smart to waste their money on pretty websites.
See the previous post: http://hbhblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/export-websites-done-right.html
I'm confused: So the previous blogpost on export websites is a B2B website, these have a higher success rate? How is a FOB MOQ website page any different than a regular retail website in getting attention, even though it is directed to pros (and not a means to facilitate a retail sale) as you state?
The premise is a website can have any "success rate" any more than a trade show booth or a paper catalog can have a success rate. The error in thinking is the internet changed things. Utterly disastrous thought. A webpage is no more dynamic than a piece of paper. so what if it moves and shows dazzling colors. If it did any more, web sales at retail would be more than 5.5% of all retail, something mail order catalogs achieved back in the 1980s. For all of the money we've invested in the web, it is a real nonstarter. it has it uses, but know them and work within it's capability.
When thinking internet, think Ho Hum.
What gets you sales is sales people. A MOQ FOB offer page is passive, like the collection of catalogs people once had in their offices or libraries stocked. So you need to replace that catalog with the FOB MOQ page. With advances in communication and research, that page can be set to answer serious buyers and repel the unserious.
Those buyers who reorder the offer on the test page can be worked by sales people. This translates into the trade show booth as well. Attract the serious, repel the unserious.
Post a Comment