Cluetrain-a-Day 2009: Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone.

2009 business cluetrain-a-day-2009 consulting 26 January 2009 | View Comments

This post is part of a 95 post series discussing the 95 theses of the Cluetrain Manifesto as they relate to business in 2009. Read more about the series in the introduction post. And check out the rest of the series!

Thesis #16: Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone.

Don’t Pitch Me Bro Uploaded by chrisheuer

As we’ve established, the language of “pitch”, which includes sales, marketing, campaigns, verticals, leveraging, and more…is ineffective.

When it works, it only works when you cast a net so massive that you are working the power of numbers. If you pitch to hundreds of thousands, even millions of individuals, of course you’re going to have some rate of conversion. But that’s a ton of wasted energy. And in terms of voice, and language, is a great way to the business equivelent of laryngitis.

Why is the language of “pitch” ineffective at anything other than alienating your audience? Think about it this way. While some of us are better at it than others, we all have some innate “lie detection” built in to our communications arsenal. First line of defense? Irregular speach patterns, followed by messaging designed to obscure intent.

Now let’s examine the physiology of “the pitch”. By definition, a pitch is meant to succinctly explain

a) what you are pitching b) why it is valuable c) who you are, related to that element of value

Notice anything missing?

The ideal pitch explains how perfect your product or service is for the person being pitched to.

Unfortunately for the “pitcher”, that’s when our innate lie detection kicks in. For me, it’s the “too good to be true” meter that usually goes off the charts.

That’s usually when I turn my back. I don’t know about you, but the things that set off my lie detector send me the other way.

As soon as I hear a pitch, I assume that I’m in the middle of a bait and switch.

“Here, stay for the weekend in this beautiful ski resort. It’s free. All you need to do is sit through a 2 hour presentation about our time share offerings”.

Right. I saw that episode of South Park and I’m not buying it.

Which is why the companies that use the voice of “pitch” in all of their communications are finding that they look up from their pitch script to realize that they are talking to an empty room.

“Where did everyone go?” the pitching marketer asks.

They’re online, and they’re talking to each other.

Bookmark and Share

Tagged in ,

  • @Lee,
    I actually totally agree with you, and I wrapped a few too many things into "pitch" than I should have.

    What's important about the Geico example is two things:

    1. Tone, or voice. As I've been harping on, even if we know the intent is sales, the tone isn't anywhere near it. This is one of the benefits of the "non related" commercial strategy. You can use an unrelated tone without it feeling...fishy.
    2. There's something important about the comedic factor of the Geico commercials. That comedic factor is, in my opinion, a social capital deposit in the favor of the company the commercial is for. In my mind, I go something like, "OK, you made me laugh. Well done. For that, I'm willing to accept that you're selling me something, even though I did't really want to be sold to in the first place."

    Commercials that are unrelated to the product/service they sell that don't elicit a similar response (by either being funny, ridiculous, or SO in incongruent that it is inherently interesting) fall into that "uncomfortable, I know I'm being sold to and I'm not OK with it" pitch voice.

    And to your final point that one is correct and the other isn't, of course. These essays are speaking in extreme terms for the sake of illustration. In practice, all new media/social media/whatever you want to call it works BEST when used in conjunction with traditional efforts.

    Great, great points, and I'm glad you brought them up.
  • Lee
    Hey Alex, interesting post. I think this thesis needs to make a bit more subtle distinctions. For example, you write:

    "As we’ve established, the language of “pitch”, which includes sales, marketing, campaigns, verticals, leveraging, and more…is ineffective."

    Let's take a real life example: Geico. Everyone knows their commercials. They usually are only barely, at best, related to the services they sell. I wouldn't really consider their commercials a 'pitch' beyond saying "hey, I can save you money on your car insurance." Other than that these commercials just tend to be funny which is why they work. They are sales, they are marketing, and they are effective - not ineffective.

    The kind of pitch you are talking about I think is just the lowest form of sales, the true sleazy pitch. Just like pitch websites or infomercials, you are right, they work by volume alone. However, there are many pitches (in the form of commercials and other mass media advertisements) that work because they're clever, and yes, because of numbers. That doesn't make the irrelevant or obsolete.

    I think the whole new media vs. old media sales & marketing is just going to eventually balance one another out: to make a blanket statement that one or the other is correct I just don't buy. Traditional Sales & Marketing has its place... as certainly "new" sales & marketing does as well. To be a big-time company you need to hit the masses, that will never change.

    Later dude, - Lee
blog comments powered by Disqus