Don’t Buy Or Sell Another Internet Lead Until You Read This
by: Christy O'Connor
How much money have you spent on internet leads so far this year? How many companies did you have to go through the so called “dance” with? And, do you know how to befriend your lead generation company or broker in a way that protects you as well as your vendor? Are you a lead aggregator in search of buyers with more understanding? Today I want to talk about some effective techniques to help minimize your exposure and create a strong ally while trying out a new source or lead buyer.
Let’s face it, learning to lower your risk is something that can pay in more ways than you can imagine. However, there is a way of doing this so that you have a potential relationship you can build upon. Being too nervous can cause good companies to turn away your business. The relationship you have with your lead provider is a delicate one. Either side may come across with a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. This is not healthy for either party. Vendor/buyer relationships are built over time. I guess what I’m trying to say is that both lead providers and lead buyers have had bad experiences and more often than not the initial stages of any campaign are usually uncomfortable for both sides. It doesn’t matter if you’re looking for prospects for debt relief, refinancing, home improvement, auto, or any other potential customer for your given industry. There are good guys and bad guys in every business. Let me repeat myself; good guys AND bad guys. If you have gone through your share of bad guys, and we all have, don’t lose hope there are good people on both sides of the internet marketing field left out there.
It may be helpful to recognize these few basic points and create a mental starting point as you move into a new relationship: 1. It takes time to see results. 2. Both the buyer and the seller of lists and data are usually nervous do to past experiences and a sense of monetary risk. 3. There are good people left in the world. This seems elementary but hard to keep in mind while handing over your credit card number or valuable data. Here’s an example: Jack paid for 40 internet generated Refinance leads from a company that was recommended by an acquaintance. The first two days or so were used up by programming a form submission for the buyer so the prospects would be referred in real time. The next two days approximately 20 forms were delivered in real time as agreed. The next thing that happened was that the mortgage lender (buyer) sent back the applications that were rejected. There were 10 names (leads) being returned, 8 of which were bogus. The buyer was under the impression he had only received 10 leads total. Both the lead provider and the lender hastily agreed to end the relationship. The lead buyer declared the vendor as a bad company and wanted a refund immediately. After all, 80% rejection is not acceptable in anyone’s book. This company was just like the rest of them that sold fake data. The vendor’s position was that the buyer was rejecting far too many leads and would continue to be a high risk client.
After looking closely at the names being returned, the vendor noticed that none of the names on the list were names of refinance applications that were delivered to the buyer. In the eyes of the vendor the payable leads were not being reported on. The standoff continued. The vendor insisted targeted prospects were being referred and the buyer insisted there was corruption. It turned out that the leads that were being rejected were the first two days worth of test data that was being posted over to test the real time delivery. The leads were supposed to be fake! The point is that both the vendor and the buyer were willing call the relationship quits before it even got off the ground. It was a simple and common reporting issue that happens every day while dealing with programming issues. Test leads must be sent until the programming is sound. If each party took a little bit of time to investigate the problem before jumping to conclusions the relationship would have grown into something mutually beneficial. Instead both parties left defeated. Fear makes people illogical and in this industry it’s becoming harder and harder to keep a cool head. Above is a classic example. It would have been logical to put the campaign on hold for a few days while the issue was being investigated.
It’s my belief that new campaigns should be broken down to a formula. The formula should be predetermined, realistic, and include my “mental starting point” but also take into consideration the needs of both the buyer and the seller. There’s no need for one party to take all the risk or feel there is an unbalanced relationship underway. New lead acquisitions should be treated as a partnership. After time you both recognize the need for each other. It is important the return policy and the payment terms be discussed prior to accepting/delivering the first lead, as this is where conflict bares its ugly head most often, thus, best avoided by setting up the ground rules. Let me give you an example of a standard formula a larger company may use and one that a small buyer may use. A larger company may have a formula such as buying 25 leads per day for 7 days followed by a quick approval to continue for another 7 days if quality seems acceptable. After a 14 day period, if all goes well, volume can be increased to 50 leads per day on the same type of cycle. A small buyer may buy a total of 25 leads only wanting to receive 8 leads once per week for 3 weeks (say 8 leads each Monday). Both formulas appear to be very simple but deciding ahead of time takes the pressure off both the vendor and buyer. It will also eliminate long and confusing conversations making one or the other seem inexperienced. With a clear definition both parties can move slowly into a new relationship repeatedly reminding each other of my 3 simple points keeping the focus on building a foundation for a long lasting relationship. With a formula in hand, the end result is a marketing company and a lead buyer striving to maintain a calm and systematic approach to an uncomfortable situation. This system allows both parties to focus on the facts while minimizing the risk of the most important thing in a vendor/buyer relationship, the loss of a mutually beneficial alliance. For more information visit http://www.oconcomarketing.com
About The Author:
Christy O'Connor:
15 years Marketing, Lead Generation, and Sales experience.
For more information vistit http://www.oconcomarketing.com or e-mail info@oconcomarketing.com
March 2006
Disclaimer: The information presented and opinions expressed in these articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of BIZBUD.com and/or its partners.
Unless otherwise stated, the contents of this site are
Copyright © 2006 BIZBUD.com - All rights reserved.
Articles are copyright materials of their respective authors.
|
