The Stationers Guild

Today as I was watching CNBC, financial analysts were commenting on the surging IPO (Initial Public Offering) share price of LinkedIn, a business social media website.   The initial offering of $45 a share suggested a market valuation of some $4 billion.  Shortly after the IPO, the share price almost tripled and has now settled back into the mid $90s.  This indicates that LinkedIn is valued by the market at some somewhere north of $8 billion.

Contrast this with the offer of Liberty Media to acquire Barnes & Noble for just over $1 billion.    Barnes & Noble has 705 stores across the United States and some 35,000 employees.  It has been looking for a buyer since August of 2010 and many believed that no one would step up to the table until Liberty’s most recent offer.  By comparison, LinkedIn has around 1,000 employees and operates from one location in Mountain View, California.

What is one to make of these two news events?  Is LinkedIn really worth $8 billion and, if so, what does it say about the value of retail bookstores that are being impacted by the public acceptance of digital books?  More importantly, what does it mean to commercial real estate values, employment and retail businesses that rely on the physical movement of goods and services?  What does this news portend for property tax revenue for local governments across the United States?

I don’t know the answers to these questions and am surprised that none of the financial analysts or news media pundits have addressed the long term implications of these changes.    Clearly, the impact of digital efficiencies will have a marked impact on our communities since less storefront properties are required to “sell” physical products.  It is difficult to believe that new restaurants, banks and clothing boutiques can replace stores that have been vacated by traditional businesses that were vital  to one’s sense of community.   I am not sure that people with lattes in Starbucks on their iPhones, iPads, Nooks and Kindles and interacting with their digital community  is quite the same as chatting with friends or colleagues at the local diner or coffee shop.  Do you?

Like many others, I am not sure where this digital revolution is headed, but I don’t think things will be quite the same for communities across the United States.  We need to rethink town planning with an eye to the changes created by this digital revolution.  Communities that continue to base town planning around the automobile, FAR (floor to area ratio) and antiquated zoning regulations will soon be catering to vacant storefronts and wondering what went wrong.

Richard W. May
Therese Saint Clair

For the last several years, I have attended practically every seminar offered by the National Stationery Show that had to do with website design, e-commerce and social media marketing.   While I have found some seminars to be quite useful, I have often felt that the information provided was either too basic for many in the audience and, at other times, simply overwhelming for those seeking a few tips on how to promote their business online.

As such, I was not expecting much as I sat down to listen to Rafael Mael of brandlauncher.com talk about social marketing.  Boy, was I in for a surprise.  This was simply the best presentation I have heard on this complex subject and I am quite sure that those who were fortunate to attend would share my assessment.  Well done Mr. Mael and tell your wife that we all thought you did a great job!

The goal of Mr. Mael’s presentation was to give us five very valuable insights on how to tackle social media.  His objective was to teach us how “to engage successfully with a minimum of effort” so we could get back to our “real life” with family and friends.  As one who spends far too much time in front of a monitor, I find this to be a most worthwhile objective.   After all, a real person is far more engaging than a Twitter “follower” or a Facebook “friend” – at least they should be!

I am going to list his 5 Rules (which he  supported with useful examples of what he was discussing) with a minimum of fanfare unless I think it is required:

1. Optimize Everything - This Rule mainly covered website design in which he emphasized that “less is more.”  A simple design pattern that tracks “proven” website reading patterns (the “z” effect) works best.    Fully agree, and my next website will reflect that look and functionality.
2. Give your audience what they want -  Your audience seeks two things:  stuff that is “interesting,” and stuff that is “free.”  Mr. Mael was interesting and entertaining and passed out many FREE gifts.
3. Automate Everything -  He gave us tools to automate NOW: ping.fm and tools to automate LATER:  hootsuite.com.  Ping.fm is used to communicate the arrival of new products and “new” news, which Hootsuite.com is used to schedule communication to social media outlets that are known in advance.
4. Use Video:  YouTube is the second largest search engine after Google.  There are plenty of activities in your store that attract interest.  For instance, one video received some 14,000 views on how to wrap a gift.
5. Where do you Start? – Start with the end result in mind and reverse engineer the process.  In other words, envision where you want to be and then work out the details to determine how you can get there in the most efficient way possible.

Following the presentation, Mr. Mael stayed around to give those that were interested a 10-minute one-on-one.

Thank you Mr. Mael and thank you organizers for finding this most engaging speaker.

Richard W. May
Therese Saint Clair

I recently was engaged in an  interesting discussion on LinkedIn within the “Greeting Card, Stationery & Gift Industry Gurus” Group.   Without going into a lot of detail, the discussion focused on the future of paper greeting cards and how best to create the next generation of eGreetings to connect with a new generation of “tech savvy” users.   While I do not question the impact of the digital revolution on paper greeting cards, I could not see an economic rationale to create a sustainable and successful eGreeting business.  Found below are brief excerpts of some of the comments I made during this discussion. 

 There is no question that digital greetings and invitations are rapidly eating into the “paper” market. While I don’t happen to think of paper as a “device”  since color reproduction and print quality on paper remains far superior and authentic to anything on the web (band-width restrictions), the whole point of the discussion is how to make money with digital greeting cards.

Personally, I think it is a losing proposition because I don’t believe any company will be able to create designs or unique delivery capabilities to compete on a sustained basis with the many (and growing) “free” alternatives on the internet. I have yet to hear how someone will be able to create “brand awareness” around something so mercurial as a greeting card and convince a critical mass of “subscribers” or “buyers” to pay for something that is pretty much free.

To draw from just one example. Take Blue Mountain Greeting Cards which was one of the first digital greeting cards to make a splash in electronic greeting cards. They are now owned by American Greeting Cards (AG), because they wouldn’t have been able to survive as a stand alone venture. Is AG any better off? I think not. Their sales are down 25% since 2002, they lost over $200 million in 2009 and they may break even this year.

Why Paper? A well-designed greeting card with a personalized message printed on quality paper is often worth “saving.” On the other hand, a digital greeting card or image maybe worth “storing” (there is a huge difference between mechanically deciding to save a physical object as compared to storing it on your computer). While you may eventually want to print the stored image, what will you print it on?: 20lb copy paper stock. There is a reason why people go to art museums: they want to see the real thing, not some digitally reproduced image formatted for a digital transmission. The same is true for greeting cards for memorable occasions.

There is a difference between building an iPhone application that plays “Happy Birthday” and sends a cute text message to your contact list on their birthday as opposed to building a business providing “unique” designs over a technology platform that gives the business provider a sustainable competitive advantage. Most novice tech users can already embed videos and pictures in their emails and many have already created their “free” Wordpress or Blogger websites. While I don’t doubt that technology providers can “sell” services to users interested in creating or selling their own greeting cards, I have yet to see how one can build a sustainable eGreeting business around the many “cool” apps that appear each day. Competing against “free” communication alternatives doesn’t seem to be a market that offers much promise.

Just did a Google search: there are 14.5 million web pages offering “free greeting cards.” Do you think it will be less competitive when the iPad hits the market in a few weeks? Again, if someone shows me a sustainable business model for eGreetings I will eat the digital printout of the business plan. Better yet, if you have figured it out, go for it! (I would love to be a shareholder).

I remain unconvinced that one can make money on a sustained basis with electronic greeting cards. Twitter and Facebook have essentially eliminated the need for them since the lives of its members are pretty much an open book.

Richard W. May
Thérèse Saint Clair

Melissa Magsaysay makes a very impassioned case for fine stationery in a May 10 article in the Los Angeles Times.  She laments that she has yet to receive a handwritten note from any of her 250 “friends” on Facebook.  She adds, “Does anyone under 30 even remember what handwritten notes are all about?  I am hoping that all this public chirping gives way to something more personal, maybe even a return to the romance of beautiful stationery, flair and making an effort.”

Melissa’s plea for “something more personal” got me to thinking about the relevancy or impact of social networks on interpersonal relationships.  Sure, I’ve experimented with Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and other social networks but, for the most part, I’ve never really made a serious commitment to develop a network of friends, acquaintances, followers or other network buzzwords that define relationships.   Melissa’s article got me to thinking “Why?”

I think it has to do with the type of person that I am.  Let me explain.  The relationship theme of Twitter is based on the simple question:  “What are you doing?”  Frankly, I never really thought that people really cared what I was doing and, even if they did, would they think more or less of me if I didn’t tell them?   It seems to me that “real” relationships are based on consideration for another (“empathy” strikes me as the appropriate word) rather than talking about myself.    As Melissa points out, making the effort to write a handwritten note brings the cream to the top and separates the casual acquittance from those you might like to know better.    The handwritten note sends a message that is far more intimate and caring than any 140 character “tweet” could possibly convey. 

I do not understand why so many people find it so meaningful or liberating to talk about themselves and eavesdrop on others who feel the same way.  Maybe I am missing something, but it strikes me that one is either an egomaniac or is suffering from a rather severe inferiority complex.   In fact, much of the social network “chatter” is based on “my” feelings,”my” views,“my” beliefs,“my” activities to the detriment of a relationship based on mutual respect developed through listening rather than talking about oneself.

I am hopeful that many of Melissa’s “friends” will take up the the challenge and experiment with the civility, etiquette and beautiful craftmanship that define fine stationery.