What B2B Can Learn from B2C

In the ever-evolving world of marketing, the lines between B2B and B2C are blurring. Join our discussions with industry experts, dissecting the strategies and philosophies that have shaped both realms. Each episode delves deep, offering listeners invaluable insights, from leveraging technological advancements to understanding the depths of customer relationships. Whether you're a marketing novice or a seasoned professional, this podcast promises fresh perspectives and actionable takeaways to elevate your marketing game. Dive in and explore the fascinating confluence of B2B and B2C worlds.

Guests

Colm O’Shea, Senior Leader - Marketing & Digital Growth,  BCG
John Read Content Manager, DLA Piper
Elliot Wood Paid Media Specialist, Digitas UK

Transcript

Joaquin - [00:12 - 02:02]
Um, well, thank you so much, uh, for tuning in today. Um, we are chatting about the, the world of B two B and B two C marketing. So let's start with a, a quick definition about the topic and what we will revise today. So at first it sounds simple. Um, B two B sells to businesses. B two C sells to people. But when we dig deeper, uh, it's clear that B two B is also reaching to individuals, right? And in B two B, you might be using, uh, your company's money, but, uh, a bad, a bad decision could impact your, your job. So there's still a lot of at stake. So emotions, um, play a big role too in B two C. Um, it's about a personal feelings like comfort or excitement. Um, think about car ads that, that talk about adventure or, or style. Um, on the other hand, um, B two P B two B focuses on, on, on worries, like making a, a mistake or not achieving results. So there is a lot of change, uh, happening. And, and B two B is starting to use more positive emotions like, like B two C does. And, and also if you're buying something for your company, you want the process to be as easy as when you shop for yourself, like, like when you shop on Amazon. So your buyer journey is not competing with your competitors, is competing with Amazon. So we've got a, a pack agenda and, and we will dive into these topics and, and see how B two B can learn from B two C marketing. Joaquin - [02:02 - 02:16]
And so today we have great guests, uh, today, here with us. So let's start with a quick introduction. Um, Tom, would you like to, to start first?

Tom - [02:16 - 02:20]
Thank you. My name's Tom. I'm the Chief executive and founder of azac.

Joaquin - [02:20 - 02:23]
Thank you, Tom. Um, Colin?

Colm - [02:23 - 02:35]
Yeah, my name is Colin Moshe. I've been working in marketing and related areas for 15 plus years. The past couple of years I've been with Forrester and B C G.

Joaquin - [02:35 - 02:37]
Thank you.

Elliot - [02:37 - 02:53]
Um, Elliot, Elliot Wood, uh, currently performance lead, uh, Digita under publicists, um, but actually moving to a client director role, uh, at a, uh, publisher side soon. So getting to see both sides of the coin.

Joaquin - [02:53 - 02:56]
Brilliant. And, and John?

John - [02:56 - 03:18]
Uh, hi. Yeah. Um, my name's John. I am senior creative writer at D L a Piper, which is a global law firm. I'm a lawyer by background, but I moved into, uh, writing and editorial and, uh, content, uh, a while ago. So I work on all sorts of brand messaging and, uh, different kinds of communications projects here at the firm.

Joaquin - [03:18 - 04:17]
Brilliant, thank you. Well, um, I'm Joaquin Dominguez. I'm head of marketing here at at sac, and I have a background in, in B two C marketing. I used to be brand manager for CA El dlo, the wine brand. Then I transitioned into B two B marketing for a technology startup. So let's kick off the, our discussion today. Um, we will dive into the evolutionary gap between B two B and B two C marketing. Um, many people believe, uh, B two B is always behind B two C, but what's causing this gap? Um, or let's address the elephant in the room and, and let's see why B two B is so bo boring or too practical or too focused on short-term, uh, results. Uh, what, what do you think?



Elliot - [04:17 - 05:31]
Ultimately, I don't, I, I think historically B two B has been more or less bland because it's just golf days and publisher trade press and things like that, that are going very specific target audience. Um, and I think it's the, from a technical side of point, there's just less data. Like you can't, there's just, oh, you've only got 10 target customers or a hundred target customers as opposed to B two C. You've got thousands, millions, tens of millions. And realistically you can't optimize with that. But I also think it's the opposite that, uh, it was in the notes you shared was the, the level of information about each customer can be so much deeper, whether from the actual company's perspective or the individual you are engaging with. And there is, like all the data privacy of B two C, basically, none of it exists. You can, in a choice of better word, stalk your potential client and understand every single thing about them, their LinkedIn, their Instagrams, and really understand, cool, if I need to close this deal, you understand the business objective of increased sales, decrease cost, whatever the thing is. But also on a personal level, you can get super deep with the person you're trying to, um, woo to be a business partner or whatnot.

Tom - [05:31 - 05:48]
Yeah. Because the, the value is so much greater in Yeah. In the transaction. So it, it, yeah. So, and account-based marketing, as you say, allows you to, without getting, without gathering personally identifiable information, you could be so much more personalized per potential purchaser.

Elliot - [05:48 - 05:51]
Yeah, a hundred percent Actually.

Joaquin - [05:51 - 06:18]
And, and it's, I think it's totally acceptable as well, targeting a, a company's culture, for example, you want, you want to target a company that is interested in sustainability. Yeah. Whereas targeting people is more nuanced, right? Because you, how did you obtain their data? What, what you mentioned before, it's, it's much more nuanced and sometimes it's, it's like a dream for a marketer having all this information in front of you. Yeah.

Elliot - [06:18 - 06:45]
It's a little bit of a side tangent, but there's a great book called The New Gold Standard. It's about the Ritz-Carlton. And coincidentally we do business with the Marriott hotel chain who owns the Ritz-Carlton, and they have a dossier on every single customer that has ever stayed with them at the Ritz-Carlton. So, do you like red apples or green apples? Do you like the New York Times or the LA Times, or whatever it is. And it's, I know that's a B two C product, but it's such B two B mindset, and I think it's tremendous that other people can utilize.

Tom - [06:45 - 07:23]
I definitely think we should talk about luxury. I think Colm, you had a perspective on user, you know, you, you are comparing Louis Vuitton's approach, you know, the, the luxury approach with a B two B approach. I think there's definitely things that B two B marketers can learn from luxury. And that's a really good example, Elliot. You know, that in a B two B world would be called a B M marketing. But in B two B A B M is relatively, relatively new. And I think most B two B companies don't tend to do very, very detailed personalization of digital marketing. But clearly the Ritz has been doing it for, you know, 400 years.

Colm - [07:23 - 09:14]
Yeah. The per the, on the personalization piece. And I haring back to my time at Forrester here. Uh, that was really a key thing, especially in B two C around four years ago, I would say. When we were doing a lot of work with clients, primarily at the time, we, we did it in both B two B and B two C, but primarily in B two C. And obviously there was a lot of focus on customer journeys at that time. Also, in bringing it forward now a couple of years, I don't think that was ever dealt with very much in the B two B side of things, I would say. But certainly within the luxury retail Marriot who I also had, uh, some dealings with, yeah, it was totally key at that time to, to focus on personalization. Of course, all of these houses of brands, some of these are including Marriott would have the different tiers of targets that they go after and then they personalize based on that. Um, on the B two B side of the house, that was not at that time a conversation that I would have with some of the bigger clients that I had in that space, which would've been more in telco, for example, in pharma, we weren't really discussing personalization, uh, in that point. And then two points, uh, about two years after that, I would say it's switched more into maximization of data. This was during the pandemic, the personalization piece was kind of thought to have been done in those B two C uh, companies. And if it hadn't, they were definitely laggards, uh, where B two B companies were in that regard. Then, I dunno, I'm open to you guys giving what your opinions are on that, but, but that was where we saw the work coming from in personalization, I would say for three to four years ago.

Tom - [09:14 - 09:57]
I think a company that's been selling to really massive organizations for a long, long time in B two B is likely to have a similar sort of Ritz Carlton style mindset. But a lot of that personalization is basically done by people like the salesperson, the account managers being there, managing the Dell account for, you know, five years, 10 years. They know everything about all the buyers and they're probably doing that reasonably well. But I think the big gap is in, when you're selling to mid-size companies or smaller companies have this real, I think because Elliot, you said at the beginning, you can be more creative and interesting in your marketing, more personalized if you have information about your audience to put color on them.

Elliot - [09:57 - 09:57]
Yeah.

Tom - [09:57 - 10:25]
But if you, if you don't, then you are stop being boring. And I think that a lot of businesses that are targeting, but if you're targeting like massive organizations, you don't tend to target them with extensive digital lead gen campaigns. 'cause you know them all personally. But when you're targeting, you know, potentially millions of small businesses, the information on them tends to be really, really poor. And therefore the marketing tends to be quite boring.

Elliot - [10:25 - 11:34]
I think also because there's so much brand safety elements to B two B marketing. I've seen a few, and I've got an example I know, um, asked to prepare a few for the call is, um, what everyone's people like a business doesn't exist. It's not real. It's just a collection of people and some IP and a few lawyers. And ultimately, yes, the customer is the business of whatever you're selling software or something, but it is an actual human you need to convince to buy your thing. And they need to put their reputation online or their personal values or whatever to actually go, cool, I look at this, my boss is gonna be proud of me and I'm gonna be proud of my decision. And I feel that the boring side of it, in one of the examples that I don't, if you wanna share it now or if there's a segment for that, is there's a lot more fun stuff happening that is, yes, I know you need to have a professional conversation over on the left, but we're actually gonna have a more exciting human to human conversation, even if it's one way advertising of the way I'm trying to communicate to you. And you go, huh, that was interesting, that was fun. Maybe I should actually fill out a lead form or pick up the phone or whatever.

John - [11:34 - 13:08]
It's, Yeah, I, I think that's a great point. And you know, you hear a lot about the differences between B two B and B two C, so obviously I'm coming at it from a content and a writing perspective, you know, and a messaging perspective. I don't think the differences are as great as many people would have it. Uh, I, you know, a lot of this stuff will be why, if you're writing for a business, it's gotta be formal, it's gotta be long words, it's gotta be complex, it's gotta be technical. But what you've just said there is I think the key to it, which is that we're always, at least for now, right, until the AI take over the world, we are writing for other human beings. So what I'm most concerned with when I'm working on messaging or brand building or content or any kind of advertising, whatever, is how do we as human beings process information? How do we take that information? How do we process that? How do we pass that information and how do we act on that information? And that's not just about information that goes to your head, it's also about how you feel. And so I think a lot of B two B organizations or you know, many B two B organizations kind of miss that. And they, we, we confine ourselves in these, these boxes of formality, but they're self-imposed. They don't need to be there. As long as you're not being silly, as long as you're not saying anything offensive, as long as you're not gonna get your brand into trouble, you know, legally or you know, some risk perspectives, you've got a long way that you can go before you get to those places. And you can get your copy or your content or your messaging into a much more audience-centric human place by freeing yourself of those shackles of what we perceive business writing or mid business messaging needs to be.

Elliot - [13:08 - 13:38]
Yeah, I think in general, in Europe, and actually I'll put Australia in that as well, we are not very good at it. The, in the states, I think they make really good B two B ads. They're fun, they're exciting. I watch a lot of F one and a lot of the sponsors are now B two B this season. Um, uh, who's at Amazon and Workday. So it's like, yeah, I'm never actually gonna use that as a person, but if I have to do the a job, great. And they're actually really fun ads and you're like, okay, nice, this is good. But again, they're US based, so I don't know if there's a cultural difference there as well.

Colm - [13:38 - 14:16]
I think, I think there is, having worked quite a lot with US companies too, I think they can get away and feel free to disagree with me on this, uh, to what we, in English speaking Europe, let's say, would, uh, would describe as exaggerated wording. Uh, that was my opinion, uh, in terms of their ads, that some of the stuff that they, they, the grandiose states that they might use in the states might not wash as well over here, certainly, But maybe that also allow, but also that kind of, uh, freedom also gives you a bit more ability to create more creative, more interesting Yeah.

Tom - [14:16 - 14:17]
Ads maybe. Exactly.

John - [14:17 - 15:51]
Yeah, absolutely does. Like, you know, and it sounds obvious, but people like fun things. People like having fun, people like reading things that are enjoyable. You know, this B two B stuff tends to be very heavy on the infor information side's, very informative. It's got a lot of description, a lot of nouns, a lot of detail in it. But we, as human beings, we don't change, like the writing techniques and how we process information doesn't just change at nine o'clock in the morning when we just start work and we're like, oh, now I'm a completely different human being and I'm gonna take this information because I'm working for a business rather than a consumer. We don't work like that with the same people. And all of the research that I've seen, and there's been done some done specifically on, you know, what clients of, uh, law firms prefer in terms of audience, you know, perception or their messaging. It's, it's all relevant for any kind of writing. And yeah, you probably can't get away with being quite so informal in some ways, right? As if you've got a consumer brand and you've got a very jokey self-referential brand, and then maybe that's not gonna work for a, you know, a big serious organization that's doing some, you know, serious things. But that doesn't mean that you can't have some fun. It doesn't mean that it can't be relatively informal and relaxed and conversational, because that's how we as human beings react to stuff. And the, the audience is the only thing that really matters. Like, if I write something that my manager, you know, loves, but my audience hates, I've, you know, It's about cre creating a brand personality, right?

Joaquin - [15:51 - 16:30]
And, uh, and, and that that involves a, a long-term commitment is you don't invest in, in, in a brand for one year, for one campaign. You need to invest thinking about the, the, the next 10 years or 20 years, and maybe, maybe you call, uh, Colin, you, you have, in your experience at Forrester, um, you advised a lot of B two B CMOs, and so how can B two B marketers, um, can put more emphasis on, on that brand building and long-term commitment? I don't know if you gave them some advice in on, in that area.

Colm - [16:30 - 17:23]
Hmm. It tended to be a lot of, was very much actually focused on internal B two B marketing within big organizations. I think one thing at the time, this again, probably two to three years ago that especially we were emphasizing on the B two C side was, uh, the value of emotions. And that is often lacking in B two B, even if it's an internal B two B messaging, I'm thinking of typical B two B message messages. You get, even within a a, a bigger organization, they can be very formal, like you mentioned, and lack and emotive. And I think that that was kind of one area where they might to, to, to the point of, uh, lightening the messaging somewhat. That was an area that was not really touched on much with the B two B companies at that time at least.

Joaquin - [17:23 - 17:24]
Mm-hmm.

John - [17:24 - 18:27]
That might be, And that's critical. 'cause I, I, I went see my doctor the other day, you know, consultant and, and he was saying we were having a chat. So I've known him for a while and he said, oh, I said, have you got a website yet? You know, have, you've got your websites up? And he said, no, I really need to do that. He said, well, do I put on it? He says, you know, and he said, I've got my expertise, I've got, you know, the operations that I do, all of that. And I said, yeah, but think about what you're really selling. And he was like, I'm selling my expertise. And I said, yeah, you're, you're also selling that, but what you're really selling is trust. You're selling safety, you're selling reassurance. You're selling hope ultimately to people that, that, that they're gonna, you're gonna be able to fix their problems and they're gonna have a, you know, a a, you know, a good life, you know, and that, so it's, yeah, you're selling products and services you may be, but you are also selling other things. And as a law firm, we sell that too. We sell security, we sell confidence, we sell, you know, success. We want our clients and we want to help them succeed. Yeah. We do that through legal solutions and other other things and advice. But it's, it's more than just the facts. It's also, like you say, the economy, the emotions.

Colm - [18:27 - 18:46]
And Do you think, which I think companies had to, had to really emphasize and they were forced into doing, like you just mentioned, um, emphasizing these pos positive elements and these secure elements during the pandemic. Whether they've actually continued to that now two years Later is, is a different point.

Elliot - [18:46 - 19:05]
Just on that one. I am still annoyed that no alcohol company during the pandemic, 'cause there was heaps of ads on, I was in Australia during the pandemic. None of them just went, this sucks. Have a beer They were all like, oh, we're with you. And I'm like, guys, just say what we're all thinking, It's, yeah. Sorry. It's a side tension.

John - [19:05 - 20:29]
No, it's, it's, it's, that's the thing. And I, I just, yeah. Be plain speaking, tell your audience, you know, what they wanna hear. If that matches up with what you wanna tell them, that's where you get the engagement, right? But there is this thing of authenticity. But I think a lot of people, people, and you know, I'm not talking about my business here, but you know, generally in sort of business, you know, sort of marketing and messaging, they kind of feel that it needs somehow to be more like the, the longer words and the longer paragraphs and complex words are somehow more sophisticated and they will Make people trust it more. Yeah. And that's more, that's more the done thing. And it's usually because that's how they learn from the person who learned before them. And they're working from templates and the way it was done. And we just have to break free of that and think, well, when we're not at work, do we enjoy reading business writing? Generally we don't. Right. It's not fun. It's not that interesting. It's not that exciting. So, you know, I, I think you've gotta go as whatever you need to do to engage your audience is what you should do. And obviously that does come with understanding your audiences other, and Thomas as you've said before, but, um, we have to start getting people, you know, we, I think people have to start getting comfortable with the process of going outside their comfort zones, um, and exploring some of these things. It's still very safe to explore outside the parameters that we, uh, self-imposed in business marketing.

Elliot - [20:29 - 20:33]
I think Ryan as my favorite, it's the best Twitter account in the world.

John - [20:33 - 20:41]
Yeah. And there's, there's a, there's a great one in the us I can't remember what department is, it's a US federal agency or something. That's the, you know what I mean? Right.

Elliot - [20:41 - 20:44]
It's the, Did it do the, um, taco Bell one?

John - [20:44 - 20:46]
Yeah. I think that might have been it. Yeah.

Elliot - [20:46 - 20:50]
Yeah. It's like the Delaware Water Cup, uh, like so, yeah, go on.

John - [20:50 - 21:28]
And they, and they, yeah. And they're just very joke, they're very self refresh now. They do a very serious thing, but that's their persona, that's their personality. And, and I think as long as if you're gonna do something, you should, you should do it, you should really lean into it. Right? I think where it doesn't work is if you say, we're gonna put on a quirky personality, but we're not really gonna buy into it. 'cause we think it's a bit silly ourselves, but people pick up on that and they think, yeah, that's a bit naff and a bit you, you're trying too hard, right? So it's like, work out who you are as a business, work out who your customers are, your audience is, and then create that person that you think will work for you and for them. And then just go for it. Like, lean into it a hundred percent.

Tom - [21:28 - 21:42]
But you Need to somehow get the other members of staff to also really buy into it or think that it's authentic. 'cause otherwise any writing that they put out will be so totally different from what the Twitter outputs out that it'll be kind of clashing. Yeah.

Elliot - [21:42 - 22:18]
I think it needs to be, it has to be a top down approach. And I, I think from a comms perspective, whoever the chief comms officer is, it has to be a default Yes. As opposed to a default No, with these things. And Formula One, again, big fan, they've changed and a lot of the brands have changed that. They were very stiff, like formal. We came first or we came second as I think they've given freedom to say, have some fun, let's try it. Obviously don't push it too hard. But, um, it's definitely a top down of you can say something a bit edgy, um, get approval first, but Yeah.

John - [22:18 - 23:33]
But like show personality and Yeah. And, and be a bit provocative sometimes because that's what engages audience. Like we are in, we as audiences are engaged when we see something that subverts our expectations, right? So if we've got a big serious business and they're writing in a slightly quirky way, we're thinking, oh, okay, well why are they, that's a bit interest, it's a bit different. What we're expecting is the bland, sterile corporate, you know, normal way of doing things, you know, try not to swear. So give them something they're not expecting. And you know, like, and one of the other challenges we have, particularly us as a business is that because we are a, you know, we're a law firm, we have partners, we have a very, you know, decentralized process. We've got lots of different individual voices, many thousands of voices all producing copy and messaging. Mm-hmm. Which invariably is never all gonna be perfectly aligned. Um, because that's just the kind of business that we are. Um, versus if you have a consumer company and you've got like, I dunno, a bottle and you're putting a label on it, then you get very tight control right? Over what goes on the label in that bottle. So something that we've been looking at is, so we've developed our tone of voice for our brand and something that works for the kind of business that we are, but that tone of voice might not work for, you know, a a very consumer brand that's got that very tight control.

Tom - [23:33 - 24:09]
Hmm. Yeah. And it can, it can go wrong for consumer brands as well. Like, remember the, um, various controversies around the Oatley brand, you know, that oat milk brand that had a very, very, uh, twee, shall I say, tone of voice. Um, and then they got into trouble for, you know, they were very, um, very, very informal, very kind of, I'm your mate. And then they turned out to be doing all sorts of nasty things and Yeah. You know, the cl the clash between what they were putting on their bottle, which was, as you say, you know, funneled through one particular channel and then what they're actually doing.

John - [24:09 - 24:40]
Yeah. And particularly the, you know, businesses, you know, you know, you know, it should have always been this case, but perhaps hasn't been. But um, you know, with E S G, you know, businesses have to, you know, um, walk the walk, you know, they have to be credible, uh, and doing what they, uh, you know, are, are sort of pushing out on their sort of, uh, channels. So I think it, you know, there is, you know, things to be mindful of there when it comes to that kind of risk to the brand, um, that that, that all B two B organizations do need to be mindful of.

Tom - [24:40 - 25:00]
We see other publications, I get this, you know, do it quite well. I think the Financial Times has extremely good, very readable. I think actually the, the, the news on just general stuff in the Financial Times, it's really, really readable and well digested and short and, You know, the ft and the economists do that really well.

John - [25:00 - 26:02]
Like, you'd think that, you know, if if I asked my mom, she'd be like, financial Times. That sounds like a lot of work. But actually they, you know, it's like the, you know, the best headline writers are, you know, at the summit and places like that, right? They're really kind of writing those short, snappy headlines. It's much harder to write in a very succinct way than it is to write in a very long-winded way. And that's something that we also see is that, you know, I'm a big believer in putting some kind of, um, limits on creativity in the sense of, you channel that creativity and you know, if you've got like a big Hollywood blockbuster, right? And you've got like $500 million to spend on it, it could turn out brilliantly. It might be a mess 'cause you could do anything you wanted, right? Whereas if you've got a low budget horror film, you, you know, where your parameters, right? You've gotta be creative, you've gotta force it to work, you know, within the, the, the, the, the limits that you've got on you. And then I think that can also apply to the creative process in B two B marketing when we're thinking about what can we do, given we've got finite budgets, finite resources, how can we be creative within those? 'cause there's still room to do that. It doesn't all have to be, you know, you know, apple levels of spending, you know, you can still do this stuff effectively.

Joaquin - [26:02 - 26:57]
Yeah. And I think understanding your, your audience, your customers or prospects, um, is one of the most important things, uh, to be creative, right? And, and, and, and this like B two C has been always really effective of using all the technology available to understand your audience. Um, Elliot perhaps you, you working in, in an agency, you must see a must see a lot of trends in, in technology advancements. So it's always B two B lagging behind you. You, you mentioned something at the beginning that is not always the case, but, but how can we get the, we we can get the most out of the tools that originally maybe were made for, for B two C marketing?

Elliot - [26:57 - 28:20]
Ultimately, it, it's the data play. And I feel that no matter what it's, it's tools like you guys have is using, using data in a clever way to make informed decisions. As at the moment it's just meta and Google ingesting everything. And then, um, basically making the decisions for you as the technology for B two B. I think it, I haven't seen any used yet because I think these are all very, um, fearful based businesses in general. They don't wanna try something that's a bit scary. Um, but yeah, I, I think particularly with this AI stuff, they're going to be using more of these tools to pretest ideas. One of the examples is, um, what was the link to it? It's called, uh, round Table ai. It basically, 'cause all these AI tools have read the internet instead of commissioning a $50,000 survey with Kantar to do all this blah blah, blah, or like having a professional survey company come in, it's a survey company, but it's just asking the ai, so you ask it in the frame of I am this business here is my B two B customer and you, you preface the AI with this and then you just ask your, um, your customer survey and they've done a whole bunch of predict what someone Would say or predict what Yeah.

Tom - [28:20 - 28:23]
50,000 people are gonna say Exactly.

Elliot - [28:23 - 28:41]
Because it's already read the whole internet, it's already read your website, it knows exactly what you're like it's every review, every blog post about it. And it's not perfect. But they've done a whole bunch of studies on it, um, and they're like, yeah, it's pretty accurate that, look, you're never gonna get 50 results from actual customers, but we can have a pretty good idea if you just use this.

Joaquin - [28:41 - 28:56]
Mm-hmm. Yeah. I also wanted to to ask you something about, uh, there there is some buzz around, uh, Google and meta making significant changes. Yeah. In in, in how we operate.

Elliot - [28:56 - 30:30]
So, so I've got the clickbaity salacious answer and then I've got the slightly more sensible answer. So the clickbaity one of ultimately the question was is why are meta and Google taking away our audience targeting capabilities and our assets selection capabilities or creative selection capabilities? The click bey answer is 'cause we suck at our job. Like, I don't know about you guys, I can't say which brands. One of our internal clients had a, uh, an ad for a big campaign coming up and they pre-tested it with one of these very expensive pre-tests. They had single digit percentage approval rating for the ad, which means out of a hundred, less than 10 people said, I liked this ad, it, it was enjoyable. And I'm like, guys, you have unlimited budgets and all, all along I know we say B two C does great ads. I'm like, no, no, I think we see thousands of ads in a week, but maybe two or three stand out. You go, oh, that was clever. Like a spec saver one for example. In general, it's Google's going, guys, we've been begging you and trying and doing all these trainings to give you all this budget to make good ads. We just never have. Um, that's on the actual creative side. On the audience side, I think it's a twofold piece of no matter what business you are, even if you're Louis Vuitton or Apple, at most, you probably represent 5% of your consumer's total spending excluding housing. 'cause that's ridiculous. So it's like, even if you're the most in depth, you're supermarket, but at most you're maybe getting five, 10% of their total spending as Google and Meta have, I would hypothesize probably a 50% view of every single dollar you spend, whether you're using Apple Pay, Google Pay, all of the websites you're on there, pixeled. Elliot - [30:30 - 30:52]
So they just by default can create a better targeting list because they're not actually creating a targeting list of people that are into cycling and rugby and golf. They're going, no, no. We have seen who's bought your per your products. We've created a Venn diagram of all the other companies and we're just gonna show it to them. We don't care if they're into cycling, golf or rugby where into people who are likely gonna buy your thing.

Tom - [30:52 - 31:04]
Yeah. So no matter how many Roundtable ais or however many surveys that Apple or Nike or whatever do, as you say, they're, they just don't have the data that the ad platform does. Yeah.

Elliot - [31:04 - 31:57]
That's it. And it's, I don't, I actually think it's great. It's like with all this AI stuff I've said to myself, it's like, my job is to make myself redundant. 'cause that's how you get promoted. If someone else does it, a k a Google and Apple, you get fired. So it's, it's massively going to change. And for me, because the ad's, my favorite part, all of these studies from LinkedIn, meta, Google, all this stuff, they all say between 50 and 60% of the performance of a campaign is the ad itself, not the targeting and the media and the frequency and the reach. It's like, guys just make better ads, but they don't know how to do it. Brands don't dunno how to do it. So Google and Apple have just said, bugger, we're just gonna do it for you. And they will and it'll be amazing, like all these mid journeys and create chat GPTs, the ads are gonna be phenomenal. Yeah. Sorry to all creative departments out there, you are losing your jobs Yeah.

Joaquin - [31:57 - 32:04]
But, and then how you interlink that with, with the brand, right? Because you need to do it in the right tone of voice and, and, and everything.

Tom - [32:04 - 32:27]
Uh, Yeah. 'cause it could be, you might create, uh, in some ways you don't want it just to be brilliant. You also want it to be unique and consistent. Like you, you would accept worse ads if they were consistent because if they're all brilliant but all totally different, then they're not gonna associate, they're just gonna really enjoy the ads as little bits of media or whatever.

Elliot - [32:27 - 33:18]
But yeah, And I think it'll be a, a case by case basis. 'cause it started in Google Ads for example, it started, they took away, you can put headline one, headline two, headline three. Now you just have to upload up to 15 headlines and it will shuffle the order and figure it out. That was step one. Now they're going, oh, we're just actually gonna write the ad for you based on your website. And now we're at step three, which is we're actually just gonna write whatever gets you customers. And they utilize the website and they've put it through all these, um, safety filters obviously. Um, but ultimately I kind of feel that the people who create it from the get go are going to impact what the AI ends up creating. Now that may be human presently, but I have a feeling the computers and AI are gonna be making the brand vision and messaging, so therefore Theis are gonna feed off themselves, basically.

Tom - [33:18 - 33:20]
Mm-hmm.

John - [33:20 - 34:19]
I wonder if they will get to a point though, where, you know, 'cause at the moment not everything is ai, right? Yeah. So we're in the, we're in the phase where it's taking off, you know, massively. And you know, you know, we and lots of other businesses are sort of exploring, you know, like the possibilities with it, with the technology. But I wonder if just how, um, you know, like vinyl made a big comeback, you know, like, you know, we'll go through a phase of e every, you know, people would start using AI and then it'll be everywhere. And, and then we be in a a point, you know, probably, you know, you know, not my organization, but you know, generally speaking, where we can be reasonably confident that most things that we see are AI produced in one way or another. And I wonder if there will come to a point then where there is a sort of almost maybe a backlash, but a point where businesses will be able to start differentiating themselves by not using ai. Yeah, sure, sure.

Elliot - [34:19 - 34:32]
A hundred percent agree. Right? I think it'll be like a, a chew cobbler or a tailormade suit or a really great, uh, bartender. The reason you're going isn't because it's the best, it's because of the human feel and touch Experience, right?

John - [34:32 - 34:33]
Yeah.

Elliot - [34:33 - 35:52]
And I think you're totally right. And, um, I guess better time than ever my favorite B two B out of the year, it's these Twitter bross that have, like the guy Mafiaa they're calling themselves is the private equity guy, the self-storage guy, the car dealership guy. And my favorite out of the year has been this, uh, they do staff outsourcing to the Philippines and latam and average pay is about $5 an hour. And they've been paying all of these guy mafiaa, um, Twitter people to just talk to their audience, which skews to business owners and SS m e operators. And they're just like, I love paying $5 an hour for my staff. It's such a good feeling. I save so much money. And they like, it's to rile the audience up a bit. And this one guy with, uh, 300,000 followers, his name's Nick Huber, he makes about 50 to $7,000 a month in referral fees alone from making one or two tweets a week. Like riling up his audience who, oh, I love paying $5 an hour. It's so much better than $40 an hour in America. And that to me is the best B two B play of the year. And so much so he actually approached them and said, I'm gonna create a competitor to you. Give me a piece of equity. And they said, okay, here's the equity. Please keep tweeting. And so he now owns a piece of the business because it was so successful. No, it's just too successful. Yeah. wow, That's, You can't do that for every business.

John - [35:52 - 36:50]
No, but it's, it's that point again, isn't it? It's by sort of there will always be that human ingenuity, you know, to, to think of, you know, you know, I don't know enough about AI to know at what point we may transition to having, you know, a a a true, you know, or what they call a genuine artificial intelligence. But we aren't there yet. And as far as I've seen, I don't, you know, I haven't seen a credible, you know, it's like we've got these huge land, large language models, but they don't, they don't know anything. You know, like then they say that the, you know, like they talk about, you know, the computer beating Gary Kasparov, you know, years ago, the Deep Boot in Peter, he doesn't know it's beating Gary Casper, he doesn't even know it's playing against Gary Kasparov. He doesn't even know the thing it's playing is chess really? So these language models are good at telling us what the next letter is and you know, that's all that they're doing is like, what's the next letter? What's the best next letter to give the, uh, you know, to the user on the prompt. So if we do ever get a genuine in, you know, AI that can actually think in the same way as a human and be creative, then you could see it could come up with those kind of ideas.

Tom - [36:50 - 37:55]
But, But I think it's, it's still gonna be before that happens, it's still gonna have a, it's still gonna have a tendency to kind of go to the common denominator. That's what, you know, a lot of chat do necessarily because it's trained on so much. Yeah. Best is probably somewhere in the middle. So the ads are likely to come up to the level, you know, there's a lot of very bad ads, as you say earlier in B two C right now and in B two B as well. But yeah, perhaps it could bring it up to a certain level, but maybe in B two B especially because you are likely to have to give the informa give the algorithm specific information to overwhelm, because in B two B you often speak with an audience that's quite niche, you know, might even just be a few hundred people. So you, you still wanna make ads though, so, but you'd have to train it with enough information that it's sort of counterbalanced all the other information that might be bringing it down to a common denominator. You want to speak in a certain language that you kind of know about. So maybe especially in B two B, it might be still worth putting a lot more training data into the AI at least for a lot longer.

Elliot - [37:55 - 38:35]
Yeah, I think there's already these tools and basically they just ingest every single email, every single piece of comms you've had with a person and you can plug in their social media and everything. So you can know if I was speaking to Tom versus John versus Colin, the tone of my emails would change to make sure that I'm communicating in the way you want to be communicated with. Yeah. 'cause it's, um, I don't know where it was. It was basically it's, we wanna see people that are like us, sound like us and behave like us in general. It's like you want people that you're like, huh, that's cool, I like that. And ultimately that's just, it's gonna start doing this mimic thing. I don't necessarily think it's right or wrong, I just think it is and it's going to be utilized by companies if it makes more money.

Colm - [38:35 - 38:44]
So are you saying in five years time we're gonna have five different variations of an ad all targeted toward, towards your type of personality on tv?

Elliot - [38:44 - 39:11]
I think they're going to be way more detailed than that. I have a feeling it will be pure one-to-one messaging because Meta and Google are going to be creating the ad. So they'll know that I've seen Nike, Rolex and Formula One. They'll go, cool, we need to create an ad copy that's relevant to that person as opposed to Barbie, Oppenheimer and Apple. And they'll go, great, we're gonna make this.

John - [39:11 - 39:39]
And that's where it's like transformative, right? Because if you've got that level of user data, it would be prohibitively time consuming and expensive for humans to produce, uh, a bespoke ad for each one of those consumers. Yep. So it's, it's not just that the AI can do it at all. It's that, you know, so it's not that they can just come up with the ideas, it's that they can actually execute that on such a huge scale, um, for people.

Joaquin - [39:39 - 39:52]
And coming back to, to today's topic, do you see in in, in the use of this technology a big difference between B two B and B two C in the past? And and what do you expect for in the future?

Elliot - [39:52 - 40:57]
I think behind the scenes, you guys may have seen B two B does it first, but they keep it very quiet because B two B is, it's a pure marketplace. It's, you don't, like most of your thing isn't done because of brand power. It's because of offering and position and relationships. So it's, for example, um, I think it was Goldman Sachs, they've already put a billion dollars in to train their own ai. We were talking internally at publicists, dunno if this is public, bleep it out if it's not to putting like $5 million to do something. And I'm like, guys, you are playing a completely different scales here. So I think B two C does exist, but it's more vocal as B two B. Again, I could be wrong behind the scenes. I have a feeling they're doing way more, There's more twi, more twi plant jump behind the scenes on the B two B side As the very public with B two B two C of like, oh, we're trying this new AI filter thing that's gonna make your shoe fitting more like a better experience. As we might figure out that actually no, these guys have built a completely different tool on the B two B side.

John - [40:57 - 42:24]
Mm-hmm. There's also that, that, that sort of, you know, there would be a resistance in some ways, right? So if you go onto a, you know, like a corporate website and there's a chat bot, you know, I don't really wanna use the chat bot that much, you know, even if it's really, really good, I probably don't wanna do it. Like when I'm in the supermarket, I don't really wanna check out my own stuff because, you know, um, I don't work there. That's just me, right? So, um, I'd rather human was paid for that and I didn't have to pack my own stuff. I think that's a relatively reasonable value proposition. So I, I do think there's gonna be, you know, just like you have like the uncanny valley in sort of ai, uh, AI in sort of c G I, right? Where now we can kind of almost make photo realistic, you know, people, you know, using computer general, but there was a bit where it was quite un uncanny and weird and a bit freaky. There is that resistance isn't there on the part of anyone, whether they're a consumer or a business customer to, to something that they know has been, if they know, of course it's been generated by an ai, by a computer program rather than natural human investment. And I imagine that that would probably be play into, you know, you could you think of it a different level if you were a bus B two B organization with pitching documents, right? You were pitching to a client and the client could tell that that was just a template and you've just changed a few things on it that might make them feel less positive about that experience and that interaction.

Tom - [42:24 - 42:49]
So it's just about the audiences tend to be older, So it might be that that level of preference retain, you know, stays for longer in B two B, but actually in B two C there are certain brands that actually are totally upfront about it and for a certain audience, perhaps a younger audience, they lean into it and just like, yeah, all our celebrities, all our spokespeople, all our content, everything is ai.

John - [42:49 - 43:33]
It's like some people, you know, I guess, you know, I don't know if it's, this is strictly generational thing, but you see it with like emojis, right? Like, you know, some, you know, some people like emojis, some people don't. And and maybe that's partly tied to, you know, you know, generation, I don't know. But it's like we all, as humans, we, I find that more interesting is, is or just as interesting as where AI goes is what, what are our responses to where AI go is going to be as humans, as consumers, as audiences, right? Because we can't work, we, we can't guess that, right? We might be able to say, okay, we're engineering this AI to do these certain things. How, how will humans respond to what that AI does is I think less knowable.

Colm - [43:33 - 44:04]
I think, I think there're always gonna be traditionalists out there and they could be high earning traditionalists as well. Uh, so they will be non-AI fans, let's say like this. So it's the same way if, if books have not disappeared over thousands of years, nor are they going to, and that's traditionalist element too. So even if this AI becomes dominant, I still think you, you should never, um, ignore the traditional 'cause they'll always be there.

Elliot - [44:04 - 44:06]
Agreed.

Tom - [44:06 - 44:42]
I think events are very powerful in B two B. I mean they, at least they used to be, you know, extremely well used compared to B two C where it's really expensive, really massive scale if you want to do an event that makes any difference. And B two B often quite a lot of deals done between people and I, I spoke with a lot of people during Covid who predicted a massive resurgence of in-person events in B two B. I mean, has anyone, has, have you guys seen that have, have you seen people really investing in really high quality experiential B two B events?

Elliot - [44:42 - 46:02]
Because I haven't Got the classics, the golf days and they're ramping right back up and um, I've got to go to a couple and the new business I'm joining as well, they do I think at least one big one every six months where they invite their 30 most valuable clients. Um, and that's technically B two B because it's like, it's B two B two C, um, and so it's, it's quite a traditional behavior set To C to B. Yeah. Um, yeah, it's quite a traditional behavior set of, gather a whole bunch of people around, have some breakfast, play some golf chit chat, and hopefully some deals get done. Um, and also I think it's the measurement piece is B two C has been obsessed with incrementality and attribution modeling and viewability and all these things as B two B's kind of just gone, well, I'm gonna spend a hundred grand on this event. Yeah, we're probably gonna make it back in 18 months. And they're just like, okay with that as, um, which is actually on the flip side of, in the advertising world, they've seemed to be very strict of if I'm gonna spend this $10,000 on sponsoring a a yeah newsletter, I wanna see at least that much come back in a Yeah, that's right. Trackable format. But on the events, I dunno, you guys, um, I think it's just so hard to convince a C F O to sign off on a hundred thousand dollars when it's like, we could just jump on Zoom. It's like, yeah, but it's different.

John - [46:02 - 46:29]
I guess the, you know, I'm, I'm not in events, but I guess the pandemic had a, an effect on all of that obviously with, you know, there, you know, you know, I I guess it's similar to, you know, that the working from home thing, right? It's like it hasn't gone back to how it was before in quite the same way, right? So these, although, you know, it didn't just bounce back and maybe maybe events have been changed by that too in the in-person side of things.

Colm - [46:29 - 46:37]
Well, I think the reason We're here talking about this, sorry, didn't a certain company announce that they want everybody back in the office yesterday or the day before?

John - [46:37 - 46:43]
It was a good headline. That was, I enjoyed that headline. That was, you can tell the day.

Joaquin - [46:43 - 47:53]
Uh, in interestingly, my, my my experience with events was in while working for ca Blo, uh, the, the wine brand is sponsors, uh, Manchester United. Okay. And it's, it's a millionaire. Uh, it's quite an expensive sponsorship, but if you live in the uk it's really rare to see any relationship between the two brands. And it's because of, uh, how, how they use Mags State United is is for a B two B relationship is to invite clients to, to, so they, they have the, the old Trafford one once a year entirely for the brand. You can invite they invite the, the Tesco's wine buyer. Exactly. And, and in some regions they, they, they use it, uh, for B two C and, and, and run ads on TV, et cetera. But in, in most of the countries was purely for, for a B two B relationship. So I think that's a good proof of how, how important are events in, in B two B marketing?

John - [47:53 - 48:09]
I didn't, I didn't know that. I often see with football c they've got like official whatever official waffle partner, you know, for the, for the football club or something and you're like, what's that? Well, the waffles got to do with that sports team. the way you've explained it there does make sense and now I'll, I'll look at those in a different way. Yeah.

Elliot - [48:09 - 48:44]
From a research side of points, a lot of those partnerships don't have a lot to do with selling end product. It's usually reformed as a non rejection strategy of they sponsor the big famous shiny thing that everyone, everyone knows about and has a lot of brand equity. Yeah. So that, let's say insurance company for example, they sponsor menu or whoever it is. So when you are going to renew your car insurance, you're gonna review all 10 companies. When you go to one of the, uh, aggregators, you are, the sole purpose of that ad is to make sure that you don't immediately disregard them. You go, oh, I think I've seen 'em on menu. Cool. I'll consider them.

John - [48:44 - 48:55]
So you Don't just so you're not ruling them out immediately. Yeah. There's, there's something there deep in my brain that's like, they've got some of that reflected glory from that bigger brand equity that they've been assessed.

Elliot - [48:55 - 49:07]
It's Just a trust thing. I think it's, if they can afford to sponsor menu, they're probably a real business as I think when you're making even a wine purchase, you're like, well, if they can support menu, they've probably got a good facility to make wine, I'll buy that. Certainly to Try.

Tom - [49:07 - 49:22]
In some ways the quality of the ads sometimes doesn't matter at all. Yeah. Like Sometimes you, it could be the shittiest way of presenting it, but you're simply saying, I have a lot of money and therefore you should take me seriously.

John - [49:22 - 50:23]
That's percent, it's interesting. Yeah. 'cause you know, obviously I work in professional services sort of, you know, a line of work, you know, I'm not in a consumer organization, so, you know, understanding our customers, you know, can be a bit harder. Um, and, and like you said, that there can be more than, you know, can be different reasons as to why one bit of messaging or one advert could work, you know, for a customer. And sometimes it is more complex and sometimes it is more simple. Um, and, and that's another variable that you have to factor in, which is, you know, when, when, I'm certainly thinking when we are thinking about messaging here at the, at our firm is, okay, but what's the purpose of what we're, you know, we're trying to do here? You know, whether or not we can measure it, like what, what's the intent behind it? And I'm a big as, as you know, obviously I would say 'cause I'm a writer, but I'm a big believer in that sort of authorial intent and not trying to please everyone. Like things done by committee don't really end, you know, usually that brilliantly. It's, it's when you've got that clear purpose and approach and then you lean into that, um, I think those things tend to be more successful.

Colm - [50:23 - 50:38]
I actually think the way that Joaquin, you describe is that, uh, Castillo has done things is actually quite smart. 'cause that's what I would actually look to do in different markets if I were them. Mm-hmm. it's like the rationale for doing that.

Joaquin - [50:38 - 51:17]
Yeah. And same thing in, in Asia, if you want to enter a, a country that is totally different and, and, and, and, and is you need to build relationships with distributors, finally making this kind of partnerships are, are really helpful. And yeah, we used to sponsor the Masters of golf in Shanghai. You, you mentioned golf, uh, before Elliot. Uh, yeah. That's the reason you, you need to spend time with your clients in an event talking about something that is different of what you usually talk.

Tom - [51:17 - 51:35]
Yeah. And it definitely applies to B two B, you know, especially if you were saying at the beginning, like quite a lot of B two B is, is about, you know, Elliot, you were saying non rejection in B two B is kind of trying to minimize the risk that I'll get fired for, for doing this. And so, Yeah.

John - [51:35 - 52:13]
And, and I think that, and that goes a even further, right? Which is that sometimes people in be, you know, B two B, they're, they're like, well, they might be scared of doing something, not necessarily even because they think it might get them fired, but because it's just hasn't been done before here. And they just think, well, you know, like safety is just doing the same thing that we did before because no one got in trouble for that. Right. And, you know, but sometimes you've gotta look and say, well, if we, if, you know, if a business is producing something and it's getting, I don't know, like 10% engagement or something, or whatever, you've not got a lot to lose by doing something differently. Right. If you are at like 80% Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You've got a lot to lose by going crazy with it. Yeah. So, you know. Yeah.

Tom - [52:13 - 52:20]
So there's a kind of a, a tipping point, isn't there? Yeah. With a brand that's big enough. Like Kellogg's, you absolutely don't Rock the Yeah.

John - [52:20 - 52:20]
Don't rock it too much.

Colm - [52:20 - 52:35]
If you are surreal, that kind of new serial Always be, even if you're a Kelloggs, always be trying, even if it's only 5% of your budget spend, try something new all the time. Otherwise you're not going to evolve the brand.

John - [52:35 - 53:51]
That's a good point. Also, I, I find it interesting to think about, are we only concerned about maximum efficiency? Right? So Will is that only the, I mean, capital, the late stage capitalism will probably say yes. You know, that's, that's what we're concerned with here is maximum efficiency, maximum return on investment, you know, maximizing all of those things and that the art and the poetry and that human experience, you know, it all must be subservient to the end that we're trying to achieve. So the difference between like a marketing brochure and a novel, you know? Right. You know, the, the novel is not about efficiency, it's about that experience. You know, that quality that we have as humans in our, you know, subjective experience of different things. Like we experience the color green in different ways, right. All of the, that what makes us human and I, I I, I, I hope that we are not heading for a place where with ai, that it just is maximum efficiency and there's no room for that kind of subjective experience. That poetry, that art, that, that entertainment, that the stuff that we respond to in need as human beings throughout our lives, throughout the existence of humankind, we've always needed the arts. We've always needed that creativity there. It's not just about making money. I Like to think, Sorry you go Achim, But thank you.

Joaquin - [53:51 - 54:17]
We, we, we, we draw the parallel before with the luxury industry. The luxury industry is full of small details in, in, in the choice, in, in the, in the role of key opinion leaders. Um, Colin, you, you have experience with that. I don't want to miss opportunity of talking about that because I think it's really interesting that the connection between B two B and other industries to learn from, like the luxury industry.

Colm - [54:17 - 55:17]
The interesting thing about the luxury, the luxury, uh, companies I've done work with, I, I, some of them were just very fixated on looking at other luxury companies and seeing what they're doing, which I think is a mistake. You should always mm-hmm. Yeah, you should always, even if I take the example John of let's say a legal company that's doing something really interesting, why shouldn't a big luxury brand also to that? Because otherwise they're gonna end up doing the similar things to, let's say a stick to say Gucci and, um, a Louis Vuitton or doing something exactly the same. Um, and they're only looking at each other sometimes. And I worked in, in that industry way. Exactly. We're we're losing you.

Tom - [55:17 - 55:18]
I'm so sorry.

Joaquin - [55:18 - 55:35]
We're Colin Just like luxury leaves us wanting more Sorry, we, we lost you for a second, um, connection. Um, Yeah, can you, Sorry, I interrupted you. You, you were going to mention something.

Elliot - [55:35 - 57:01]
I was wanting to add to John's point about the totally right of maximum efficiency versus the art. And I feel the art has a massively undervalued long tail. It's thinking like a Mr. Beast video. Yes, it gets a hundred million views and sell $10 million worth of chocolate, but that's a one-off, as opposed to think of the small vloggers or content creators that you follow and you build a genuine one-to-one parasocial relationship with that person where you, you actually think you are their friend, even though they've no idea who you are. And I feel if any, if there's any takeaway, which I, I think we can agree on, is like B two B companies need to make more content and real content. Not here's my widget, it has six gadgets and it can do this for your business. It's like, no, no, we get that, that's assumed. Um, we're doing a tender process. Why should we engage with you? What is the experience or the fun or anything? I always call it the, I got it from the c t O of HubSpot. Um, uh, I forget his name. Um, the LPMs, the laughs per minute in his presentations. And, uh, Esh, that's the gentleman's name. And it's, I think the beauty side of things, particularly with the Twitter examples, these people have 50, a hundred thousand followers. They're now making a hundred, 200, $300,000 a year being genuine. And ultimately, I think being genuine is gonna make way more money than min maxing your, uh, efficiencies.

Tom - [57:01 - 57:59]
I mean, it has, has worked for, uh, again, I go back to luxury, but in the seventies, eighties, there was a quartz crisis where Swiss watch makers suddenly had a panic. And obviously the quartz crystal is absolutely better. Like, it's just better it's way more accurate, it's far lighter, much thinner, you know, it's a bit like AI is, you know, clearly so much faster, so much more accurate, never makes grammatical spelling mistakes. Like it's, it's better than hiring a grad to, to write something for you. But then in the two thousands, and you would've thought that all these, you know, luxury makers except Rolex would've gone out of business, but they kind of came back and they now like, you know, clockwork is actually deliberately sought out and nobody want, well not nobody wants a qua watch. Of course they're mostly still courts, but there's, there's huge demand for clockwork and to beyond and all these kind of weird stuff that's really hard to predict.

John - [57:59 - 58:45]
So you, It's like the, the, the Maya, isn't it, it's like people remember how they made you feel, right? You know, that that's how you, what you remember of those relationships or those experiences. And the enemy of that is, I guess, disposable consumerism, right? Where it's just a thing that you throw away. Whether that's content, whether that's a t-shirt that's been made for like two pence, you know, somewhere where someone's being exploited. You know, you know, what, what do we value? What's important in, in life, even in cap even and even in a capital of the society, we still value the experience, you know, rather than just the efficiency. I think our lives would all be poorer if, if, if we, if everything was done super efficiently, but it was, there was no connection with the, the people providing those goods and services.

Tom - [58:45 - 59:01]
So I think there's, there's, There's definitely a niche there for a B two B especially brand to completely deliberately reject ai, cook generated content and do stuff that somehow, I dunno how you do this, but it's obviously human, maybe human in-person events, you know?

Joaquin - [59:01 - 59:45]
Exactly. Well, I just realized we are coming to an end, um, of, of our time. Thank you so much for, for your collaboration today. It's been a great conversation. Um, we will be in touch, um, in the, in the upcoming weeks. Uh, I just realized we had some, some questions from, from our audience because we were streaming this on LinkedIn and, and YouTube and we didn't have time to, to answer those questions. So I will post these questions in, in an email later and see if you could, uh, help us answering them Okay. So we can give answers. Excellent. Wonderful.

Tom - [59:45 - 59:46]
Thank you very much. Thank you.

John - [59:46 - 59:49]
Yeah, Thanks everyone. Enjoy that. Thank you so Much.

Joaquin - [59:49 - 59:50]
Thank you, John.

Tom - [59:50 - 59:52]
Thanks. Thanks Elliot. Bye.

John - [59:52 - 59:55]
Bye.

#PaidMedia #Programmatic #Multichannel #Attribution #LinkedIn #Segmentation #ABM