undefined | Better HN

0 pointslostinquebec4y ago0 comments

Your first point is very hopeful, but not what I've experienced. The bigger the company, the more slack for bad decisions.

Your other points I think relate to scale. No advice can be universal, and if you read the article as absolutist, your take makes sense. If you read it as "hey, your mix is likely wrong", a lot of the criticism fades.

I think we've lost a bit of creativity in marketing. The Lego movie example is a really good one. I think it is probably good this happened, as a lot of creativity was performative (how do I win an ad award/impress my peers) and not about increasing sales, but we've perhaps shifted the balance too far, and there is likely some areas with good ROS that are now better bets.

0 comments

aerosmile4y ago

Scale brings both, headwinds and tailwinds. The outcome often hinges on how the balance of those two forces plays out.

Ecommerce example: every year the CPMs go up and your paid margin goes down. But every year you have a larger email list, so the balance of paid to unpaid shifts.

General example: every year you get more of the late-stage employees who care less and less about your company. But every year you can afford to pay for more layers of management, which will keep an eye on the underperformers.

This list goes on and on... The headwinds are driven by external forces, whereas the tailwinds end up working out based on your specific execution of the opportunities that present themselves to you. This is where an experienced operational team can make a huge difference.

> I think we've lost a bit of creativity in marketing.

You absolutely cannot rely on performance marketing forever. It's a shot in the arm until you have reached enough [fill in whatever you wnat] so that you can leverage that momentum to reach the escape velocity. So it's not good forever, but it's a great catalyst.