I'm interest in this topic, unfortunately, I saw this post a little too late and wasn't able to participate. Any chance the session was recorded? Will it be available anytime soon? Thanks!
Manufacturers, 12 Tips for Getting Covered
Here are our 12 top tips for manufacturers to get covered on IPVM and other publications, a recap of our live webinars held on May 22nd and May 28th:
- The top 2 manufacturer PR problems
- Issue real Press Releases
- Release them using a wire service
- Advertise releases on Twitter
- Avoid stock PR email pitches
- Emphasize new and different
- Include tech details and cost
- Find practical problems and issues stated on IPVM or pubs
- Personalize / customize pitches
- Find your right contact
- Push it if done right
- Why 'bad' press is good
Inside, we explain each one.
Undisclosed A, I just published a full recap of the top 12 points we discussed in the webinar. It is in the post above.
If you or anyone else have questions / feedback, this is the right forum for it.
Thanks for this informative information updated as I missed the webinar becuase of wrong caculation of time difference. I was about to ask IPVM. Would it be possible to test our products if we sent you them for evalution? Of course, we should cover the product cost including shipping charge.
"Would it be possible to test our products if we sent you them for evaluation?"
For us, the cost of the product is a minor factor in our choice of doing tests because it typically costs us $2,000 to $5,000 in labor (our team's time) to do the test, write the report, shoot videos, prep images, etc.
Because of that, it is much more important that we anticipate the product has broad appeal to our readers. That's why, as we mention above, we are looking for things that are different from existing offerings in meaningful ways - whether it's new functionality or lower price, etc.
Got it. Thank you again for your answer.
So for any manufacturer who wants to us to test their product, the best bet is to lead with what is different / novel / appealing to an average integrator.
That's the make or break factor for us. If you convince us of that, we'll likely do a test.
Manufacturers, here's a great case study in how to get covered in trade magazines.
The trade magazines recently covered the resignation of Frank De Fina like it was the Nobel Peace Prize.
7 of them immediately wrote glowing stories about him, which is an incredible feat in an industry where they struggle to do anything more than cut and paste releases.
For example, here's the articles from SSI, SIW, SDM, SSN, Security Products, Source Security.
How'd he do it? It was not just luck or good timing.
There were 2 critical steps:
- He's bought nurtured long relationship with the trade magazine editors. For example, De Fina regularly took the editors out to fancy diners at trade shows.
- Using the good will he built, he arranged a conference call with the editors announcing his departure / pitching his story.
Manufacturers need to ask themselves how far they are willing to go and how much work they are willing to put in to get themselves covered.
Though this tactic does not work with IPVM, it is a masterful execution of old school PR.
The trade magazines recently covered the resignation of Frank De Fina like it was the Nobel Peace Prize
I think you may have overestimated the trade rags actual coverage of the Nobel Peace Prize. ;)
Excellent article. This applies to more than just manufacturers.
Here's an example of an excellent manufacturer comment.
An integrator asked about VMS Software Running On Virtual Servers?
It's been a good conversation. A manufacturer employee chimed in, from Vicon, with an excellent comment. I've copied it in full so others can use this as a template:
"Disclosure: written by a Vicon VMS manufacturer employee.
From the manufacturers point of view, the issue we typically deal with is not the actual running on a virtual machine to which (as said above) the application is indifferent.
The main concerns we see are three:
- Most VMs built by IT tend to be around the typical database / web server type machine and tend to be under the spec we require to handle the massive throughput video requires
- Considering no 1. The number of VMs you can carve out of a physical server is lower for video intensive applications than other (which increases the $ per VM expense)
- The sharing nature of VMs (drives and network cards) is not a friend of intense video systems
What we do is offer a guideline for those who consider VM as must:
- Emphasizes that the VM must be built according to the standard minimum requirements
- Specifically asks that the drives for recording will be dedicated ones and not shared with many other VMs (so I/O is maximal)
- Asks for a physical NIC in place of a virtual one so all bandwidth is available
In many cases where a VM is considered a must, this guidelines puts everyone on the same playing field and eliminates technical issues."
It's informative and it shows that he knows what he is doing. And the disclosure up front plays a dual role - one, people know that he is a vendor but, two, they also know where he is from, so he can get credit. Vicon is not a company that generally gets good press or marketing. Yet here is a 6 paragraph post that gets people thinking positively about Vicon.
If you are a manufacturer, ask yourself, how can I do something similar?