> ...we scrapped it because only our software developer used it and other people in the company preferred something else (they used a mix of email, Google chat/hangouts, and text).
Clearly something was wrong with the UX if only one person was willing to use it?
I think they may have left off the "s" from developers, based on context it seems like there must have been multiple people who liked it enough to build plugins. Sounds more like a "developers vs. management" kind of thing rather than "our one IT guy tried to sell the whole company on IRC".
The point you were making is that a single rabid IRC fan was trying to steer the rest of the company, so actually I'd say the typo certainly does affect the point.
I run a popular weekly newsletter that makes fun of the tech industry. Think: The Onion meets TechCrunch.
Newsletters can generally charge a much higher CPM than a social media accounts or even podcasts in some cases. You can start making beer money with only a few thousand subscribers.
We’re also thinking of hosting a few live events as well once our audience is large enough.
(P.S. for the curious, the newsletter is called TechLoaf: https://techloaf.io)
+1 on your point about marketing. I also deeply undervalued how much goes into a great/thoughtful marketing plan, all the way from choosing the broad messaging and distribution channels through the “tiny” details like nailing the copy on your landing page (this may seem easy or straightforward, but it took us a while to truly understand what worked).
At TechLoaf, we experimented with a lot of different, elaborate, shiny landing pages that expounded on how amazing our newsletter was, etc...
And after falling flat on our face for months, we realized that an incredibly simple, borderline-mysterious landing page converted users far more effectively.
About 30% of all visitors to our site end up subscribing, which is drastically higher than what we saw earlier iterations do.
How qualified are the leads you get from the opaque landing page? Seems like subscribers would be unlikely to read a newsletter having signed up for it while not knowing what it was about. I would imagine you’d want to optimize for opens over subscribers to avoid vanity metrics, though perhaps not.
Absolutely. Beyond the “obvious” stuff like getting an early look at what people in the heart of the tech universe are working on, I’ve found the community to be very supportive and willing to help on promising ideas.
For example, I shared an early version of TechLoaf on here last year (https://TechLoaf.io — think: The Onion meets TechCrunch) and a) received super precise feedback on our landing page and newsletter format and b) recruited a few writers who now actively contribute each week.
I’m very grateful for this wonderful corner of the internet.
I realize this would probably be a last resort, but I’ve heard success stories of companies rallying their user bases to personally email the App Store on behalf of the company (“hey, I love x app. It makes my experience with Apple products so much better...”).
This could be a call to action included in the Rescuetime newsletter.
Despite their occasional authoritarian moments, Apple generally listens to enough frustrated customers.
A couple for you that I found invaluable as I taught myself programming:
1. Team Treehouse. They now have a huge library covering just about anything he could imagine wanting to learn, mostly geared towards beginners. Much of their work is a) project-based so students can understand the practical implications of what they’re learning and b) split up into short videos/sections to help keep their attention.
2. App Academy Open. App Academy just opened up their introductory curriculum in a series of short-form videos and programming exercises that are highly-entertaining and practical.
Once he’s graduated from those, I’d second the recommendation here to check out techyourselfcs.com. Bradfield is a fantastic resource for self-taught programmers who want to build up their CS fundamentals.
Bradfield is an excellent resource and Oz and his team are fantastic.
The only caveat would be that a lot of Bradfield’s curriculum assumes that students have some programming background already, so it might make sense as a secondary resource after starting with some more basic programming courses.
For what it’s worth, we’ve had a lot of success with a strategy not mentioned here: hosting a site that’s intentionally mysterious, if not slightly provocative.
About 35% of all visitors to our site end up subscribing.
We’re not a SaaS company, so I realize this may be comparing apples to oranges, but we had experimented with a lot of different, elaborate, shiny landing pages that were similar to a few encouraged here.
And after falling flat on our face for months, we realized that an incredibly simple, borderline-mysterious landing page converted users far more effectively.
This is important - techloaf (big fan here!) is obviously an outlier, but generally the bigger and more complex the product, the vaguer the landing pages get.
I always thought this was a shifty strategy to get you on the phone and have salespeople con you, but after reading _Mastering the Complex Sale_ I've come to realise that it makes sense - you want to understand a potential customer's needs before you actually try to pitch anything concrete at them.
That's probably good for getting a lot of sign-ups with no intent to become a paying customer/active user of your product, but I'm curious how many of those users would convert down funnel.
Exactly, we have the luxury of being able to show a single, clear example of essentially the entire product. I realize that most SaaS companies probably don’t have that luxury, as each customer’s use case will be slightly different.
One sentence later:
> ...we scrapped it because only our software developer used it and other people in the company preferred something else (they used a mix of email, Google chat/hangouts, and text).
Clearly something was wrong with the UX if only one person was willing to use it?
This place is a parody of itself sometimes.