Comments on: Balancing Your Revenue Streams http://blogs.photopreneur.com/balancing-your-revenue-streams Marketing Your Photography Business Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:14:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: me http://blogs.photopreneur.com/balancing-your-revenue-streams/comment-page-1#comment-1833 me Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:34:17 +0000 http://blogs.photopreneur.com/?p=675#comment-1833 One has to be careful, though: IF one is *identified* in the market as being on 1 thing, then one's brand is more secure. If one is identified in the market as being on many things, then one has no traction in any of 'em. The trick is to choose one KIND of thing ( still-images, documentary visual material, event capture, whatever ), defined at the most abstract level, then diversify that "thing" or "identity" into different income-branches. An example of the difference between a company that is secure in its income and one that diversified until its profit-margin became miniscule, is Smuckers / Kraft. Who makes jam? "Smuckers!" everyone says. Technically, both do, but we *identify* Smuckers with jam. It's their brand. They diversify *within* their identity, by having many kinds of jam. Coca-cola, too, over Pepsico. when Pepsico was opening many restaurants ( it owned several chains ), a Coca Cola commercial ( aimed at restauranteurs ) said something like: "feeling competition against you from Pepsi? Wait a few minutes, and their next restaurant may have opened next to you" Pepsi sells nearly nothing in restaurants, except their own chains. Diversifying cost 'em profitability. "Focus" by Al Reis does the subject justice, nearly. There are a few details he missed ( focus at the most-abstract level, diversify at the lowest-level within that one abstract-identity ) but he "gets" it, and I first "got" this subject, from his book. Cheers! One has to be careful, though:
IF one is *identified* in the market as being on 1 thing, then one's brand is more secure.
If one is identified in the market as being on many things, then one has no traction in any of 'em.

The trick is to choose one KIND of thing ( still-images, documentary visual material, event capture, whatever ), defined at the most abstract level, then diversify that "thing" or "identity" into different income-branches.

An example of the difference between a company that is secure in its income and one that diversified until its profit-margin became miniscule, is Smuckers / Kraft.

Who makes jam?

"Smuckers!" everyone says.

Technically, both do, but we *identify* Smuckers with jam.

It's their brand.

They diversify *within* their identity, by having many kinds of jam.

Coca-cola, too, over Pepsico.
when Pepsico was opening many restaurants ( it owned several chains ), a Coca Cola commercial ( aimed at restauranteurs ) said something like:
"feeling competition against you from Pepsi?
Wait a few minutes, and their next restaurant may have opened next to you"
Pepsi sells nearly nothing in restaurants, except their own chains.

Diversifying cost 'em profitability.

"Focus" by Al Reis

does the subject justice, nearly.

There are a few details he missed
( focus at the most-abstract level, diversify at the lowest-level within that one abstract-identity )

but he "gets" it, and I first "got" this subject, from his book.

Cheers!

]]> By: Dave Taylor http://blogs.photopreneur.com/balancing-your-revenue-streams/comment-page-1#comment-1829 Dave Taylor Wed, 27 Aug 2008 03:14:17 +0000 http://blogs.photopreneur.com/?p=675#comment-1829 I've got to commend you on the quality of your posts. Very relevant and timely. Many of your posts have struck a cord with my interests and hold great promise for my business. I applaud the work you do here, great article and keep it up. I've got to commend you on the quality of your posts. Very relevant and timely. Many of your posts have struck a cord with my interests and hold great promise for my business. I applaud the work you do here, great article and keep it up.

]]> By: John Esberg http://blogs.photopreneur.com/balancing-your-revenue-streams/comment-page-1#comment-1826 John Esberg Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:32:09 +0000 http://blogs.photopreneur.com/?p=675#comment-1826 I like how you tied online diversification with doing the same in photography. In the dynamic market of the world today, it seems to becoming vital everywhere. I like how you tied online diversification with doing the same in photography. In the dynamic market of the world today, it seems to becoming vital everywhere.

]]>