Those who have websites that are stuck in Google’s Witness Protection Program (can’t find ‘em in the search results) usually think that online is a waste of time. Those who are findable but just get “surfed over” are sure their SEO consultant is robbing them.

The key to effective local business promotion lies in the business itself. The owner has to look at:

* The business’s current sales process
* How the business keeps in touch with current clients/customers
* The business’s business plan — specifically, the Mission Statement
* The most profitable merchandise, products and/or services
* Any underused capacity that can be scaled up easily
* What causes the most aggravation for the business (and its owner)

Only then can the business select the means (SEO, geo-location, email marketing, online video, etc.) and the method of using the Internet effectively. Just blindly revamping a website or starting a blog may not be the right thing to do.

Speaking to you now as an Internet Marketing consultant, I’d rather tell a business owner to continue to put display ads on restaurant placemats, if that’s what works for them, than “sell” them a package of Web design and autoresponder tools that they really don’t need (and not charge him or her for the advice). On the other hand, I also want to help those businesses and professionals that can use my services best — and can afford the recurring fees I charge for such services.

Sincerely,
Vince Runza

Depends what you are offering, I’ve had 18 new advertisers in the past four and a bit months, and whilst I’m not putting a down payment on a Ferrari just yet, I feel that if I look to help advertisers they will gain confidence with online ads.

And if that 3-5 years prediction could speed up a bit that would be nice

Also not sure if Jeff has highlighted this study from the UK, granted it is from a vested interest:

Consumers with spending power more responsive to ads on niche sites than portals – http://bit.ly/HGgBJ

At this time, it is most important for a local business to OWN their primary Internet resource and use other online venues to advertise this hub. Services such as LocalADLink and MerchantCircle are emerging as potential leaders in this local search rodeo and the good old local newspapers should be in the forefront of organizing and promoting these services to their business communities.

To Bob’s point, as a local publisher I’ve had some early discussions with national pubs about selling their local audience. It’s a slow go with them yet when I’ve spoken with the local advertisers, it’s something they have interest in as long as they don’t have to buy a bunch of non-relevant inventory.

Disclosure: I am a local publisher (SunValleyOnline.com) but also consult with organizations setting up their low-cost sales models. Their expensive shoe-leather salesforces are ill-equipped to do much of what their companies want them to do. The sales model is much closer to Dell than it is the Dallas Morning News. The good news is that it’s working very well but requires a lot more than a tweak here and a tweak there to their sales org.

Something that lets them quickly write ad text, edit it if required whenever they want, and start with an initial outlay of £10 so they can go at a pace that suits.

MSM is focussed on sticking with the same size pie dish, but I’ll gladly look to bake a bigger pie.

They have at least three things going for them:

1) strong brand and history in their market (though some recent research shows huge generational shifts in this)

2) some level of traffic in the market — maybe not google or yahoo level, but probably bigger than everyone else in the market

3) longstanding relationships with local advertisers.

They need to focus on how they leverage these three assets to help change and get to their next business.

Also, they need to better focus on identifying their true competitors. It’s not “the internet” or craigslist. Craigslist has taken the classifieds biz, made it free and it’s not coming back anytime soon, if at all.

Real competitors are the ad networks that can bundle massive amounts of inventory and sell impressions cheaper to national advertisers through volume discounts.

Look to your core strengths and build on those.

@BOB “If the national news sites could carry targeted local ads they would make more money.”

When local businesses bring me in for online marketing consultation they almost always ask me these questions and make these statements:

1. Newspaper advertising is too expensive and complicated.

2. The cost structure / sizing in their media kits looks like the table of elements.

3. I only want to advertise next to relevant content.

4. I want to market my self, my own website.

5. I did it once and it was horrible, I lost money.

6. I wanted an ad on their website, but they could not tell me where exactly it would appear.

7. How can I use the internet to drive business to my company?

My clients want to get placement on Google Maps, Yahoo Local, Yelp, YellowPages.com, etc… They pay me to help them set up these free accounts and show them how these features work to drive traffic to their own websites. This costs them a few hundred bux but lasts as long as their accounts stay valid. I give my clients a service that Newspapers seem incapable of providing at a cost they cannot match. Oh, and I also build websites for them if they want.

Newspapers need to step up their value proposition if they are sincerely interested in remaining viable entities.

NCN done right would have addressed the core *structural* issues in the news business. But, its real impact has been to frighten away any who attempt to address structural issues. Journalists would serve themselves well by standing up to this ghost and trying it again…

bob wyman

When I read LAtimes.com, I see ads which are either specific to California or that are general to the US as a whole even though I live in New York City. Similarly, if I’m a resident of North Dakota reading the New York Times, I see no ads for sales in Grand Forks any “local” ads are for New York City… This is silly. Ads should be specific to the readers’ needs, not to the “scope” of the publisher.

National newspapers are read by “everyone” while local papers are read primarily by locals. Having larger audiences, national papers can sell cheap ads in bulk to “national” or “regional” advertisers but lose the opportunity to access the potentially rich market for targeted local ads. Local news sites have a problem in that while they have a highly targeted audience and can often charge premiums to access that market, they often can’t aggregate sufficient audience to generate the revenues they require.

If the national news sites could carry targeted local ads they would make more money. If the local sites could efficiently access the audiences of national sites, they would make more money and get higher readership.

At the same time, we have both national and local newspapers cutting back on reporting staff since they aren’t making enough money. So, the solution seems obvious… The national papers should partner with local news bureaus to provide “local” coverage and ads on a common platform. For instance, a news bureau in Grand Forks, ND might provide the “North Dakota” coverage for the New York Times. Readers in Grand Forks would “opt-in” for North Dakota coverage as their “local news” option in the New York Times. This “hint” would swap the North Dakota news in place of the default NYT Metro and Local coverage. The location hint would also cause the advertising engine to serve local North Dakota ads. Thus, the Times would expand the market for its ads, the Grand Forks news bureau ad sales would gain access to local readers even when they aren’t focused on local content and they would probably get higher readership as well since readers who go first for non-local news would get local North Dakota news mixed in with the NYT coverage. The Times and the Grand Forks group would split revenues on both local and non-local ads when served to readers who self-identify as North Dakotans. Everyone wins.

The Times, of course, will object that the journalists in Grand Forks don’t meet their standards or that the folk in Phoenix don’t. But, this is what editors are for. If it is a concern, then the Times should work to help train, select and edit their local partners. The Grand Forks folk will object that folk will end up reading the Times and won’t visit their own site. This is actually good… They’ll end up making more money off more locals at the Times and they can reduce their local technology costs…

What have I missed?

bob wyman