I’m evaluating attending a conference for business purposes and I’m looking for some clarity around my reasons for doing so – so I’m writing about it!
I gravitate toward attending conferences and meeting in person in general. In the age of AI and automated marketing communications, it removes the bs factor of “personalized marketing” which when done poorly, doesn’t really develop a personal trust-based connection.
At conferences, there’s a multiplier effect generated by simply hanging out with people, most of whom are not cagey and are mainly there to add value. In my experience, if there’s not a direct conflict with their business, most people will point you in the right direction to the degree that they can. This works particularly well if you are also known as a straight shooter that also passes along the good will. I have tried to cultivate this type of relationship with those in the cryptomining industry and Mark has a good rep as well. This has born fruit in the past.
I have messed up some relationships in person as well to be sure. There have been failed pitches where I was unprepared to deal with a prospect on their level, which definitely failed to impress. It’s a bit to work back from, but I think it’s still a better position than to not attempt a personal connection.
I’ve met many of the people I’m looking to meet up with previously. Doesn’t it help to keep those connections fresh though? I think so.
The market has shifted. Even since last month, where I would have typically attended Mining Disrupt, quantities of ink has been spilled on the topic of miners jumping into the AI space. As the market context has changed, I think it would make sense to get in front of the key folks in these businesses to make sure they know we’re there for hardware end of life.
My bias toward meeting in person may help with bringing opportunities, but do we win those opportunities? Events are actually a small part of our sourcing and revenue. I have a small issue with the way that this is counted in Hubspot and could probably produce a report that weighs the initial source of repeat business, rather than classifying them solely as repeat business. This approach may be more useful as a high level metric, but when you’re thinking about growth, you want to think of that repeat business as attributable to the original source of the lead. This would definitely be a valuable exercise to justify future events. I believe that some of the ongoing business we enjoy with some of the brokers in the ITAD space came as a result of an industry meeting. Mining Disrupt has produced a few leads, but it hasn’t been as promising from a repeat business perspective, as you might expect, with miners exiting that business being the primary type of customer.
Our history with events has left Mark with the justified opinion that they don’t bring much. My thinking diverges with his because while we have a lot to offer the market, the timing is generally off compared to the way business works for most of the companies that have an event strategy. I would frame it as a “face to the name” kind of branding exercise, so that when someone we met at a conference needs our services, they are more likely to go with someone that they’ve spoken with at a conference. I am fairly certain this has borne out a few times, one larger deal comes to mind in particular.
Additionally, both Mark and I are of the opinion that an account based strategy is going to be more important going forward. For that, we can’t be absent in the public eye. Be it a personal visit at an event or through participation in the various industry groups, we have to be top of mind when an end of life conversation comes up.
To that point. I am working on a GPU price tracking project that will hopefully give me something to publish regularly for people to come to know us as the the GPU market experts. Stay tuned.