Ted was the last major league baseball player to hit over .400 for a season. When asked how he wanted to be remembered, Ted told people, \u201cWhen I walk down the street, I want people to say, \u2018There goes Ted Williams, the greatest hitter who ever lived.\u2019\u201d That is a fabulous, singular focus. Ted didn\u2019t want to be a \u201cgood\u201d hitter or a \u201csuccessful\u201d hitter. He wanted to be the best hitter who ever lived.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his book, Ted breaks down the strike zone using 77 baseballs. Every one of those pitches represents a strike\u2014or, to a CMO like me, a profitable idea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Anyone who\u2019s played little league baseball has been conditioned, on some level, to believe they should swing at EVERY pitch in that 77 zone. \u201cSwing at strikes!\u201d we\u2019re taught by well-intentioned Little League coaches and parents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ted knew there were only four pitches in that zone that would get him to his goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He also knew that every time he swung at a pitch at the outer margins\u2014 still strikes\u2014his probability of getting a hit dropped to .280\u2014a 30% decrease from .400. Every swing in that zone took him further from his goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s 32 pitches Ted Williams wouldn\u2019t even consider. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The greatest offense you can make as a batter is to be called out on strikes. Fortunately, marketers don\u2019t have to swing at every pitch. There is no such thing as a 2-strike count in marketing. \u201cNo\u201d is always an option, and, if Ted is any indication, it\u2019s the best option 73 out of 77 times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you are a hitter or marketer who aspires to be the best, you have to be willing to listen to 77 ideas and move forward with, perhaps, only 3 or 4. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nobody, especially smart people who have achieved senior roles, wants to be told, \u201cNo.\u201d As a decision maker, others will sometimes regard you as foolish, inexperienced, risk-averse, obstinate, closed-minded, \u201cstuck in your ways,\u201d or simply an A**hole when you say \u201cno.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s especially difficult when you like and respect the person sitting across your desk; when you\u2019re certain they believe in what they propose, and that they want only what is best for you. The difficulty is compounded when you are provided with case studies of other brands that have found success with whatever is being pitched to you. <\/p>\n\n\n\n What\u2019s a CMO to do?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I\u2019ve been at Saatva for eight years. Over that time, we\u2019ve spent hundreds of millions and taken millions of swings at the plate. We know our sweet spots. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Imagine that my sweet spot is Meta. It\u2019s not, but for the sake of this example, imagine it is. I know that I can write a check to Meta, run a remarketing campaign targeted at people who abandoned one of our product pages, and get $6 back for every dollar I invest. <\/p>\n\n\n\n My goal for marketing overall is to generate $4 for every dollar invested. I could stop investing in Meta and maximize my profit percentage, but if each marginal dollar I invest generates $6, I can increase my revenue and profit in absolute terms by continuing to spend there until ROAS lowers to 4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here\u2019s where it gets even more interesting. As far as all my various measurement partners tell me, I am far from diminishing returns on Meta. Chances are, if I spend more there, that $6 has an equal likelihood of growing. Any money I divert from Meta right now might preserve a high profit return, but it damages my business. I might top out at a 7 or 8 ROAS before I see any sign of diminishing returns. And even after diminishing returns, because it\u2019s my top performer, I\u2019d be foolish if I did not continue to lean into Meta. <\/p>\n\n\n\n No.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I\u2019d be equally foolish to focus only on Meta. My remarketing campaign would not work if Saatva hadn\u2019t invested in a site for people to abandon. TV drives consumers to search for us and then visit our site. Email is also a highly effective and inexpensive way to remarket to site visitors. While Meta may be our top performer, it dies if I don\u2019t do other things that are designed to fuel its fire. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But I don\u2019t want to be distracted by too many things that take my team\u2019s time, attention, and focus away from our sweet spot. Any agency that takes the time to understand my business, to understand our sweet spot, will do well to help me and my team understand how their offering complements our strengths. <\/p>\n\n\n\n If I can\u2019t draw a line from your idea to my sweet spot, I may listen politely, but you\u2019ll never have my full attention. If you want to gain traction with me and my team, you have to spend less time telling me about you and your success and more time understanding Saatva and our success. I understand that some brands aren\u2019t really sure what is best for them, or where they should lean in. Those CMOs should be testing and learning, and identifying their sweet spots. We\u2019re in a different place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If my team has to spend time setting up geo hold out tests to prove your idea will work for us; if I can\u2019t measure the results accurately; if I have to rely upon you to grade your homework; if I have to spend time and money to produce new creative assets; if investing in you reduces my ability to invest in Meta\u2014all of those things are more difficult and time consuming than adding another zero to the check that I write to Meta. <\/p>\n\n\n\n You might call me lazy. I\u2019m ok with that. Working harder to make less money is stupid, and I\u2019d rather be lazy than stupid. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Wow. That still makes me sound bad. Let\u2019s say I’d rather be \u201cwell rested\u201d than stupid. That\u2019s on brand for a mattress marketer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Showing me a logo on a capabilities deck and telling me that X Brand generated 12% incremental revenue is less valuable to me than hearing it directly from X Brand\u2019s CMO. That way, I can listen and learn from them. Perhaps they\u2019ve already done the geo-targeted incrementality studies. Perhaps they\u2019d be willing to share what their MMM says about your idea. I\u2019d like to better understand their sweet spots and determine for myself if your idea is relevant to me. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Things change as our company moves along its life cycle. Our \u201csweet spot\u201d seven years ago was different from our sweet spot 4 years ago was different from our sweet spot today. At some point, I\u2019ll reach diminishing returns on the combination of meta, search, and email. Out of Home, Events, in-flight advertising, or court-side signage might become just the thing for us. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing is certain. If you listen, learn, and understand my business, I am unlikely to forget about you or your ideas. There\u2019s a much better chance we\u2019ll work together, someday, if not today. <\/p>\n\n\n\n While we are more likely to say no, we\u2019re always listening for the idea that makes us say, \u2018Hell yes.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Ted](\"https:\/\/press-room.saatva.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/Ted-Williams-on-Marketing-2.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Ted](\"https:\/\/press-room.saatva.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/Ted-Williams-on-Marketing-3.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Ted](\"https:\/\/press-room.saatva.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/Ted-Williams-on-Marketing-4.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nSaying \u201cno\u201d has consequences<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
My sweet spot<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Should I focus on our sweet spot to the exclusion of everything else?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What\u2019s an agency or person with an idea to do?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Get to know us and what works for us.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Make it eas(ier)<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Introduce me to your friends<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Plan for your moment<\/h4>\n\n\n\n