Vitamins, Painkillers and Viagra
Lately I have been looking at how Sxip will make money. We have done a great job of raising awareness, the video of my Identity 2.0 keynote helping with that quite a bit. But I digress. I have been using the labels of vitamins, painkillers and Viagra to classify product opportunities.
Vitamins are something we all know we should take. Vitamins are preventative. They don’t provide any immediate feedback. It is a good idea, and when the stars are aligned we take them. It is really hard to sell vitamins.
Painkillers solve an immediate pain. When I have pain, I want painkillers and I want them NOW. Painkillers are easy to sell to people that have pain. It is not that they want the painkiller though so much as they DON’T want the pain.
Viagra lets you do things that were not possible before. Viagra gives you new powers! Once someone understands what Viagra can do for them, they want it. Even if they don’t really need it, they would like to try it!
At Sxip, we are looking for what the Viagra in the Identity 2.0 world.
I think there’s a painkiller to be found here. See the next comment.
Comment by John Koetsier — August 31, 2006 @ 11:12 pm
Dick, re: previous "Guy Kawasaki" comment, please see:
http://www.sparkplug9.com/bizhack/index.php/2006/08/31/online-reputation-and-anonymous-comments-sxore-to-the-rescue/
Comment by John Koetsier — August 31, 2006 @ 11:34 pm
tee hee!
where to start!
Just to pluck some words from drugstore.com: skin care, allergy, hand sanitizers, digestion, lubricants, beauty, gnc, lip balm, shaving …
But i particularly like: "sun care"
Comment by Ben Hyde — September 3, 2006 @ 4:08 pm
Would be interesting to think of where "sun care" fits in!
Comment by Dick — September 3, 2006 @ 10:16 pm
So Dick lets get this straight… you like Viagra or your company is like Viagra?
Comment by Roz — September 7, 2006 @ 11:06 am
The products should be like Viagra! (I’m sure it is easy to get confused given my first name
Comment by Dick — September 7, 2006 @ 1:17 pm
In order for Sxip to make money using Viagra as a marketing model, you will need to create and then claim to be able to fulfill certain libido-related expectations in the general public. Oh yeah, and there should be no risk of blindness…
Comment by Dave — September 11, 2006 @ 4:34 pm
Great advice. Thanks Dave!
Comment by Dick — September 11, 2006 @ 4:59 pm
It seems that Viagra is somewhat of a myth buster… there is a belief or idea which people perhaps with what’s the PC term? (erectile challenges?) have accepted as a reality. Viagra, busts this myth by creating a new world of possibility.
So in the ID space what are some myths about what is not possible today, or rather what are some accepted truths? (ie I will need a different password for every website..)
What can SXIP do to shatter those beliefs or misconceptions.
Finally I recommed reading anything by Joseph Campbell….
Comment by Pierre — September 21, 2006 @ 10:55 am
Thanks Pierre!
Comment by Dick — September 21, 2006 @ 7:51 pm
Dick,
By comparing your identity system to Viagra, you shut out most women from the discussion. Your identity system is not Viagra, in the sense that you suggest. Viagra lets you do something you could do before, but can’t now, due to poor circulation, poor eating habits, aging, etc. Identity 2.0 *is* about doing something you could never do before and therefore it’s the opposite of viagra.
Secondly, women don’t sexualize public discussions because they don’t want to talk about sex generally with men. They feel uncomfortable about your analogy. That leaves this issue to men after you make the analogy, because as a rule women feel uncomfortable talking about sex with men in a public setting.
We women know we can discuss sexual topics with men under 35, because they won’t act like weirdos and think we are interested in them just because we discuss it. With men over 35 you basically just can’t bring it up unless you have an interest in them, or they misunderstand and think you are available to sleep with them.
Comparing identity to viagra just alienates women from you, and identity. Why do you have to sexualize something that makes some portion of the population feel bad about discussing it because they don’t want to talk about sex with you? It alienates women from the topic of identity.
It’s extremely uncool.
A girl who doesn’t want to talk about sex, with you.
Comment by girl — October 7, 2006 @ 5:17 pm
Thanks for commenting. I think that you have missed the point of my post. I’m not talking about sex, I am talking about drugs. I picked Viagra because it is a well known drug that has the property of enabling the patient to do things they were not able to easily do before. Until this comment, the word "sex" has not come up.
My analalogy is contrasting different drugs and the motivation for people to take them. Sex is not the topic. I’m sorry if you feal uncomfortable. Can you suggest a different analogy?
Comment by Dick — October 8, 2006 @ 10:03 am
Dick I think you missed the point. Girl said she thought it was inappropriate to sexualize the conversation around identity. (this is different then talking about sex) By choosing Viagra as your ‘drug’ metaphor you ARE sexualizing discussion because of what that drug does - give men who are unable to have erections have erections. Viagra and what is stands for came up again and again at DIDW after your presentation. As on of the very few women in attendance it was unpleasant to hear repeated references to this topic. I think a number of men were too.
The analogy didn’t work on another level. - We are going to creat this identity system…it is like viagra…so we can ‘FUCK USERS BETTER.’ I don’t really think this is the message you were trying to send but it is what could easily come across.
Comment by Girl2 — October 8, 2006 @ 10:51 am
I did not miss the point. Frankly I think the girl is projecting her own issues. I did not sexualize the conversation. My example was about medicine. I was contrasting vitamins, painkillers and Viagra. They are all medical products. I was not talking about dildos and vibrators and Viagra. That would have been a sexual analogy.
Any message can be twisted around to mean something else. I think it is a big jump about Viagra being a way to f*ck users. As you know, Sxip is very committed to a user-centric model.
Comment by Dick — October 9, 2006 @ 11:36 am
Dick, it’s my first time reading your blog and it’s interesting to see how you think. I believe the analogies are perfect, in fact I like to play the same game to get my mind to come up with answers. Anyway, on how SXIP will make money I wish I had something insightful to say but I think in your case you are a painkiller unless your product is used for something drastically different. Having roundtabled it with several friends (CIO’s,Harvard/Oxford types) months ago we all agree. I should add that generally speaking we’re not very boxy thinkers as the same conversation had us discussing the lower back tattoo of the internet(Myspace,You Tube etc.). Won’t those videos be precious 5 years from now. Someones going to make a good living trying to erase the internet for these kids or decrease their ranking score.
However,what does present an opportunity as long as I understand what you’re doing well enough is the information your collecting about people and it’s validity. Take Google’s purchase of You Tube for example…..for advertising revenue, I doubt it. It’s for the insight into the users, if not then they could have just slapped up some ads on the homepage that gets 112 million hits a day.
If your product becomes a repository for personal information that can be trusted -(key point), why not allow users to sell that info as they surf and charge for the service. Put another way, I surf over to a webpage and it sees that I have your digital ID holding all my personal info, because of settings I have already defined, that website is allowed to see selected bits of personal information about me and pays me for this. Identity 2.0 adds credibility to the thousands of fake personas we could create, that’s where I see the value.
Comment by JS — October 11, 2006 @ 7:52 pm
I think there is something there Jarod. Of course, we are not trying to create a system where everyone gives *us* their identity data — but that we make it easy for the user to move it around. As all of this evolves, the Viagra can be something like what you discuss.
I like the tattoo analogy — that resonates!
Comment by Dick — October 12, 2006 @ 12:03 am
Thank god the Womyn have arrived to assert their assumed moral superiority over Dick’s highly useful allegory.
"We women know we can discuss sexual topics with men under 35, because they won’t act like weirdos and think we are interested in them just because we discuss it. With men over 35 you basically just can’t bring it up unless you have an interest in them, or they misunderstand and think you are available to sleep with them."
WTF does this have to do with Dick’s allegory in the least? "Girl" is drawing lines to all sorts of orthogonal sexual issues which are clearly of a personal nature and choosing to attack Dick in his own forum. If you want to mount some sort of feminist witch hunt, go chase down a few Republicans.
In the meantime, I’m enjoying the thought of Girl and Girl2 running screaming from the room whenever a Trojan or Viagra ad airs while they’re watching Rosie O’Donnell reruns. Unless they’ve already sold their TV to buy more pepper spray.
Comment by John Doe — November 6, 2006 @ 11:38 pm
Identity 2.0 is the (or perhaps one of the forms of) lubrication that will make the transition to Web 2.0 (whatever that is) comfortable.
Given that, perhaps you need a K-Y label as well. K-Y and Viagra, and unbeatable combination.
Comment by =cmm — November 21, 2006 @ 12:21 am
That analogy is a slipperly slope I don’t think I will pursue, but thanks!
Comment by Dick — November 21, 2006 @ 7:23 am
Hi!
I have watched your site ever since I saw Identity 2.0 for the first time and I always have that presentation in my mind when creating presentations of my own.
I also have a confession to make. I have (sadly enough) stolen the idea of labelling product opportunities as Vitamins, Painkillers and Viagra in order to break the frames in my department.. and I work as Head of Trade Finance in a bank
Hope you dont mind..
Lars
Comment by Lars Millberg — November 26, 2006 @ 9:37 am
Don’t mind at all — great news that the analogy is working in a bank!
Comment by Dick — November 26, 2006 @ 9:48 am
What kind of program did you use when making Identity 2.0? Keynote? How the h*ll can you flip slides in that pace?
Comment by Lars Millberg — November 27, 2006 @ 9:32 pm
I use Keynote.
I click the button quickly.
Comment by Dick — November 28, 2006 @ 8:31 am
Dick congrats on Sxipper it looks like your first dose of Viagra for the web.
Comment by Pierre — December 28, 2006 @ 1:08 pm
Thanks!
Comment by Dick — December 28, 2006 @ 1:19 pm
How can you build an identity product that is so fun and so compelling that I would want to use it, not because it is good for me, but because it is just awesome and cool to use?
I would use an identity product if it made me seem cool.
Comment by ihath — March 8, 2007 @ 3:17 pm
Hopefully Sxipper will appeal at some point to making you seem cool!
http://www.sxipper.com/
Comment by Dick — March 8, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Wed Jan 2, 2008 at 8:59 PM .Federation car needs to hitch on the train that is online collaboration.Borrowing from one of Dick’s presentation - federation needs to become a Viagra solution (i.e. giving more powers) and not http://itickr.com/?p=105
Trackback by Anonymous — January 2, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
Thank’s. It’s a great article about generic Viagra .
Comment by Generic Viagra — January 30, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
Always use Viagra when want to have "great" sex! Good tab
Comment by Tiesto — February 20, 2008 @ 6:00 am
I think viagra is very useful drug. It`s helps many people..
Comment by Tomy — March 9, 2008 @ 3:02 am