Tag Info

Rude question, but a fair one: PR firms have a solid reputation for taking money and not being accountable for results. Pushing a release over the wire is not results. Even getting an article published isn't necessarily results. Results means something of tangible value -- non-crap leads is a good start. (Revenue is better but most companies can't ...

You will have a very hard time reaching critical mass through subscriptions, unless your product is a cure for cancer. Real world numbers are a lot worse than your calculations. Based on Mailchimp newsletter statistics, 30% is the group that will at least open your beta invite email. Others won't even do that. Typically not more than 40% out of that 30% are ...

My understaning is that it just hasn't caught on so focus on the 500 mil + facebook for the 9 mil + twitter or a niche site that is focused on your busienss. I could see if you had your employee group all on gmail and you you share the whole rss from reader or a blog with each other to look at but how it gains traction when it feels apart of your email ...

How can startups tell bad PR firms from good ones? Related to Tim & Jason's points, what are the metrics for PR? How would he quantify a PR firm's results? When do startups not need a PR firm? If a startup's lucky enough to get major primetime news coverage (like Chat Roulette, or twitter on CNN), what can they do to make the most of it? How can you get ...

$1000 per month is hardly what I would call "startup pricing"... I also don't see how they are relevant or what they could possibly do for me/my company. How would a PR company have the contacts that are relevant and ones that get results (sales)? I see firms like this akin to the big newspaper media companies who are struggling to retain clients and stay ...