|
1.0 Minnesota Business and Technology Forums The Minnesota Business and Technology Forums are useful for many purposes. In order to view and post information on the web forums, you need to register by creating an account. There are many reasons to create a free account. In order to fully participate as a "NetSudser" in the Minnesota hightech community, you should create an account and use it to full advantage. The Minnesota Business and Technology Forums - http://www.masvf.com/forums/index.php Upcoming Events - http://www.masvf.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4 HighTech Companies - http://www.masvf.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=17 People On The Move - http://www.masvf.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12 Press Releases - http://www.masvf.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=13 Why email only to your small email list of associates when you can post this information on Minnesota Business and Technology Forums and have access to 5500+ NetSudsers. 2.0 Jobs in the "com and .com" Market Click on http://www.masvf.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=28 for a list of available HighTech Jobs in Minnesota that have been posted at the Minnesota Business & Technology Forums. We encourage you to post available jobs for hightech professionals in Minnesota. You must identify which company you represent. If your company is already listed, please do not create a duplicate thread. Instead, post to the same thread. If you are a recruiter, you must identify yourself as such.
3.0 Calendar of Events The calendar for hightech and medtech events in Minnesota is scattered all over in print, email and online publications. Up until now, there has been no single definitive calendar. NetSuds and MedSuds has created the first and only online calendar for all hightech, medtech, biotech and life science events in Minnesota. Calendar of Events - http://www.masvf.com/forums/calendar.php? You can use the online calendar to post your organization's events. We will even allow the posting of events which compete with NetSuds and MedSuds events. The calendars are free to use for both tracking events and for posting your own events. Non-Minnesota companies conducting events in Minnesota will not be allowed to post events for free, even if they are teaming up with a Minnesota company. Non-Minnesota companies or organizations should contact matt@netsuds.com to discuss the fees associated with posting such events.
4.0 Tidbits
Visiting
http://www.masvf.com/forums/index.php
allows one to visit the Minnesota Business and Technology Forums and observe
what is available. However, in order to become a member of the community,
one must register. Registration is simple and has several advantages.
First, you can search for other members in the community using names, IDs and
keywords related to industries. Second, you can identify yourself to the
community through the use of keywords and interests. Third, you can
subscribe to certain "threads" and receive email when these threads experience
activity. You may also unsubscribe from any thread at any time.
Fourth, you can post to the Forums. This is extremely powerful.
Members can post their opinions, information and engage in online discussions.
Jobs can be posted. Events can be posted.
NetSuds encourages members to choose
usernames which readily identify one's self to the community. For example,
the username "johnsmith" identifies the member as John Smith (or at least we
hope!). Use of IDs to hide one's identity is not encouraged in these
Forums. Remember, this is a professional Web Forum and not some
adolescent, rumor-spreading chatroom. Even after you register you can alter your user profile in the "CP" section
along the top of the Forum webpage. 4.2 CaringBridge Thanks to
NetSudser Scott Schwefel,
scott@insightstwincities.com, for pointing out the wonderful blog
CaringBridge.com. If you haven't been made aware of this service for
enabling communication among those concerned for a sick or dying friend or
family member, you should check it out.
Hello, This email is to introduce you to
Caringbridge.com, a free, non-profit
website that enables two-way communication among friends and family, during
times of illness or ctitical care. I lost a very dear friend two years ago,
and this site became the way hundreds of us shared thoughts and prayers with
her and her family. I also know the Caringbridge staff well, and they are a
wonderful group of people. Where it is needed, it is truly a miracle. Here
is also a 10 minute video if you'd like to learn more about Caringbridge.com.
4.3 Municipal Broadband II
NetSuds
reported in last month's issue that the city of Moorhead was considering a
municipal WiFi service modeled somewhat upon the network set up in Chaska.
The February 8 issue of the Fargo Forum newspaper reported the following, which
we pass on to you. Wi-fi task force takes no side on proposal By Dave Roepke The Forum - 02/08/2005 Advocating neither for nor against the proposal, the task force that
reviewed plans by Moorhead’s public utility to sell wireless Internet access
gave its report to the City Council and utility board Monday. The task force’s noncommittal report reached three conclusions: High-speed
Internet is not yet an essential service, the plan should not be approved for
public safety reasons, and back-office tasks like customer service should be
handled by a third party. Assistant City Manager Michael Redlinger said the diversity of the
informal group -- about a dozen school officials, business leaders and residents
-- ensured there would be little on which they would agree. “This represents where consensus could be found,” said Redlinger, who
organized the task force’s three meetings. “There wasn’t an expectation of a
firm ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ ” The City Council created the task force in December when it authorized the
utility to sell Internet, signing off on the $2.2 million plan to build a
citywide wireless network. The proposal calls for selling residential Internet access for $23 per
month, with business access at $29 per month. Task force members raised the question of whether high-speed Internet is
an essential service because some have argued for the utility’s plan by
comparing broadband service to essential ones like water and electric. One of those proponents is Robert Swenson, a member of the utility board.
Though he disagrees with the task force, Swenson pointed out the report said
broadband would eventually be essential. “It’s definitely going to be in the near future,” he said. The group decided wireless should not be pushed on public safety grounds
because fire and police have no specific plans for using the service. Getting outside help for support functions like customer service would
soften the risk of getting into the Internet business, said task force member
Jim Taylor of 702 Communications, a Moorhead-based phone company and Internet
provider. Industry critics have cited as unrealistic the utility’s modest
customer service plan, which calls for only one customer service representative
for the first three years. “They have not been in a competitive business environment before,” Taylor
said of the utility. Mayor Mark Voxland, who pushed for the formation of a wireless task force,
is pleased with the results. “I think what we got out of it was more than I could expect,” he said. Though the City Council has already signed off on the plan, the utility
board still must approve the proposal. Voxland said the task force report will give board members “that extra
little benefit” when deciding whether t o approve the plan. Utility board commissioners will seek additional input at a public forum
at 7 p.m. on Feb. 24 in the City Council chambers before making a decision on
the project in March, general manager Bill Schwandt said. Approval from the five-member board is not a done deal. That was underscored Monday when Swenson, a strong supporter of the plan,
asked for a legal review from the utility’s lawyers on whether they could use
money from their water and electric operations to bail out the Internet unit if
necessary. Swenson said if they cannot, it would be a “deal-breaker.” Readers can reach Forum reporter Dave Roepke at (701) 241-5535
4.4 Red River Valley Research Corridor
http://www.theresearchcorridor.com/index.html
4.5 Start-Up Beats Back Death
Read about the story behind Intradyn's
NetSudser
Gary Doan in the latest Forbes magazine.
4.6 HP & Storage
From eWEEKS's eNews & Views, February 14, 2005 News:
Storage Failures Key to Fiorina's Undoing Among factors that led to a rift between ousted Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly
Fiorina and HP's boardroom, dissatisfaction with the company's beleaguered
enterprise storage efforts rings the loudest. Analysts and customers speak
out. HP's Image Makeover 4.7 New Tech Prevents DVD Copying,
Kills 'Rippers' From the February 15 eWEEK eNews & Views Macrovision says its RipGuard technology will eliminate the vast majority
of DVD copying. Learn how it works and who's going to be using it.
4.8
Opinion: Spyware's Real, but Anti-Spyware's a Fraud
From the February 15 eWEEK eNews & Views Hats off to Symantec and other vendors who aren't trying to create a new,
artificial category of software. Spyware and adware should be blocked by
existing software. 4.9 French Ruling Threatens Google
From the February 15 eWEEK eNews & Views The ruling in a Paris court that Google had carried out trademark
counterfeiting, unfair competition and misleading advertising conflicts with
a December decision favoring Google and could put the company in "an
extremely difficult situation." 4.10 The EU and Patents
From the February 15 eWEEK eNews & Views A European Union legislative body scraps a proposed IT
patenting rule that would have brought, according to critics, "the same
broad and ambiguous system that is in place in America." Technology Patents in Crisis 4.11 2005 MN VC Conference and MASVF Conference - May 9-11
Once a year,
NetSuds and
MedSuds
hosts the Minnesota Venture Capital Conference. This year, we've added
a seed stage conference entitled the Midwest Association of Seed & Venture
Funds Conference. These conferences can be found on the web
at
www.mnvcc.com and
www.masvfc.com. Registrations for both
conferences are off to a great start. The list of investors for the VC
Conference can be found at
www.mnvcc.com/agenda/investorprofiles/2005.htm.
The agendas are filling.
We are still soliciting and selecting start-up and mature private companies
for inclusion in to the VC Conference. Apply at
www.mnvcc.com/entrepreneurs/
today! Sponsorships are still for sale. Early-bird
registration ends February 28. 5.0 Email Advertising
The
NetSuds and
MedSuds
email lists reach 8500+. The
NetSuds
email lists are double-opt-in and concentrated on professionals in the
communications, IT and Internet markets. The
MedSuds email lists are
double-opt-in and concentrated on professionals in the medtech, biotech and
life sciences markets. So, rather than spend your
advertising dollars on any other email lists in the Twin Cities, consider the
NetSuds and
MedSuds
lists. Contact
matt@netsuds.com or 612.605.5252. For current ad rates, visit
www.netsuds.com/adrates.htm.
6.0
NetSuds
CEO Roundtable - Next Roundtables starting in June 2005
NetSuds
is opening up another group of CEO Roundtables in June 2005. If you are tech or medtech CEO and want to join us, (the
first session is free), contact
matt@netsuds.com.
A synopsis of the CEO
Roundtable can be found at
www.netsuds.com/ceo/ It is repeated here
as well.
NetSuds
CEO Roundtable Membership Only CEOs of tech and
medtech companies are allowed to join the
NetSuds
CEO Roundtable. If you are a VP, CxO or President, you are not welcome
unless you also hold the CEO title. Perhaps we will start a CFO, CTO or
COO Roundtable but until then, we are only interested in the top dog, the CEO.
If you are interested in becoming a member, contact
matt@netsuds.com.
Membership is not automatic. There must be an available spot open in the
roundtable. You must have employees. Your company must be
incorporated. Your company must be a tech (communications, IT,
software, Internet) or medtech (medtech, biotech, life sciences) company. You
must pay a yearly fee of $1800 in advance. You may not send substitutes to the
Roundtable. Roles Unlike the days of knights,
kings and Camelot, there is no king of the
NetSuds
CEO Roundtable; only a facilitator; Matt Noah, CEO of NetSuds.com, Inc.
Knights are replaced by CEOs and the table won't be quite round. Schedule The Roundtable will meet 10
times per calendar year on the last
Tuesday of every month. Each meeting lasts 2.0 hours starting at 7 am. A facility
convenient to the majority of Roundtable members is used. A continental breakfast
is served. Purpose CEOs need resources to
assist them in executing their duties and leading their companies. Boards
of Directors and upper management are not always the best or most independent
resources upon which to draw. The CEO Roundtable exists to provide CEOs
with an independent resource of wisdom and shared experience. Your key
'take-aways' from the Roundtable will be accelerated learning - so as to avoid
common and uncommon pitfalls -, an expanded network of advisors and colleagues
and tools to enhance the productivity and value of your enterprise. Content First, networking among the
CEO members of a Roundtable is the best and richest content. Second, the
Roundtable facilitator will schedule subject matter experts of interest to the
CEOs. Examples include intellectual property, branding, sales,
engineering, marketing, finance, compensation, human resources, M&A, etc. Format Meetings will consist
primarily of 2 elements. First, "content" will be presented and discussed.
Second, "discussion" of common problems and solutions will take place. The
facilitator will lead both elements or assign elements to certain CEOs. Confidentiality Roundtable meetings
are completely confidential. Nothing said in a roundtable discussion,
short of illegal activity, leaves the meeting. This allows each CEO to
feel comfortable discussing issues and subjects he may not feel comfortable
speaking about with others. 7.0
How To Prevent "Unpaid Consulting":
Timely Advice For Today's Sales Professionals by NetSudser
Jeff Thull, CEO, Prime Resource Group,
support@primeresource.com If you’re in sales, you have probably encountered this scenario. You’re
trying to convince a potential customer that your great products or services
will solve their most pressing problems. To prove the point, you explain
precisely how your solution will work. Mr. Potential Customer listens carefully,
asks many questions and takes copious notes. Everything seems to be running
smoothly. The customer nods and says all the right things and you leave
convinced that the sale is in the bag. The problem is, when you call to close
the sale, Mr. PC is nowhere to be found. Later, you hear that he has decided to
buy from your top (and less expensive) competitor. Frustrated, you find yourself
asking, “Where did I go wrong? Why didn’t I see it coming?” You realize,
you’ve fallen prey to an all-too-common trap: unpaid consulting. Unpaid consulting starts when we
cross the line between diagnosing the problem and explaining the solution. When
we start designing solutions, we start acting as unpaid consultants. In past
decades, this was not a monumental issue. Generally, there was limited
competition in complex sales. If you figured out the problem and designed a
unique and valuable solution for a customer, the sale was almost guaranteed and
the salesperson was rewarded for his consulting effort. Today, there is an
ever-increasing proliferation of competitors in complex sales, and once a
solution is designed, the customer can easily shop it to the competition. Why the change? It is the
outcome of the technology explosion our world has experienced in the past decade
or so. Simply put, no matter how sophisticated your products and services are,
chances are there are numerous competitors offering the same thing. And because
geographic location is no longer a critical factor—due in large part to the
advent of the Internet—a manufacturer in New York can easily access a supplier
in Los Angeles (or in China for that matter) just as easily as it can the one
across the street. So, what’s a sales professional to
do? In today’s complex business arena there are no simple “band-aid” solutions.
What is required is a systemic approach to an environment characterized by long
sales cycles, multiple decision-makers, and numerous perspectives that may cross
national and cultural borders. A system called Diagnostic Business Development
provides a navigable path from the first step of identifying potential customers
through the sale itself and onto expanding and retaining profitable customer
relationships. These are the four phases in this system:
üDiscover: The sales
professional researches, prepares and sets the stage for a compelling engagement
and a continuing relationship based on trust and respect.
üDiagnose: An in-depth
determination of the existence, extent and financial impact of the customer’s
current situation is pursued. Diagnosis is meant to maximize the customer’s
objective awareness of their dissatisfaction and determine whether or not that
dissatisfaction supports the salesperson’s offerings.
üDesign: The goal is to get
the sales professional and customer working together to identify the optimal
solution to the problems that were uncovered and quantified in the Diagnose
phase—even if it involves alternative solutions offered by competitors. This
phase is the “dress rehearsal” before the final presentation is made. It is here
that many salespeople make the mistake of giving away valuable information and
becoming an unpaid consultant.
üDeliver: This phase begins
with the presentation of a formal proposal and the customer’s subsequent formal
acceptance of the solution. Implementation and support of the solution are next,
followed by maintaining and growing the relationship with the customer. The process described in this book is a 1800
turn from conventional selling. To avoid the pitfalls of using outdated
methods—pitfalls that include but are not limited to the unpaid consulting
trap—consider the following suggestions: • Prevent Premature
Presentations. How can you present a solution to the customer’s problems
before you clearly understand what those problems are—and more to the point,
before the customer fully comprehends the problem and recognizes that you do
too? While most salespeople devote the majority of their face-to-face time
presenting and handling objections, the most successful salespeople spend the
majority of their time collaborating with customers, diagnosing their situation,
designing or creating a desired solution, and building their resolve to actively
solve the problem. • Don’t Lead The
Witness. The traditional salesperson draws conclusions for the
customer—often prematurely—and presents them to the customer before the customer
is prepared to hear them. It is important that the customer discovers and takes
ownership of the problem before deciding to seek a solution. If you move ahead
of the customer, he or she is likely to interpret your actions as pushy or
manipulative. This leads to a lack of trust, and creates a confrontational
rather than cooperative atmosphere. • No Pain, No
Change, No Sale. Dissatisfaction is the most basic human motivator for
change. It is the natural defense mechanism that tells people that if they don’t
change and deal with a problem, they will face consequences. Change itself is
painful. As a result, change will not occur until an individual or company
recognizes that it would be more painful not to change. This is why it’s
so critical to do a thorough diagnosis that uncovers the pain of the current
situation, and the lack of the future outcome. As you know, nothing less will
motivate the customer to change. • Go For The “No.”
One advantage of a thorough diagnosis is that it allows the salesperson to
quickly identify the 20-30% of their prospects who have the immediate reason and
resources to make a change. It is the difference between an intellectual
conversation about a desirable future and an objective observation and
measurement of real indicators of an unacceptable present. The traditional
salesperson wastes time arm-wrestling with a prospect that has no pain and hopes
to win the sale by sheer tenacity. This has its roots in the theory that the
good salesperson never takes “no” for an answer and the salesperson’s view that
“no” equates to personal failure. You should always be asking yourself, “Is
there someplace better I could be?” Clearly, the role of the salesperson has changed
dramatically. The often-ignored reality is that customers need outside expertise
to help them understand the problems they face, design optimal solutions to
those problems, and implement the solutions. It is up to you to provide the help
your customers need. See yourself as a project manager for your customer’s
decision. That is the secret behind succeeding at the complex sale. # # # About The Author: Jeff Thull is a leading-edge strategist and valued
advisor for executive teams of major companies worldwide. As President and CEO
of Prime Resource Group, he has designed and implemented business transformation
and professional development programs for companies like Shell Global Solutions,
3M, Microsoft, Citicorp, IBM, and Georgia-Pacific, as well as many fast-track,
start-up companies. He has gained the reputation for being a thought-leader in
the arena of sales and marketing strategies for companies involved in complex
sales. Jeff is a compelling, entertaining and thought-provoking
keynote speaker with a track record of over 2,500 speeches and seminars
delivered to corporations and professional associations. Jeff Thull’s work is
published in hundreds of business and trade publications. He is also the author
of the best selling book Mastering the Complex Sale – How to Compete and Win
When the Stakes are High and newly released, The Prime Solution: Close
the Value Gap, Increase Margins, and Win the Complex Sale For more information contact: Prime Resource Group,
support@primeresource.com,
http://www.primeresource.com,
1.800.876.0378 or 763.473.7529, 3655 Plymouth Boulevard, Suite110, Minneapolis,
MN 55446 New Book Released January 2005: “The Prime Solution: Close the Value Gap, Increase
Margins, and Win the Complex Sale” (Dearborn Trade Publishing; January
2005; ISBN 0793195225; $24.95 hardcover). Current Book: “Mastering the Complex Sale: How to Compete and Win
When the Stakes are High!” (John Wiley & Sons; 2003; ISBN 047143516; $24.95). 8.0 Congress and Telecom - Senator Ted Stevens From the February 22 edition of the Money in Politics Alert, Center for
Response Politics, Vol. 8, No. 4; tel: 202-857-0044, fax:
202-857-7809, email: info@crp.org, web:
www.opensecrets.org;
www.capitaleye.org;
www.fecwatch.org
COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN Congress takes another look at revising the country's telecom laws By Courtney Mabeus Shortly after assuming the chairmanship of the powerful Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation Committee, Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) announced that his
top priority would be overhauling the nation's telecommunications laws, a move
that was certain to add fuel to the fire of a long-running battle between the
influential telephone and cable industries. About the only thing competing factions of the telecom industry agree on is
that the current law, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is badly outdated.
Stevens, one of the sponsors of the act, told the Congressional Internet Caucus
this month that it is "necessary to rewrite" the decade-old law, which was
drafted before the emergence of the Internet. "Things we considered luxuries back when we ... passed the Telecom Act are
necessities today in American life," Stevens said. "We talked very little about
the Internet then." Stevens has said he plans to hold hearings and meet with industry officials
before revealing any detailed plans for updating the law. In the meantime,
phone, cable and media companies are gearing up to spend millions of dollars on
federal and grassroots lobbying efforts in the hopes of shaping the debate in
their favor. The telecom industry certainly has not shied away from political giving.
Telephone utilities, which include regional companies known as the "Baby Bells,"
have given more than $44.4 million in individual, PAC and soft money
contributions to federal candidates and parties since 1999. Nearly 60 percent of
that total has gone to Republicans. During the same period, cable companies have contributed $21 million, 56
percent to Democrats. Telecom services and equipment companies, which include
the owners of cellular networks, have contributed $39.5 million since 1999, with
Democrats collecting 53 percent. One of the most controversial provisions of the Telecommunications Act, which
was the first major reform of telecom laws since 1934, allowed the local Bell
companies to enter the long-distance market in exchange for opening up their
networks to new rivals. But the development of new technologies, including the Internet, has blurred
the lines distinguishing the products offered by various telecom industries and
exposed what the phone companies call inequities in the law. For example, cable companies, which compete with telephone utilities to
provide high-speed Internet service, have begun offering phone service. Now
phone companies say they are at a competitive disadvantage because they are
required to share their networks, while cable providers are not. The phone
companies want a rollback in regulations. "Technology has brought us to a place where those delineations [between
telephone and cable] don't make sense anymore," Walter McCormick, head of the
United States Telecom Association, told the Wall Street Journal last month. USTA, the phone companies' leading trade association, began running
television ads nationwide last month pushing for deregulation. The group is
among the biggest political spenders in the telephone industry, having
contributed a little more than $1 million in individual, PAC and soft money
donations since 1999, with 66 percent going to Republicans. USTA spent $20.2
million lobbying the federal government from 1999 through the middle of 2004. Two USTA members, SBC Communications and Verizon, already were among the
biggest telephone companies before recent merger announcements promised to turn
them into behemoths. Last month, SBC ($8.6 million in contributions, 59 percent
to Republicans since 1999) announced that it was acquiring AT&T ($8.4 million,
56 percent to Republicans). This month, Verizon ($8.2 million, 56 percent to
Republicans) made a successful bid to buy MCI ($3.3 million, 55 percent to
Republicans). Telephone industry employees and PACs have contributed $53,000 to Stevens
since 1999. They have sent $42,000 to the Senate Commerce Committee's top
Democrat, Daniel Inouye (Hawaii). Although cable companies have given less -
$17,500 to Stevens and $36,000 to Inouye since 1999 - they have grown more
competitive with phone companies on the political playing field. The cable industry also is competing with the Baby Bells to provide phone
service. Cable companies already offer phone service to nearly 3 million
customers, according to the National Cable and Telecommunications Association,
the industry's leading trade group. When it comes to revamping the telecommunications laws, cable companies
prefer the status quo. NCTA president Robert Sachs has said he is opposed to a
rewrite of the 1996 act, although he has acknowledged the need of some "fixes." NCTA spent $29.3 million on federal lobbying from 1999 through June 30 of
last year. The association, which is one of the top campaign donors in the cable
industry, has contributed $3.2 million to federal candidates and political
parties since 1999, with 58 percent going to Republicans. Cable and phone companies also are battling fiercely for the bigger market
share of high-speed Internet service, known as broadband. That competition has
raised the stakes of the debate over Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP,
which allows users to make low-cost telephone calls via the Web. Under federal
regulations, phone companies must pay into the Universal Service Fund to help
subsidize phone service to rural and low-income areas. VoIP providers are not
required to pay the fees, or the interconnector costs that phone companies
charge each other to complete phone calls. Stevens and other senators from rural states are intent on fixing the fund,
which has suffered a decline in contributions because of alternate technologies
such as VoIP. Some lawmakers and industry insiders have urged a review of which
industries should pay into the fund and what companies should be eligible for
subsidies, according to the Wall Street Journal. The telecom debate also involves broadcasters, which are concerned that a
rewrite of the telecom law could lead to stricter media-ownership rules. The National Association of Broadcasters spent $34 million on federal
lobbying from 1999 through mid-year 2004. It has contributed $2.6 million to
federal candidates and political parties since 1999, about 61 percent to
Republicans. Previous attempts to update the Telecommunications Act have spurred lobbying
wars, but as Stevens told the Internet Caucus, he is "unconcerned about old
battles." His counterpart in the House, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman
Joe Barton (R-Texas), is reportedly intent on considering comprehensive energy
legislation before telecom. This story is available online at 9.0 Guest Writers for This Report If you are aware of others who would like to receive the NetSuds Report, ask
them to visit
http://www.netsuds.net/mail.htm
to subscribe or
unsubscribe. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||