<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for April</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/cca8dbdd2d67a5ed699d65a379c09f77/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:31:21 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Product Management on Alltop</title><link>http://writethatdown.disqus.com/product_management_on_alltop/#comment-3221964</link><description>Hey Adam,&lt;br&gt;Just seeing this now.  Trust me, it wasn't a lot of work and it was, like, 95% self-serving.  Thanks for the link!&lt;br&gt;April</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:30:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Beta Releases: Good Riddance</title><link>http://writethatdown.disqus.com/beta_releases_good_riddance/#comment-5368086</link><description>I couldn't agree with you more.  If there is not goal or purpose to the beta then it shouldn't exist.  I liked Fried's comment that betas are often used as an excuse to publish unplanned or undesirable software and “it’s confusing and generally sends a bad message to call something beta in public.”  Worse than that I recently worked with a development team who insisted on releasing a product as a "beta" simply because they were unsure of the quality of the product and felt the "beta" tag lowered quality expectations in the minds of the customers.  Trying to trick your customers in that way, in my mind, is just plain wrong.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:13:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Leaving PlanetEye</title><link>http://writethatdown.disqus.com/leaving_planeteye/#comment-10726416</link><description>I'm late to comment on this but wanted to add my "Good luck" to the others here.  It's an awesome time to be looking at new things and in my books a big change is always good.&lt;br&gt;April</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:31:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: (Personal) Branding is Closed-Source</title><link>http://newestindustry.disqus.com/personal_branding_is_closed_source/#comment-2820635</link><description>What a great post!  &lt;br&gt;As a marketer I am increasingly uncomfortable with the use of the term "branding" to mean anything and everything that a company (or people) do in public.&lt;br&gt;While ultimately for a company, "brand" is measured externally - i.e. by what people think the brand is, I agree that it's a bit silly to think about a brand participating in a conversation.&lt;br&gt;I'm much more comfortable using the term reputation when it comes to people.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:30:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Choose Me — Bring in Product Management before Other Marketing Disciplines</title><link>http://siliconvalleybusinesscatalyst.disqus.com/choose_me_bring_in_product_management_before_other_marketing_disciplines_30/#comment-6280121</link><description>Hi Grace,&lt;br&gt;This is a great post and I totally agree with you.  I think in my mind I was making the assumption that product management would report somewhere other than marketing (which is what I usually see in smaller companies).  Almost every successful smaller company that I know of has started with product management, then someone from that team has branched out to handle product marketing.  All the while, the marketing communications stuff, when and where it couldn't be handled in house by the product marketers/managers was outsourced to consultants.    &lt;br&gt;What seems to be more common however, is that a marketing communications is staffed first, which I think is just plain backwards.&lt;br&gt;Love the blog!&lt;br&gt;April</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:17:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Request: How Many Strategies Are There</title><link>http://strategicproductmanager.disqus.com/request_how_many_strategies_are_there/#comment-6481147</link><description>Whoa!  That's a whole lotta strategies!  I like the "How will we win" strategy that can include (or exclude) any of the above. ;-)&lt;br&gt;April</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 11:18:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Another kind of value proposition</title><link>http://caddellinsightgroupblog.disqus.com/another_kind_of_value_proposition/#comment-7348219</link><description>You make some good points here about both pricing and risk.  &lt;br&gt;In this economy, I'm finding that value statements like "improved productivity" just don't cut it. Customers (particularly IT departments) are getting squeezed so badly that helping them reduce costs is top of mind.&lt;br&gt;I also like the point you make about helping customers reduce risk.  Statements like "reliability", "caring about my business", "helping me solve my problem" are really getting at the potential risk in bringing in a new solution.  As an incumbent vendor you have a real advantage when you can show that you are meeting a customer's needs because any new vendor might not and that's a risk that companies are afraid of, particularly right now.&lt;br&gt;April</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">April</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:54:58 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>