3 ms·
> Your acquisition costs are close to zero I think the point was that the acquisition costs are _not_ close to zero. Rather, the acquisition costs are no longe
by RHSeeger 7y ago
> Your acquisition costs are close to zero
I think the point was that the acquisition costs are _not_ close to zero. Rather, the acquisition costs are no longer specific to individual clients, they're general in nature. If you spend just as much time/money but don't spend it on specific client, then the cost for each client doesn't change (it's just the total divided by the number of clients).
- ghaff 7y agoGood point. There clearly are acquisition costs. In marketing speak what he's basically saying is that your bottom of funnel acquisition costs are low. (I don't think they're quite zero because you still need to close a specific contract.) But top of funnel awareness/education/etc. is a large chunk of your time. Which for some types of consulting/advisory work rings absolutely true to me. e.g. https://trackmaven.com/blog/marketing-funnel-2/ https://trackmaven.com/blog/marketing-funnel-2/
- wtracy 7y agoI think the author is trying to say that you're trading high fixed costs to get near-zero marginal costs per client acquisition. If you're only planning on working with half a dozen clients every year, the distinction is mostly academic. If you're running an agency that has a new project kicking off every other week, the difference could be huge.