Trash, Rats, and Garbage Juice: A Case Study in PR
This week, Liz Picarazzi tells Jay Goltz and Sarah Segal about her first brush with bad publicity. Liz’s debacle started with a negative post that appeared in a prominent local blog. It was about a Times Square pilot program for which her business, Citibin, is supplying trash bins. The problem? The bins were not being maintained properly, and there were photos to prove it. At the time we recorded this conversation, Liz was bracing for additional stories in both the New York Post and The New York Times. Both of those stories have since been published—we’ll talk about them in a coming episode—and you can find links to all of the coverage in the show notes. For Liz, perhaps the biggest challenge was defending her company without trashing her client.
— Loren Feldman
Guests:
Liz Picarazzi is CEO of Citibin.
Sarah Segal is CEO of Segal Communications.
Jay Goltz is CEO of The Goltz Group.
Producer:
Jess Thoubboron is founder of Blank Word Productions.
Show Notes:
Here’s the Streetsblog post.
Here’s the New York Post story.
And here’s The New York Times story.
Full Episode Transcript:
Loren Feldman:
Welcome Jay, Liz, and Sarah. Great to have you all here. Let’s dive right in. Liz, you’ve had an interesting time of late. As you’ve informed us, you’ve had your first brush with some negative publicity. Can you tell us about it?
Liz Picarazzi:
Well, sure, I can say that the roller coaster is such that the thing that I’m most proud about is the thing that I’m currently most ashamed of. And that 180-degree shift has really thrown me. So as I’ve shared here a little bit, my trash enclosures are in many neighborhoods in New York City now, but most recently, they’re in Times Square. So it’s the highest-profile client I’ve ever had in probably the highest-profile location in the world. My product is there at the intersection of five different corners in Times Square.
And a Twitter person, last week, took a photo of the bins in a very sorry condition. They were very dirty. They were bulging with trash. They had garbage juice in front of them. And the person said, “Hey, New York City, how is that Clean Curbs program going for you?” which was bad enough. But then one of the reporters who covers a lot of civic and local issues related to trash saw it and contacted me for a quote, and then ran with an article the next day about how filthy these bins were.
And the news hit last Wednesday, which was our 18th wedding anniversary. We woke up to that. And we were planning on going to the beach, and we did go to the beach. But we were completely freaked out and talking about this the whole time. There were other reporters from other publications, including the Post, contacting me. And it felt completely out of control.
I’ve never had bad press. Honestly. I’ve always gotten good press. And it’s usually because I go for it. And this was something that was out of my control, and frankly, something that was somewhat warranted. It was an issue that we were aware of. The maintenance workers in Times Square are supposed to be cleaning them daily, and they weren’t. They’re over-stuffing the bins, which is why they were bulging at the bottom. As for the garbage juice, you know what? That’s a little out of my control. I can’t lie awake at night worrying about trash juice in Times Square. Yet that’s kind of where I’m at right now. So that’s what happened, Loren.
Loren Feldman:
Liz, you said you were ashamed. Is this your responsibility? I mean, you sell the bins, but you’re not maintaining them, right?
Liz Picarazzi:
You’re correct, and the shame is not that I didn’t do what I could. It was really that it is my creation, and it’s on display. And I’m very, very proud of that creation. And to have it in that sort of shape, and then to be lambasted in the press, knowing that The Times is also probably running something this week… I am ashamed, because it’s hard to pull apart the, “Were they serviced and cleaned correctly?” with, “How does the thing look?” And I think that, for the public, they may not think, “Oh, you know, Times Square, they weren’t cleaning the bins as often as they should.” They’re gonna say, “Oh, hey, Mayor Adams, how’s this Clean Curbs program working for you? Look at how dirty this thing is.” So that’s where the shame comes from, regardless of whether it’s warranted.
Jay Goltz:
Wasn’t part of the problem that the garbage juice—I’ve just been hankering to use that phrase, I never thought I would—they took the bins out. There are supposed to be plastic bins in there that would contain it, and they took the bins out. Isn’t that true?
Liz Picarazzi:
No, they don’t use bins within the bin. They put the bags in there straight. So basically all of that juice is being compacted until it’s picked up and it’s spilling out the front.
Jay Goltz:
And did the city tell you that they were going to get this under control, or is this just beyond them?
Liz Picarazzi:
So it’s actually not the city. It’s the Times Square business improvement district. So they have a private cleaning crew that handles all the trash and all the cleaning in the area. And they were pretty appalled by this as well. They took immediate action and have shifted to daily cleaning. We went there the very next day to change the cladding from kind of a lighter brown color to a very dark gray color, which is something we should have done before.
Loren Feldman:
To change what?
Liz Picarazzi:
The cladding, so the siding on the bins. They’re these bamboo composite boards that are usually used in decking, so they clean like a deck. They clean very well. But if you don’t clean them, they’re gonna look really bad. So we reclad them from this brown color to this dark gray color, and also are making sure that they’re washed every day.
So the situation is much better than it was. But the responsibility is on this private company. And I actually do trust that they are going to turn it around because you know, it does reflect negatively. It doesn’t look good. And the whole point of this, which is the ironic part, is to create clean curbs, which is to beautify the city, and not have it be an eyesore.
Sarah Segal:
Can I ask, when reporters reached out to you—I mean, I can imagine you’re in a bit of a tough situation, because you don’t really want to rake your client over the coals for their lack of maintenance of the bins—what did the reporters ask? And what did you say?
Liz Picarazzi:
So far, I have actually been very diplomatic. And I want to be, because the Department of Sanitation and Time Square have been really good partners. And I believe that partly because this happened, we’re going to be even closer partners. But I definitely did not want to bash my clients.
I talked about it more in terms of: This is a pilot. We’re working with Times Square on many aspects of the bins, including some of those that were pointed out. We’re working closely with them on a maintenance plan that may be better than where it was. And just as a reminder, this is a pilot. We’re piloting this with the city, and the point of a pilot is to gain learnings, which will make the product better.
So I even said something to the effect of that I was actually glad that my bins were being tested in Times Square, because there’s probably no other place in the world that would stress-test it as much as Times Square. So I replied in a way that I think showed that I’m up to the task and that I do have a strong partnership with the Department of Sanitation in Times Square. But I hope I did it in a way that didn’t make them look bad.
Loren Feldman:
Well, I also thought that what you said—especially acknowledging Times Square and the stress-test aspect of it—came across as acknowledging the problem but not sounding defensive about it.
Sarah Segal:
So this happened on your anniversary. How much coverage has happened since then? Or did it die down?
Liz Picarazzi:
So I’m glad you’re asking, because you might be able to give me some advice on this. The Post reporter contacted me the day it happened, which was last Wednesday.
Loren Feldman:
That’s the New York Post, right?
Liz Picarazzi:
The New York Post contacted me. And I talked to them for probably like 15 or 20 minutes, and they were actually asking a lot more questions about myself and my company and how I came to get my bins into Times Square than they did about the garbage juice and some of the other stuff. So I was feeling kind of encouraged that the questioning was headed more in that direction. And I also was encouraged that they asked for a headshot, because I thought, “If they’re going to criticize me, would they really ask for a headshot?” Several people have said yes. [Laughter]
Jay Goltz:
Of course they would.
Liz Picarazzi:
I was hoping, “Oh, that’s such a personal thing. They wouldn’t be asking me for it if they were going to put nasty words next to me.”
Jay Goltz:
They’re probably giving you an award or something, if they want a headshot. [Laughter]
Liz Picarazzi:
Yes, yes. So they haven’t run the story yet. And I actually did contact the reporter, and I said, “Hey, you mentioned it was going to come out on Saturday. I haven’t seen it yet.” And he said that they’re holding it potentially for next week.
Sarah Segal:
So you did a lot of things right. I mean, first of all, you responded to the reporters right away, I assume. You’re not in the wrong. It’s a test program. You are not responsible for the maintenance of them. You do provide the product. And you had a statement right away.
I mean, a lot of people, when something like this happens, their first reaction is, “No comment.” I’m not a believer in that. I believe in responding to the reporters right away, saying, “Hey, what can I do to help you?” And providing them context, which is, I think, what you were effective in doing.
And so now they’re taking the story and going, “Okay, well, maybe there’s a larger piece of this,” where it’s worth kind of giving an evergreen story to. The reporter probably wrote something that’s not linked to any moment, but is a more big picture of what’s being done to clean up Times Square. And that’s why there’s no urgency in running that story. But you did a lot of things right. You kind of turned the narrative from a negative about your bins into a positive of, “We’re trying to make change, and we’re trying to do things.”
I can tell you a fun story about a client that had a similar incident this week, but we were able to kind of just have fun with that narrative. It’s not apples to apples, but I think that it’s kind of reflective of the fact that: Yeah, this is a news moment for a day. But news moves so quickly that nobody’s going to remember it tomorrow.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yes.
Loren Feldman:
What’s the secret to having fun with it, Sarah?
Sarah Segal:
We had a client who runs a successful boutique, crafted a wonderfully delicious donut company in the Bay Area, and they have several stores. And they actually had somebody break into their corporate office, steal their petty cash, and then apparently, the burglar left, realized they had left their keys or something, and came back.
All I know is, I get a text from the client: “We have the Associated Press calling us. They’re doing a story.” And if anybody knows anything about the Associated Press, once you get on the Associated Press, it goes viral, because it’s syndicated across everything. So they’re in a panic about how a happy, fun, warm brand is all of a sudden going to be associated with a crime.
And so the way that we dealt with it was—thank goodness, the founder has a wonderful sense of humor—we worked with him to draft a couple quotes and responses that were along the lines of, “We’re just happy that no donuts were harmed in the process,” “We’re delivering a couple dozen donuts to the officers who came to our aid.”
And it got picked up, and it blew up. I want to say, yesterday, it had hit 291 pieces of coverage on that one little story. And it put them in a good light, right? And that’s kind of what you did, was that you went, “All right, yeah, it’s a negative story, but I’m going to say, ‘This is actually a positive thing we’re doing.’” And there’s room for human error in everything that’s done out there. And we just need to make sure that the headline isn’t the only thing people are getting out of this story.
Jay Goltz:
I think you can make lemonade out of your garbage juice.
Sarah Segal:
I agree!
Jay Goltz:
Here’s my first question: Are we sure that they aren’t using too thin of plastic bags? Maybe simply changing the bags they’re using would not explode so easily and let the garbage juice out?
Liz Picarazzi:
Nope, nope. I’ve spent many hours in Times Square actually observing them and talking to them. And I see how they move quickly, and they need to move these bags in and out. So I don’t think any thickness of a bag would really help that much.
Jay Goltz:
Here’s my second thought then. I think by framing this all in, “You know what? We’ve sold thousands of these. They’ve worked out beautifully on most occasions. We didn’t realize that Times Square is your local condo building times 20, and we’re making adjustments.” You’ve just now told them, Yeah, they usually work out just great. And who can argue with the fact you didn’t realize how intense Times Square was? Who can blame you for that?
Sarah Segal:
I’m gonna disagree with that.
Jay Goltz:
Really?
Sarah Segal:
Because by her saying that she didn’t know means that she didn’t do her homework as a business owner. As a business owner, she should know that should be part of the process—not necessarily her responsibility, but the business district. They should know how much garbage is going to be going into those bins and be prepared for it. It should be part of the onboarding process.
Jay Goltz:
Except even if she knew that, she wouldn’t know they’d be pushing the bags in there so hard that the garbage juice would explode. I mean, that’s why it’s a pilot program. Sometimes, you just can’t predict everything.
Loren Feldman:
Well, I think that’s the point, Jay. You can say that without saying, “I didn’t realize, we didn’t figure this out, we should have thought more about it.” You can just say, “It’s a pilot. We’re learning.”
Sarah Segal:
Part of this is that now you’re going to add it to your best practices when you onboard a client. You say, “This is not a trash compactor. Don’t do that.”
Liz Picarazzi:
Definitely, and some of those learnings have led us to even question the siding that we’re using. We had a couple of meetings in recent days with providers of other materials, including wraps, like commercial vinyl wraps. And there have been a couple of companies that do advertising on the side of municipal fixtures—like bus stops and whatnot—that are really interested in doing something on Citibin. With that, I’ve kind of pushed it to the side. It may be an interesting thing, but I’m not going to compromise my relationship with these business improvement districts by bringing up advertising on my products. That’s not cool. But I have learned that there is a real estate value for advertising of these bins that people are thinking of—even if I’m not.
Something like a wrap could take care of some of the dinginess that you can get if it’s not power washed, but then again, with those, we’re going to be testing those. Those might not power wash very well, because the ink could fly off of it. But one funny thing, in terms of the garbage juice, in the Streetsblog article, I was quoted as saying that, “The problem is from misuse and garbage juice.” It rhymed. And I thought, “Oh my gosh, I never would have thought I would have said those words.” But then yesterday, I Googled something that was even more nuts that I never would have thought I would be Googling, and it was “wee-wee pad for garbage juice.” That was the search term. Because I was thinking about putting a wee-wee pad on the bottom of my bins. Like, I’m taking this incredibly seriously. I’m Googling things I never would have thought were possible, because I want to solve the problem.
Loren Feldman:
Wee-wee pads are generally for pets, right?
Liz Pizarazzi
They are.
Jay Goltz:
Can’t you just put a plastic tub in there that would just enclose it all and not let it leak out of the bottom?
Liz Picarazzi:
It’s not quite that easy, because the doors have bars between them. And I don’t think having a different pan for every module would be very good from a user’s perspective. But I don’t want to troubleshoot it necessarily here, but I think the overall point is that we’re adapting our residential product for municipal, and we’re having growing pains with it. And that’s natural. And some of the growing pains that we overcome are actually going to enable us to create an entirely separate line of municipal Citibins that are beefed up and tricked out with everything cities would need. So it would be at a higher price point.
Loren Feldman:
Liz, you talked to us about that when you first told us about this. In fact, I think there was some discussion between you and Frank, wasn’t there, about what materials should be used to create these bins and how much wear and tear they would take being in Times Square, as opposed to a residential building? Do I remember that correctly?
Liz Picarazzi:
Yes, we were talking about steel or aluminum, and that’s actually part of the test. So we’re piloting steel versus aluminum for a year, and I think that’s gonna give us our answer.
Jay Goltz:
I’d like to throw out an unpopular thought, probably, that it’s possible that at the end of this, given that you’ve been very successful with these and they work great in most applications, that maybe you just want to say at some point, “You know what, they’re not appropriate for Times Square.” Because the amount of energy… I don’t know that this is a fixable thing. If the maintenance people don’t keep up with it, you’re just making their problem your problem, and you have a very successful concept that works in 99 percent of applications. At some point, I think you need to just consider, “We’re gonna give it our best shot,” but you’re not the mayor. This just isn’t your problem, at the end of the day. And if they don’t maintain them properly, why continue to put yourself in harm’s way with this whole thing? Just food for thought.
Liz Picarazzi:
Well, I don’t love that opinion.
Jay Goltz:
I knew you wouldn’t
Liz Picarazzi:
But of course, I have to think about it!
Jay Goltz:
It’s not failure.
Liz Picarazzi:
And I have to think about how if this turns out to be a negative picture of my product all the time, I think I would want to do that, because I wouldn’t want to tarnish my brand in the residential front where I started. These are in commercial districts, so this is where people are going to eat dinner—not just Times Square, but generally the business improvement districts. If they see something like a Citibin that maybe they, at the residential level, were thinking of buying, and then they see a dingy one in public, they may have a second thought about buying that for the residential.
So those are the sorts of scenarios that go through my head. And it’s also something that Frank and I sometimes butt heads about, because I am the CEO, the visionary. I’m the founder. I’m always going to be many, many steps forward. So I’m going to think about the brand implication of using one color versus another color. I will think really hard about which color we should put on these, and he won’t spend any time thinking about it. Now he’s needed to, and he’s totally come around, but my position now is, “We are not putting anything except for the darkest color in any public spaces.” And that was not a position that we would have had even two months ago.
Sarah Segal:
I think you need to look at it like you’re gonna have a timeline. You’re like, “We will do this for six months, one year, what have you.” And say, “We will give it a go. And then we will make a call on this date,” and give yourself a hard deadline to make a decision on whether or not you want to continue with this product line, whether or not it’s more of a headache than a benefit to your overall profits. It’s like being an actor. People go to New York, “I’ll give myself three years! And then I’ll find a real job.”
Liz Picarazzi:
But I’ve already made it into Times Square. An actor comes in and is trying to get on stage…
Loren Feldman:
If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yeah!
Jay Goltz:
At the end of the day, though, you simply don’t have complete control over this situation. So there’s only so much you can do. You’re not the ones maintaining them. So at some point, it might make sense to just say, “You know what, it was a good pilot. This isn’t our business.” I’m glad you have that as a possibility. It certainly is not failure.
Loren Feldman:
But Jay, keep in mind, she’s got business improvement districts around the country reaching out to her because of this.
Sarah Segal:
All publicity is good publicity.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yeah, and the story on this could be: Brooklyn entrepreneur adapts her residential bin for municipal use nationwide, or international. Like, you name it, saying 90 percent of my product is solid, maybe 10 percent of it needs improvement. But I’m going to use this Times Square pilot to solve that 10 percent. And then therefore, for other BIDS—the business improvement districts—it could be, “You know what, Times Square was our guinea pig so that you could have a better bin.” That makes everybody look good. Any potential buyer’s gonna know that it’s gonna get more beat up in Times Square than anywhere else. So to Loren’s point, if I get it done there, if I do a great job, that’s going to help our selling proposition in everything else we do.
Loren Feldman:
Liz, I think it’s worth keeping in mind—correct me if I’m wrong—but the alternative for Times Square is they had just been throwing these bags of trash on the sidewalk. Right?
Liz Picarazzi:
Exactly.
Loren Feldman:
Where the garbage juice ran free.
Liz Picarazzi:
Right!
Jay Goltz:
Well, no, I don’t know that it did, because they weren’t being smushed. So maybe the juice problem wasn’t as bad.
Liz Picarazzi:
Oh, Jay, Jay. [Laughter]
Jay Goltz:
I don’t know. I’m asking.
Liz Picarazzi:
Jay, they are smushed. You’ve seen the mountains. There are actual mountains there.
Jay Goltz:
I have not been as attuned to garbage juice as I should be. I don’t know garbage juice that well.
Liz Picarazzi:
That is how I make a living. I’ve got more expertise on the garbage juice front than you do.
Jay Goltz:
Okay, I’m sure you do.
Sarah Segal:
I can predict the name of the headline of this podcast episode is, “Garbage juice and something…”
Loren Feldman:
You may be right, Sarah, because unlike Jay, I’ve been waiting all my life to use the term “garbage juice.”
Jay Goltz:
And I’ve never heard it my whole life. So that’s the difference, because I’m in Chicago, where we’re civilized. And we have alleys, and the garbage is in the alley. And there’s no bags of garbage on our sidewalks. I know that’s shocking.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yes, however, Jay, do you know where the worst rat situation in the U.S. is? According to Orkin Chemical Company, where is it?
Jay Goltz:
Okay, I’m not surprised by that.
Loren Feldman:
Is it Chicago, Liz?
Liz Picarazzi:
Yes! And it’s not just this year, it’s every year, because I’m also in the rat business. Not just the garbage juice business. And I know that Chicago is always in the number one position.
Jay Goltz:
But our rats are friendlier, and more down to Earth. They’re not snobby like New York rats.
Loren Feldman:
What kind of pizza do they like? Chicago-style or regular?
Liz Picarazzi:
Do they eat pizza?
Jay Goltz:
Yeah, Chicago-style. They would turn their nose up at New York pizza.
Liz Picarazzi:
Oh my god, Chicago-style pizza, they would not be able to carry that up the subway stairs. Only thin-sliced can do that.
Jay Goltz:
Okay, it’s a dine-in choice.
Loren Feldman:
This is getting out of control. I want to move on to another topic, but first, I have one last question. Liz, you mentioned that The New York Times might be doing something about this. Have you reached out to them? Have they reached out to you? Do you know they’re doing something? Where does that stand?
Liz Picarazzi:
So they haven’t reached out to me, which actually is a little disturbing, because I would like to have my voice in it. But someone from the city government said that they had been interviewing people about, I think, the program in general.
Loren Feldman:
Have you tried to figure out which reporter is doing that interviewing and tried to contact them?
Liz Picarazzi:
I thought that would be too forward.
Sarah Segal:
No, go for it. Hey, they’re probably looking for you. I mean, I’m assuming you have a press email on your website. But you should, for sure, reach out to them: “You’re doing a story. I’d love to offer up some insights.” For sure.
Jay Goltz:
Do you know what the good news is? The good news is, people say, “Oh, New York’s a ghost town.” Not anymore. There are so many people down there, the garbage is back. That’s not a bad thing. There are a lot of people in Times Square. Seriously. It’s good to hear there are a lot of people in Times Square. I’m glad to hear that. That wasn’t the case a year ago.
Loren Feldman:
Problem number two. Sarah, you’ve had a situation recently that you described to me, where you have been struggling with potential customers who ghost you after you’ve done elaborate proposals for them. Tell us about that.
Sarah Segal:
It’s an industry problem. Advertising agencies will generally request a budget to come up with an ad campaign, a proposal for their clients. PR has never done that, and I don’t know that social media has ever done that. If it’s a social media agency, I can’t tell you.
But generally, you get a potential client who reaches out and says, “Hey, I want to potentially use your PR.” You have an initial call. They tell you all their problems and kind of what their goals are. And then you go away, and you put together a deck, essentially. And then you spend an hour going through it with the client on the call with the time and energies of your entire team. And I want to say 20 percent just disappear.
Loren Feldman:
Has that number gone up? Has it gotten worse of late?
Sarah Segal:
No, it just feels like it. I put a lot of energy into these things. We audit their competitors. We put a lot of time and effort into it. We did one earlier this year, where the entire team worked on it. It was a client that is totally in our area of expertise, and we would have rocked this. Actually, I had two different clients do this. And we put together the proposal, a lot of energy, time and hours doing it, and then our follow-ups. We would get, “Oh, yeah, we’re reviewing it, we’re reviewing it”—and then you’d not hear from them, so you follow up again. And, “We’re reviewing it.” And eventually, they stopped responding. And then you find out through the grapevine that is the industry that another agency got it.
And my question is: You just wasted how many hours—potentially billable hours—that I could have been working on current clients of our time? And you don’t have the courtesy just to send a simple email that says, “Hey, thanks for your time. We decided to go another direction”—as opposed to us just putting out these follow-up emails into cyberspace? It’s frustrating, because we all get excited about working for these clients. And we get that they’re probably talking to other agencies. We weren’t born yesterday. It’s just, where did we lose common courtesy and just communicating that we’re doing something else?
Loren Feldman:
It has an impact on you beyond that, in the sense that you have to be prepared to take on that work, which means you need to have people available if the client calls back and says, “Yes, we want to do this.”
Sarah Segal:
Oh, yeah. And it’s much harder when you’re a smaller boutique agency, because if we get a new client that’s going to pay us to do their consumer technology PR, and I don’t have enough people on my team, then in tandem, I need to find somebody to kind of add to the team or shift somebody over from another team. It’s not as fluid for a small agency, because we don’t have as many bodies to service a client right away. There are a lot of moving parts and a lot of stresses, for sure.
Jay Goltz:
I just want to be clear. Are you telling me that somebody sends an email to the person in charge and says, “Hi, Bob, it’s been a few weeks since we made our presentation. We’re planning out our next 60 days. If you’ve decided to go some other direction, we certainly understand, but could you just give me a yes or no? Please get back to me by the end of the week.” Has it been that direct to say, “Please give me an answer?” Or is it, “Hi, just following up”?
Sarah Segal:
I probably haven’t been that direct. I mean, and I probably could be. Would you worry that it would be off-putting to somebody?
Jay Goltz:
Not at all. Not at all. If I were getting bids from somebody, whether it’s heating, air conditioning, or PR, or anything else, and it’s been a few weeks, and someone said, “Jay, we’d love to work with you. We’re starting to get busier for the fall season. We would like to know: Where are we at on this? If you’re not going to choose us, we understand. There’s a lot of things that go into it.” I wouldn’t be off-put at all. I’d be like, “No, no, it makes perfect sense as a business person. I get it.
People understand there’s limited resources, and you’re just trying to give me a hand here. And I think if you put in there a sense about, “If you’ve decided to go in a different direction, we certainly understand”—let them know you don’t have to be embarrassed by it—it’s fine. We’re big boys. We’re big girls. We get it. I think the perfectly crafted email would get a response. Versus, “Hey, we’re just following up.” I mean, I get those all the time. And it’s like, “Great.”
Sarah Segal:
I just wanted perspective. Liz, how do you follow up with potential clients?
Liz Picarazzi:
So we mostly do it by email, and we usually only do two follow-ups. Maybe one will be a week after and the other one, maybe two weeks after. We rarely use the phone.
Loren Feldman:
Two weeks after what, Liz?
Liz Picarazzi:
Two weeks after we give them an estimate or a quote, and then we rarely use the phone. I think we should be using it. But our close rate is really high, because I guess this is like you, if you’ve done a proposal and a presentation. In our sales process, we most of the time have been to their property, have met them, have taken measurements, have done renderings, and we have given them a formal written proposal. I mean, maybe it is because there aren’t that many competitors out there that they’re not shopping around. Whereas maybe with your business, there is a little bit more shopping around. So like when we follow up, it’s pretty sure. We know whether they want it or not.
Sarah Segal:
Do you customize your proposals? Or is it like you have it so dialed in that you’re just like clicking buttons, and it’s done?
Liz Picarazzi:
It’s dialed in. For the most part. The renderings sometimes take more work, bBut that’s also down to a science where we have all of the EPS files to throw into a rendering, superimposing the bins on their property. And that was something that used to take us a lot of time to do, but now we have someone who does it, and it’s a really quick turnaround.
Sarah Segal:
But you are going out to their locations.
Liz Picarazzi:
We most of the time are, yes.
Sarah Segal:
So that’s something that did change in PR, and just general agency. Pandemic happened, and then we all started doing our proposals virtually. Prior to that, it was like everybody got on the plane and went to see the potential client and talk to them in person. And I’ve been thinking about this lately, like: Do I need to start getting back on a plane so I can breathe on people?
Loren Feldman:
Sarah, tell me about the proposals that you prepare. You said that you spend time talking to the potential client, and they tell you all their problems. How far do you go, in terms of addressing those problems?
Sarah Segal:
I think that most of it is the competitive audit that we do. We’ve kind of looked at them, compared to peers in their industry, and kind of seen where they are stacking up.
Loren Feldman:
In terms of?
Sarah Segal:
Press, media coverage, brand awareness, all of that kind of stuff, share of voice. Where are you currently, and how do you compare? We’ve been talking to a potential client that makes special mattresses. And their main, biggest competitor is Sleep Number, which has this technology-driven product. Looking at that competitor, as well as some other smaller competitors, and saying, “Okay, this is where they are. And this is how they got there. And this is what they’re currently doing. This is what your smaller competitors are doing. And based on that, and based on our expertise, this is what we think you should be doing if you have a small-, medium-, or large-sized budget.” So we’re putting together proposals that are very specific to them and their landscape.
Jay Goltz:
I think the most underused tool these days is the telephone. I can give you 20 examples. Everybody thinks that email—not everyone, many people—has replaced telephones, and they don’t call. And it’s not the same thing.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yeah, I just had a thought on this, too, Jay. We sometimes talk about the sequencing of our follow-up, and there’s the proposal and then two follow-up emails. I think it might make sense to actually do a phone call—insert that phone call in before the first follow-up email. Because the phone call will be close after that email with the proposal that was sent. And that phone call could be kind of like, “Just wanted to make sure you received it.” So when I was a consumer of these sorts of services, that sort of a phone follow-up after I had received a proposal did register with me more than if I was only getting a couple of email follow-ups.
Sarah Segal:
I like that.
Jay Goltz:
It’s powerful. I think that’s an opportunity—to go old school.
Sarah Segal:
Yeah, yeah, go old school for sure.
Loren Feldman:
Is this reflective of issues in your ability to obtain clients? Or is it more just: Why can’t they be polite and let you know?
Jay Goltz:
He’s asking: How’s your close rate?
Sarah Segal:
My close rate’s pretty high. We do pretty well. But there’s this 20 percent that, when we don’t close them… I’m saying that, of the people who we don’t close, 20 percent of them are just people that ghost us.
Loren Feldman:
And here’s why I’m asking—because we’re sitting here talking about strategies you could use to get them to be more polite and respond, as opposed to talking about ways to get them to sign you up.
Sarah Segal:
That’s fine. I mean, the signing up part we’re fine with.
Jay Goltz:
How many of them ever come back, when you think they’ve disappeared? Do they ever just show up and say, “We’re ready to go?”
Sarah Segal:
Sometimes they’ll resurface. There’s a problem with the PR industry in general, the ghosting aspect of it, where it’s just they disappear without a trace. And then they come back and try to turn you on when it’s convenient for them.
Jay Goltz:
I think it’s worse for your industry, simply because, if I need a heating or air conditioning system, I need it. Even advertising, you need it. PR, maybe you’re going to do it, maybe you’re not going to do it, maybe you’re going to wait a little while? Are you going to do PR at all is not even necessarily a case of they’re going to use you. So I could see where that happens more often.
Sarah Segal:
There is another issue, and this is a conversation I see a lot in my industry feeds that I’m part of. There’s a sense that some of these potential clients go out to 10 or 12 different agencies to just literally gather ideas, with no intent on hiring them.
Jay Goltz:
Wow. That’s bad.
Liz Picarazzi:
Yeah, that definitely happens in a lot of industries.
Sarah Segal:
And so that’s the service industry. You can’t really do that with things that are containing garbage. You’re not going out and getting somebody’s ideas, because you could see, touch, and feel the idea, or furniture or framing or whatever you’re doing. But when you’re in a service industry, it’s like they’re just trying to mine for smart things.
And I’ve always been the person like, “I’ve gotta put my smartest ideas that I can come up with, only knowing so much about the client, in my proposal.” But then sometimes I’m like, “You know what? I can’t do that. Because what if they walk away from us, and they take our smart idea?” We don’t have anything in writing that says, “These ideas are only for our execution, and we will sue you if you take our idea and give it to another agency and do it.” But I’ve heard stories of that.
Loren Feldman:
Sarah, do you ever get a client without going through a formal proposal process? You have established clients, you have a nice website, you have credibility. Do people ever just sign up without making you give away your best thoughts?
Sarah Segal:
Generally, no. We usually have to go through the process of showing that we understand what they need, and how we should do it. People generally want to see that. I’ve only ever had, like maybe one or two that are like, “Yeah, sign on the dotted line.” But those are long-term relationships.
Jay Goltz:
If it makes you feel any better, believe it or not, it’s actually in the Bible, the Old Testament, that wasting a salesperson’s time with no intention of doing business with them is a sin. Yes, it’s in there. No, I’m telling you. Someone told me that. I looked into it. It’s absolutely right. I wrote a blog post on it one time, and I got some people who wanted to reprint it because it’s absolutely the truth.
Sarah Segal:
At the very end of my proposals from now on. [Laughter]
Jay Goltz:
Yeah, put a little asterisk.
Loren Feldman:
“It would be a sin.”
Liz Picarazzi:
“This is a venial sin.”
Jay Goltz:
Just saying, yeah.
Loren Feldman:
There are businesses that have said, “We’re not going to play this game anymore.” When I was at Forbes, we wrote about an advertising agency in Toronto that just decided, “We’re not doing any more spec work. We are who we are. If you want to hire us, hire us. If not, don’t.” And they acknowledged in the article that they probably lost millions of dollars in revenue in the immediate years, but that over time, it worked for them. And they probably didn’t grow as much as they would have, but they did great work for great clients and were very happy with the choice they made.
Jay Goltz:
Well, they might not have as much, but their costs were less, too. So maybe it worked out.
Sarah Segal:
But I wonder, if I were to do something like that, where like, okay, I’m not going to do these proposals anymore, because they’re a time suck, they’re a lot of energy, and they’re a waste of time if somebody doesn’t sign with us. Do I just provide, “Here’s our menu of services” and call it a day? I think that there’s an expectation that you’re going to do the dog-and-pony show. And so I wonder whether or not that would have a negative impact on us, or whether people would be like, “Oh, yeah, I get that. I don’t want to waste their time. They don’t need to customize something for me. I’m happy with the menu.”
Jay Goltz:
Well, there’s no question that will turn some people off. The question is: Will it be enough to make a difference? There’s no question some people are going to go on to someone else. But I don’t know if that’s 50 percent, 10 percent, 80 percent. That’s the question. I guess you’d have to try it out.
Sarah Segal:
Not this year. [Laughter]
Jay Goltz:
When you have more business than you know what to do with, that’s when you try that out.
Sarah Segal:
Exactly. Or when I ask them if their retainer is above or below a certain amount, I’ll be like, “All right, if their potential retainer is below this amount, they get the menu. Above, we’ll do some dogs-and-ponies.”
Loren Feldman:
Wait, you ask them what their retainer is, as opposed to telling them what you charge for a retainer?
Sarah Segal:
Well, usually they come in, and you ask, “What is your line item, in terms of your budget, for this?” Because they’ll be like, “Well, we only really set aside $6,000 a month for PR.” And then when you know that going in, you’re gonna give them a proposal that is $6,000. You’ll probably add a couple things and say, “But if you give us $7,000, we can do this. If you give us $8,000, we can do this.”
But it’s customized to their priorities. So if they come to us, and they say, “We need people to talk about us and influence other people to buy our product, but we only have $6,000,” and they’re a lip gloss company, we’re going to look at them, and we’re going to say, “Well, we should work on influencers for you. Because that’s really going to be what’s going to give you additional transactions, and people buying your stuff,” whatever. As opposed to someone saying, “I have a new garbage bin company and need to increase our brand awareness.” We’re not going to say we should work with influencers. We’re going to work on traditional media, some product placement, probably. So it depends on what their goals are.
Liz Picarazzi:
I’ve got a question for you, Sarah. When you get a client that definitely is not at the budget level that you would need, do you ever refer them to another company, even if it’s somewhat of a competitor?
Sarah Segal:
Well, usually, we’ll talk to them, and it’s either to another company, but usually, it’s to a freelancer. Or we’ll say, “Okay, you’re at a much lower-budget level. You probably need an independent contractor to work with you.” And that’s how we will make those referrals. We’re not at an Edelman or FleishmanHillard size yet.
But I actually had a conversation with a PR professional the other day who works in a very niche technology. And she was telling me that a lot of their clients come from one of the larger agencies that have a minimum retainer size of $25,000 a year. So anything below that range and potential retainer size, they pass along to smaller agencies.
Jay Goltz:
I think that’s perfectly reasonable. When I’ve interviewed PR firms, I would appreciate it if they just told me upfront, “Listen, before we talk to you, I just want you to know our minimum is x.” Just tell me, and then I’ll go, “I don’t want to spend that.” But just tell me. It’s good for them, good for me, because you never know.
It took me a while to figure out that five grand a month is nothing, right? It’s not a lot for a PR firm. From the other side, though, it seems like a lot. It’s kind of like how long a minute is depends on what side of the bathroom door you’re on. You know, when you’re paying it, five grand’s a lot. When you’re taking it, it’s not. So I would appreciate it if somebody just said, “Listen, our minimum is, whatever, $15,000.” “Okay.”
Sarah Segal:
What made you realize that five grand’s not a lot?
Jay Goltz:
By talking to enough PR people over the years. I’ve probably used… I don’t know, four or five different PR firms over the years, and I’ve had the independent person who’s on their own. I’ve had the quote-unquote firm. And I’ve had the one with two or three people. And I know now that I’m not going to get anything—I’m not going to get much—for $5,000 a month, just from talking to people. But like I said, if they would have just told me that upfront, I could have saved them and me—
Loren Feldman:
Did you ask them?
Jay Goltz:
No. They’re coming out, they want to make a proposal. I wouldn’t be insulted if before they came out, they say, “Jay, have you used a PR person before, a PR firm?” “Not really.” “Do you have a budget for it?” Ask me, “Do I have a budget?” “No, not really.” “Okay. Just so you know, our typical clients generally range from—” just tell me.
Loren Feldman:
But you could ask. They’d probably tell you.
Jay Goltz:
I guess, yes, I could now, but in the beginning, I didn’t bother, because I didn’t think it was an issue. Now I know it’s an issue. So I would ask upfront, because I wouldn’t waste their time. I wouldn’t waste my time. But I only do that now because I’ve used some PR firms in the past. I think the typical person, small business, that hires a PR firm? They have absolutely no idea what it’s gonna cost.
Sarah Segal:
I know, I actually just wrote a blog post about cost and kind of what our ranges are, including it in our newsletter. But I’m probably gonna put it up on our blog as well. I wrote a blog post ages ago about pricing, and to this day, it’s still the most searched and SEO-most-valued article that we have on our site.
Jay Goltz:
I can totally see that. There’s really no way an entrepreneur would have any… How would an entrepreneur know what PR costs?
Liz Picarazzi:
By asking other entrepreneurs.
Sarah Segal:
Well, that’s the thing. It’s hard to work with entrepreneurs.
Jay Goltz:
I’m sure.
Sarah Segal:
It’s easier to work with an established company that has like 500 employees.
Jay Goltz:
No question.
Sarah Segal:
PR is an understood necessity, and they see the value in it. When you work with entrepreneurs who have never experienced PR, you’re having to teach them. It’s a lot more work.
Jay Goltz:
No question. I absolutely can see that. And it’s the money right out of their pocket. It’s not coming out of a budget somewhere. I’m sure that’s true. Most entrepreneurs don’t have PR firms. That’s just the reality. I’ve been in business groups with, I don’t know, 60 entrepreneurs. I’m not so sure that I can think of more than two of them who ever used a PR firm. It’s not a typical thing for a small business.
Sarah Segal:
But there are a lot of stories that come up where us PR people look at those and go, “Oh my goodness. They need PR.”
Jay Goltz:
Yeah, for sure.
Liz Picarazzi:
How about trash, rats, and garbage juice?
Sarah Segal:
I know, I was like, “Boy, did you respond to all of those yourself? Did you have holding statements put together already?” That’s actually something that you should consider doing, is just thinking of all the potential things that could go wrong that the press could pick up on, and draft those statements before they happen.
I truly believe if a reporter reaches out to you and says, “I need to talk to you about this terrible thing that happened,” you need to email them back instantaneously and say, “Happy to provide you information. What is your deadline?” And then you have a buffer. You’ve responded, you’ve put the ball in their court. But you should have your holding statements set for anything that could potentially go wrong.
Loren Feldman:
I could talk to you guys all day, but we are out of time. My thanks to Jay Goltz, Liz PIcarazzi, and Sarah Segal. As always, thanks for sharing.
