HubSpot Releases Social Inbox and Reveals So Much More

I spent yesterday afternoon at HubSpot’s “Open House” in Cambridge, MA, during which they briefed the community on their business progress, introduced their new Social Inbox, described their  approach to marketing and sales alignment, explained their “culture code”, and answered questions.

The most concrete news, Social Inbox, extends existing HubSpot features by more fully integrating social media monitoring and response with the HubSpot interface. The Social Inbox presents a list of Twiter posts by user-specified individuals or containing specified key words. Users can drill into each post to see a complete profile of the poster. The big deal in HubSpot’s eyes is the profiles include all information the HubSpot database about each person, and are even color-coded with the sales lead stage. The data includes Web and email behavior captured directly in HubSpot, data imported from Salesforce.com, and whatever else the system has available. Users can respond directly, forward a post to someone else, or add the poster to a HubSpot campaign. The system can automatically alert users to new Tweets as they happen or on a regular schedule.

HubSpot said they couldn’t find any other product that combines this type of social monitoring with access to such deep profiles. I can’t immediately think of one either, although it might exist. Either way, uniqueness is less important than the value provided, which is considerable.

What’s ultimately more interesting, however, is that Social Inbox is aimed at managing one-on-one interactions between users and individual contacts.  This sort of contact management is quite different from HubSpot’s traditional focus on attracting inbound traffic or even from conventional marketing automation.

The new features came up again later in the day, when the audience asked several pointed questions about whether HubSpot would eventually add a full CRM capability. This caused by far the most discomfort of any topic addressed by a management team which provides itself on transparency. Answers ranged from a coy “we think about a lot of things” to a fairly definitive stream of conscious listing of the arguments against adding CRM.  The currently dominant line of thought seems to be that HubSpot already provides adequate features for clients who want light contact management, while adding full CRM features would only lead to a losing battle with Salesforce.com. Unstated but hovering in the background was the fact that Salesforce.com is an investor in HubSpot and might some day consider buying them to expand its own marketing scope. CRM would make HubSpot less attractive to Salesforce, since it would create a set of redundant features that need to be supported or removed.

But the most fundamental reason that HubSpot management seems genuinely disinclined to add CRM is that they see HubSpot’s mission as transforming marketing. There’s a distinctly messianic gleam in CEO Brian Halligan’s eyes when he says this and the vision is no doubt shared widely across the company. In fact, it’s arguably more surprising that HubSpot has overcome its marketing focus to introduce the contact management features already in place. My take is that customer needs – another HubSpot mantra – have driven the system in this direction despite management reluctance. The system has a will of its own.

Admittedly, I’ve been arguing this for a long time: the need for integrated customer treatments will eventually lead marketing automation, CRM, and Web content management to become a single system, or at least to share a common customer database. HubSpot’s current vision of highly personalized data-driven marketing is consistent with this. The current vision is also quite different from the original HubSpot vision of attracting traffic through huge volumes of great (but not personalized) content. But the new vision is a logical extension of the original: once you’ve attracted people and start to learn their preferences, the more you’re able to make targeted content recommendations. And, the more content you have available, the more you need those recommendation to point people at the right materials.

This brings HubSpot right back to contact management, because the same data used to recommend marketing content can, and should, be used to recommend treatments during personal interactions. It’s possible to simply push recommendations to an external CRM platform, but setting a connection for each point of contact quickly becomes a lot of work. The temptation to eliminate that work by building an integrated CRM system is hard to resist.  As I say, the system has a will of its own.

Incidentally, there is another way to look at this. The traditional view sees marketing as making automated contacts, while sales and service use human agents, supported by CRM, for individual interactions. This is why CRM seems foreign to a marketing system. But the automated-vs-human division is no longer so clear cut. Social media marketing is mostly done by humans through one-on-one messages, while many sales and service interactions are automated. In this view, HubSpot needs contact management features even if it rigorously restricts itself to serving marketers alone.

The problem with this approach is that it denies sales and service the benefit of HubSpot’s data and customer understanding – a terrible waste of corporate resources. So this view also pushes HubSpot towards a unified marketing and CRM system, or at least a database and recommendation engine that’s accessible by both HubSpot and a separate CRM. I swear I didn’t mean to end up here, but this does lead to the Customer Data Platform I’ve been discussing over the past few weeks. I don’t think HubSpot management wants to move in that direction, or even that they necessarily should.  But these things have a will of their own.

Read More

HubSpot Reports 82% Revenue Growth

HubSpot released its 2012 Year in Review today, reporting 82% revenue growth, to $52.5 million.  Number of clients grew by 42%, to 8,440.   The figures are in line with my expectations, so they don't require any adjustments to my previous estimates of industry size or growth rate. 

Compared with last year, the revenue growth rate is about the same (82% vs 85%), while the customer growth rate is sharply lower (42% vs. 55%).  That means revenue per customer grew by significantly, by 24%. This reflects HubSpot's aggressive moves to serve larger companies and provide expanded features for traditional marketing automation such as more robust email and lead nurturing.  The revenue per customer suggest that things are going according to plan.

Congratulations to the team at HubSpot, and special appreciation to them for openly sharing information that many other companies do not.  I believe such transparency builds greater confidence in the company, as well as providing a clearer picture of the industry as a whole.

Here are figures and growth rates for the past three years, as listed in the report.  Note that I calculate revenue per customer based on the average customer count for each year. 

Read More

HubSpot's Latest Marketing Software Sends the Right Message

Poor targeting

HubSpot yesterday launched a “completely re-envisioned and rebuilt” version of its marketing system at its Inbound 2012 user conference. The main thrust of the new release was dynamic customization of emails, landing pages, and forms based on each contact’s profile and behaviors. This is a major expansion beyond HubSpot’s original focus on “inbound marketing” to attract leads.

Specific changes include:

- a new contact database that is much more flexible than the original HubSpot database, allowing access to all types of email and landing page interactions within HubSpot and to social media activities imported to the system. The new database is built with HBase, which accesses Hadoop files. More on that later.

- “smart lists”, which are rule-based definitions of contact groups whose membership is updated automatically as contact data changes. Apologies if that’s a bit jargony; it just means the lists are always current.

- “smart calls to action” which are dynamic content blocks driven by the smart lists. That is, users define which contents go to members of different lists. The blocks are stored in a library and the same block can appear within multiple emails, HubSpot landing pages, or external Web pages.  In practical terms, this means things like: users who have already downloaded one piece of content can automatically be offered something else.

- “smart forms” (do you sense a pattern?) which don't repeat questions a client has already answered. This isn’t quite true progressive profiling, which would replace questions that are answered with ones that are not.  But it removes a major annoyance.

- workflows (hah! Bet you expected “smart flows”) that are triggered by smart list-style rules and can include multiple steps with multiple actions assigned to each step. Available actions include changing contact data, sending a record to CRM, updating a lead score, setting a lifecycle stage, and changing the call to action.

- social media tracking that captures responses to system-generated social media messages within the contact database.  The responses are associated with specific individuals, so they can be used in smart lists and workflow rules.

- iPhone apps to view some reports and individual contact data

This is all good stuff, although far from revolutionary. Dynamic email content, for example, is available in 14 of the 22 systems in our VEST report. HubSpot recognizes that these are not new features but argues they’ve made them easier to use than competitors. I’m not so sure – the rule builder underlying the smart lists and workflows looks pretty much like every other rule builder, and the workflows themselves are also similar to the sequential flows in other systems.

This isn’t a criticism of HubSpot, but just a recognition that these are inherently complicated features which plenty of smart people have already tried to simplify. Radically better approaches may yet be found – I had an interesting chat about some possibilities with HubSpot co-founder Dharmesh Shah – but so far, the state of the art is what it is.

The new release also includes improved email and landing page designers, A/B testing for landing pages (not available in the entry-level version of the system, alas), enhancements to the app and service marketplaces, and expanded training services. The company said the coming year will bring enhancements to existing components including the blogging and search engine optimization applications.

What’s really important about all these changes is not whether they’re unique, but how well HubSpot has pulled them together and how it teaches its clients and resellers to use them. This is where HubSpot has always been strongest, and the vision it set out this week – of highly relevant marketing messages for each individual – is indeed advanced. (It’s also one I agree with – see this post on why the marketing funnel is dead.) If HubSpot can get marketers to focus on that sort of targeting, which is quite different from traditional campaign-oriented promotions, they can indeed have a revolutionary impact on their clients and the marketing industry.

And what about HBase? Although HubSpot didn’t talk about it in its marketing materials, switching from a conventional relational database to the Hadoop-based system is almost certainly the most radical feature of the new release. So far as I know, HubSpot is the only marketing automation system using HBase.

I discussed this a bit with HubSpot Chief Product Officer David Cancel, who joined the company when it acquired Performable, which was itself built on HBase. Cancel said HBase takes more resources than a conventional database engine but provides direct access to all details of each contact’s behavior history. One immediate benefit is that HubSpot now allows custom fields – up to 1,000, in fact – which it didn’t previously.  Ad hoc reports against the HBase data isn't available yet but is due before the end of 2012.

Longer term, I suspect HBase will make it easier to add custom objects and to deal with unstructured and semi-structured data such as Web logs and text comments. This could make HubSpot fundamentally more flexible than most B2B marketing automation systems, whose data structures are tightly linked to CRM data structures. As I mentioned last week, the main exceptions to that rule today are the high-end marketing automation products, which were built for consumer marketing applications and assume a custom data structure. Having that flexibility in product for small-to-mid-size businesses could open up some possibilities that truly do make HubSpot unique.

(Wondering about the alligator man picture?  Well, one of the sessions at the HubSpot conference said that having pictures in your blog posts increases readership, so I thought I'd give it a try.  If you want me to justify that particular image: she's getting a message she doesn't want.)

Read More

Genoo Adds SEO To Web Site Management and Marketing Automation

I had an earful last week from Genoo president Kim Albee, who told me that I’ve misclassified her target customers as “micro businesses” (under $5 million revenue) for the past two years. She tells me nearly all of her clients are larger than that. I’ve revised my big list of demand generation vendors to reflect this.


The main cause of my misunderstanding was Genoo’s starting price of $199 per month, which is below any small or mid-size business system. But the lowest price for Genoo with CRM integration is $599 per month, and I consider CRM integration a required feature in a B2B marketing automation product. This is still low for small-to-mid systems but not wholly out of line. On the other hand, I should have been warned by the fact that Genoo doesn’t provide a built-in CRM system, which is pretty much the key defining characteristic of a micro business system.

The good news is the error doesn’t seem to have crimped Genoo’s growth, although Albee tells me it was used against them in several competitive situations. The company now has about 75 clients, compared with around 35 at the time of my initial review nearly eighteen months ago.

The system itself has also grown although the general approach remains consistent. This approach extends beyond most marketing automation products to incorporate full Web content management and marketing services. The most interesting recent enhancements are products for search engine optimization (SEO): “competitive intelligence” runs a multivariate analysis to identify factors that contribute to competitive pages’ ranking; and “content relevancy analyzer” scans high-ranking pages find theme words that search engines will use to determine relevance. The goal in both cases is to recommend changes that will improve search marketing results.

Other enhancements allow deeper visitor tracking, including tracking tags on Web pages not hosted at Genoo; improved customer scoring; progressive profiling; unlimited custom fields on the lead table (Albee said no client has ever asked for custom fields anywhere else); and an expanded Application Program Interface (API) to accept leads from other systems. The February release will add features to capture social media activities and encourage social book-marking. These join a respectable set of social media features already in place, including sharing buttons, share tracking, and traffic reporting.

Albee said the company has also developed anonymous visitor look-up, based on IP address. But internal tests found additional filtering is needed to avoid wasting users’ time, so full deployment is on hold until this can be added.

This concern about users’ time reflects Genoo’s unusually deep involvement with its clients’ marketing programs. Professional services have always been a major part of the company’s offering and constitute its fastest growing line of business. The company is setting up alliances with external consultants to help meet the demand.

Albee also pointed to Genoo’s pricing as a reaction to customer requirements. The model is more complicated than many small business oriented marketing automation systems.  It has three product levels and gives users within each level the choice to pay either for emails (with unlimited leads in the database) or by database size (with unlimited emails). The two lower price levels also require additional charges for the SEO tools, which are licensed from an external developer.  Free phone support is always included and professional services are always billed separately. There’s also a salesperson access tool billed at $9.95 per month per user. Clients can change their plans each month and are billed for overages on a cost per thousand basis. While conventional wisdom among marketing automation vendors is that buyers prefer a fixed fee and no surprises, Albee said her clients appreciate the flexibility of Genoo’s approach.

Albee said her clients are a mix of small and mid-size businesses, including some divisions of large enterprises.  Genoo's low price may have scared off a few buyers who felt a system that cheap simply couldn't be adequate.  It's an easy mistake to make, but companies of all sizes who want to combine conventional marketing automation with Web site and SEO should still take a look.

Read More

Marketo Spark Targets Small Business Marketing Automation

Marketo today announced the launch of Spark, a new brand aimed at small and mid-size business. Functionally, Spark is pretty much identical to the standard Marketo system. Exceptions are advanced features including revenue cycle reporting, email deliverability assistance, API access, fine-grained user rights management, and the Sales Insight salesperson application. Most of these aren’t of interest to small business, and several involve additional charges even for Marketo’s regular packages.

So the news here is price. Spark starts at $750 per month with no annual contract, compared with Marketo’s $2,000 per month minimum and annual contract for its full-featured Professional Edition. Marketo has discontinued its $1,200 per month Small Business Edition, which lacked some features now included with Spark.

In other words, this is a price cut. To me, it looks like a reaction to the success of other low cost small business systems, including HubSpot, Act-On Software, and Pardot. (HubSpot and Act-On have similar pricing to Spark, while Pardot runs a bit higher.)  Some of those firms are actually growing at a faster rate than Marketo, although on a smaller base.  Spark should help to blunt their momentum while increasing Marketo's own client total -- a closely watched metric, regardless of the associated revenue per client.

Whether Marketo actually makes any money at Spark's price is questionable. It really depends on the sales and support costs, and Marketo doesn’t appear to have changed how those are delivered to keep them down. Other small business specialists have designed sales and support models that are not as staff-intensive as traditional approaches. By contrast, Marketo is stressing that Spark includes services to help clients take advantage of their systems.

Of course, Marketo could have lowered its entry price without creating a new brand.  So why bother to launch Spark?

One reason may be to avoid cannibalizing sales of its other, higher-priced editions.  But, let’s face it, any sentient buyer will notice that Spark is out there. I think the more important reason is that Spark lets Marketo address small businesses separately from larger companies.  The two groups do have different needs and neither wants a system designed for the other.  Spark lets Marketo position itself as a small business specialist when selling to small businesses, without alienating big-business marketers who would consider a small business system an unsuitable toy. 


This is a delicate game.  For one thing, "small business" means different things to different people.  Small business specialists like Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot actually serve a different market -- one that I label "microbusiness" and put at under $5 million revenue.  Those products have a different configuration from Spark, HubSpot, Pardot, or Act-On.  Specifically, Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot have starting prices around $300 per month and offer built-in shopping carts and CRM.  (Other micro-business specialists like Genoo and MakesBridge also have a sub-$500 monthly price, but no CRM or shopping.)  Although Spark is not aimed at the micro-business market, some people may not recognize the distinction.


Nor it is clear that the Spark brand will be enough let Marketo play in both the small and mid-size business segments ($5 to $500 million revenue, by my definition) and the big business segment (more than $500 million revenue.)   Nearly every other marketing automation vendor focuses on one or the other.  The main exception is HubSpot, which is also trying to add larger clients without losing its small business base -- and facing some positioning challenges of its own.  

Spark also poses a financial challenge.  Marketo has said it will earn around $30 million revenue in 2011, and will have an average of around 1,100 clients.  That comes to about $2,500 per client per month, a figure Marketo has been striving to increase.  A large number of Spark clients at $750 per month would dramatically reduce its average.  The profit margins, if any, will surely be lower as well, again dragging down the corporate average.

Now, this is all interesting stuff, but does it matter to anyone who isn't a Marketo investor?  Probably not.  Spark may push prices a little lower and may put a small crimp in some competitors' growth rates.  It may also give small business marketers another fine set of resource materials to complement those from HubSpot and others.  But the bottom line is that similar capabilities were already available at a similar price point from Marketo and others. Spark just doesn't change much.

 

Read More

HubSpot's Strategy for Winning the Marketing Automation Horserace

Back on September 20, I posted various tips from the Inbound Marketing Summit and HubSpot User Group. Naturally, the conference also included public and private discussions of HubSpot itself, but I thought those were best shared in a separate post. Here goes.

The conference yielded a clear picture of HubSpot’s business strategy for the coming year. This strategy has two main elements, which were set out by CEO Brian Halligan in his keynote:

- expansion to “middle of funnel” marketing. HubSpot originally focused on “top of funnel” or “inbound” marketing, which boils down to helping marketers to attract Web traffic. In concrete terms, it involves blogging, search engine optimization of Websites, and social media messages. The company is now doing more to help marketers nurture the leads its attracts.  This involves strengthening its “middle of the funnel” tools for more powerful email, better segmentation and content selection, and enhancing lead profiles with data from social media.

“Mid funnel" is the territory of standard B2B marketing automation, although HubSpot largely avoids the term. Indeed, CTO Dharmesh Shah said their goal is to “leapfrog” current marketing automation vendors by replacing their focus on email marketing with a focus on social media. HubSpot also plans to automate functions that are simply too hard for most marketers to do manually. These include segmentation, building lead scoring models, and content selection. To be clear, this isn't about building a simpler interface.  It's about having the system perform tasks without any user effort.

- allowing other companies to offer functions and services to HubSpot customers. This lets HubSpot extend its scope without developing all the features or delivering all the services itself. The key initiatives here are a “platform” program and app store that allow HubSpot partners to sell products that integrate directly with HubSpot’s data and user interface, and a “services marketplace” that makes it easy to find vendors for marketing tasks such as program design and content creation. Shah said the marketplace will rate vendor performance by looking at results captured within HubSpot.  For example, it might report how much traffic is generated by content from different providers. That’s an intriguing concept, although I’m not sure how vendors will feel about that sort of measurement.

Benchmarking in general is another aspect of HubSpot’s strategy. Like automation and use of external resources, benchmarking is aimed at helping marketers become more effective without consuming HubSpot resources. The company already provides benchmark reports that compare a client’s key metrics with averages for all HubSpot clients, for top 10% clients, and for similar companies. Shah said it is working on additional programs to help marketers measure their progress, such as comparisons among companies who start using the system at the same time.

- Halligan’s keynote also listed a third theme for the coming year: application maturity. He gave current HubSpot applications a C+ on his report card for the previous year and said blogging and Web content management are targeted for improvement. He also cited previous enhancements including custom fields in list imports, custom lists and segments, increased email limit from 5,000 to 50,000 messages, better email templates, optimized email for mobile and social platforms, and improved Salesforce.com integration. HubSpot's purchase of Performable  will also improve its Web analytics, event tracking, and email campaign capabilities. Performable is still largely separate from the main HubSpot application but is expected to be fully integrated by the end of this year.

Maybe it’s just me, but I see application maturity as table stakes, not a major strategy. HubSpot is quite clear that it isn’t aiming to serve the most demanding users, but remains focused on small businesses who want a single, simple solution to their basic marketing needs. (Well, they do sometimes admit they plan to creep upmarket over time.)  I appreciate the company’s candor in admitting that its applications could use improvement and hasten to point out that I haven’t heard  more complaints about HubSpot than anyone else. But it’s clear their goal will continue to be making simple things easy, not complex things possible.

What Does It Mean? As I’ve written before, HubSpot is one of those very well-run start-ups that define a sound, long-term strategy and execute intelligently and relentlessly. The top of the funnel, where there was less competition, was a good place to start.  Extending from there to mid-funnel makes perfect sense as a way to add value and to preempt or displace other marketing systems. Adding the platform and services marketplace both enable further growth with minimal investment, and (perhaps more important) make it easier to recruit allies in the sales process.

But, smart as those strategies are, they’re fairly standard. Much more intriguing are HubSpot’s bets that it can radically simplify marketing tasks through automation and that the primary marketing channel will be social media instead of email.

Although I’m a great fan of automation, it’s not at all clear to me that it can be more than a productivity enhancement tool for skilled marketers, as opposed to actually making skills unnecessary. Okay, I can already hear the rebuttal: “We’re not saying skill isn’t needed but that we can reduce the level of training and effort required.” Well, sure. But the question remains: can automation reduce those requirements enough to matter? For what it’s worth, the amount of work remaining for users was also my original criticism  of HubSpot’s SEO tools. Those do seem have pleased many users, so I’ll certainly entertain the possibility that HubSpot is on the right track.

Similarly, HubSpot would surely point out that they’re not abandoning email, but simply adding social media as an increasingly important alternative. Again, granted. But all other marketing automation vendors are also adding social media capabilities. So I think it’s legitimate to ask whether there is anything fundamentally different about HubSpot’s approach, or, setting a slightly lower bar, whether a mindset that sees social media as primary actually leads in a different direction. I haven’t seen anything so far to suggest either is true*, and think there’s a pretty compelling counter-argument that it’s more important to take an integrated view than try to treat any channel as primary. But the jury’s out on this one too – we’ll see where HubSpot goes with it.

Bottom line: like every marketing automation vendor, HubSpot is wrestling with the fundamental challenge of enabling marketers to do all the new things their system makes possible.  Expanding the product scope and its surrounding ecosystem will help, but others are doing the same.  HubSpot's hope that automation can close the skills gap is a fundamentally different approach -- and while the company isn't betting everything on that one horse, it will certainly win big if it's right.

_______________________________________________________________
*For a good overview of HubSpot’s social media features and an explanation of why they bought social media marketing software company oneforty in August, see their blog post announcing the oneforty acquisition.

Read More

Useful Tips from Inbound Marketing Summit and Hubspot User Group

I spent three days last week at the Inbound Marketing Summit and Hubspot User Group in Boston.  These featured a flock of first-rate speakers who presented more useful information than I can jam into a single blog post.  That said, here are highlights from my notes.

Youngme Moon, Harvard Business School

- when all competitors address the same customer problems, their products all seem the same
- to differentiate, embrace your negatives and make them into positives
- her examples:
  - the Mini Cooper highlighted that it was a small car, rather than trying to convince people it wasn’t really that small
  - IKEA reduces selection, service and sturdiness, and convinces people these are simplifying their choice, encouraging self-reliance, and making it easier to refresh your furnishings.  (Sorry Youngme, but I still detest IKEA.  Let's face it: the reason most people buy there is price.)

Web Content Management panel with leaders from Bridgeline, Sitecore, Percussion, and Ektron

- content management systems have evolved to deliver personalized customer experiences across all channles
- I only mention this because it supports my own view that Web content systems are candidates to encompass the marketing automation industry. 


Michael Damphousse, Green Leads

- 30% higher response rate to 3 sentence text email than HTML email
- 10x more likely to reach a lead by telephone if call within first hour of submission
- 15% higher chance of answering a call from a local phone number
- leave a voicemail that says you are sending an email and ask for a reply
- peak answering times are 7:30 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m.; these yield 20-40% more connections than calling at 10 a.m.
- people are most likely to answer their phone between 5 minutes before the hour and 10 minutes after the hour
- 23% of appointments are rescheduled; try to reschedule if someone asks to cancel

Guy Kawasaki, author, Enchantment

- keys to creating an “enchanting” product are likeability, trustworthiness, and quality
- a product must be complete, meaning it includes service and creates an entire ecosystem
- when launching something new, don’t try to convince people who reject you; instead, find people who agree with you

Dan Zarella, Hubspot

- ideas spread because they’re good at spreading, not because they’re good ideas
- social media success comes when people share your content, not when they engage with comments
- negative comments are shared less often than positive comments
- reaching influential individuals is less important than reaching large numbers of people
- people are more likely to read and share social media content on weekends
- Tweets that include “Please Retweet” are shared three times more often than those that don’t

David Skok, Matrix Partners

- viral marketing growth depends more on cycle time (how quickly people share with others) than the number of shares per person
- to attract influential followers, identify what they write about and write about it yourself
- offer rewards to both the person who shares your content and whomever they share it with, so it doesn’t seem like people are exploiting their friends

Rick Burnes, Hubspot

- be systematic about creating content that attracts the traffic you want
- check your blog analytics daily and use data to drive content decisions
- create blog posts in a mix of categories: how-to (most important, preferably daily); thought leadership, research projects, fun, controversial statements
- posts need to be useful; they don’t need to be great literature
- reuse old content
- have a big message

Read More

HubSpot Spreads Its Wings

The folks at HubSpot have been busy this summer, announcing their acquisition of Performable in June and their HubSpot App Marketplace last week. Both events mark a continued expansion of their product.

The company gave me a brief preview of the App Marketplace back in May, when the public beta had just launched. App markets are quite the fashion right now, and HubSpot’s joins the Eloqua AppCloud announced in June. In both cases, what’s really happening is the vendor has published APIs that make it easier for other vendors to build products that integrate with their systems. Such APIs are available to varying degrees for other marketing automation products too, so an app marketplace isn’t quite as huge a leap as it may seem. But marketplaces do make it easier to find compatible applications and, done right, ensure that deployment is very simple.

I couldn’t find a public list of the available HubSpot apps, but their press release cites a connector for Microsoft Dynamics CRM and my notes from May mention custom analytics and shopping cart integration.

Unlike smartphone app stores or Salesforce.com AppExchange, the marketing automation vendor app markets won’t establish their products as “platforms” for a broad range of tasks (although the vendors can dream). They instead extend the functionality of the core product and, mostly, simplify integration with other products that already exist independently. In other words, the app markets are useful but not huge strategic differentiators.

Acquisitions, on the other hand, can be strategically decisive. HubSpot didn’t make that claim for its Performable deal, which shows an admirable sense of reality. Performable offers some interesting capabilities but nothing that radically alters HubSpot’s market position.

The main feature of Performable is an ability to define “events”, which can be page visits, form submissions, or other Web behaviors. This is a useful extension of standard Web behavior tracking techniques. Like other Web tracking, it requires users to install a small Javascript tag on their Web pages. Performable also has existing connectors with a variety of social media, help desk, email, billing, chat and CRM systems. Events and connectors make it easy to build a central database of customer behavior.

Performable leverages this central database with some impressive reporting, showing the first, last, and intervening sources (i.e., the Web site they came from) for visitors who reach each event. Although HubSpot already had reasonable Web analytics, Performable's ability to incorporate additional external activity is a substantial improvement.

Events can also trigger multi-step campaigns that send an email or call an external URL. The URL calls can including parameters with customer information or other data, providing lightweight integration with nearly any external system. Performable also has an impressive landing page builder that supports a/b testing and can ensure that visitors assigned to a particular test group are treated consistently in later visits.

However, the multi-step campaign engine is quite basic. It allows wait periods and conditional steps, but does not allow grouping to automatically exclude customers who meet one condition from subsequent steps. That's a pretty basic feature, typically used to send different messages to different segments at the same stage of a campaign. Users who wanted to do this would need to write conditions for each step that exclude conditions for previous steps. This can be a pain-staking and error-prone chore.

Multi-step campaigns are a weakness in the existing HubSpot system, so it's disappointing that Performable doesn't provide much help. Somewhat similarly, Performable relies on third-party email systems, so it doesn't directly improve HubSpot’s existing email engine, which also lags competitors.

But HubSpot made clear that the Performable acquisition was as much about getting first-rate development talent as about the product itself. In fact, the entire Performable staff joined HubSpot after the acquisition and Performable CEO David Cancel is now HubSpot’s Chief Product Officer. So in that sense, at least, the acquisition is indeed strategic.

Read More

The Pond Just Got More Crowded: Google, Salesforce.com and Sequoia Invest in HubSpot

Summary: HubSpot announced a $32 million investment yesterday by Sequoia Partners, Google and Salesforce.com. This could be a real game-changer in the small business marketing automation landscape.

If you heard a loud thud late Tuesday afternoon, it was the sound of two shoes dropping. Salesforce.com and Google announced their long-anticipated entry into the marketing automation industry, in the baby-step form of investments in HubSpot. The $32 million fourth round of funding was led by Sequoia Capital, which apparently provided most of the money (numbers were not announced). It followed $33 million in earlier funding since the company was founded in 2006.

In many ways, this investment strikes me as more significant than last year’s acquisitions of Unica by IBM and of Aprimo by Teradata, which were widely touted as “validating” the concept marketing automation and involved vastly more money ($1 billion combined). Both Unica and Aprimo were long-established vendors with fundamentally stable products sold primarily to large enterprises: although their new owners may market them more broadly, they’ll be selling pretty much what IBM and Teradata always sold (big systems) to pretty much the same customers (big companies). Even the most ambitious vision articulated by the vendors – radically more integrated, analytically-driven marketing management – won’t really change their sector of the marketing automation industry.

But HubSpot plays in a different pond, where the frogs are more numerous and much livelier. It’s selling to small and mid-size companies and business-to-business marketers, who are just dipping their toes into marketing automation. It’s not yet clear which vendors will dominate the industry or what form the successful systems will take. And the current frogs are all small enough that a powerful newcomer could displace them, especially if it had a natural entry point such as, oh, Google AdWords or Salesforce.com’s CRM system.

During the analyst call that followed the announcement, HubSpot co-founders Brian Halligan and Dharmesh Shah made quite clear that they hoped to leverage the Google and Salesforece.com relationships in just this way. This will involve tighter technical integration with both Google and Saleforce.com, and apparently some marketing to the Salesforce.com customer base.

Of course, the entry of Salesforce.com as a direct competitor has long been the worst nightmare of B2B marketing automation vendors, who exist largely because Salesforce.com doesn’t give marketers what they need. A viable marketing solution within Salesforce.com would preempt many purchases of a separate marketing automation system in companies where Salesforce.com is already in place.

Yesterday’s announcement doesn’t mean the nightmare has come true – this is a small investment by Salesforce.com, not an acquisition, and it’s quite clear that HubSpot intends to go public on its own. But if Salesforce.com likes what it sees, who knows where that will lead? The same goes for Google, although Google Venture Partner Rich Miner went out of his way during the analyst call to say that the Google investment was financial (i.e., intended to make money on its own) rather than strategic (i.e., intended to extend Google’s own business).

All this is good and kudos to HubSpot for getting this far and landing such powerful partners. The company also deserves praise for articulating a sound vision of future growth through expanded product features. This is as close as you can reasonably expect them to come to acknowledging that the existing HubSpot is far from a complete marketing automation solution. (See my December 2009 post for a more detailed discussion of HubSpot's capabilities; basically, they are still pretty weak in outbound email, lead scoring, and nurturing, which are all core components of standard B2B marketing automation. They also lack integrated CRM features – a hallmark of small business marketing automation – although the Salesforce.com connection probably makes that moot.)

Yet something really bothered me about yesterday’s announcement. HubSpot has always been quite clear that it is focused on small-to-mid-size businesses and that it offers “inbound marketing” rather than traditional marketing automation. In fact, it has always been highly dismissive of traditional outbound marketing as essentially obsolete – a claim it repeated again yesterday.

Despite this background, yesterday’s announcement positioned the firm’s competitors as the mid-to-large company B2B marketing automation vendors, listing Eloqua, Marketo, Genius, Manticore Technology, and Neolane by name. This wasn’t a casual comment – the press release twice called the HubSpot a marketing industry “leader” and included a pie chart showing “over 50% Market Share”, a claim that is only true if you (a) count clients, not revenue (an absurd mixing of apples and oranges in this case) and (b) ignore HubSpot’s most direct competitors, the other small business marketing automation vendors including Infusionsoft (6,000+ customers vs. HubSpot’s 4,000+) and OfficeAutoPilot (2,000+ customers). [Note: comments from Infusionsoft and HubSpot, posted below, suggest those vendors may compete less than I thought when I wrote this. But I still think excluding them from the analysis is wrong.]

Here’s what I consider a more realistic view of the market:

- Based on revenue, HubSpot had less than 7% of the B2B marketing automation market in 2010 ($15 million HubSpot revenue vs. $225 million total) (see my post of January 11, 2011) and an even smaller fraction if you include B2C marketing automation.

- Based on client counts, adding Infusionsoft and OfficeAutoPilot reduces HubSpot’s share to about 25% (data from our B2B Marketing Automation Vendor Selection Tool).

- The small business vendors, including Infusionsoft, OfficeAutoPilot,It's those firms, and other small-business-focused competitors including Act-On Software, Net-Results, and Marketbright, who have the most to fear from HubSpot.

Now, I wasn’t born yesterday and am rarely upset to see a company spin the facts in its favor. In fact, as a marketer myself, I have a grudging admiration for people who do it deftly. But a distortion this large really bothers me. I could say that’s because it harms the market by confusing people, but I think the real reason is more visceral: it insults my own intelligence and that of everyone else who is apparently expected to believe it. What’s even sadder is these particular claims are totally unnecessary: HubSpot is a strong company with a solid product and excellent story. It doesn't need exaggeration.

I’ve also found HubSpot to be quite open and honest in the past, which makes this all the more puzzling. I hope it’s just an aberration.

One other point from today: in a related blog post, Brian Halligan gives some insight into HubSpot’s business strategy and the reasons for this round of funding. I’ve no complaints about any of it. But there’s an intriguing graphic that shows HubSpot’s lead sources – intended to illustrate how HubSpot “eats our own dog-food” through inbound marketing. Am I reading this wrong, or does it show that (bad, obsolete, interruptive) email is their largest source of business, while organic search and social media barely register? Now THAT's what I call openness.

Read More