Letters, feedback, get it off your chest: 27 January 2010

James Cryer calls for action on promoting print outside of the industry itself, while the debate on print selling continues. Why not write in and let us know your thoughts on this, or any other stories.

Letter of the week:

Re: Print myths busted at LIA seminar

Years ago many printing companies displayed the famous words of Beatrice Warde, describing our industry as an "armoury of fearless truth" and an "incessant trumpet of trade". Have we gone soft?
 
The LIA forum to be held next month is to be congratulated, because as an industry, we're being beaten to death by perception prevailing over fact. Emails are gradually becoming the preferred medium-of-choice for the financial services industry.
 
However, Phil Lawrence will be telling us all the stuff we want to hear and/or may already know.
 
In other words, he'll be preaching to the converted - and what's the point of that? He'll get a lot of cheers - but what we want as an industry, is to engage with the enemy.
 
Why not have a genuine forum, whereby we bring along someone from the stock exchange or a large corporation, financial services or consumer advocates  groups. In other words, someone who believes, with equal vigour, in the cost justification of sending shareholder reports by email and who is actively "against" print as the default medium to communicate with shareholders (and others).
 
Alternatively, why not invite members from the mainstream media (Fairfax, News, etc) to cover the event and let us communicate our virtues (as "accidental environmentalists") to a wider audience? The LIA forum may actually be a newsworthy event in its own right: "Industry Holds Itself up to Fearless Inspection!" – could be the next day's SMH lead headline!
 
We constantly say we want the understanding of the public, and this LIA event is a perfect forum to promote such views - why not exploit it - the way the "bad guys" always exploit the media?
 
Perhaps as an industry we've been too inward-looking, too conservative, too polite? Now the stakes are higher we may have to think more strategically about getting our message out into the public domain. What better way than to use the upcoming LIA forum on this contentious topic as a launching pad to send a message to the community at large, about the environmental impacts of print versus email.
 
It's great to have a meeting where we all agree with each other. But what really drives the point home to a wider audience, is a forum that sends out a signal that as an industry we're on the rampage! It might even help attract a few more adherents, as I'm sure many young school-leavers regard us as an old-fashioned industry.
 
Let's rattle the cage and build on the good work which the APIA has started.
 
James Cryer

Re: Traditional print selling is dead - Print21 magazine article

Oh dear, why is it every second article one reads talks about doom & gloom and another revolution of one kind or another, with another industry guru quoting this or that (who decides who is a guru anyway?)

Whilst there is considerable merit in what is being espoused in this article it is hardly news to anyone. I agree some aspects of traditional selling is dying – it has been for years. No longer can sales people be order takers or nice folk that rock up with nothing to offer except to enjoy a good yarn with the buyer. Of course they have to add value, engage at a higher level than ever before –  isn’t this basic evolution that is happening across all industry sectors?

Technology is a wonderful tool but it is just that a tool and will never replace quality sales people who develop relationships and inspire clients to do business with them. I for one welcome the advancements in technology and the opportunities it provides; it is a great supplement to any revenue stream but come the day when a good sales person is no longer required or when people to people contact is no longer effective, it will be the day I will pull up stumps and call it a day.

My experience is that both forms of approach need to be embraced. Please give us sales professionals a break, we know the game plan is changing, the good ones adapt as do the good companies but to say sales is dead is a big call – average folk or those stuck in a time warp will always perish – any good ones out there who continue to perform and understand the importance of relationships, networking and the hussle, please give me a call – we could do coffee. Bet you can’t do that online!

Brett Johnson

An excellent article by Peter Barnet.
John Taylor

*********

Re: Industry activists target anti-paper website

Congratulations Tim Woods for taking Paperless Aliance's’ spin and misinformation to the ACCC. Perhaps Mr Dee, instead of chest-thumping about legal action and integrity, would care to read 'Are Pixels Greener than Paper?' in the attached issue of 'Down to Earth.' Having read this information, would Mr Dee then care to comment on this forum, specifically on topics raised such as:

Does he agree or disagree with the recent US research that shows the Pulp & Paper Industry accounted for just 0.7% of purchased electricity versus 1.5% for Electronic Data Centres? Furthermore, does he agree or disagree that the Pulp & Paper Industry's fossil fuel energy usage is declining due to ultra-efficient use of renewable and carbon-neutral sources?
 
Does Mr Dee agree or disagree that paper is biodegradable, recyclable and reusable and that (in the US:- % is higher in Australia), 60% of all paper is recycled? Does he know only 18% of electronic devices are recycled and that they represent serious toxicity to eco-systems due to the metals and chemicals used in their manufacture and degradation?
 
"The fruits of our high-tech revolution are pure poison if these products are improperly disposed of at the end of their useful life" - would Mr Dee care to discuss this statement from Ted Smith, founder of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition?
 
Does Mr Dee acknowledge that for every tree harvested to make renewable, recyclable and biodegradable paper (that also locks in Carbon for its entire life cycle), two more are planted? In the US alone that is 1.7 million trees every day. Western countries typically hold 30-50 per cent more forest coverage today than in 1950.
 
Jonathan Porrit, Chairman of the UK Sustainability Development Commission said: "There aren't many industries around that can aspire to becoming genuinely sustainable. The Pulp and Paper Industry, however, is one of them. It is inherently sustainable." Agree or disagree Mr Dee?
 
Finally, does Mr Dee and his organisation agree or disagree that they have failed to inform Australian businesses and the public – in a fair and reasonable manner, concerning the truth about pulp and paper and indeed, may have potentially mislead many people into believing that paperless, electronic means of communication are significantly less environmentally damaging?

Over to you, Mr Dee.

Andy McCourt

*********

Re: Letters, feedback, get it off your chest: 20 January 2010

Nicholas,
What I say is: if you can’t print it, sell it.

Pedro