This chart got a Wowsa from @bhalligan !
Mailchimp began their domination over Constant Contact in November of 2014 if you look at the Google Trend that Brian shared.
Mailchimp began their domination over Constant Contact in November of 2014 if you look at the Google Trend that Brian shared.
There was a point where the search result volume for Mailchimp and Constant Contact intersected Oct-Nov 2014. From that point until today MailChimp Surged at the expense of Constant Contact. 
It's definitely a "wow" that it happened. The "wow's" make me wonder what the "why's" are. I spent a few minutes trying to figure out what the heck happened leading up to that point. The search dramatically narrowed in July 2014.
In #Martech there is usually an announcement that starts interest followed by momentum of adoption of what has been announced resonates. I went to Google News and to the @Mailchimp blog to see what happened from July 2014 forward
I used the @waybackmachine to view the Mailchimp blog. I found two interesting posts. The first one posted on July 24, 2014. "The Purchased List is a Dead List" What? Mail Chimp is saying that? Why?
Why? Maybe that prior post was a setup to big announcement. Three weeks later this post made a big announcement for @MailChimp - "Marketing Automation for Everyone" MarketingAutomationChimp is a long name!
This was a well planned release. In the post @Mailchimp didn't just dip their toes in the water. They had things people wanted and released them. The prebuilt workflows were impressive. They must have gotten the feedback on what would be used the most. Feedback!
I then searched Google news and saw the first article that was returned for that period in 2014. @Mailchimp had the full court press on and the news hit the PR wire with this headline from another source. "Why Mailchimp is Killing Auto-Responders: The Rise of CRM"
Here is an excerpt from the post. It's clear MailChimp deliberately disrupted themselves and at the same time disrupted Constant Contact and AWeber. And they category changed with comparisons to @HubSpot Marketo and InfusionSoft.
MailChimp has been a brilliant second mover and made quite impactful moves building product on feedback. This allowed them to aggressively provide MVP's minimally viable products at low price points.
They consumed the share of the buyer first and then responded quickly when it was clear. To use a football analogy. This is a goal line stance on the 1st yard line going in for a touchdown.
Running a Quarterback sneak, Mail Chimp is the Quarter Back. The firstmovers in marketing automation are the line. Constant Contact is the defensive line. Mailchimp uses the first movers to block while they run past Constant contact in for the win.
For this play to work there is a requirement. Mailchimp must be a second mover with a low friction low priced but better product. Mailchimp vs. Constant Contact. The market cannot be fully penetrated. They can grab the full market.
If you look at the original google trend MailChimp waited until they were the dominant player in the space to disrupt themselves. They rivaled Constant Contact. This move was not to compete with the first movers in Marketing Automation. It was to beat Constant Contact.
However long term Mailchimp waited until 2014 until Marketing Automation was mature. The first movers are price locked against mailchimp. Their products are better, but to fend off mailchimp they must move upstream on Automation.
The first movers who are not constantly disrupting themselves will be the next "constant contacts". The first movers need to disrupt someone else upstream or they can also move downstream in a product area that isn't email or marketing automation.
It becomes a multi front war. The first movers can become second movers in emerging technology. Keeping prices low or free as a second mover is not hard. One other option is to form alliances and partners. The other is acquisitions.
This is the war for the first mover to prevent the second mover in their market from having a second mover advantage in what might be the next technology with mass adoption.
The other front of the war is the war upstream. These first movers in Automation can now attack on price and features towards those that moved upstream first on things like CRM and Platform.
If you any in the market are not proficient at multi-front battle they will lose. The organization needs to be formed in divisions. The organization who can most effectively manage scale, wins. Scale is more than internal ops.
Scale is beyond hiring and product dev. You need to maintain a precision and discipline on how your customer is reacting to how you are changing. No experiments! You can kill your brand otherwise.
Google has been the absolute best in this strategy. Credit to Google for creating a strong bench and creating CEO sets with Alphabet and even within the company. Apple also under Jobs hired CEO quality teams.
Silo's don't always work. To win you need a CEO who manages CEO's. It is important for companies to not lose the talent that is capable of being a CEO within the company. It is very difficult to create this dynamic through acquisition.
This is precisely why Apple is losing. Cook has not embraced what the person who hired him did. He is not hiring people who are the strongest leaders in the market. Apple has a broken feedback loop.
It is impossible to have the matrix of vertical and horizontal silo's communicating together without true autonomous leadership. A CEO of CEO's is what works best. Just study war. It's ok to have a Patton in your ranks. It's how you win.
