If you compete with Zoominfo, you have to understand Zoominfo…so you can exploit its weaknesses.
Highlights from the Zoominfo podcast
I could have listened to a long podcast with CEO Henry Schuck to understand the company’s weaknesses, but I didn’t have to because Matthew Robinson provided a time-stamped list of highlights. Or maybe Robinson didn’t do it himself, because Robinson is no longer necessary.
This first one caught my attention as the biometric product marketing expert, for obvious reasons.
(13:34) How they automated product marketing: From 26 people translating product info into content, down to 2 people managing AI agents.
Basically, mining data and auto-creating content.
And this second one just plain caught my attention.
(27:32) When you know the AI pressure is working: His CMO literally dreamed she disappointed him because her kids weren’t AI algorithms yet.
It’s good to know that Zoominfo has a distracted CMO. And that the CEO thinks it’s funny.
When Zoominfo’s headcount hits zero
And it’s awfully amusing that 24 product marketers lost their jobs. Remember the claims that AI wouldn’t replace you, but would let you do your job better? Lies.
Zoominfo’s business, by the way, is providing information on companies and the people who work for them. And as companies like Zoominfo right size, there is less demand for their services.
And that’s when Zoominfo will eliminate the position of the CMO and automate it.
On the long-standing debate on the mix between automation and manual operations, here’s what the Cyber Security Hub says:
100+ AI security startups claim they can replace Tier 1 and Tier 2 SOC analysts with 24/7 LLMs. They promise AI can triage, detect, and respond—no humans needed.
But here’s the reality:
AI tools hallucinate and miss context
Custom attacks slip by without human insight
Escalations stall when no one’s validating alerts…
…This isn’t about rejecting AI. It’s about using it wisely—and never cutting people out of the loop.
I’ve consistently believed that when a company is in trouble, it pares down to three key elements:
Engineers to create the product.
Salespeople to drive the sales of the product.
Executives, because they’re always critically important and can never be let go, can they?
Actually I’m kidding about the last one. There are plenty of cases where executives, and even company founders, determined that they were no longer affordable and left their own companies.
But many companies realize that engineers and salespeople aren’t enough, and they actually hire product marketers and other marketers.
Take UiPath, which self-identifies as “a global leader in agentic automation, empowering enterprises to harness the full potential of AI agents to autonomously execute and optimize complex business processes.”
It just hired a new Chief Marketing Officer (CMO): Michael Atalla, previously of Microsoft, F5, and other tech firms.
And hopefully he’ll remove “improve outcomes” from future press releases.
Draw a realistic picture of a wooden floor in a cabin on a sunny fall day. The focus of the picture is on a 12 Oz aluminum can of “Impact” with blue letters on a mustard yellow background. The can is illuminated by a ray of sunlight from a cracked door to the outside
So I just created a short reel for no purpose other than to illustrate Theodore Roosevelt’s famous saying “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”
But then I began thinking. For product marketers, is “speaking softly” an idea that should be relegated to the early 20th century? The answer to that question partially depends on whether you are marketing in an earlier awareness stage, or a later conversion stage.
But the reel doesn’t get that deep.
Speak softly.
An aside (overly serious product marketers skip this part)
Originally this reel was supposed to be a single image, with no stick, showing President Roosevelt to the audio accompaniment of Paul Simon’s “Loves Me Like a Rock.”
To be honest, ORIGINALLY the President was supposed to be Nixon, whose mama loved him and was a saint.
But once Roosevelt got behind the Presidential podium, my mind traveled to earlier times in the Dakotas and Cuba, and the stick—softly—inserted itself.
Excluded from the reel but not forgotten: my earlier fictional conception of Roosevelt overseeing the construction of the Panama Canal, previously shared here.
A man, a plan…
And if you haven’t already figured it out, Teddy appears to be safe from the restrictions from Google’s guidelines on depictions of famous figures. As I said before, no picture generation of President Richard Nixon, or President Taylor Swift.
“This quote often attributed to Theodore Roosevelt is actually a West African proverb. Roosevelt writes this in a letter to Henry Sprague on January 26, 1900.”
A year and a half later, after Roosevelt’s political enemies had maneuvered him into the then-obscure position of Vice President of the United States (subsequently characterized as a bucket of warm…spit), he expounded upon the phrase at the Minnesota State Fair on September 2, 1901.
Deep fried pizza on a stick. Not historically accurate.
(He and his political enemies had no way of knowing that later that month McKinley would be assassinated and Roosevelt would be President. Oops.)
“”Speak softly and carry a big stick—you will go far.” If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble; and neither will speaking softly avail, if back of the softness there does not lie strength, power. In private life there are few things more obnoxious than the man who is always loudly boasting; and if the boaster is not prepared to back up his words his position becomes absolutely contemptible. So it is with the nation. It is both foolish and undignified to indulge in undue self-glorification, and above all, in loose-tongued denunciation of other peoples.”
As Roosevelt noted, the “and” it’s important. A soft speaker without a big stick will not be persuasive.
But is speaking softly all that important?
Speaking loudly: Berliners, Crazy Eddie
There are certainly instances, both in diplomacy/politics and product marketing, in which speaking loudly is extremely effective. Avoiding the 21st century (we really don’t want to go there) and confining myself to the 20th, the masses of people at the Berlin Wall were very loud.
“The Treaty of Portsmouth formally ended the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05. The negotiations took place in August in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, and were brokered in part by U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt….Although the actual importance of Roosevelt’s mediation and personal pressure on the leadership in Moscow and Tokyo to the final agreement is unclear, he won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in moderating the talks and pushing toward peace.”
Of course, everyone knew that negotiations were taking place in Portsmouth, just like everyone knew that Egypt and Israel were negotiating at Camp David 70+ years later.
“The world of golf was left stunned on Tuesday as the PGA Tour, DP World Tour and rival Saudi-backed LIV circuit, who have been involved in a bitter fight that has split the sport, announced a shock agreement to merge and form one unified commercial entity….The bombshell announcement was slammed by many PGA Tour players who were left in the dark about the merger…”
Not historically accurate. I don’t think.
For the moment, ignore the fact that the merger hasn’t happened two years later. The heated war between the PGA and the LIV meant that while a merger made financial sense (see the NFL and the AFL bidding up football player prices in the 1960s), no one expected a PGA-LIV merger to happen.
As a wordsmith, it’s interesting to see how slight wording changes can affect…pictures.
Slight alterations in the wording of a Google Gemini prompt can cause dramatic changes in the resulting images. The final picture prompt included words such as “oversaturated” and “grandly.”
Google Gemini imposes severe restrictions against creating pictures of famous figures. You can’t create a picture of President Taylor Swift, for example. But Woody Guthrie is fair game, which is no surprise to anyone who knows of JibJab’s tussle with the Richmond Organization. But I digress.
But what if I uploaded a Wikipedia picture of a famous figure to Google Gemini, asked Gemini to describe it, then had Gemini create a picture based upon its own description?
Unfortunately it doesn’t always perform a perfect recreation, and I bet none of you can figure out the original famous figure depicted here.
The description, excluding her attire:
“The person in the image is a woman with fair skin and light-colored hair, possibly blonde or light brown. Her hair is styled with a slight wave and a side part. She appears to be of a mature age, with some wrinkles visible on her face, particularly around her eyes and mouth. Her eyes are light, likely blue or grey. Her nose is straight and her lips are thin. She has a serious or neutral expression.”