HERE&NOW

It’s becoming harder to justify gating content, and doesn’t reflect how B2B buyers behave. I 100% get the temptation. You put all this effort into producing valuable content - so it’s fair to expect data in exchange for information. But it also runs directly against why you should be creating B2B content in the first place. To: • Demonstrate expertise • Show your authority on a topic • Provide value long before a sale is considered Ultimately - all the above points come down to building trust. Which is the #1 deciding factor in getting a B2B sale over the line. B2B buying can be slow and risk heavy, and you need to build trust long before someone is directly ready to reach out for a new business conversation. I always come back to the idea of an ‘unfair value exchange’ - as a business trying to win business, you should always be giving away more than you’re trying to get back. Asking for something upfront before you’ve been able to show your value or start to build trust runs in contrast to this idea. There’s also the practical issue of AEO / SEO optimisation. It’s news to no one that the search landscape has changed massively - traditional & LLM tools won't spend as much (or any) time crawling your 30 page PDF, over a web page which has been optimised for that purpose. Which means all the content you invested time, money and effort into is effectively invisible/lost. You lose the upside of any reach and discovery that would’ve come from your content piece, along with the compounding effect that content delivers. The best content strategies (and what I recommend for my clients) is to do the opposite. Give more than you take. Reduce any and all friction. Let buyers self-educate, on their terms. If your content is valuable, people will come back They’ll remember you helped. Forms don’t build trust. Useful, generous content does. So a firm recommendation from me to whack a ‘sign up to our newsletter’ CTA on your site where it makes sense to ask for an email and stop gating your juiciest content pieces in 2026 😅

How many of you are planning on buying a new phone in the next two weeks? This was the question asked in a SXSW session with Tracksuit co-founder James Hurman last week. It was the best articulation of the 95/5 rule I’ve seen in practice. I keep coming back to this because short-termism keeps coming up in conversations and this framework really helps explain the reality of B2B marketing. This vid breaks down the 95/5 rule + the different attributes and mindsets of in & out of market buyers.

The data is in🤓 My key take-outs from Linkedin's latest research report on B2B brand & demand marketing - surveying 4,000 marketers: 📌 Optimal B2B marketing campaign budget split is 46% brand & 54% demand - compared to 60/40 for B2C 📌 Targeting both new and existing customers in marketing campaigns led to 1.6x higher business growth 📌 96% of marketers surveyed were measuring ROI on their marketing investment after 3 months, when the average B2B buying cycle is 6 & my fave take-out - data proving it takes 2.5+ years to see the impact of brand campaigns, while most B2B businesses surveyed (75%) were running their campaigns for 6 months or less. This also off the back off Mark Ritson saying earlier this month that businesses need to be consistent with their messaging for 'at least 20 years' to truly solidify their brand and positioning. Tough slog selling in a 20 year campaign vision to a board / team needing monthly growth updates 🫠... but a good reminder that campaigns take way longer than we typically give them to measure whether they've been truly successful. DM me and I can send you the full report if interested👊

It wasn't that long ago that we were trying to wrap our heads around why brand needed to lead performance. Fast forward to today and the mix has shifted. Brand led marketing has taken priority. If you're still in the bottom 20% - take this as your sign. The market has officially shifted. Are you keeping pace? Weekly pulse check survey by Mi3Australia

Trust is the new B2B marketing currency. We know people buy from people. We know B2B sales are driven by mitigating risk, not seeking gain. In an AI world this becomes more critical than ever. Connecting a business to the faces behind it is a differentiator. It's a way to share real experiences, show people how you think, and build credibility in a way that can't be replicated. Food for thought if you’re a B2B founder or senior leader still sitting on the social media sidelines. There's always an excuse not to get started, but there's never been a more important time.

If you're only advertising during your key selling periods, you're missing a huge opportunity. This research from Kantar's blueprint for brand growth shows that brands with an always on approach attracted 7x more buyers than those who were only present half the time. Take-outs from this: 1) Consistency trumps seasonality Having a consistent presence is better than only being active during times of year that might feel most relevant for your industry/buyers. Plan your annual budgets and activity to account for it. 2) Sales cycle If you're only marketing during your key selling period, you've already missed the boat. It takes time to go from awareness > action (no more so than in B2B), and an always-on approach keeps your brand top of mind for when someone is ready to make a purchase decision. 3) Cuts through the noise Chances are if you're thinking about advertising or ramping up during your busiest selling period, your competitors are too. Being always-on gives you an opportunity to be more strategic with your approach and get through to your prospects when others aren't. Seasonality is still so important. Being mindful of where target buyers are at allows you to tap into their state of mind to drive relevant marketing/messaging angles.. but being too driven by it means you're cutting yourself off from the cumulative gains of an always-on strategy.