united-states, marketing, productI have a product that I’m bringing back to life. My father wrote it as a side project back in the days of VB 6.0 (it was a simpler time) and it only really had one client, but that client stayed on for around ten years. We thought a couple times about updating it over that time, but ultimately the ROI just didn’t support taking up either of our time.
We’re looking now to resurrect that project and make it a bit more modern and profitable, and I’m curious of whether it’s reasonable to say we were founded in 1996, or if it’s safer to just go with, well, a week or two ago.
I’m not so much concerned with the legality of it all, we have a pretty good claim to the trademark, and we’ve had a one-page website for it for as long as I can remember, basically just saying “this site is under construction” with no intent to update it. But I am wondering about the ethics and practicality.
From what I can tell, the main concerns would be:
Of course, there are certain advantages too, marketing being number one. Particularly having a viable date before 2000 seems like it could be a very good tool.
Am I forgetting anything? Are there pros or cons of picking either the new or old date? Or are there standards off of which I should be making this decision? And I know I said I’m not overly concerned with legality, but as a bonus, have there been any precedent-setting cases wherein a company was (or was not) found to be using false advertising through similar means?
Maybe it doesn’t even matter, and founding date is simply a legacy term that people don’t really care about in tech any more?
I do think it’s noteworthy to mention, as I’ve implied, that we’re keeping the same name, and obviously it’s the same kind of program, with the same goals in mind.
I would go with the 1996 date. And with the story about your dad. Build on that story. How did he get the idea? How did you get involved? What’s been going since then? Why is there a need for the service now? Are you in this together? What are your different roles? All those things can be part of the story.
If you think about why you want two contradicting things at the same time, you’ll find that they really don’t contradict. All you have to do is make it more obvious for your clients.
The product is new. Like a new a brand new redesigned car. Obviously, people like new stuff better. This means that the product is a response to the most current market needs and most likely made with use of modern technology.
The product is built by someone with experience in the industry (e.g. Toyota). The longer it is on the market the better. This means that the company is using all the knowledge and experience it acquired to build the brand new product. That’s why old companies usually proudly mention that.
Really depends on the market for the product, and in my experience being old in the software industry on average is not seen as a positive. I’d suggest focusing on the value you produce now, not marketing the age of the product; after all one customer over ten years really is what it is.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.