RSS iconemail icon
1
comment

PR vs Substance

Pondered by Nat over a year ago

I had a conversation last week about two competing businesses. One with substance, but no PR machine, the other with great PR but not a lot a lot behind it. The one with good PR is currently winning out.

Having come into contact with PR based businesses, I feel like I’ve seen first hand how vulnerable the smoke and mirrors are but how good they look from the surface. I’m a firm believer that in this case ‘slow and steady wins the race’ and startups have a tendency to boom and bust because they focus too much too early on convincing the world they are more successful than they are.

It’s a good strategy to put your competitors off, but don’t businesses need to focus on growing their customer base, not playing mind-games with other businesses?


One Response to “PR vs Substance”

  1. Strings Says:

    PR and no substance AND limited capital = imminent de-listing and/or receivership (lots of capital only defers the inevitable by bank balance divided by weekly payroll).

    It’s quite a simple equation really (-_-) and one you should avoid being part of like the plague!

Leave a Reply