<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1324445537888680&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

Podcast: with Keith Petri - The Ideal Future of Marketing

NetWise Aug 11, 2021 11:23:00 AM
Listen:

 

Show Notes:

Our guest this week is Keith Petri, the CEO of Lockr. He's a data advocate, with a decade of experience working with consumer data. He joins us to talk about what he's seen as the data-driven marketing landscape has evolved. We dig in on what we mean when we talk about consumer data, how ad targeting is different from the "discovery"' mechanisms built into platforms like Netflix and Spotify, and how thinking about both of those things can get is to a better ideal future of consumer data and marketing functions.

We start by talking about how Keith thinks about marketing, and his idea that marketing is necessary, but we don't like it because currently it tends to be interruptive and inconvenient. He believes that it's possible to have ads that we actually like seeing, just look at the superbowl.

Then we get into talking about why we perceive a difference between marketers using data to retarget us with ads and platforms like Netflix or Spotify using very similar data internally in order to suggest more content they think we'll like. We tend to think of "discovery" functions as different then marketing, but are they really?

This gets us to the reality that your data isn't worth as much as you think. People like to say that "data is the new oil." Well, oil takes refining, and then you need an engine to burn it in before it has the value that we see out of gasoline. Similarly, consumer data is one useful as part of a bigger system (or inside of platforms like Netflix or Spotify.)

As an example of how we can rethink this, Keith digs in on Uber data and ways that it could be used differently, or used outside of the system to benefit the consumer in different and novel ways (that aren't just a "data dividend".) This, of course gets us to Lockr and Keith's mission of creating this ideal future of marketing.

Want to hear more about it, click on that player above to listen!

Links:

Skip the line to sign up for Lockr: app.lockrmail.com/data-driven-marketer

https://blog.prototypr.io/how-spotify-discovery-algorithm-works-fae8f63466ab

https://www.wired.com/story/opinion-andrew-yangs-plan-to-pay-you-for-your-data-doesnt-add-up/

More Netwise:

YouTube | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Web I Blog+Newsletter

Transcript:

Adam Kerpelman:

So how you feel about fidget spinners?

Brian Jones:

I have tons of them on my desk. I certainly have all kinds of things to fidget with, but that's right, man, the fidgety thing it's covered with them.

Keith Petri:

I'm more an Adam's boat where I fidget things but not fidget spinners. Is that copywriting? Because I feel like everybody makes those.

Brian Jones:

I don't know.

Keith Petri:

Mine are too loud. I have poker chips. That's my main fidget spinners.

Adam Kerpelman:

Can you do the like riffle thing where you [inaudible 00:00:31].

Keith Petri:

All I do is riffle all day long.

Adam Kerpelman:

Hey everybody. This is Data-driven Marketer sponsored by NetWise. I'm Adam.

Brian Jones:

I'm Brian.

Keith Petri:

I'm Keith.

Adam Kerpelman:

Welcome back for another hang-in the data basement. Thanks for joining us. And special thanks to our guests this week, Keith Petri. Did I say that right? I realized that I've fallen out of my host duties. Usually, I would confirm the pronunciation of your last name.

Keith Petri:

It is Petri, but everybody says Petri.

Adam Kerpelman:

So close. Sweet. Well, in spite of my inability to pronounce your name properly, thank you for joining us. Do you want to just jump, right in? Keith, you can give us some of your background and kind of why you're here on the Data-driven Marketer podcast.

Keith Petri:

Yeah. Appreciate it, Adam. Brian, thanks for having me appreciate NetWise putting this together. From my perspective, I am very excited to talk about everything data-driven. I think the names perfectly fitting. And my background I've spent over a decade building consumer profiles within Adtech and MarTech and monetizing that data across various industries, everything from paid media analytics and even hedge funds. So excited to dive in and see where the conversation takes us.

Adam Kerpelman:

Very cool. So we talked a little beforehand. I think ultimately we're going to get to where we frequently end up, I think, which is the conversations about the promise of the future of marketing and things like that, which we'll get to your current projects. But I think maybe the place to start is first an exploration of what is marketing now?

Adam Kerpelman:

From your standpoint, what are we talking about when we even say data in that context? Just, there's so much different data out there. I feel like before we can jump in any kind of conversation, we need to level-set what data we're even talking about here. What is marketing now from your perspective? And how does data play into it?

Keith Petri:

I personally, that marketing is a necessity, but it's also an inconvenience and a cost, and it's unaccepted inconvenience and cost. And for the most part, consumers are willing to be inconvenienced because it minimizes their personal costs. And from where we sit, I think that that is something that is easily rethought but very hard to enact because enacting it would be like ripping off a bandaid and starting at zero. And unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of immediately starting at zero.

Keith Petri:

And that's painting a picture for a very long road ahead of us, of innovating within this field and changing it from what it is today to what it can be in the future. And the main hurdles, just like a lot of industries. And a lot of innovation is how do we maintain the status quo today? Not interrupt any revenue streams and not interrupt any large players while still completely reinventing what it means to be a marketer and how that economy supports an entire ecosystem.

Adam Kerpelman:

Mm-hmm (affirmative). I think you said something interesting there in terms of personal costs. I think it's easy in the modern ecosystem to talk about the idea that, like you said, marketing is inconvenient. I want to meet the ads. I want to get my TiVo so I can DVR things. And then cut out the ads. Everybody's trying constantly to avoid ads.

Adam Kerpelman:

The same time if they all went away suddenly, we're so used to it we wouldn't know anything anymore. We would have no idea what movies are coming out. Actually had a real example of this in my life. I've lived in LA for, I don't know, eight years, and then I moved to DC., and in DC, there's no billboards. The only place that you see ads is on the subway and then at bus stance.

Adam Kerpelman:

And so I went from LA where what's going on in pop culture constantly because it's just everywhere all the time to a town where it's really not. DC is very clean in that regard. And I suddenly had no idea what movies were coming out anymore. And I didn't realize it until I went back to visit LA, and I went, "No shit, that movie's coming out. I want to see that."

Adam Kerpelman:

And it made me very aware of the extent to which exactly what we're talking about. There would be personal costs for everyone if we just stopped all marketing and it kind of makes me wonder, Brian, maybe this is one where you have thoughts. Before marketing was invented, what did we have? People just didn't know about things? Or you had to go to a library and look up how to fix your washing machine?

Brian Jones:

It's interesting question because it's a really great question for our guests as we bring people on what do you think marketing is? How do you think about it? How does exist in the world? And I really liked your answer that you started with its necessary, which is an interesting choice. And I like that too. And then you said, but it's an inconvenience.

Brian Jones:

I was totally agreeing, but then I had the thought that sometimes, and not very often, but sometimes it's not an inconvenience. And then Adam, you were talking about like, you're trying to fast forward through all the ads, which is like 99% of the time true. But what about Superbowl? For instance, it's kind of an unfair choice, but sometimes we're thrilled with the ads. Why aren't we always thrilled with ads? And why does marketing get this bad rap? Because I don't think it's always an inconvenience, even though I think I tend to recognize it that way and talk about it that way.

Keith Petri:

Brian, it's like you're reading my tweets because I just tweeted about Superbowl and ads being part of the experience less than 24 hours ago.

Brian Jones:

That's great.

Keith Petri:

I think that's a completely fair statement. And I think that ads and this is repetitive. Ads can be additive to an experience. They can be complimentary. And I think that to Adam's point, they can be almost a part of your life that you will miss should it be removed. I was more making a macro statement on the essence of the open and free press is a hotly debated topic right now in all regards.

Keith Petri:

And the open and free press is being threatened. Not by any political discussions, we don't even need to go there or touch that right now, but the open and free press is being threatened by the depreciation of online trackers. And that's not really being talked about in terms of, "Hey, we have these identifiers that enable these publishers, any publishers to monetize their readership at a premium."

Keith Petri:

And if those identifiers are taken away, for whatever reason, that open and free press will no longer be able to be financially supportive. And from that regard, it is something that I believe is a necessity. It is an inconvenience for some people. It is additive for others. I'm in the additive camp. I love ads, by the way. And it's a cost-saving for the consumer because they're now left with a choice for the most part, in any of the experience that encapsulates ads they're left in this scenario where they will either need to pay to subsidize the service of whatever type it is or they need to be content with having that service be monetized, the ads.

Brian Jones:

What do you think's happening with services where customers are paying now to not have ads? And we're not even sure that was the promise. I'm thinking of Netflix specifically, but I'm seeing this on all the streaming systems, for instance, where they have ad-free versions, but you can also pay less and have the ad version.

Brian Jones:

And Netflix, I don't necessarily. I don't remember it being part of the conversation. It was ad-free. It was just a service that evolved into a streaming system that just didn't happen to have ads, maybe because they started with the DVR rental model.

Adam Kerpelman:

There have recently been whisperings of an ad supported option for Netflix.

Brian Jones:

It would seem crazy not to have that because what's so interesting with ads as a business model. And I think this touches on kind of where we're probably headed with this. Individual's not worth very much. I only generate so much value for a business where I'm like watching TV or reading news articles.

Brian Jones:

And it seems like much more so watching TV than necessarily reading news articles. But in aggregate, as a business model, Netflix has what, close to a billion people, subscribed to it, hundreds of millions. Even if you're making a couple bucks a day, that adds up to a tremendous business model. But it's a weird business model.

Adam Kerpelman:

I'm in LA. I started in entertainment. I understand how a lot of this stuff works. The industry still doesn't know what to do with the idea that Netflix is just printing money. They keep saying, "We'll do this thing." And it doesn't compare to the amount of money that Netflix can throw at making content. And it's so much higher than the budgets of these movies that they're used to dealing with that they're still sort of like, "Well, what if we put up 300 million for another Chris Hemsworth joint?" That's like, Netflix doesn't care. They'll just do that too.

Brian Jones:

So previous are ads. So movies are supported by ads. We just don't think of them as ads. That's a smart word. People like them.

Adam Kerpelman:

Well gets to the split that I think we are sort of dancing around here, which is there's the ad itself, which is, in this case, it's a trailer for a movie. They want you to know that the movie's coming out, and then there is how they make sure that you see ad and the right person sees it. Netflix runs ads in that they have trailers for their future content. You will sign up.

Adam Kerpelman:

And they run those ads on other places to try to get you to come to Netflix and sign up for it. But that's different from knowing that I watched Netflix. Here's what I've watched. So I'll probably like this next thing. What's interesting there is Netflix is tracking the same contextual data. They're just using it in their disquote discovery system to suggest more Netflix stuff that they think I'll like to watch.

Adam Kerpelman:

And they're actually really good at it. I never see trailers for this giant swath of stuff that they make that's really successful, but it's all targeted at 14-year-old girls. I never see it because they were like, "Well you're not going to watch that." My wife, on the other hand, when she's logged into her account, sees all those trailers.

Keith Petri:

I do think that there's an interesting transgression or whatever. We can go deep on this topic, and it's not necessarily where we were going with the conversation, but on Netflix itself, they do utilize some data to optimize their recommendations. But at the same time, if they've invested heavily in a specific title, they can also promote that title and make sure they hit figures that justify their investment there. They're owning a lot more of the stack than historically.

Brian Jones:

I think this is interesting because it's showing so many other ways that we're seeing things that are kind of like advertising, they're marketing, they're educating, they're exposing us to new things we wouldn't see otherwise. And even just in Netflix, there are a dozen different ways that that happens. Whether its little teasers at the beginning of something you're watching, or like you said, out the suggested things or ad you see somewhere else driving you to become an ethics subscriber.

Brian Jones:

I think this speaks interestingly at large in what marketing is these days because there's so many ways that we engage with information and media. There are like an infinite number of creative ways that people are getting their information to us now, whether it's in games, on a website, in a magazine embedded at the top of an email, how Gmail has weird little like fake emails.

Brian Jones:

There's no limit anymore. It's not like you can just buy a print ad in a magazine. I think we don't recognize all the things that are going on in regular day life, which speaks kind of complexity of the data problem.

Adam Kerpelman:

I think one of the most interesting places where I bring this up, I think I can bring it back around to an initial topic we talked about that's super interesting if only for a soundbite get into a podcast. I've said for a long time that the winner of the Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube Music fight, it's going to come down to discovery, ultimately.

Adam Kerpelman:

Everyone will be able to host everyone's all of the music. That part of it is not novel anymore. The part where it replaces the radio to some degree so that I can find new music is the thing that matters. What's going to be the best algorithm for discovery? Because the radio is not a part of my life anymore like it used to be. And so it used to be that the people that had the mechanism to get on the stations were the people that had the power to get their singles in front of whatever. And then those turn into the hits and all that kind of stuff.

Adam Kerpelman:

It's a completely different ecosystem now. And so what they have its same as I was describing with Netflix, there is a cache of data about your behavior that they can use to drive a discovery algorithm to say, "We think you'll like this song too." And then put that song in front of me. But, and this is the topic we talked about earlier. This is a great example of why your data isn't worth as much as you think.

Adam Kerpelman:

And that complicates the whole broader conversation around, "I should be able to monetize this. I should be able to get a data-driven sort of whatever." But the fact of everything that I listened to is not worth that much by itself. It's only worth that much if it lives inside of Spotify's ecosystem. Along with all the tracks.

Keith Petri:

Let's take my favorite example, which is actually your Uber data. Uber is able to leverage vast amounts of data. There's two different things here, by the way. There's how much data at scale, meaning how many individuals are generating the same structured data asset. And number two, what layering on top of it is that company providing?

Keith Petri:

So internally at Uber, you have all ridership data. You have for Brian, every time he gets picked up at his home, how frequently he's going to his office versus the airport versus a coffee shop versus getting picked up at bars at night. What cities does he travel to? What airports is he picked up at? We've done studies internally. What percentage of your travel do you rely on Uber? And we've found 84% of our users are leveraging Uber at one end of their airport trip at a minimum.

Keith Petri:

And so when you look into this data, is that data that Brian is generating useful? Can he sell it anywhere? This is my Uber ride information. No is the short answer. Nobody's in the market. I'm not going to buy Brian's Uber ride history. However, internally at Uber, it is worth an unquantifiable number in terms of value because they know how many people go to that hotel on a daily basis. They know how many people take Uber to an airport.

Keith Petri:

They know the likelihood of a necessity of an Uber at 4:00 AM in the morning in specific neighborhoods based off of their prior activity. There is tremendous opportunity with that data internally at Uber based off of the algorithms that they have built on that structured data. And they want to make sure that they continue generating that data.

Keith Petri:

Now, if you gave every single individual access to their data, which is obviously what is going on across the Australian privacy act, GDPR, which is widely known, and the efforts in the domestic US, mostly at the state level, what does that mean? What are the benefits? And there really aren't any because there's nobody who built a layer on top of that data to do something with it.

Keith Petri:

And if you even take any of the historical companies that have made significant and value and efforts in this space of your data, your value earn money off of your data. So on and so forth, they've maybe achieved some scale. Let's just assume that they've hit some significant scale, which a lot of them haven't, but let's just assume they do. They can't go out and try to sell raw consumer data. That's not what the market's looking for.

Keith Petri:

A real tangible example of this, and I'll go back to the Uber example in a second, would be if you could get 100 million consumer files of everything that somebody purchased at Saks Fifth Avenue and try to sell it to Nordstrom, a directly applicable example, Nordstrom. A directly applicable example. Nordstrom would never know what to do with that data.

Keith Petri:

The skewed numbers might not line up with publicly available products. They might not have a delineation of what a skew number equates to. Is it a short sleeve tank top? Is that address? Is it a skirt? Is it shoes? What might it be? There's so many nuances there. And these companies, although they all leverage data, none of them pay for data.

Keith Petri:

Even any client of NetWise, they're not paying for data. Why is this not delivering data to any end customer? Meaning an enterprise, NetWise, is providing customer acquisition. They're not providing data. And that's the same thing that all of these brands are looking for. So if you took the same data, all that data from Uber, all that data from Saks Fifth Avenue, and you brought it to anybody that could leverage that data for customer acquisition, there would be a way for them to justify a value in exchange for acquiring a customer.

Keith Petri:

So Nordstrom, if they could use that data to acquire a new shopper that would have a private shopping experience and spend over $5,000 a quarter guaranteed, that's something that they're worth investing in. And that is something that you could do with that data at scale, with a layer on top. That couldn't be John Smith taking his own data and bringing it to Nordstrom on his own.

Keith Petri:

And so that's how I believe that marketing to come full circle here will evolve in the future. Is that it will be a convenience factor where the value exchange and the economy no longer resides with the current marketing stack but is actually value that is given in exchange from a brand direct to a consumer in the form of a benefit in exchange for acquisition.

Keith Petri:

So if somebody doesn't currently fly Delta, but Delta can leverage your prior Uber history, Brian, and they can understand that you live near an airport that they service you travel frequently. Let's say once a month or more to a Delta hub, Salt Lake City, Atlanta, San Francisco, LA, New York, et cetera. You only stay in hotels that are over $400 a night, easy data point from Uber. You only take Uber Black. You never take Uber Pool goes to your budgetary restraints.

Keith Petri:

Then they can compare that to their internal CRM and be like, "Brian's only flown 12,000 miles with us in the past 12 months. This is a real opportunity to leverage that data and give him an offer." And that offer might be something like a free first-class ticket domestically. So let's equate that to $5,000. $5,000 is still significantly less money than Delta spends today on their total customer acquisition cost for a single Delta diamond flyer.

Keith Petri:

And now they've taken that money, and instead of putting it into the marketing ecosystem, they've put it into your pocket as an acquisition costs to convert Brian to a Delta diamond flyer.

Adam Kerpelman:

What you just ran through is a great example of something we talk about frequently here, which is that as software eats stuff, and there are more and more data streams like these things, the kind of overly clever answer for what the future of marketing looks like is it doesn't really look like marketing, at least not the way that we imagine it.

Adam Kerpelman:

The way that sales increasingly looks more like marketing. And then, if you keep chasing that, marketing looks increasingly like discovery on Spotify. Which we wouldn't think of as marketing, but the same mechanism, it's putting stuff in front of you that we think you'll be interested in so that you could get around.

Keith Petri:

There is no mechanism today that's acting like Spotify for the consumer because with my Spotify, I'm not being recommended a certain genre of music that I don't enjoy. I feel like I'm going to get reamed over any genre I state here. So I'm going to try to avoid that, but I'm not being recommended. Let's say classical music, even though I am because I listened to it when I work, but I'm not being recommended classical music because I love classic rock as an example.

Keith Petri:

And Spotify is doing that to optimize my experience on Spotify and what we need are those consumer feedback loops of what is perfectly relevant for that consumer at that exact time based off of what they're searching for? And I know this is the dream that everybody talks about today, but it's not a reality.

Keith Petri:

And I think even more, so it's how does that consumer want that to be conveyed to them? Do they want it delivered in an email? Do they want a push notification? Do they want some other form of offer put in front of them? And how is that conveyed? And when?

Brian Jones:

You're touching on a really important part of back to what you said at the beginning, that marketing can be an inconvenience. It's the timing and the format that makes it inconvenient. If I'm sitting down at night after dinner and want to watch a movie, but I have to watch an ad in the middle of it, it ruins my experience. I don't mind learning about the thing. It might be something I buy tomorrow. I might be really thrilled.

Adam Kerpelman:

Or like I always talk about, a bunch of pharmaceutical ads. I can't even call my doctor right now. He's not there.

Brian Jones:

He's not there. I want the pharmaceutical so badly, but I can't call my doctor.

Adam Kerpelman:

To take action.

Brian Jones:

Not my usual experience. So do you think what you're describing because there's a different model here. There's a company's driving consumption by using my data increased consumption. There's a different communication method here. It's a different business model than the idea of ads being displayed on a third-party thing that I'm looking at.

Brian Jones:

It's very different than Delta saying, "Hey, I'm going to go advertise in the New York Times." And interrupt an article. You're reading with an ad for Delta. It's much more targeted and much more personal as part of that data asset. They probably have access to my communication streams so they could text me, or they could email me, or they could insert it into things.

Brian Jones:

Maybe I say, "Hey, I don't mind ads running during the news when I'm watching news, but I don't want ads while I'm watching movies. This feels like a whole different business model concept is potentially emerging. That solves some of marketing's big problems right now.

Keith Petri:

The business model is completely different because it actually incorporates the consumer. Right now, the internet was created. And let's say 25 years ago, the model of the internet of discounted or free services are going to be offered as a result of the consumer resigning and conceding their right to their own data by participating. It's just a requirement.

Keith Petri:

And that was really written by basically advertisers and platforms sitting in a room around a negotiation table. And right now, the depreciation of cookies and device IDs, and other identifiers, it's presenting an opportunity to renegotiate the terms of the internet. And that renegotiation is taking place at the W3C at IAB at Prebid and all of these industry working groups that are trying to figure out what this new internet will look like and how will it function, and how will it support itself financially.

Keith Petri:

And what's interesting is that finally, there are publishers at that table. The publishers were not at that table when the internet was first negotiated. But what I'm finding is that although publishers are now at the table with advertisers and platforms and other services, there is nobody representing the consumer at that table. And that's what's lacking from what I believe will be marketing of the future. And that is where lockr fits in.

Keith Petri:

We represent the best interest of the consumer, and we will enable the consumer to control their own identity, consent, and data. And I believe that by flipping this and not having it be services and publishers and advertisers creating and facilitating the rules and having it actually owned by the consumer, that's when the consumer can stipulate.

Keith Petri:

Yes, you can email me. No, you can not communicate with me. Yes. You can have my data. No, you can not have my data and so on and so forth. I think that's where the true value exchange of the internet can be completely redefined.

Adam Kerpelman:

Well, you mentioned the only extent to which the consumer is at the table right now is through legislators. And the problem certainly in the US is the average age of those legislators is like 65. So for one, I barely understand what's happening with the internet right now, but they, for sure, don't understand it, not listening to the stuff as they do.

Adam Kerpelman:

I can tell because I read the legislation, and they don't understand what they're talking about, but the problem there is they see their job as protecting the consumer. They're not taking part in that conversation as if it's a negotiation, understanding all the pieces and how we can build this better web. Instead of they're having this, we're afraid about privacy. And so the whole conversation ends up being like, we need to put these protections in place and blah, blah, blah.

Adam Kerpelman:

And the interesting thing is privacy, without going too down this rabbit hole is kind of the wrong conversation because the world that we're talking about here kind of actually means cracking it wider, open, and Brian and I talk about this all the time, which is sort of like, we need less privacy to get to a world that we all enjoy more in the classical sense of how they talk about it.

Adam Kerpelman:

And privacy is the wrong conversation, at least as it's happening now, because like you said, where all these identifiers, like the cookie that's getting deprecated. Well, the cookie has allowed us to get to this account-based marketing thing, which is sort of what we're talking about here. We thread it together this kind of hacked system of an awareness of me as an account instead of just me as a reader of this particular paper who contextually, I think might be interested in X, Y, or Z topic.

Adam Kerpelman:

And so it's actually going the right direction, which is to say, we want to target you based on your interests and your traveling around the web, not just sort of nebulously the places that you hang out, we'll make sure that there are ads there. Well, to get to the future we're talking about, we kind of need to lean even further into that. The reason I bring it up in terms of privacy is because that's kind of the weird paradigm shift part that's a little confusing.

Adam Kerpelman:

And I think you are presenting an answer for, with lockr, which is, well, how do we give people the right context to feel protected enough that they can hand over even more stuff? That I can have a place to put my Uber data so that I can get the world with Delta that you talked about, that doesn't feel as icky as whatever currently exists, that's causing people to call their senators and go, "You got to stop this. It feels icky. And which causes them to then roll out legislation. That's just going to make the web suck more.

Keith Petri:

Candidly, it's an education process. And that is purposely where we sit today and that everything that I've articulated to you we're relatively transparent about, but it's not the product that we're offering in market today. That is the future that we plan to accomplish over time. And where we start today is if we went to consumers and stated that this was a privacy tool, there'd actually be very little adoption, which has been historically shown by a number of companies in the past decade.

Keith Petri:

And we're not going to market offering, "Hey, shut off access to your data to these companies." That doesn't work. You more need to build trust with consumers and then graduate and leverage that trust in a positive manner by adding additional features through an easy education process. And so our goal is to always represent the consumer in all of these scenarios, and the place that we chose to start that will be a very interesting talking point was email because email is your identity online.

Keith Petri:

Your email is your digital identity, just like your Social Security number is your physical identity. And so lockrMail provides a publicly facing email address that consumers can use to establish a relationship with any brand. And then lockrMail allows you to have a pre-filter on your inbox and control who can communicate with you when they can communicate with you how that communication comes through in all regards.

Keith Petri:

And so, where we're starting is really simplistic. "Hey, you purchased something at Nordstrom. What do you want from them in the future?" "I want my order confirmation, my shipping confirmations, but I don't want any of their marketing emails." But maybe you love their shoe department like I do. And I want anything 30% off or more on shoes to come through to me. Right now that that classification only sits within lockrMail, but in the future, there's a very real scenario that we can provide that signal to Nordstrom so that they know that that's all you're interested in.

Keith Petri:

And that's where we stand today. Just to really kind of paint a picture where we're going is what do you provision access to when you create an account somewhere? Maybe you create an account on the New York Times, and on the New York Times, it stipulates, "Hey, you can have an account and have five free articles a month and that's it."

Keith Petri:

Or you can pay us $17 a month for our digital subscription. And you get unlimited experience on the digital content with less ads and all this fun stuff. Or you can, through lockrMail, provision access to the past 12 months of purchases you've made on Amazon, and you get unlimited digital access completely for free in exchange of that value exchange that you provisioned to us.

Keith Petri:

And this is not just something I care about through lockr. This is how I believe the internet will be sustained, and all of transactions will be sustained whether or not they're digital or physical. It doesn't matter to me. It's all one world now, but the consumer owning their own identity, provisioning their own access to data, and controlling their consent both now and in the future. And there needs to be a consumer-facing tool that does that.

Keith Petri:

We always talk about consent as an industry. Brian, I can just visualize you dealing with us on a daily basis, but we have all these fun acronyms, DMP, CDP, CMP, all these fun things. If you just go through all those for a second, my favorite one is CMP consent management platform. These are tools and utilities that are sold in a B2B manner to enterprises so that they can manage consent.

Keith Petri:

Let that sink in a little bit. We have a B2B tool that works for the enterprise managing consent. When you go to court, you don't let the prosecutor represent. You have your own lawyer, and that's that doesn't exist in this digital world. And that's what lockr is.

Brian Jones:

And the scale at which all this is happening is just staggering too. And so all of these things being twisted and backward are just a tremendous weight on businesses and advertising ecosystems and software systems at large We can't realize some of the vision that you're putting together the way it's structured right now. Technologically it's impossible to do it.

Brian Jones:

We can't have 28 million companies all managing consent for their marketing. That doesn't work. Something you said in there that's really interesting that I've never thought about before you were talking about me being able to filter really specifically in my email and getting ads about a particular shoe size and a color or a price point.

Brian Jones:

And part of the answer here, and it speaks to what Adam was saying, is not only will this work better when consumers can share more of their data more intelligently with other systems, but we want data back from the businesses. I want to know what you're advertising. I want data in that stream so we can intelligently route them. Again, shoes, you can tell on my smartphone when I'm shopping for clothes. It knows I want to see clothing ads then.

Brian Jones:

You can tell when I'm watching movies. I want to see movie ads then. I don't want to be interrupted all the time. And there's so much subtlety with marketing. It's not just this marketing's bad or privacy is the answer. Privacy is just like a feature. Sometimes I don't want ads. Sometimes I want to look at a thing and not have you bug me.

Brian Jones:

Other times I'm happy to participate in this business ecosystem. And so, it's the complete opposite of what everyone's saying. It's about more data. It's about better systems to manage all of this. It's so interesting. It sounds like you've got a really neat vision.

Adam Kerpelman:

The other thing you said that's key to that vision is what you articulated before we started recording as a convenience versus privacy distinction that people like. We, again, it's a great thing for legislator to go out there and talk about I'm going to protect your privacy. But when they say that the part of your brain that's triggering as a voter is you're thinking about things that legitimately should be private if you want them to be.

Adam Kerpelman:

Sexual preferences, health data, things like that, that we have lost to protect for reasons because people behave certain ways around them.

Keith Petri:

I would be embarrassed if you knew how many pairs of shoes I bought during quarantine. It makes no sense.

Adam Kerpelman:

It's fair. But the broader point you're making is people are completely willing to give up privacy in a lot of contexts in exchange for convenience. And in that context, when you say, "But it's about privacy." They're kind of like, "I don't really care." So when you try to sell them privacy about their Amazon purchases, most of the time, people kind of don't care enough to take the extra steps.

Adam Kerpelman:

But if you go to them and say, but if we put the data over here, which is incidentally more private and we give you this value add, then people jump on that like crazy. I mean, that's coupons are a tracking mechanism that people use constantly to get 20 cents off a can of beans. It's a perfect example of that.

Keith Petri:

The same behavior that you take your couponing experience and you leverage that by having a benefit of a discount on gas in the same shopping center, that's the equivalent of me giving up how many rolls of Charmin toilet paper I've bought in the past 12 months to get free access to the New York Times. And we're building that mechanism.

Brian Jones:

It's interesting seeing that evolve, too, because there's a generational component to this that's so important. And it also speaks to the success of business models. The internet had to go through a couple cycles for there to be generations who understand what's going on technologically enough to be okay with things and to want to iterate these things. I would suspect that there is skew on the people who are concerned about privacy and the skew is probably older.

Brian Jones:

Not so much younger because younger understands the subtlety, and those people are fine using coupons. And they probably don't even think about the fact that it's tracking them. It's dragging your information. They use their grocery store card. I don't go to the grocery store. I get my food delivered. So it's all digitized now. That takes decades for human society to adapt to that, and only now does it seem like the timing's right for a company like lockr to really come in and totally innovate that space.

Keith Petri:

I think timing is key. I'd say that some of my earlier ventures in my career have been too premature. And I'm hoping that I nailed the timing a little bit better on this one.

Adam Kerpelman:

I feel that.

Brian Jones:

The greatest minds are always premature.

Keith Petri:

Too early is as good as wrong. I say.

Adam Kerpelman:

Specifically with regards to a bunch of my previous ventures. Awesome man. Well, I feel like we could keep going on this forever, but we are out of time. Thank you again for joining us. Before we wrap, where should people find you on the interwebs, et cetera?

Keith Petri:

You can find me by, let's say, Twitter, Keith E. Petri that's P-E-T-R-I, or you can look up lockrMail, which is L-O-C -K -R mail.com.

Adam Kerpelman:

Awesome. Well, thanks everybody for listening, and thanks again for joining us. Keith, if you enjoyed this episode, like subscribe, do the thing. It helps us reach more data-driven marketers. This has been the Data-driven Marketer, sponsored by NetWise. I'm Adam.

Brian Jones:

I'm Brian.

Keith Petri:

I'm Keith. [inaudible 00:42:25] everybody.