We’re the [blank] for [blank]

“We’re the Twitter for this and the Facebook for that.”


When I read something like this, here is how I break it down. The first blank is the company you feel you relate to most, and the second is the niche you wish to understand. But the overall sentence? Just a vague description. Open to multiple interpretations… which is bad.

When time is short… #

Don’t get me wrong. When you’re trying to pitch something or help someone quickly understand your product, yes it’s nice to give some context. Something people can quickly connect with and understand.

But that’s great for when you only have a brief moment.

When you own the clock… #

But when communicating via text (your product website, email, etc.), using an existing product or company isn’t always the best route. After all, if you latch on to someone else’s product and reputation, you’re automatically limiting yourself to what they’ve done–successes and failures. In the end, you still have to explain what makes you different.

So avoid taking the short route of describing your product with another. As one friend of mine said, “let the journalists form that mental picture.” And another, “get to your own unique description sooner than later.”

Identify what it is that you do/solve and explain it in your own words. Build your own brand, your own identity. Make it that products after you will do with your name what you intended to do with others.

You’ve spent so much time working on your killer product. Don’t half-ass its description.

Be short, yet specific. What is it that you do?

If you haven’t figured that out yet, then you have bigger things to worry about than comparison points.

I’m on Twitter.


Now read this

If Emails Worked Like URLs…

…there would be less triaging involved. Over the weekend, I received a few emails for possible design work. Immediately, I applied my red Gmail label. But then I thought, what if emails worked like URLs? As you’ve probably read... Continue →