SocialNetworkStrategien Social Networks, Crowdsourcing, Communityaufbau, Social Media Marketing

The We-Tab Failure as a social media learning example: As stupid as Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen? Please make it better!

Unbelievable! How stupid must you be to cause so much agitation on the Internet for a whole half year as Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen, managing director and business spokesperson of Neofonie (170 staff according to Wikipedia), founder of the search engine Fireball in the 90's and until 4. of october 2010 managing director and spokesperson for WeTab Ltd has done.

He announced that he was standing down as managing director of WeTab Ltd. The reason: he used a pseudonym to write false positive reviews about WeTab on Amazon which had had an indifferent start and - much to his ire - was quickly found out! The Internet community is not as stupid as Herr Ankershoffen thought! Even if he might think it's daft now.

Our compliments to Richard Gutjahr who worked out that hidden behind the Amazon pseudonym was the WeTab managing director. From his discovery he coined the term "WeDepp", what means "schmoe" in german.

But this faux pas is just the latest in a whole chain of errors which serve as a wonderful example of how NOT to act within the social web. Up till now I haven't reported on WeTab here, because the idea of the product – open to all developers without limitations, with USB ports and much more, diametrically opposite to the closed Apple system – is of itself a good thing. And because, coming from Berlin I wholeheartedly wished Neofonie (also Berlin based) every success. But this no longer applies!

What hair-raising mistakes are coming next? I don't want to now dwell on each single cock-up that has happened. I am much more concerned about the structural failures. And about how a business, which intends engaging in the social media, can do everything wrong, or in the opposite case, everything right. The WeTab Fail is a social media learning example.

Hubris and advertising an unfinished product – machismo brings negative criticism.

To want to position your product confidently in the market is not objectionable in itself. Quite the opposite. I like enterprises that are head of themselves and show courage and initiative. First you must be honestly convinced yourself about your service and/or your product. Then you can convince others. But to do this it is important to be able to properly reflect on your own product. Is is really as good and innovative as you think it is?

It is dangerous to go on the offensive with an unfinished product as WeTab did this spring. However good the idea behind it is. No matter what reasons exist for going public early. I imagine it was iPad pressure that forced them to it.

In principle I think its great to involve a community in product development. With help from the mechanism of the social web you can ask people in a wonderful way what they really want from a product. You can achieve closeness to your customers and market. But, in order to do this, you must be able to properly handle the people in the social web.

If you are over confident in this, you will soon be thought of as a big mouth. As happened to Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen. The message about a super product will only spread virally in the social web if the product delivers what it promises. Or to put it better what the firm promises to potential buyers is actually behind the product. Sadly with WeTab, this was, and is still as of today, not the case.

And exactly this message that "the thing is still completely unfinished, and only half as good as we thought" (too difficult, battery life far too short, Flash is still really jerky sometimes, there are hardly any additional apps, etc etc) spreads just as quickly as positive reports would have done.

Pressing ahead without a social media strategy

"We'll just do it! Its easy to create a community on Facebook. Other people do it." Right! That community thing – other people do it as well. Kauperts for example.

But if you go about it in such an overtly unplanned way as in the case of WeTab, then I can only shake my head sadly. Before using one or several platforms, then you have to think to yourself: what am I hoping to achieve? By what means? In what time span? And what technical know-how and professional manpower do I need? (Put very simply).

So I need a strategy for engaging in the social web. Things like: who will take care of what? Who is allowed to do what? How do you handle criticism? How do you go about the extremely necessary monitoring? And so on. Resources must be planned for, A budget set up. Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen and the WeTab team clearly gave these matters no thought.

No Community Management

If I plan to create a community on Facebook I must first clarify – who will look after community management? And this person or even this team should understand something about what they are doing. The right instinct and some experience of social media are basic requirements. Beyond this a generous time allowance must be planned in.

A definite requirement is permanent monitoring. What will be written by whom and when, what asked, what commented on? Questions must be answered, problems dealt with. A community has to feel it is important to the business and that it is taken seriously.

None of that happened with WeTab. Clearly no community management was planned and there was no community manager. The managing director dabbled in it a bit. The outcome was spectacular at first (because people warmed to the idea of WeTab) and then devastating. Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen happily posted on the site and then didn't look at the WeTab community on Facebook for weeks at a time. Meanwhile questions backed up and went unanswered. The question quickly arose (from me as well) – are they really serious about his?

To all intents and purposes there was no community management. The community was left to its own devices. Which meant in turn that it went its own way. WeTab, known formerly as WePad before the name was changed, became a laughing stock. Speculation was rife and the WeTab creators allowed it to carry on.

A user, Bendrik writes completely correctly about this:

Whatever else Neofonie did wrong, respect should be shown for the fact that they allowed this free Forum to go on. For many months it has for me been an inspiring daily soap opera of craziness and at the same time high quality profundity. That they put up with this Wall of Sh...ame even now in the hour of their greatest (till now) defeat with no intervention is to me totally amazing. They are ahead of their own young people in the game with this.
In a strange and peculiar way I will miss you and your presentation Herr von Ankershoffen.

Today they have over 23.000 fans on Facebook. But the page is a wildly chaotic mixture of malapropisms, cutting Anti-WeTab and pro-IPad posts and fewer and fewer members that support the WeTab party. But there are a lot saying (and a lot more thinking) that the idea of WeTab is in itself great.

The often (and mostly correctly) praised powers of a community to clean its own act up are barely working here. The underlying reason for this is that the WeTab creators do not see themselves as members of the WeTab community with the same rights as others, but rather believe themselves to be able to intervene from above.

Eye to eye communication is not taking place. Herr von Ankershoffen in his role as person with overall responsibility for communicating with the outside world has up till now not understood the social web. Accordingly the Facebook community is heading towards catastrophe.

Assuming people are supid

An unfinished product coupled with hubris. No strategy for working in the social web and non-existent and therefore disastrous community management. All great ingredients for a PR campaign that will with 100% certainty go under.

Add to that a belief that the internet user and potential customer is brainless, then the whole thing goes to pot.

Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen (an incomprehensible name that he gave himself), as explained above, used a pseudonym to give WeTab positive reviews on Amazon. And the internet community noticed. We are not daft my dear Herr von Ankershoffen! And we are not just one silly purchaser, there are a lot of us! We are not alone. We help each other, keep each other informed. That is how you get real value. For every user. And for every business, when it understands how to use the social web.

And we don't like it when someone tries to con us. (Sorry for the strong word but nothing else will do in this case).

Conclusion: Brand image totally destroyed

At one time (the beginning of 2010?) the aim was to position WeTab as the positive underdog and diametric opposite to the iPad. This is not about price politics. WeTab is not just inordinately difficult, it is also inordinately expensive.

I will take a guess that this was the real plan. If the plan was really "to get the most possible negative headlines in the media as often as possible", then the plan has gone wonderfully well. That this will lead to good sales figures however, I strongly doubt.

Everything I say or do in the social web impacts in one way or another on my brand. Positively or negatively. Herr von Ankershoffen worked hard at this. He consistently made one mistake after another. Without learning anything from his mistakes. Without getting professional advice. This is the impression that must be drawn if you take note of what has happened over the past months.

I have never seen a firm like WeTab Ltd do such much wrong in PR matters and the social media field. And it is fascinating how advice-adverse the WeTab creators appear to be. As if people outside only want to do bad things. No, they do NOT want to do that. They only want not to be taken for stupid. And they want a product that does what it promises. And they want to be taken seriously. If that doesn't happen, they will defend themselves. The social web gives them the means to do this on a plate.

As I said in the beginning, I was (and still am) really very sympathetic to the basic idea of WeTab. And is all lost already? The question mark at the end of that sentence gets bigger every day.

If the "three steps to viral online success", meaning an exciting product with high potential, internal business structures and behaviour patterns that correspond to and fit with the social web together with a well thought out social media strategy, are not adhered to, then the hoped for success will not happen. And moreover it will turn to disaster if wishes are not satisfied, community members are put off and are taken for stupid.

Social media and the creation of communities – which played a large role in this specific case and which are part of my professional core theme – are not "just made". Like the motto, "anything you can do, I can do too". There's more to it than that. All the things that can go wrong on the way have clearly been seen by Herr Hoffer von Ankershoffen in the past months. As sad as this story is, it is a shining example for others. Because we can and must learn from it. The social media are crammed full of possibilities, chances and good value. And nothing can avoid social media in the future. Because that is where products, services, people and brands are talked about. Whether it suits an enterprise now or not. I can support and it and use it. Or close my eyes and ears.

To conclude another quote directly from the WeTab community on Facebook. Someone called Mario writes:

I nominate this website/forum for the "Grimme online award" (a famous german award). Months of excitement, an unbelievable lot of laughs, and the not to be overlooked merits of displaying the rules of the game for those who believe they can manipulate people and pull the wool over their eyes in the age of Web 2.0. And with never fewer than 20,000 spectators.

There is – sadly – a lot of truth in this. But it can be done properly and well. And then there would be many, many spectators that all become potential ambassadors. If product, strategy and methodology are all right and compatible.