NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Rich, Busy, and Clueless: The New Clients Fueling a $250,000 Matchmaking Boom

Technology has made the matching process ever easier, which has had a mixed impact.

 

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jul 28, 2026

 

 

In the decades before the scourge of the pandemic, admitting that you met your mate through a marriage broker or an online dating service was generally regarded as a confession of behavior somewhere between despair and desperation. It wasn’t as bad as buying a mail order bride or marrying a pen pal who was in prison for life, but it could still raise eyebrows. Blind dates, hooking up and one-night stands were all deemed to be acceptable youthful behavior and not expected to lead anywhere anyway. But marrying someone you met on Match.com just wasn’t something you bragged about to your friends and neighbors. It smacked of having no other choices and settling for someone equally at wit’s end.

However, Covid-19 gave millions of cellar dwellers and wallflowers permission and the opportunity to actively seek out companionship and even more substantial commitments in online forums and dating services where they wouldn’t have otherwise been caught dead. And to be clear, it was no longer confined to any particular age group or gender. It wasn’t as pristine as Tom Hank’s and Meg Ryan’s romance in You’ve Got Mail, but at least it was no longer perceived as pathetic. But the whole matching process—finding your future on your phone—was never really accepted and always regarded as déclassé.

Technology has made the matching process ever easier and easier which has had a mixed impact. Initial connections were much simpler to secure because there were millions of people in the database, but at the opposite end of the martial spectrum, equal millions of would-be romances and suggested introductions were immediately thwarted by tech-enhanced critical scrutiny and rejections resulting from a quick scan of a prospect’s online persona. There’s a persistent FOMO-like sense among online searchers that a better bet and a more attractive match are just a swipe or two away. So, they keep searching and coming up empty. After all is said and done, the bottom line has never really changed. Many people still think looking for love online is for losers. This persistent attitude and a consistent lack of results have led to user fatigue, disappointment, and large-scale abandonment of the online services. And it’s created a resurgent demand for face-to-face personal matchmaking services.

As a result, and notwithstanding all of the subtle and not so subtle opprobrium, the U.S. matchmaking industry has rapidly expanded to meet that demand. It now numbers over 2,000 “professional” firms of various sizes and of widely different skill sets, experience levels, and even pricing models. This number is, of course, substantially supplemented by “helpful” parents, friends and other family, know-it-all neighbors and yentas, and plenty of intrusive experts at the office.

But the real explosive growth in the business—more than two-thirds of the newer firms—has come from corporate chains expanding nationwide, much like the model of H&R Block. These numerous and readily accessible players occupy (and have actually already overcrowded) the lower segments of the marketplace. Their stated efforts to use technology and now AI to professionalize and standardize a very sloppy, unregulated, and chaotic industry have mainly resulted in dramatic price increases for their basic standardized and turnkey services. These price hikes combined with a Wild West environment without rules or regulations regarding any player’s behavior, promises, representations or performance guarantees have brought the expected onslaught of crooks, con men and scam artists – all enabled by A.I. and the awareness that no civilian, client or customer can ever tell what’s really inside of their black box. High demand, high prices, an ignorant and gullible customer base, and no applicable laws make for an environment ideally suited to cheats and criminals.

But technology has also been inadvertently responsible for the expansion of a singular high-end segment of the match-making business which has thrived in the new environment—especially on both coasts and in D.C.—by offering previously unimaginably high prices for their personalized and customized services. Their specific targets—rarely overtly stated—are tech-created rich nerds looking for love with huge gobs of cash, no time, no class, and no clue as to how to proceed to find a partner.

And there are lots of new mini-millionaires like these being created every day by AI IPOs and the expiration of all manner of lockups and other trading restrictions, especially around crypto deals. They literally have more money than they (or their parents) have ever had in their lives and almost no ability to evaluate which of these firms might make sense for them to employ in their quest.

So, in the time-honored tradition of the very best tech promoters and marketers, these poor suckers fall back on the stupidest rationale of all: How can it be bad if it costs so much? Worse yet, there’s clearly a Veblen effect as well which dictates that higher prices for luxury or scarce goods increase the demand rather than reduce it. And finally, there’s clearly a FOMO effect which the high-end and high-priced personal matchmakers make very clear and that is that their time and resources are limited, the number of great men or women out there who are looking is a finite number, and waiting will never get you anything worth waiting for.

The bottom line: the highest-end boutique players in this very narrow field are perfectly comfortable charging rates between $50,000 and $250,000 for their services with no strings and no guarantees attached. They serve executives, high-net-worth individuals, and successful entrepreneurs. And they’re getting these kinds of numbers and growing their revenue every year. It’s all legal for now, but I guess the real question—like so many Trumpian actions these days—is should it be legal?

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Stripe Wants to Buy PayPal. The Real Prize May Be Hiding in Plain Sight

Stripe’s $53 billion bet reveals a brutal truth about the tech Industry.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jul 21, 2026

One of the oldest ideas in the technology world is that most of the competitive races among new entrepreneurial entrants that are proposing to provide various novel products and services will eventually resolve themselves into markets and verticals dominated by one (or at most two or three) very large and successful players while the rest of the also-rans and wannabes share the crumbs left on the table, until they eventually fold up their tents and pack it in.

It’s a cyclical circumstance in the tech industry and we’re seeing it again today in the AI frontier engine competition with the clear dominance of a few major platform players. Technology is a “winner take all” world driven by several practical and structural considerations that typically drive this kind of concentration conclusion. Some of the key contributing factors to this recurring outcome: demonstrated economies of scale, market-dictated centralization and standardization requirements, the herd mentality of large technology purchasers—believing that you can’t go wrong or lose your job if you’re buying what everyone else is using—and the power of Metcalfe’s Law, which describes and defines the exponential growth characteristics of networks.

And, of course, when you have a passive and forgiving regulatory environment and an utter lack of enforcement of antitrust laws aided, abetted and actively encouraged (if not directly ordered and demanded) by an easily bribed and corrupt administration, it becomes easier and easier to consolidate even traditional industries into the hands of a few powerful players aiming to crush their competitors as we see every day now in the broadcast, entertainment and media sectors. The message to the insiders and the sharks is pretty clear—the gloves are off, join the crooks in the White House in grabbing whatever you can, and worry about the consequences way down the line—if ever.

So, it comes as no great surprise that PayPal, which really started the whole online payments business in 1998, is once again being tossed around and targeted by Stripe. Founded more than a decade later in 2010, Stripe has just made an offer to buy PayPal for about $53 billion, about one third of Stripe’s most recent valuation. More interesting, in the manner of the minnow swallowing the whale, PayPal handled over $1.8 trillion in payments, which completely dwarfs Stripe’s current operations. But with its stock under tremendous negative pressure, PayPal makes a very attractive target for a business like Stripe, which has been trying to consolidate and control the overall e-commerce processing space since its inception.

PayPal was bought in 2002 by eBay and pretty much moldered in the shadows there until it was spun off as its own entity in 2015. Earlier this year, the CEO was fired, the stock being down more than 25 percent, and, more recently, PayPal split itself into 3 divisions—one of which is its rapidly growing Venmo division (acquired by PayPal in 2013) which processed about $300 billion in payments last year. Stripe—which in its own operations is clearly best of breed—certainly sees the Venmo division as a great add-on.

Of course, this would represent a very substantial contraction of the overall consumer payment space even though Apple Pay is growing quickly and other programs like Zelle are also gaining some modest traction. In the old pre-Trump days, this kind of a proposed deal—especially on this scale—folding together the two leaders in the space would be highly suspect from a regulatory standpoint. But in today’s laissez faire environment, you secure the Orange Monster’s blessing (often under the table), and then this kind of deal simply becomes business as usual.

In all fairness—and putting aside the fact that this smells like another Lutnick self-dealing special that we’ll only learn about a year from now—the truth is that PayPal may have committed the cardinal Silicon Valley sin of becoming boring and passé, unduly complicated in a world seeking speed, convenience and ease of access; and ultimately being perceived as behind the times, especially when compared to the simplicity of players like Stripe. While we might gripe about the concentration issues, the fact is that PayPal largely brought all this attention and grief on itself. It had a diamond in Venmo buried within a corporate bureaucracy that should have been exploited, promoted, and accelerated. Instead, in a final fit of accelerating its own demise, PayPal split itself into distinct parts that highlighted and identified the old news and the new value embedded within. This wasn’t lost on some of the bankers whose earliest analysis and comments were around the idea that Stripe might very well be able to make more profit and drive more growth for Venmo than PayPal ever could at this point.

Joseph Schumpeter may have died in 1950, but his doctrine of creative destruction lives on. Founders and market leaders aren’t entitled to persist indefinitely and it’s the regular emergence of new entrepreneurial companies with better technology, ideas and resources that eventually spurs change, innovation and growth. Sometimes it doesn’t hurt in the long run to be the second mover rather than the first.

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Microsoft’s Massive Xbox Downsizing Signals the Brutal Reality of the AI Revolution

We’re beginning to see the secondary and other follow-on impacts of AI.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jul 14, 2026

 

Sony’s PlayStation has been the global market leader for years, while Microsoft’s Xbox has been a distant second even after failed attempts by Microsoft to make its games a visible presence in the desktop world, where it clearly dominates the office installed base worldwide. Both Sony and Microsoft missed the migration of gamers to small mobile devices, where Nintendo prospered for a while—even before the phone revolution completely changed the video gaming space.

Now, we’re in the early innings of another sea change where the major tech players in the gaming industry are realizing that they no longer need armies of programmers, designers and developers to build and deliver the next generation of games. This is due to AI, of course, but also because the new games—mainly mobile—will be so lightweight and rapid as a result of the AI enhancements that there will be no need for any kind of bulky and costly game boxes or platform devices. Finally, as is the case across dozens of industries these days, the cost of the chips used in these boxes has been driven skyward by the adjacent and competitive demands of the AI companies for product that has cut into margins and may ultimately result in price increases at the worst possible time.

The latest salvo in this latest war of enforced attrition was last week’s announcement that Microsoft was making major changes in the Xbox video game business which entailed specifically cutting the Xbox workforce by 20 percent—about 1,600 employees now and another 1,200 plus over the next year. More importantly, the company is largely exiting the studio space, where it spent billions on expensive acquisitions not too many years ago.

The personnel growth in the MSFT games division was massive while the overall demand, player base and playtime all decreased substantially. It turns out—as with many other pre-phone and streaming activities—that millions of gamers would rather watch the play of truly talented players on YouTube than be second-rate participants in multiplayer competitions or simply play older games at home by themselves.

As far as the various studios are concerned, a few big ones like Activision Blizzard will shrink but remain, some others will simply be shut down, some are being encouraged to spin off and go off on their own with temporary support and assistance from Microsoft, and a few will remain until they too can be responsibly booted one way or another or quietly sold off to other buyers who right now seem to be few and far between.

But the most important takeaway from this highly visible and intentional effort at downsizing one lagging division to help offset enormous commitments and investments elsewhere in the enterprise—particularly in AI capabilities—is that we’re beginning to see the secondary and other follow-on impacts of the AI revolution. Thousands of Microsoft employees didn’t just lose their jobs because the AI tools could build new games, faster, cheaper and even more compelling than the former workers, they were also directly dismissed because the sales, marketing, manufacturing and promotion efforts of the entire video game division were shrinking and Xboxes were losing share and playtime as the gamers went elsewhere and the old boxes lost their sway and value.

This is only a single example, but I fully expect that we’re about to see many other industries rapidly roiled by similar advancements in process and speed or response time which will permit—in the name of speed, efficiency and massive cost savings, the wholesale elimination of entire groups and departments in businesses which will simply no longer be necessary because all of their functions in the value-creation chain will be substituted for with new AI-infused technologies. I’ll be writing shortly about a staggering combination in the advertising industry that brings together two powerful technologies and will completely upset and reorganize the ad creation business into a faster and cheaper system, which will also create more engaging and effective products.

It’s clear that a new form of M&A is already actively helping to connect and combine disparate companies with tools and services that are addressing common overarching problems in industries like advertising, and it’s also clear that these individual companies aren’t likely to build end-to-end systems by themselves in a timely fashion whether through lack of capacity or all the necessary resources or because they have been so deeply focused on solving their segment of the overall solution that they didn’t realize that a better and more robust and compelling solution could be offered by combining multiple offerings into a single comprehensive process.

 

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

The Brutal Truth About Second-Class Service: Customers Are Done Waiting in the ‘Right Now’ Economy. Consumers are accustomed to having virtually everything available at the touch of a button. If you’re not willing to meet their requirements, they’ll find someone else who will.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jul 7, 2026

We’re nearing the end of the “hurry up and wait” era when customers politely settled for service and timeliness that suited the providers but sucked for the recipients. In many cases, there were few alternatives, and they were grateful to have access at all to certain of these providers. However, in today’s competitive environment, “right now” is barely enough to satisfy the demands of an educated, aggressive and increasingly connected public. No one wants to wait for anything, and if you’re not willing to meet their requirements, they’ll happily find someone else who will. The whole world is a few clicks away.

You can blame a small part of the overall “need for speed” on the impatience of young people—whose cultural impact and purchasing power across the board has never been greater—and on young techies and developers who are always seeking to accelerate whatever processes are central to their products and services. You can also point to the global nature of competition these days, as well as the ever-present availability of advice, instruction and alternatives that mobile devices make possible. Then there’s the fact that Amazon is constantly upping its delivery game and heightening the assumptions and expectations of buyers everywhere, both as to delivery times and the expansiveness of its inventory, wherein virtually everything you can imagine is online and available at the touch of a button.

The simple truth is that there’s no going back and, if your business or industry hasn’t been impacted and changed by these trends, it’s only a matter of time until the wave of change hits. The passage of time is not anyone’s friend except maybe for the Orange Monster who stalls everything and has escaped accountability for his misdeeds for decades. For us mere mortals, time has a nasty way of turning even the best assets into liabilities.

Speed, convenience and access win out over quality in far too many cases, but it’s really our own fault because we settle for “good enough” too often. We’ve also come to believe that almost everything is relatively disposable and quickly replaceable, so we think that we’re not really giving that much up when we accept second class service and mediocre performances and results.

Too many providers still take advantage of our indifference and grudging acceptance to continue to do a lousy job because they can get away with it and no one has yet offered a better alternative. But change is coming. One of the first groups to be targeted will be government office holders and political candidates. Anyone who’s wasted time trying to call or contact any of their city, state or federal representatives knows they’ll never reach anyone of consequence or secure any assistance or relief.

While our political and governmental officers and representatives have always lagged in terms of the demonstrable speed and service advances which we now see in virtually every business, the fact is, once a new technology emerges—and when that technology delivers better, faster results—the race will truly be on to see how quickly the laggards can catch up. Many of them won’t have the capacity to deliver comparable new features and services and will quickly fall by the wayside.

We’re only now starting to see the introduction–obviously aided in many respects by artificial intelligence–of intelligent automated response systems which will enable politicians, candidates, governmental authorities and other regulatory agencies to create authentic and interactive digital twins like Selfie which will enable them to deliver replies and responses in a timely (in fact instantly) and scalable fashion to a virtually unlimited number of callers, constituents, and voters.

These systems can be updated in real time 24 hours a day and provide the most accurate and comprehensive answers available to any inquiries. The time, cost and manpower savings which this kind of interactive and intelligent automation will offer to early adopters will be substantial. Competitors, candidates, and other offices or agencies which lack comparable tools and capabilities will rapidly discover that they are doing a comparatively poor job of providing the services to their constituents, prospective voters, funders, media and the public in general.
These are people who are looking forward to the past. The future doesn’t wait.

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN FROM HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Forget AI: This is the Real Trend Making Life Miserable for Traditional Ad Agencies

Here’s why brands are ditching massive agencies for this low-cost alternative.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jun 30, 2026

While the ad agency world freaks out about A.I. being infinitely better than humans at a multitude of tasks, including every kind of content creation, it turns out that there are much more subversive activities underway. These efforts by influencers, remote gig workers, and at-home creators are far more likely to make life really miserable for traditional advertising executives, some of whom are still sucking down three-martini expense account lunches while the world shifts radically around them. Even the Apple TV+ show Your Friends and Neighbors presents a far more realistic view of the economic pressures and other personnel issues at agencies than you’ll find talking to execs from Madison Avenue who apparently haven’t yet gotten the memo.

The big firms and spin-outs that are trying to position themselves as new and innovative, youth-oriented enterprises are still largely hawking the same tired and antiquated pitches while offering expensive, highly polished creative, which is too slick and woefully off target. Sadly, those old models, stories and approaches no longer connect—emotionally or intellectually—with the demographics that every advertiser wants to target and reach.

If the customers and their audiences aren’t looking and listening, it doesn’t matter how wonderful your messaging and ads may be. You can tee me up for flattering articles in the old business magazines that might matter to my parents, but no one I know reads those rags or cares about anything they have to say. The giant agencies are out of touch and no longer have the access, reach or ability to connect to the people that matter, and yet these are the links and connections that the old-line agencies are still bragging about. It’s largely the same issue with cable, where the wrong crowd may be hearing the chatter, but even they aren’t listening to what’s being said or sold. It’s just background noise to keep them awake.

The game today is about an entirely new reality where massive teams and abundant resources and a decades-old track record really don’t matter, but where credible and authentic relationships and accessible networks of engaged fans are the keys to the kingdom. What smart advertisers, promoters and product managers are looking for and attracted to today is very simple—User Generated Content (UGC)—which is unvarnished, live, authentic, presented as peer-to-peer, easy and inexpensive to create, and immediately publishable at virtually no cost (thank the Internet for that) to millions of engaged fans and buyers.

The entire space has rapidly advanced and grown up, and now the content offerings are extensive and addressed to every conceivable market and interest. Even more importantly from the standpoint of any advertiser is the extent to which both the providers and the audience can be sliced and diced with degrees of accuracy and precision that only directly connected networks can offer. And finally, the actual cost to connect to the right audience in the correct context and at the right time is pennies compared to any other offering.

I’m watching several new startups, including Selfie, which offers a mobile app used to quickly create a personal digital twin, implement a comprehensive rollout plan that turns out to be ideal for one or more of these new fangled influencer networks because (a) the Selfie product and service is AI and mobile-first, so the phone app is the key; and (b) Selfie’s primary targets and ideal end users are, in fact, the very highly-regarded influencers already having tons of fans and followers who are active participants in these kinds of networks; and (c) the marketing brief for this Selfie campaign requires each influencer who joins the Selfie Influencer Network to download and build their own Selfie and create and post a demo video of their Selfie, along with an explanation of how they will be using it and why having their own Selfie makes sense for them and saves them time. Hard to imagine more of a win-win situation for all concerned.

But equally important to any new business or established firm thinking about using one of these influencer networks—even if your products or services aren’t quite as ideal as the Selfie app—are the selection, specification and management tools available to the client that permit practical choices including the age, gender, geography, video experience, presentation skills, other relevant skill sets, and size of the fan and follower audiences segmented by social media channel for each influencer that the client invites to participate in a given promotion across the network. In addition, the client can set other performance requirements and metrics as well as compensation arrangements for each influencer signing on to a specific campaign.

There are a growing number of players in the influencer network space and many of the newcomers most likely offer access to the same influencers who are under no obligation to provide their services exclusively to a single network. Each campaign stands alone—the costs are variable but incredibly modest compared to typical agency fees (there are no media or creative costs), and the entire commitment has a specific time frame and no further obligation beyond the initial campaign. Whatever your market, targets and budgets, this new channel is a must to check out before you start your next marketing programs.

HOWARD TULLMAN JOINS LISA DENT ON WGN RADIO TO DISCUSS HIS LATEST INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN

 LISTEN TO THE SHOW HERE

LISTEN TO THE SHOW HERE

HOWARD TULLMAN JOINS LISA DENT ON WGN RADIO TO DISCUSS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ISSUES

 LISTEN TO THE SHOW HERE

LISTEN TO THE SHOW HERE

NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN BY HOWARD TULLMAN

 

Your Customers’ Biggest Problems Aren’t Unique. Use This 1 Simple AI Method to Fix Them Fast

The most valuable data-centric businesses today understand that the game has changed again.

EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN

Jun 22, 2026

 

Time is the scarcest resource in our lives. Data may be the oil of the digital economy, but the timeliness and contextual delivery of that data is what creates real value. One of the things I learned in my first business—providing market-based vehicle valuations to auto insurers—is that it didn’t matter how fresh and accurate our data was or how quickly we responded to inbound inquiries. What mattered is whether the folks asking for the answers were accessible and available when we got back to them with the information. The when and where of the data delivery (context) was just as important as the what (content) in the final analysis.

Driving our people crazy to meet certain performance standards, arbitrary operating metrics, turnaround times, or other contractually mandated service levels was simply stupid if the results didn’t matter to the customers. Not everything needed to be instantly available or made into a crisis or a fire drill if no one was going to appreciate, recognize, or compensate us for the extra effort. Youthful and aggressive enthusiasm eventually led to painful experiences.  

It took a while to get the flow and timing correct in that business, but the core offering–real-time and precise valuation information as opposed to the stale, generalized historical data that was the industry standard–radically changed the way in which claims for lost or stolen vehicles were settled in the auto insurance game. Today, 44 years later, that business, CCC Intelligent Solutions, is still operating as the unquestioned industry leader, works with every major insurer, and is worth billions. The most important lesson we learned is that a one-dimensional emphasis on the speed of delivery or the quantity of the data alone often creates more undue stress rather than building value.

Today, the most valuable data-centric businesses understand that the game has changed again. Now, the key and central concern is capturing vast amounts of data regarding relevant activity—in the moment, at the edge and from both employees and their customers—and then converting and communicating it back to the team members as immediate, actionable instruction. The clearer and more immediate that any strategic inputs can be, the more accurate and valuable the decisions relying upon them will become. The only right time is real time and right now.

And, with considerable assistance from AI tools, we’re seeing the emergence of companies like Pulse that are developing systems to provide real-time data flow, extensive and timely analysis and actionable feedback that can be used effectively to inform and improve employees’ qualitative behaviors rather than simply their quantitative decisions.

These new systems function as intelligent filters, flow managers, and ranking agents so that, by the time the often overwhelming and unmanageable volume of customer feedback data is parsed, parceled, and prioritized, any business can turn scattered, duplicative and unhelpful volumes of customer inputs from multiple sources spread across their entire organization into sorted, identified, consolidated and actionable categories and clear, next-step instructions and directions.

These new systems reinforce what we’ve known for decades but help to organize and deliver better, more timely and comprehensive solutions. Three key areas of addressing customer issues and concerns really stand out, and I believe that they are true of almost every business.

A small number of recurring problems and errors cause the bulk of issues with customers

As many times as you tell your team how, when and what to say, they still forget, quit, freelance, get bored, and get upset or distracted. Automated and interactive scripts, dynamic checklists, sidebar chats and prompts can constantly provide and reinforce the right messages, paths and online responses to issues and objections. Training and practice are helpful, but not as valuable or effective as real-world experiences and immediate feedback.

Problems are rarely unique to individual, unhappy customers. Solutions need to address root causes and then be quickly circulated to the entire team

Solving one-off problems with unhappy customers is necessary, but it’s not sufficient in the long run as a strategy for overall improvements in deficient processes and unsatisfactory behaviors and/or product performance. Even more importantly, once a broader fix is determined and in place and applicable to all customers, it’s critical that the solution (either what’s working or what’s not working) be immediately transmitted to the entire team and incorporated in all of the supportive tools and materials, all future interactions, and all new changes and product enhancements and improvements.

All of us are smarter than any one of us

It’s hard to overstate the value of aggregated, collated, and carefully analyzed data collected from literally millions of conversations, transactions, interactions and dispositions when you’re trying to continually enrich and enhance the customers’ experience and your product or service’s brand, reputation, consistency, and value. Tools like Pulse’s Feedback Intelligence OS put all of this accumulated knowledge and experience directly and immediately and intelligently into the hands of your key decision-makers with actionable instruction and guidance.

The goal today is to make all your people smart as fast as possible and Pulse may be one of the best and most cost-effective systems out there to move your business quickly down the path to improved results and better satisfaction inside and outside of your business.