<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to make the 80/20 rule to work for you&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bniriverside.com.au/how-to-make-the-8020-rule-to-work-for-you/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bniriverside.com.au/how-to-make-the-8020-rule-to-work-for-you/</link>
	<description>Brisbane's friendliest business networking group</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:48:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry</title>
		<link>http://www.bniriverside.com.au/how-to-make-the-8020-rule-to-work-for-you/comment-page-1/#comment-431</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bniriverside.com.au/?p=700#comment-431</guid>
		<description>Yes, that 80/20 is quite remarkable. It occurs over and over. 

I&#039;ve found it to be the case over the years with lead generation programmes. Typically 80% of the revenue comes from  20% of respondents. And then, as you fine-tune the programme over time, you&#039;ll find that the same ratio occurs AGAIN within the smaller, more targeted, more profitable group.

And yes, the application to clients is VERY true. I remember talking to a CEO of an accounting practice in Brisbane years ago who had &#039;sacked&#039; his poorest-performing clients. They were the 80% the produced the least revenue, yet caused the most hassle. It was a big decision — some $190K of revenue. But it was all back withing 8 months because they could then give better service to the 20% that were left. 

More profit. Less hassle. And his business was another 25% UP IN SIX MONTHS AFTER THAT as his reputation for good service spread.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, that 80/20 is quite remarkable. It occurs over and over. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve found it to be the case over the years with lead generation programmes. Typically 80% of the revenue comes from  20% of respondents. And then, as you fine-tune the programme over time, you&#8217;ll find that the same ratio occurs AGAIN within the smaller, more targeted, more profitable group.</p>
<p>And yes, the application to clients is VERY true. I remember talking to a CEO of an accounting practice in Brisbane years ago who had &#8216;sacked&#8217; his poorest-performing clients. They were the 80% the produced the least revenue, yet caused the most hassle. It was a big decision — some $190K of revenue. But it was all back withing 8 months because they could then give better service to the 20% that were left. </p>
<p>More profit. Less hassle. And his business was another 25% UP IN SIX MONTHS AFTER THAT as his reputation for good service spread.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

