Andy Boyer

Category: Big Businesses

  • U.S. and England Lose World Cup Bids – What Went Wrong?

    Ok, I’ve had 24 hours to be mad about about this.  It’s easy to say, “The vote was rigged.  Qatar and Russia bought the Cups.”  And while that’s probably true, I don’t think you can just end the conversation there.

    For one thing, we’re a country in which college alumni will pay $200k to have a 20 year old quarterback come play for their school.  It’s not as if we’re above the whole corruption thing.  If the World Cup was up for sale, we were certainly making our own backroom deals.  So let’s not pretend we’re innocent angels who weren’t prepared to fight dirty.

    Also, we need to look at FIFA.  This is an organization that oversees soccer confederations on 6 continents and hosts 12 different soccer tournaments across the globe. Sponsors include companies like Budweiser, Adidas, Coca-Cola, Emirates, etc… Source: Wikipedia.  This is a huge company.  They aren’t just running the Poinsettia Bowl and taking bribes to give Notre Dame a bid.  This is a multi-national, multi-billion dollar organization, whose chief motivation is to make make money for everyone involved in the group.  So, for the sake of argument, let’s assume these guys aren’t idiots.

    So, making these assumptions that we were ready and prepared to bribe officials, and that FIFA is made up of smart guys, why did England and the US get shunned?  Here are some reasons I can imagine:

    1) The U.S. story is old – Look, I love Morgan Freeman too.  And Bill Clinton has charm.  But we came out with the message of, “Look we have a lot of stadiums already, and lots of hotels too.  Plus, we have a diverse population.  It’s a slam dunk, no risk, low-hanging fruit alternative.”  It’s kind of the same argument the Hyatt gives you when you are planning a wedding. “Look, we have a big boring conference room, you can have a choice of steak or chicken, and there will be plenty of parking for the guests.”  Not very interesting.  Meanwhile Qatar came in with an entirely new message. “Sure we have no stadiums and no infrastructure.  But we have money – and lots of it.  So we’ll build shiny new carbon neutral, solar powered, soccer specific stadiums that we’ll take down after the event, hook them up to a futuristic transportation system, and develop a giant version of Sim City that the world will marvel at.  Think Disney World for Soccer.”  That really is a more interesting wedding than one at a hotel.

    2) The Perceived Decline of the West – These games are being held in 2018 and 2022, not 2010.  And the rest of the world looks at the U.S. and says, “Hmm, I don’t see where they are making their comeback.”  I mean when the city of Detroit is eating itself block by block to get rid of unused buildings, I’m not sure where you see that the U.S. is a solid bet to be thriving in 2022.  Meanwhile, Qatar and Russia have all that gas and oil money.

    3) The Nobel Prize Angle – On one hand, I kind of think FIFA should be congratulated for taking such a giant risk.  They are telling a country in the Middle East that they have faith in the region.  Now, at least someone has the responsibility for keeping the lunatics at bay.  Anyone involved with the 2022 World Cup, especially Qatar’s Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, will have Mid East leaders on speed dial every time they start to get itchy trigger fingers.  If the World Cup brings some level of stability to the Mid East, which in turn brings some sort of cooperation between West, East and Mid East, then give Blatter and his guys the Nobel Prize.  

    4) We don’t have the most money anymore – Let’s face it, this election was bought.  And that’s an election style we used to like, because we had the most money.  We don’t anymore.  This is an international economics story, not a sports story.  Maybe now we can admit it’s time to change the way we do things.

    I’m sure I’ll add to this post soon.

    (Additions)

    5) One thing that surprises me is that FIFA has now made it impossible for China to get a World Cup until at least 2034.  And who knows what the world will look like by then.  

    6) JR makes a good point below that diversification could be a reason.  But, diversification doesn’t explain going all the way to the limit of Qatar.  You could have solved the diversification point with any of the candidates – Australia, Spain/Portugal or Netherlands/Belgium.  

    7) To expand on a point I was trying to make above, it’s an absolute pity that the U.S. couldn’t make any kinds of claims to have carbon-neutral stadiums and an efficient transportation system 12 years from now.  Doesn’t that seem weird and sad that it doesn’t even cross our minds that we could lead the world in architectural and transportation innovation?

  • World Cup Announcement Tomorrow

    If you are downtown tomorrow morning at 6:30am, I suggest you swing by FX McCrory’s.  There, Mick will be serving breakfast and hosting a live viewing of the selection of the host countries of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups.  RSVP here. 

    This should be exciting and slightly nerve-wracking for everyone hoping the U.S. is chosen for 2022.  It’s been a pretty dirty selection process thus far, so even though common sense says that the United States would be a better host than Qatar, well, money talks and Fifa’s selection committee members are human beings who like money and the items money buys.

    If you want to watch the US Presentation, lead by President Bill Clinton, you can watch it here.  (Sounders fans, skip ahead to 16:45 or so if you want to see how Seattle is presented as a sign of soccer’s growth in the US.)

    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/bidders/live/newsid=1343822/index.html

     

  • Poor Liverpoool

    Let the mocking begin.  The Boston Red Sox have purchased the proud English franchise.  And to commemorate the occasion, a T-Shirt company has already suggested a new uniform look and feel – “The Fenway Edition.”

     

     

  • The Cure For Local News… No Anchors?

    Not many people under the age of 55 would disagree with the idea that local news needs to be reworked.  In previous times, the local anchor was one of a few links between the scary, confusing news story and the viewer who needed it explained.  

    But over time, that bond has eroded.  Some would argue the anchor did not evolve with the rest of the news gathering process.  Most of us are more than comfortable being our own editor.  We navigate from website to website, focusing on topics we self-select in filters and rss readers.  

    So what role does the news anchor play now? Down in Houston, KIAH is going to see if that answer is, “They don’t have a role.”

    Word is that KIAH will try an anchorless newscast.  The concept is still a work in progress, so no other insight is available.  But an anchorless newscast enables a wide range of sweeping changes in the local news.  At the very least, the 4 talking heads could be consolidated into a single one, news magazine and national newscast style.  And managing editors could be guided by popular opinion or some form of viewer input.

    Will people watch a TV screen that has no differentiation from a YouTube channel or web site?  Either way, it will be an interesting to story to follow.

  • Carol Bartz Talks Leadership at UW

    You’d be hard-pressed to find someone with a tougher executive position than Carol Bartz.  As the CEO of Yahoo, she had to step into the shoes of the Founder, fix the mess he caused with the board, figure out what her company actually “does” these days, and then decide how to compete in ecosystems dominated by Google, Microsoft and the sports and entertainment giants.  So when I heard the UW Foster School of Business was bringing her into town for their “Redefining Leadership” series, it was a can’t miss opportunity.

    First impression – I was shocked and pleased by how personable and affable she is.  It was a fairly conservative environment – a large auditorium and a moderator doing Q+A – but she was candid and downright funny.  The moderator did not take us through much of a story arc in his line of questions, so rather than recap the event in paragraph form, here are a few bullets that stood out.

    On teamwork:

    (paraphrase) Business schools put too much emphasis on “teamwork.”  Individuals have different goals, even within a team.  It’s unnatural to think that in a team setting, you can all be motivated by the same thing.  Learn teamwork on a sports field instead.

    On Corporate Strategy vs Executing on Tactics:

    It’s tempting to go into a firestorm and put your head down, and ignore what the road looks like outside the fire.  3,4, or 5 year plans never work.  In fact, any plan that you had in December is now wrong.  But there are always people in a company who love thinking long term about what the company should be doing down the road.

    You need to build your business so that 70-80% is stable and going to be consistent, but that 20-30% can change and be changed to adapt quickly to what is happening around you.

    Thinking is a skill.  Understand when you have someone who is good at it.

    On Joining Yahoo:

    Yahoo had been working with tons of data, but hadn’t actually made any real decisions for a while.  She needed to make a couple of decisions quickly to shake people up.  She also found that people were hungry for interaction, or even communication, from the executive level.

    In her first 5 weeks, Bartz held 45 minute conversations with staff members, and always ended the conversation with, “Who else should I be talking to?”  From this, a clear pattern of thought leaders and key influencers developed, which didn’t necessarily map to an org chart.  The standout members at Yahoo were recognized by multiple people she talked to.

    The Yahoo Ad campaign was meant as much for the staff as more the consumers.  She needed to show the staff that Yahoo was relevant, and being on national TV helped that.

    On Change:

    Fail. Fast. Forward.  You have to try new things.  If you aren’t ever failing, you aren’t innovating.  But make sure you can fail quickly, so you can change course and try the next thing.  Always be looking forward.  Don’t dwell on the failures, and don’t penalize people.  Take the learnings to the next test.  

    If you look at life, the biggest mistakes are always the things you didn’t do.

    Change is a muscle.  If you don’t exercise it, you lose the ability to do it, or do it well.

    You need to have a good understanding about what in your business needs to stay stable, and what parts can change.  Know that your people need to be able to handle that.  

    You need people who can be interrupted without negative effects.

    On Culture:

    You have to pick your battles and understand what is really important.  Your culture is secondary to having a company that a) Makes Decisions, b) Moves Forward and c) Gets Things Done. You can’t sacrifice any of these things for “company culture.” 

    On Identying Strong Performers, and Career Development:

    Think of a bell curve.  It’s really easy to spot the folks on either extreme.  Your top performers easily stand out.  They volunteer for projects, they are the ones you think of first to solve a problem for you, and they tend to self-select and join in a pack together.  So, they are pretty recognizable.  

    But the harder thing is to find the people with that same potential, and stretch them to turn them into top performers.  They may be quieter, or not on the projects that get as much recognition.  So it’s important to find these folks and put them in positions where they can become stars.  They aren’t the average employees making the most noise – so you need to look hard for the hidden talents and figure out ways to cultivate these quiet ones with potential.

    On the other end, you need to be direct and clear with the ones who slow you down.  They’ll perform well somewhere, it’s just not necessarily in your company.  The worst thing is that the rest of the team knows when an employee is a bad fit.  and it makes management look bad when they don’t help them move on to a place where they can be more successful.  You do everyone a favor when you cut them loose and help them find a better fit.

    Every employee should be involved with sales.  Sales is not a dirty world.  You simply can never really understand what your company does until you actually try to sell it to someone.  Understanding why someone says “no” to you will help you figure out what your company can do better.

    On Personal Life vs A Business Life

    Yahoo delivers 100 Billion emails a day, and filters out another 600 Billion spam messages.  When their servers go down, it’s a big deal.  But, Yahoo doesn’t cure cancer.  It’s a web site.  Your job is probably not curing cancer either.  Enjoy yourself, experiment, laugh – don’t pretend you are more important than you are just because you have a boss or client who wants something.  Chances are pretty good the world will go on without you completing that one task you are stressing out about.  

    Don’t add pressure to yourself by thinking about the “would haves, should have or could haves.”

    On Developing Employees:

    Annual reviews are a waste of time.  Yahoo quit doing them.  Instead employees and managers are tasked with making sure they have a substantive conversation at least once a quarter.

    An annual review is useless because you have an opportunity for feedback, and have to sit on it for 6 months.  You wouldn’t wait 6 months to reprimand your puppy for going to the bathroom in the house, why treat a human that way?

    Difference Between Succeeding in Technology vs Other Industries:

    At the end of the day, business fundamentals are the same no matter what.  a) Understand what your customer wants, and deliver it.  b) Measure your success and failures.  c) Recruit and cultivate talented employees. 

  • The Question No One is Asking About the iPad

    I’m not writing a review of the iPad.  Since I’m not a tech blogger, I’ll leave that to JetCityDigital, Mashable, Jeff Jarvis, and AllThingsD.  (And yes, I did put Ron Schott in the same sentence as Walt Mossberg, so remember this post in 10 years people.)

    I don’t want to debate if the iPad is a laptop killer, or simply the media companies’ attempt to put us all back in a walled garden.  I have a much simpler question.

    In every publication I read, articles focus on 10% unemployment, a looming deficit, and the fact that we’re all doomed.  So why on earth do we need a laptop that’s not a laptop, or a phone that’s too big to be a phone, or a $500 way to read magazines that still cost $5 per issue to download?  The iPad seems like something we should have gotten in 1998, when we all used $100 bills as post-it notes.  But in a recession?  Who needs to drop that kind of coin on a device that serves a secondary function for all the functions we already have solutions for?

    I got the iPod.  I got the iPhone.  I get Android.  I get the iPad in Tokyo or Shanghai.  I may even get the iPad in the U.S. in 2 years, or if the content was all free.  But I have to admit, I’m not sure how far “shiny” and “new” takes you in 2010 middle America…  I’m looking forward to being wrong on this…  

  • Pete Carroll on “How to Run a Social Media Program”

    (Republished from Spring Creek Group blog.)

    It’s not often that you get the chance to sit down with a two-time NCAA National Champion, and current NFL coach, to talk 1-on-1 about business and strategy.  And sadly, this was not one of those times.  But I did get to share a room with 300 other people to listen to the new chief Seahawk, Pete Carroll, share some wisdom and philosophy about business and coaching.

    Carroll’s presentation was not actually entitled, “How to Run a Social Media Campaign.”  But with 400,000 Twitter followers, he could probably run an entire event on the matter if he so wished.  He spoke about general leadership and business philosophies, but when you peel away the adjectives, they are also extremely sound strategies for a social media program as well.  In honor of the 12thman, here are 12 philosophies I walked away with (and which will likely soon in up in one of our presentation decks).

    (Quotes are paraphrases of Carroll’s speech, not necessarily direct quotes, and the photo is from the PSBJ recap.)

    1)      “I wasn’t ready to be a head coach when I ran the Jets.  So it was a mistake to get involved.  But when I finally figured it out and was ready for the next role, I knew exactly what I needed to do, and what it would take to put it together.” Social media translation – If you don’t know what you are doing, don’t rush in.  Figure out what you need to do, and what it will take to get there.  Write everything down, start your program and make refinements along the way.  But know what the goals are, and what pieces you need to make them happen.

    2)      “Look forward to the challenges ahead of you, rather than worry about them.” – If you’ve built out a solid plan, you can anticipate where there may be hurdles. When you are prepared and ready to face difficulties, whether they are organizational, technical, or content centric, you are in the proper mindset to find the right solutions in an efficient manner.

    3)      “We all win sometimes.  But if you want to win forever, you figure out why you are winning.” –It’s not just that anyone can get lucky, it’s that everyone will get lucky at some point.  If you rest on a few wins without figuring out what exactly got you that bump in traffic or spike in friends, you’ll only be successful until the next company (possibly a competitor) gets their stroke of luck.

    4)      “Winners battle for a competitive edge in everything they do.  Find those who want to do things better than other people, and you all will achieve greater things. Fight, scratch and claw to find a better way.” –Don’t just pick an employee or agency because they are convenient or easy.  Pick those with drive and passion to be better than others, and your campaigns will reflect that more so than someone who just wants to get a check.  Simply doing something because, ‘it’s how we’re used to doing it’ is not acceptable for a social media or marketing program.  Do what it takes to make something special happen.

    5)      “Accomplishment is one thing, but it’s more important to understand how someone feels about that accomplishment.” –A line on a resume or a completed project only gets you so far.  Understanding whether the person thinks they could have done better, and how they’d do it over, is a better predictor of who is going to execute a quality campaign for you, and how your campaign is going to evolve over time.

    6)      “Find the folks that other people are listening to.  Make an impact on them first, then the rest is easier.” –Identify your influencers.  But don’t try to sell them garbage.  Carroll used the word “impact” which is key.  Be “impactful” to those who matter the most, and you’ll get their support.

    7)      “3 or 4 people in a crowd out of 15,000 can change a community.” –Carroll’s program to fight gang violence had a monetary return.  It cost about $100k to support each of these 3 or 4 influencers.  Each gang-related death costs the city $1 Million in legal fees.  So for every death Carroll’s group prevents, the city avoids having to pay out $1 Million.  Social media may not lead to direct sales, but can you determine if it is preventing additional costs on expensive PR efforts later?

    8)      “Do things better than anyone else has ever done before, in all the things you choose to do.” — You don’t have to do everything, but if you are going to do it, don’t just do it well, shoot to do it better than everyone else. Basically, “mediocrity” not “failure” is the enemy of “excellence.”

    9)      “Know your philosophy.  If you can’t articulate your own philosophy in 25 words or less, how do you expect anyone who works for you or around you to explain it to others?” –Your social media program needs a vision and a voice, and it needs to be articulated to everyone in your company.

    10)    “John Wooden had his own way of doing things that were unique.  He could draw on people from all walks of life, because they could all focus on his unique way.” –Your brand needs its own unique identity, philosophy and vision if you want people to be drawn to it.  If you do things out of a standardized process or playbook, you only cater to those people who agree with that playbook.  If you do your own thing, you can draw everyone who believes in the vision.

    11)    “Empower yourself to do everything you can do, in the areas you control.  Don’t worry about the things you can’t.” –Don’t stress about whether people will say something negative.  You control the product you develop, the price you sell it for, and the way you promote it.  You control how you respond to your customers and how you cater to their needs.  Focus on that, and don’t waste energy on the other stuff.

    12)   “Evaluate, Address areas of concern, and fill the holes.”  –This goes to the Spring Creek Group philosophy of 1) Analyze Data, 2) Develop a Strategic Plan, and 3) Engage the Community.  Take a good hard look at what you have, figure out the best course of action, and then be relentless in fulfilling those needs.

    You can follow Carroll on Twitter at @PeteCarroll.  Also, a full-length video of his speech can be found on the Seahawks web site.

  • New Ad Report – TV $ Down, Social Media $ Up

    You always have to take these kind of reports with a grain of salt, but Mediapost reports on a new Forrester Research/Association of National Advertisers survey, based on responses from 104 U.S. advertisers in 21 industries, including Cisco Systems, GlaxoSmithKline, ING, Kraft, Marriott, State Farm and Clorox.  All told, they represent nearly $14 billion in media budgets.

    Here are some highlights from the report, which kind of illustrates how many irrational people there are making marketing decisions: 

    • TV marketers plan to spend 41% of their media budgets on television in 2010 — the same level as a year ago.  (However, this is down from the 58% level of two years ago.)
    • BUT…62% percent of companies say TV ads have become less effective in the past two years due to increased advertising clutter. 

    So, even though 62% of the marketers admit TV ads are less effective than before, they are going to spend the same amount as last year.  Read: “Buying TV is easy, and I like hanging out with ad agency folks on sound stages.”

    More insight:

    • Virtually all advertisers believe the TV industry needs new audience metrics beyond reach and frequency; 82% of respondents would be interested in ratings for individual commercials.
    • BUT…While 78% are interested in targeting consumers more precisely, only 59% would be willing to pay a premium for it.

    So, advertisers admit the TV spot is hard to measure.  But no one wants to give up any of their media buy to improve targeting capabilities.  Read: “Buying TV is easy, and I can blame the product guys if the ads aren’t working.”

    More:
    • 80% of advertisers say future branded entertainment deals will grow. And in 2010, 38% say they will spend more on branded entertainment as an alternative to the 30-second commercial.
    • 19% say the 30-second spot will be dead in 10 years, down from 28% a year ago.

    So, advertisers want to move away from 30 second spots and into branded entertainment.  But these same people think the 30 second spot will live forever. 

    Now the good stuff:

    • Social media, Web advertising and search are stealing budgets from TV and other media. Of those surveyed, 77% said they would be moving TV dollars to social media this year; 73% plan to shift money to online advertising, and 59% will be spending more on search-engine marketing and 46% on e-mail marketing. Other non-TV traditional media doesn’t seem to be part of this trend. Only 15% said they plan to increase spending in traditional media such as radio, outdoor, magazines or newspapers.

    Advertisers want targeting (online advertising, email and SEM).  They want stronger engagement (Social). And they don’t see much future potential in radio, outdoor, etc… The question is, do they expect lower CPM’s in these channels in comparison to TV?  If they want to shift budgets to mediums where they can get a direct measurement of success, why don’t they want to force TV to do a better job of measuring?

    There’s an obvious part of this survey that is missing, which illustrates how there’s still a knowledge chasm.  No one asked how many of these companies are going to integrate their social and online campaigns with a TV buy.  It’s obvious TV is still needed – at least for the largest 104 advertisers – to drive awareness and brand.  But it’s not an either/or.  These guys have the chance to use the 30 second spot to drive branded entertainment deals online, and capitalize on an engaged social audience.  For me, how these 104 companies are going to integrate those campaigns is the really interesting question.

  • Coke’s Happiness Machine Draws Viral Chuckles

    Congrats to Team Coca-Cola for pulling off a rare triple feat:

    1. Building a successful corporate sponsored “viral” video.
    2. Using an ad agency’s creative team (Atlanta-based interactive agency Definition 6), and not UGC.
    3. Generating a positive brand response that maps to an over-arching messaging campaign.

  • All We Are Saying, Is Give Pete a Chance

    Sure, the Seahawks screwed up back when they shoved Holmgren out the door and “supposedly” gave Jim Mora the keys to the castle.  But give Seahawks senior leadership some credit for trying to right the ship.

    Years ago, in the Ruskell vs Holmgren battle, they chose the wrong horse.  Who knows what the real dynamics were between Holmgren and everyone else at Vulcan, but for some reason they chose Ruskell’s side.  That decision is done.  But then at some point they realized their gross miscalculation.  So they did the right thing – they unwound all decisions that were based on Ruskell.

    Unfortunately, that ended up screwing Jim Mora.  But at the end of the day Mora hitched his wagon to Ruskell, so when he imploded, Mora had to go with him.  Mora was Ruskell’s way to get rid of Holmgren.  It’s a simple game of office politics.  When the guy who makes you a star disappears, you better have a bulletproof resume that can stand on its own.

    So what do the Seahawks and Tod Liewicke do?  They go get one of their own guys.  Remember, Tod’s brother is Tim Liewicke, named the 2nd most powerful Sports/Events figure in the country, and who helped build the luxurious Staples Center in Los Angeles and Home Depot Center in Carson, Calif.  As moguls in the LA sports scene, there’s no doubt that Liewicke and Carroll go back a few years.  

    Also, keep in mind, Tod Liewicke has a boss, and his name is Paul Allen.  I’m guessing Allen doesn’t like having his name dragged around in the mud, and like any billionaire, is probably a little preturbed that his giant play toy is being laughed at by the other billionaires in the sandbox.  Liewicke needs a fix – or at least a plan – from someone with a winning record, and Carroll fits that bill.

    Now there is one thing that should make Seahawks fans cringe.  The deal is supposedly 5 years, $35 million.  Who cares about the $35MM, the number that is painful is the 5 years.  That means the Seahawks are going to blow it all up, giving Carroll 2 years to completely undo the current damage and start over, and then expect him to have some modicum of increased success in Year 3.  It’s going to be a couple of painful 3-13 seasons in 2010 and 2011…But look, winners stay winners.  And if he learned how to build a dynasty at USC, maybe he can do it here.