I mean, if a company that manages money for a living, doesn’t know how to manage money, then reallly, what chance do any of us have? Here’s a stock chart you don’t want to see in your portfolio…
Category: Big Businesses (Page 8 of 10)
The sad story concerning the absolute theft of the Sonics from Seattle by Oklahoma oilmen has gotten almost no publicity to date. Considering we are the city that launched Amazon, Starbucks, Microsoft, RealNetworks, Cranium and Pearl Jam, you would think collectively we might have the phone number of one PR person in town.
But amazingly, for the most part, no one outside of Seattle seems to take note of a very simple story:
- In 2006, Oklahoma guys buy team that’s been in Seattle for 41 years A team that plays in a 17,000 seat arena, in the middle of downtown, that was renovated 10 years ago.
- New owners demand $500 Million new arena from taxpayers, an arena that would cost more than the 70,000 seat football stadium and 47,000 seat retractable roof baseball stadium.
- City tells Oklahoma City guys to stick it.
- Oklahoma guys claim they can’t be successful in Seattle and announce they have remarkably found a city willing to take the team – in Oklahoma City.
- Local Billionaires who were asleep at the switch in 2006 say they will buy team to keep it in Seattle.
- Oklahoma guys, who now have Kevin Durant and six 1st round draft picks in the next 3 years, tell the local Billionaires to stick it.
- David Stern looks at Seattle fans, and tells them to stick it. Then stick it again for good measure.
- Everyone acknowldges the only question is whether they leave in 2008 or 2010.
Thankfully, one national reporter has taken up the cause. And the amazing thing is, he is the Sports Guy, Bill Simmons, as influential as any writer in sports today. His letterbag column is a must read, and carries with it the potential that NBA fans from across teh country could tell David Stern, "Hey, this isn’t right. I support the Pistons, but damn if I’m going to support a league that will let some oil baron rape and plunder a 41 year old legacy."
So please, read Bill Simmons. Send an email to thank Bill Simmons. Join the Bill Simmons Facebook Group. Send the Bill Simmons column on to your friends. Blog about Bill Simmons. Because this Bostonian has emrged as the only sportswriter who seems to care that the Sonics belong in Seattle.
Net Neutrality is a term that isn’t sexy enough to get the iTunes, MySpace and Facebook crowds excited. But thankfully, we have a bunch of watchdog technologists keeping a close eye on this.
In a nutshell, as I understand it, Comcast and other Internet Service Providers want to control how fast certain web sites can deliver content. Think about Web site content as a car. Right now, every car has access to every super wide highway, and there are no speed limits. But if Comcast and its friends get their way, they would get to decide which cars get to drive on super highways, and which ones have to drive on pothole filled dirt roads. They argue this would allow them to control piracy.
But most others argue that its a way for them to effectively shut down blogs and alternative media. For example, my blog could be stuck on their "dirt road" list and take 2 minutes to load, effectively stopping anyone from reading it. They could charge millions o fdollars for super highway access, and only the major media outlets and super corporations would be able to deliver content quickly. It would be impossible to launch a small web business, because your site would take much longer than the established ones.
Since most people don’t follow this too closely, most people don’t really think it’s a big deal. So here’s evidence that it is INDEED a big deal.
How big are the stakes in the so-called network neutrality debate now raging before Congress and federal regulators?
Consider this: One side in the debate actually went to the trouble of hiring people off the street to pack a Federal Communications Commission meeting yesterday—and effectively keep some of its opponents out of the room.
Broadband giant
Comcast—the subject of the F.C.C. hearing on network neutrality at the Harvard Law School, in Cambridge, Massachusetts—acknowledged that it did exactly that….
Be sure to read the whole article on Portfolio.com. Very shady, very corrupt, and an indicator of the lengths Comcast and others will go to control what web sites you have access to.
So, I would love to go into detail about the NFL Experience, a giant travelling tradeshow attached to Super Bowl 42. And so I slogged out the 30 miles to God forsaken Glendale to file a report at 1:00pm on Friday.
However, much to my chagrin, the NFL didn’t have an experience for the public from 1:00 to 3:00pm. During those hour, it’s only experience is for season ticket holders and special guests. Since I had already burned a half day and $10 in parking, I gamely decided to see what else the NFL had for me.
Unfortunately, the only experience I was allowed, was Westgate Center.
Now I need to properly frame Glendale Stadium. And I think the best way to do this is to weave in a popular conspiracy theory. You see, 10 years ago there was this giant expanse of desert wasteland far west of Phoenix. The conspiracy theory is that a bunch of rich guys bought up this worthless property. Then, for some unexplained reason, a highway was built through this wasteland, a giant loop that ran around Phoenix, from I-10, all the way around the city and back to I-10 on the other side. Shortly thereafter, legislators decided all this open land with this convenient highway would be an ideal place for a new sports stadium. And since the stadium was so far removed from ANYTHING, the natural solution was to build a hockey arena as well, and build up the property around the stadium with hotels, bars, restaurants, condos and shops.So if you google Glendale, what you will see is 2 huge stadiums, a shopping mall, and then acres of empty land in all directions. Desert wasteland which is now worth a fortune.
But I digress.
Now I’m out amongst the cacti and my only option is to go hang out by the shopping mall and hope for the best. To be fair, Westgate is pretty cool if you are looking for a place to grab food and drink before a game. All the standard chain bars are there (Margaritaville, Bar Louie, Fox Sports, etc….)
But this really re-iterated the point that at Super Bowl Weekend, you need VIP or Insider Status if you want to do anything cool. Sure, they have parkinglot exhibits and stuff liek that, but without any kind of priority access, you are really getting about 10% of the total experience. That’s not a lament or complaint, just a realization. And now that I think about it, I kind of remember things like the NBA and MLB All-Star Game being the same way (but I had the access then, so I didn’t care…)
So, no great report from NFL Experience. I heard secondhand stories that it was crowded, there was no food and the exhibits were so so. So, i probably lucked out.
For years, we have all been hearing how Mobile Video would soon breakthrough and become a major part of our media consumption habits. And yet, for most of us, it’s rarely or ever something we use. So the question is, "Why aren’t we adopting Mobile Video at the rates we’re expected to?"
Last night at dinner some friends and I surmised the following, and I wonder if you agree. Mobile Video is a "Supply-Side" product. Some of the most powerful brands and industries – Mobile Carriers, Broadcasters, Sports Leagues, Ad Agencies and Media Distributors – would absolutely love if we were never disconnected from highly visual mediums where ads can be placed, or content can be charged for. There is a wealth, or excess supply, of content out there, and the only thing holding back their revenues is our ability to escape from that content. So of course, they look at us and say, "When Andy leaves his Living Room, we need a way that he can keep watching TV."
But very few of us look at our phone – which is our telecommunications device – and say, "Damn, it sucks that I can’t watch TV on this." Now, I have a high DEMAND for a phone that I can take with me wherever I go. I have similar high DEMAND for Text Messaging, a car that runs, laptops I can take anywhere, online services I can use to order anything, and hundreds of other things that I can’t make it through the week without.
But television on my phone? I don’t really demand that. I understand it’s available. I think it’s cool that it’s available. But I can’t think of a reason that I would demand it be available.
And I think that is the crux of the mobile video problem. The marketing campaigns are awesome. The technology is cool. I trust the people bringing it to me. And I love the shows that are available. But those are all supply issues. Until there’s a demand scenario that makes sense for me, I think it will continue to languish.
And so, as we head toward potential Web 2.0 bubbledom and a possible recession, I’m putting all companies into these two categories. Which companies are trying to create their own market out of an excess supply of something, and which companies are providing products and services that fill an already establish demand? I think the demand side companies will survive whatever economic blip we run into.
When you think of industries with technological tools at their disposal, but that go unused in the realms of customer service and consumer experience, the airline industry really does stand apart.
Think about this. These guys all know the exact number of people who will be getting on their planes. They know where everyone is sitting, and exactly what time the plane will sneak away from the gate and into a line ready for takeoff. Yet somehow, none of that knowledge makes it to the marketing or customer relations people.
Here are 3 things that I think would improve my personal flying experience.
1) Real Time Updates of Security Lines.
Every airline knows how many people are leaving on each plane, and they know which gate each plane is leaving from. Therefore, they know that within a 2 hour period, exactly how many people will need to go through a security checkpoint. They can also look back at past data and see how many people went through that checkpoint a day ago, a week ago, a month ago and a year ago. And they know how many people will be working. Based on this, they should have no problem giving you an estimate of how long it should take to get through security. They should be able to show averages over periods of time, as long as a fairly real time estimate of how the day is going in comparison to other days. This will give me a much better idea of what time I really need to be there.
2) Let Me Choose My Seat Based on Who’s on the Plane.
I’m sure this will get the privacy advocates in an uproar, but I’d love it if I could build a little public profile of myself inside the airline’s account system, or even just let it access my Facebook account. Then when I choose my seat, and I see all the seats available, I know not to choose the one next to the mom with the 2 little kids. Not only that, you can give the kids their own section, in the very back and behind a curtain.
On a different track, another 6 foot guy would know not to choose the seat next to me because we’ll inadvertently be playing footsie all flight long. Plus, if you got really imaginative, you could put in your profile if you are a chatter or a sleeper, so those who like to yak all flight long can be placed on the wing or in the baggage cargo area. If it’s all voluntary and optional, and the technology is there anyway, why not use it? Think about it – if there are 2 seats left to choose from, and one is between two 120 pound women from Thailand, and one is between two 320 pound brothers from Green Bay, I think I should get to make a wise decision on which one I sit in.
3) SMS Updates
I don’t see any reason that I can’t subscribe to SMS updates. Often, a bar or restaurant is far from my gate. Let’s say I’m a considerate flyer, and get there 90 minutes early thinking there’s going to be a security line. But, since there was no line, I slide right through and now have 85 minutes to kill. Well, when they decide the plane is going to leave 30 minutes later, I want to know via SMS while I’m sitting in the restaurant, not after I’ve given up one of 2 power outlets in the whole airport to shlep down to the gate.
I’m sure there are 100 ideas so I’m looking forward to hearing some of yours.
So, I want to be clear that I’m not bashing Google with this question I’m about to pose. I’m trying to gauge if my reaction borders on paranoia, or if it’s justified.
Here’s the situation. On Wednesday I was on GoogleChat with a friend who talked about watching the movie "The Big Lebowski" with friends that night. The next day, Thursday, just about exactly 24 hours later, ads for Big Lebowski T-Shirts showed up in my Google Mail.
To be clear, I am not anti AdSense. I think it’s great. Contextual advertising is an amazing advancement. And I am also not naive. I know that IM’s do not dissolve into the vapor. I understand that anything I ever put in an IM (or SMS for that matter) is archived forever on someone’s server, poised and ready to ruin any chance I ever had at getting elected to public office.
But here is my issue, and again, I am asking you if I am over-reacting. If the ad for Big Lebowski T-Shirts had showed up while we were talking about Big Lebowski, I wouldn’t have blinked. Even if it showed up in the next hour. But a full day later hints to me that they have some sort of psychology behind these ads, that they are using some sort of AI to read and analyze everything I type in a day, run it through an algorithm, and shoot me marketing messages that will trigger some sort of recall mechanism from the day before. I can’t explain why, but that weirds me out.
I know, it’s not enitirely rational. But something about it doesn’t quite sit right with me. I guess I feel it starts to open a Pandora’s box. Sending me a Mariners Ticketmaster ad if I am reading an email about baseball from a Seattle IP Address is one thing. But building a complete profile about me, keeping track of everything I google, everything I write, everything I receive, and every ad I click on, then throwing specific ads that attempt to predict my behavior or trigger responses….well that borders on invasive.
Anyway, I’m looking forward to hearing your own thoughts on this.
I hesitate to write this article because I am pressed for time and really want to do a good job on this one. But the topic is starting to get stale, so I really need to bang it out.
You probably heard that the University of Washington fired Athletic Director Todd Turner this week. It was a mutual decision, but one in which the school will pay him close to half a million dollars a year to NOT come to work anymore, before his contract runs out sometime in 2009. (Someone please tell me how I can get one of these gigs.)
I’m not a rabid Dawg fan or anything, but I do find the scenario fascinating. Because two weeks ago, this same University made a somewhat controversial non-decision by not firing the football coach they already had. Then a week later, out of the blue, his boss got the axe instead. So I want to look at this from a pure business perspective, and analyze this as if the UW was a public corporation.
So, let’s call UW President Mark Emmert the corporation’s CEO. Let’s say the corporation has 3 major divisions – Athletics, Academics and Research. Todd Turner is the Exec VP of Athletics. Turner has a bunch of product groups under him, tasked with a number of brand categories. The Director of Football is Tyrone Willingham. Willingham has a bunch of Product Managers (his coaches) developing features (the players) for his overall product (the Football team).
Now for a few years now, the product has stunk. And the main reason the overall product has stunk is that the features have not been all that great. Willingham was brought in 3 years ago to improve the features and get a better product to market.
Now the shareholders (the alumni) have been getting restless. They are tired of Oregon and WSU developing better products than them. They are tired of their grandchildren wanting to buy WSU and Oregon products. And a few key shareholders have been hinting at investing their money somewhere else.
So the CEO does what every CEO should do. He asks his Exec VP – "What’s going wrong?" Turner replies, "The current features are already built so you can’t change them. The product managers are working hard, so they should keep their job. And the Director of Football is a great guy who’s really trying hard, so we need to keep him as well."
Now the CEO has a problem. His shareholders are revolting, and his Exec VP has just told him, "Hey man, everything is cool here. Everyone is really trying hard."
The CEO retreats into his office and thinks. "Well, if this is them trying HARD, what happens if they stop trying? And why doesn’t my Exec VP seem to care that we never hit our numbers? Our biggest product in his department is continuing to underachieve, and he’s not mad – in fact he his proud of his guys for trying hard!"
In this scenario, the firing of Todd Turner makes perfect sense. Really, CEO Emmert had no choice. Underperforming product, no punishment of the low levels of management and no promises of improvement. The axe had to fall at the top.
Now, college football has different timing than a corporation, but if you follow this analogy, I think it’s easy to imagine that the whole division is going to be "reorganized" sometime after the new boss gets in.
So, here’s something that’s news because there’s no news about it.
On November 19, TechCrunch reported that Google was being investigated by the Chinese government for a number of tax issues, all of which were too difficult for me to understand or techCrunch to analyze or give perspective on. My initial thought was that this was simply a follow up shot across Google’s bow.
If you remember a few months back, all the U.S. search engines in China had their traffic redirected to sina.com, in what many said was a response to President Bush meeting with the Dali Lama. So now after a "tip" from someone, the Chinese government is going to fine and/or punish Google for some allegedly shaky financial bookkeeping.
Now if you ask me, when a company has more money than it knows what to do with, cheating a few bucks in taxes in a country it desperately wants to do business in would be downright foolish. I simply can’t believe Google would purposely do anything improper in dealing with Byzantine Chinese tax laws when they desperately want to do business in this market. It simply makes no sense for Google to try to cheat the Chinese government out of less than what one of their GM’s is worth in stock options.
But the bigger question for me is, why is TechCrunch the most respected news outlet covering this? On a search on the terms – Google Tax China – there’s no WSJ, New York Times or even anything from the Bay Area papers. Why isn’t anyone writing about the Chinese accusing Google of tax improprieties? Is it part of some U.S. mandate that "We will not question the Chinese government?"
So this page is probably already known to heavy investors, but I find myself fascinated by the plethora of minute long videos found here on Nasdaq.com. Vint Cerf, Rob Glaser, Marissa Mayer, Esther Dyson, etc…. it’s an impressive list of soundbites collected in one place. Much more productive than watching guys dancing on treadmills…