Andy Boyer

Got it. What's Next?

Category: Business (Page 20 of 24)

Technology Finally Slows Down the Rockies

October 22, 2007 /

Well, they’ve won something like 23 of 24 games, so other teams can’t stop them.  But the Colorado Rockies finally found a nemesis they cound’t vanquish.

According to reports, "on Monday, there were 8.5 million attempts to connect with the computers in the first 90 minutes after sales started, and only several hundred tickets had been sold before the system had to be shut down."

One has to assume many of these 8.5 million attempts are from the automated robots now being used by ticket brokers and resellers.  This indicates the technologies that have been so useful in selling tickets have now become an impediment to getting them to the real fans. 

In fact, the Denver Post reports on the issue, including this section.  "The bots pose a significant challenge to companies such as Ticketmaster, which won an injunction Monday blocking a Pittsburgh software company – RMG Technologies Inc. – from making and distributing such programs.

"We will not allow others to illegally divert tickets away from fans," said Ticketmaster chief executive Sean Moriarty in a statement.

The flooding process has also come under fire from parents trying to purchase "Hannah Montana" concert tickets for their kids, only to learn tickets are sold out minutes after going on sale."

 

U.S. Search Engines Have New Pot Hole in Dance With China

October 18, 2007 /

When you have a few billion potential customers living inside your country, and a totalitarian monopoly on who gets to sell to them, you wield quite a bit of power on the global business climate.

Such is the case this week as the government of China is now redirecting searches from Google, Yahoo and Microsoft search engines, and sending them to the China based Baidu.com.

The fact that this action comes about 3 minutes after the Dali Lama received a Congressional Medal of Honor is at best, "sketchy."   

This kind of activity puts American companies in a tough spot.  From everything I know, supporting the Dali Lama is the *right* thing to do.  China is effectively pushing American companies to try to convince the U.S. government to change their chance.  This will not be the last time a U.S. firm is going to have decide on whether they are beholden to shareholder value or global ethics.  Redirecting IP packets is simply the easiest thing China could do.  It will be interesting to see what comes next.   

Is Google trying to Affect Politics?

October 11, 2007 /

So, here’s an issue that only matters when you are a company serving 40% of the ads on the Internet.

According to an article written by someone named Robert Cox, founder of the Media Bloggers Association, Google is not allowing a Republican senator to run ads that denounce MoveOn.org. 

According to the article, the banned advertisements said, “Susan Collins is MoveOn’s primary target. Learn how you can help” and “Help Susan Collins stand up to the MoveOn.org money machine.” The ads linked to Collins’ campaign Web site with a headline reading “MoveOn.org has made Susan Collins their #1 target.” The Collins Web site claims that MoveOn has contributed $250,000 to her likely Democratic opponent and has run onine ads against her costing nearly $1 million. The Web site also displays MoveOn.org’s controversial “General Betray Us” ad.

So, is this paranoia?  One one hand, a company should be able to run whatever ads it wants.  But on the other, if you are the ad serving technology running ads on millions of blogs and web sites, doesn’t the line get blurry if you are banning ads you may not agree with?

Google uses the argument of, "You don’t have right’s to MoveOn’s Trademark so you can’t use it in an ad."   But that’s a pretty slippery slope, and I’d be shocked if every other ad in Google Ad Sense avoids using an unlicensed trademark.  In fact, the article states, "Google routinely permits the unauthorized use of company names such as Exxon, Wal-Mart, Cargill and Microsoft in advocacy ads. An anti-war ad currently running on Google asks “Keep Blackwater in Iraq?” and links to an article titled “Bastards at Blackwater — Should Blackwater Security be held accountable for the deaths of its employees?”"

If Google’s not careful, long term these kind of issues could turn into a reason for the DOJ to start looking into whether Google is a monopoly that needs to be broken up, using the same logic they used on Microsoft a few years back.  Exept this time it’s not a piece of software Google isn’t allowing to be distrubuted, it’s censorship of speech. If a single entity that controls 40% of the online ads decides to censor those ads to affect public policy, even the non-paranoid might get a little spooked.

C’mon, Someone Thought This Was a Good Idea?

October 11, 2007 /

(Note: Correspondent Garrett Galbreath contributed to this article)

This actually made me add a new category to the blogroll, one for "Dumb Ideas."

In an apparent attempt at global expansion no matter how little common sense the idea involves, Taco Bell will be entering Mexico.  However, the company must change some of its marketing.

First, they will not be selling Mexican food.   In fact, an ad reads, "It is a new fast-food alternative that does not pretend to be Mexican food."  Instead their brand will be, ""Taco Bell is something else."  Hmm, it’s lunch time, I feel like ordering "something else."  

Second, there will be some unusual items, with a menu that projects a more "American" fast-food image by adding French fries — some topped with cheese, cream, ground meat and tomatoes.  So basically, nachos, but using fries instead of chips.

And third, no tacos – the hard-shelled items sold as "tacos" in the U.S. have been renamed "tacostadas."

Why all the changes?  Let’s ask the executive in charge.   "Taco Bell wants to take advantage of the perception that if something comes from the United States, it tastes better, that a country that has been Americanized is willing to Americanize food that is central to its cuisine," Monsiváis said. "It is an absurd idea, and given that it’s so absurd, it may just be successful in upper-class areas."

In case you are wondering, YUM shares are struggling.  Perhaps it’s because people are walking into the CEO’s office, announcing they have an "absurd idea" and having that idea greenlighted. 

Now you might be saying, "Andy, you’re being way too hard on these guys.  Why not try something, and if it doesn’t work, put it in the scrap heap and forget it ever happened, just don’t do it again."  Well, I agree.  So for a kicker – "Taco Bell failed with a highly publicized launch in Mexico City in 1992, when it opened a few outlets next to KFC restaurants."

 

Do You Need Cable Anymore?

October 3, 2007 /

So, like everyone lese in the blogosphere, I wanted to make sure I passed along the news that Joost had finally come out of hiding and was in a public beta.  If you don’t know, Joost is the new venture from the guys who built Kazaa and Skype.  It’s a real attempt at "TV on the Internet."   But, I wanted a different angle, so I’ve been waiting a few days as I figured it out.

Well, after scratching my brain a while, I believe Joost may be the straw that allows me to ask this question. "Do you need cable TV anymore?" 

Let’s think about what I would watch on my Cable TV:

1) News: Realistically, I can read online everything I need to know.  And every story that matters generally has a local or national feed I can watch.

2) Live Sports: I may not be typical, but I rarely watch sports by myself.  If I care enough about it, it’s generally a social event.  So, it sucks that I can’t host a party for the Seahawks game, but I certainly can find a place to watch it.

3) SportsCenter:  So far, this is not replicable online.  Score one for Cable TV.

4) Movies: $4 for a DVD.

5) Prime Time Shows: Many are now available online the week they air (or the week after). Since my TV Drama and SitCom watching has already shifted from "Live" to "Tivo," waiting a week isn’t a big deal.  

So now let’s do a dollar for dollar comparison.  For my $70 per month to Comcast, I would probably let the news run about 40 hours in the background, catch 2 or 3 movies, watch about 4-8 hours of Tivo’d material and catch a few episodes of Sportscenter.   Without Cable, I lose out on the background news, am forced to the Video store for movies, have to go to a bar to watch the MLB playoffs, and have my selection of sitcoms and dramas cut down by some percentage, unless I want to buy them from iTunes.  It really probably comes out a wash.

So is Cable dead? No, of course not.  It’s a wash, not a landslide.  And I’m probably atypical.  But the fact that it’s a wash should be somewhat scary to Cable companies.  Which is why this whole Net Neutrality thing becomes an important issue for us to keep an eye on.  The Cable guys aren’t dumb, and they aren’t going to just let $70/month from 100 million households walk out the door.  But that’s a different topic.

Targeting the Young (and Single?) Voter

September 27, 2007 /

Young crowds, a charasmatic performer, a lot of hype, affluent people – it has all the makings of an event or concert designed to drive single people to a bar or show. 

But this is not a bar promotion, it’s a polical event.

If you believe the New York Daily News, there are more than a few undertones from the Barack Obama campaign team that Obama rallies have become the new *it* scene for young single people tired of the bar scene, office romance or match.com.

According to the article, "Like-minded city singles are looking to tonight’s Barack Obama fund-raiser as more than just a politically charged soiree: It’ll be a raging pickup scene."

With a web site featuring social networking (complete with photos), events that seem to purposely weed out the old and stodgy, and a candidate that can almost be described as "hip and cool," it’s hard to think this is an accident.  It seems like the campaign team developed a smart strategy of, "Smart single people don’t have a great outlet for meeting other smart single people.  Let’s have our campaign be their meeting place." 

If it works, it won’t be the first time someone used sex to sell a product, but it might be the first time it was done for a political campaign.

The Battle of Shareholder Value vs Environmental Concern

September 12, 2007 /

So back in the 90’s, it started becoming en vogue for Corporations to donate profits to charitable organizations.  This started a very interesting debate about whether companies should simply deliver value to their shareholders, or be responsible for bettering the communities in which they belong.

An easy argument was to drop the charitable giving money into the overall Marketing budget and call it "Community Relations."  If a giant bank sponsors runs for Leukemia and Breast Cancer research, then one could argue the CPM was worth the donation.  It’s a pretty compelling argument that you can get a lot of community goodwill on your side, which then helps with non-tangibles such as recruiting, brand management and corporate morale.

Fast forward to 2007, and the magic bullet is in going "Green." Companies are denting their bottom line to use recycled paper, advanced heating and cooling systems, subsidizing public transportation for employees and other efforts.  And shareholders seem to be ok with that.

But what about Google’s latest announcement.   According to a Google release, "Google.org is committed to finding innovative transportation solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming…As part of this initiative, we are issuing a $10 million request for investment proposals (RFP). We plan to invest amounts ranging from $500,000 to $2,000,000 in selected for-profit companies whose innovative approach, team and technologies will enable widespread commercialization of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, electric vehicles and/or vehicle-to-grid solutions."

Now, you can look at this 3 ways:

1) Google makes $10 million in an hour, so it’s irrelevant to shareholders.  Great PR move.

2) This is a completely for profit effort for Google, stemming from their M+A group, and Google Shareholders should benefit down the road.

3) This $10 Million is nice, but why is an online search and media company investing in Transportation, something they could not possible know anything about?  Shareholders should be annoyed.

On a lighter note, what happens if Google ends up building the killer transportation app?  Will everyone be commuting to the Microsoft campus on the Google Mobile?

 

Do Protesters Need Image Consultants

August 27, 2007 /

So President Bush visited Seattle, or more accurately, Bellevue, this afternoon for a fundraiser for Congressman Dave Reichert.  I happened to be driving by the hotel a few hours before the President’s appearance, and was surprised by the hundreds of protesters gathered on street corners around the hotel.

As I drove through this collection of people, I was struck with a thought. Just based on their appearance, I don’t know if I could ever agree with them.  They were ragged, dirty and unkempt.  I found myself wanting to disagree with whatever their signs said, just so I couldn’t be classified with them.

It made me wonder whether protesters could be more effective if they spent a little more time tuning their message to the mainstream, rather than preaching to the fringe.  How many worthy causes are derailed by failing to observe basic tenets of marketing and public relations?  Furthermore, if a protester’s goal is to sway and persuade, and their actions instead make me sympathetic to the cause they are protesting, shouldn’t the protester stop attending events?  Isn’t in the protester’s best interest to evaluate the effectiveness of his campaign?

I wonder if the power of Freedom of Speech is diluted by zealots and  loonies who use it to push people away.  From a marketing perspective, how do you control your zealots, and make them unharmful to your cause?  If you were the Prius Marketing Manager, and someone started a blog campaign asking people to send in pictures of where they get stoned in their car, how would you react?  In today’s internet where everyone can be heard, how do you control your fans that can do harm to your ability to market to the mainstream?

 

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2025 Andy Boyer

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑