The Beauty of Interactive Maps and Visualization

The Beauty of Interactive Maps and Visualization

We say this over an over again, but mobile is inherently local. It’s a link to information as you move around your day.   For just 10 Euros, I know had access to every train, every bus, every schedule and optimal routes to get everywhere just by putting a destination into Google Maps.   What once was daunting, became simple.  Uncertainty of not knowing a new place faded away.   With GPS, we could always confirm we were going in the right direction.   With Google+Local listings, we knew what hours stores, museums and restaurants were open.  Google+Local saved us twice from going to a place that had since been closed (from our online research of things to do).  All of that information in my pocket.

The Separation of Church and State is Killing Local Newspapers. Advertorial Content Marketing is the Solution

The Separation of Church and State is Killing Local Newspapers. Advertorial Content Marketing is the Solution

I read a great article on PandoDaily about how the separation of church and state (that is “journalism” and “advertising”) is killing local publishers. The author, Bryan Goldberg, highlights the importance of understanding the economics of the news room, tying cost of content production to page views and brand quality.  The refusal for journalists to understand the economics of the business they are in is at best naive and at worst self-defeating.

Why Local Newspapers Struggle with the Digital Marketing Services Migration

Why Local Newspapers Struggle with the Digital Marketing Services Migration

I read an interesting article on Net News Check about why newspapers should take baby steps in migrating to offering local marketing services to clients because the transition can be “reckless.”

The article summarizes the comments of our good friend Jed Williams at BIA/Kelsey (@williamsjed).  And his point is spot on.  You don’t just migrate your Local Newspaper into a digital agency overnight because of the lure of revenue for revenue’s sake.

A Quick Response to a Particularly Dumb Analysis on Apple

Ok, I admit it. No I proclaim it. I love Apple products. Tell me you enjoy putting in a calendar entry. I do on my iPhone. And I love my Mac OS and yes I hate using your PC. But that's not to say that Apple is above reproach. The search warrant and seizing of property was more than a bit much. It was a douche move. Apple is leveraging it's dominance in the ecosystem to eek out considerable revenues. It's pushing out 3rd parties from intermediating themselves (Flash dev tools as an example), although I generally agree with controlling the quality of your distribution channel. It's a monopolistic threat and I worry that they may push too far. But so far, the products are great, and one of the key reasons is control. I think early markets should be controlled before they are opened up. Starting off as the wild, wild west can be problematic. But I digress.

My friend, Janet, sent me this article because I am an Apple enthusiast. She thought of me.

http://blogs.bnet.com/salesmachine/?p=10031



Top 10 Apple marketing mistakes, but man this guy is way off. Apple surely made mistakes. Pricing low in an emerging market in early PC days was one. But it is also why even though Apple has well under 10% market share, it has 80% margin share. Hard to argue on that one. But overall, his biggest analytical mistakes are in this writer's top 5.

#5 Sleeping With Microsoft - This guy is dead wrong. I would not have a mac if I could not run Word and Excel. Period. A laptop needs to meet a generalist purpose. A lot of startups I know run on Apple. None would without Office. Google Apps is only beginning to provide an alternative.

#4 Treating Journalists Like Cockroaches - Dead wrong again. Yes there is some journalist bitching, mostly from the recent search warrant. Before that, it was journalists bitching, but not in the consumer eye which matters. Overall, Apple has a mystery that makes it much more interesting and widely talked about than competitors. Did you know Microsoft is about to release a new mobile phone? Nope. Because no one cares. Apple's new iPhone in June? Bet you know the whole story. Mystery, exclusivity add to the brand value. I'm not supporting the search warrant, that was a douche move. But secrecy breeds intrigue. Even journalists who get the good scoop. Just ask Gizmodo.

#3 Pretending Their the Underdog - Man this guy is getting dumber with each of these. Mac's share in the PC market is under 10%. Ummm ... that's underdog in the PC business. Comparing it's overall valuation that's based on iPod and iPhone business is stupid. It's like saying Microsoft is pissed because it's marketing itself as #20 keyboard manufacturer even though it has a multi-billion dollar market cap. Different business. Apple has to challenge the "Why status quo?" Check out the market share trend since these commercials launched. Check out the improvement in brand identity. Check out customer loyalty. I'm Apple. I'm different than the mainstream people who just take what they're given.

#2 Censoring the iPhone - What you don't get is that there is a value at controlling the quality and identity of your marketplace. If iPhones and iPads are kid friendly, which device is going to be a kid's first device (hint: they will use the parent's credit card). Gaming and education will be huge on these platforms. The porn stand limits short term revenue in favor of long term penetration. Yes, I said penetration when referring to porn.

#1 AT&T Exclusivity Agreement - Ok. That's it. This guy just reached my idiot of the week status. Apple just turned the entire mobile industry eco-system upside down. Walled gardens. Control of deck. Using the mobile carrier infrastructure. If Apple didn't grant exclusivity, they would have no grounds to make demands. Their amazing product is the sole reason for AT&T's increase in market share (look at the stats). They used their superior product to negotiate a superior business model that now every carrier has to adopt to play with the most popular consumer device. They couldn't have done this without exclusivity. What's that? A billion apps sold? An iPad platform for next generation tablets where they control media and software distribution? Treating the carriers like a pipe. Apple got everything for a couple years of exclusivity. In one market.

There are many reasons to be wary of Apple flexing it's muscles and stifling innovation. Right now though, they are the most innovative company in mobile.

Is Bravo an Ad Network on FourSquare?


I just began to understand the value of FourSquare's strategy to partner with content providers. I thought I understood partners like Zagat recommending better restaurants or to dos, but I recently checked in to Merc bar and was told by Bravo to go to Paul Smith. By choosing to "follow" them to get a badge, I essentially opted in to them pushing me content.

If you think about this closely, this is essentially a proactive magazine, pushing me content when it's most easily actionable i.e. when I'm nearby. Of course the content itself is a form of advertising. Go here, buy this.

So another way to think about this is me opting-in to local ad networks, based on brand affinity (ex. Bravo, Zagat, WSJ, etc.).

I opted-in because I wanted a badge and I wanted to experiment, but over the long term this strategy can only be successful if I care about the badge that much (limited once you get the badge), if the content provider negotiates better deals (couponing as advertising) or the info is insightful and wanted (content as advertising).

As banner ads continue to die as we get better at ignoring them (just like tv commercials) advertising will continue to be integrated into service and content (just like TV). FourSquare's content strategy is an interesting development that allows them to plug in content providers or in other words ad networks. They need to be smart about controlling the marketplace, but it's a brilliant idea.

Facebook Could Become the iTunes of the Internet


Note: I recognize that iTunes really is an Internet application already, so saying Facebook Could Become the iTunes of the Internet is like saying Justin Timberlake Could Become the White Michael Jackson. But alas …

I continue to be bullish about Apple in general. They make the best computers. The best media players. And they have the best media distribution platform – and if you follow Fred Wilson, you know that software is media too. Take a look at the AppStore. The success of iTunes when everything else failed miserably was based on a couple key factors:

1) Apple had the best media player and leveraged it – It’s amazing what a simple track wheel can do. Basic file interface and playlisting, easy to navigate. Drop dead simple. That’s what it took to win a billion dollar industry. A trackwheel.

2) iTunes was simple and just worked – I got my first MP3 player from my roommate Al. Getting songs on and off of it was a chore. The interface was flashy and choppy at points. Features were hard to use. iTunes you could just install and go. And provided the music you needed.

3) Micropayments were made easy – I think it’s kind of silly that Amazon “patented” one click check out, because Apple is even better at it. You put your credit card in once, and then any time you make a purchase, all you need to is put in a password. Easy. People will buy at $0.99 a song if it takes less than 15 seconds but won’t buy at $0.49 a song if it takes 1-2 minutes. They optimized on the right dimension – time. And because they roll up all transactions minimizing the fixed costs of credit card processing, they optimize on cost as well.

4) Apple worked with the media companies at desperate times – Yes Apple implemented DRM when no one else would, and that was more of a perceived chore than an actual one for the consumer. But in the end, that was what kept Apple in the game. And by leveraging the desperation of the moment (and their iPod install base), Apple struck a good deal with the media companies. A minor inconvenience for the power of consolidation.

Now the iTunes model to micropayments can apply to all kinds of digital media including news, magazines, stock research, blogs and almost anything. So now let’s shift gears to Facebook, which is in a tremendous position to become the iTunes of the Internet. The parallels are interesting:

1) Facebook is the Biggest Internet Application and Social Network – Already being there for now 500 million people is a HUGE advantage. No one else can really compete there. By integrating payments into Facebook apps like Farmville (60M players) they can overnight build an eWallet install base. With a little creativity, you could increase penetration well beyond that.

2) Facebook is Simple and Works – Facebook’s differentiation from MySpace was that it was simple, not cluttered and that the activity feed brought you what you really wanted – what your friends were up to. It was surprisingly useful and provided what you wanted before you realized how much you needed it. Now 250 million people check it every day.

3) Micropayments Made Easy – I haven’t seen Facebook’s payment interface, but it will be simple. They have a growing history of embedding their technologies into outside web sites. And their applications have experimented with credits already, so they have lots of sample implementations to reference. Plus, with tons of payment applications for person-to-person gifting and gift cards, group payments and social gaming, weaving in payments to the social fabric makes sense. But the success depends on the chances of a collision: that the person you are interacting with is on the same network. Facebook is the natural choice.

4) Facebook Will Work with the Leading Media Companies in Desperate Times – Ok, so this hasn’t exactly happened yet but all the pieces are in place. Media companies like NY Times, Meredith, Hearst and more are scrambling. They continue losing money, audience and differentiation – just like the Record Labels were. They are trying to create subscription based services and micropayment access, but they are unlikely to succeed. If they could plug in a simpler payment service with one click payments, they sure will have a hell of better time of it. They may lose the 5-10% margin in payment processing, but they will probably get 50+% increased conversion.

Now there is one thing I didn’t mention in the analysis that could be the X factor of success. Apple has much better brand standing than Facebook. Facebook’s Beacon program was an unfortunate misstep from which they will not easily recover. Customer trust is built over a lifetime and lost in an instant.

So Facebook needs to tread lightly. Start by integrating payments into its applications like Farmville. Partner or create some basic apps that further increase penetration (event payments, gifting, etc.). Then offer a payment API like Google Checkout to a few big media companies and then you are off to the races.

It wouldn’t take that long, but it would transform the Internet. Micropayments everywhere … Facebook is the iTunes of the Internet.

Now of course no one is going to just give up the largest payment processing opportunity on the planet. PayPal is no slouch at 30M monthly uniques. Amazon Checkout has had limited penetration beyond it’s walls, but there are a few noteworthy customers like Meetup. Google Checkout is a good small vendor solution, but has had little penetration among the big boys. And with the media hating Google right now, they seem unlikely bedfellows. Then of course there is Apple, with iTunes owning paid media distribution right now. If the iPad sells 5M units this year, that’s significant traction. But hardware purchase is a big obstacle to customer adoption. So advantage Facebook.

It’s all very early … but that makes it all very exciting too.