PardonMyFrench

AT&T's Ad Guru Talks About Bungling, Err I Mean Bundling

My very good friend Grace sent me a heads up on an article in BrandWeek called AT&T Ad Guru: Brand Name Still Rings a Bell (subscription required).  While the article mainly focuses on an interview with Wendy Clark, VP Advertising for the New, New, New, Gosh I Promise You It Is New AT&T talking about branding it also has a paragraph on AT&T's bundling efforts. (side note - for those of you that are in the political world or financial services relax, I have two good posts coming your way.  Tomorrow will be on Lynn Swann for Governor's online advertising campaign).

I won't go into detail or commentary on the rebranding efforts because if you had to choose between SBC a Texas company or AT&T a world-wide brand name known for technology (courtesy of Bell Labs) and customer service, which way do you think those focus groups went?  Ms. Clark does mention testing brand name X versus SBC and AT&T and a good thing X didn't win out; otherwise we would have been bombarded with a $200 million ad campaign promoting a truly awful brand name like Embarq.  Ms. Clark says in the article "What AT&T is all about is going to be bundled services.  We know from our own tracking that customers want one company to do business with."

Really.  I've seen the same sort of research back in the mid-90's when I was part of a marketing and product team researching bundles for the old and better AT&T.  I researched every bundle you could think of: wireless/LD, local/LD, cable, and etc; we even researched a plan on rollover minutes way before Cingular introduced it. After all of that, we launched Personal Network in 1999 which I believed was still the most retentive product AT&T has to date.

You know what people want?  They want the arbitrary world of local/LD products combined because it is just something made by a regulatory ruling.    They want true bundles that are at the access point- so, if you use the internet for phone service they want one bill for that, one bill for cable, and one bill for wireless.  The only reason people will go to a provider for all of their telecom needs is because they believe they will get a bottom of the bill discount by combining these services.  If they can buy a la carte cheaper they will, because as Ms. Clark points out, "you make a decision and lock in what you think is a good value and a good decision, and go on with your life."

She also says that the new AT&T will only market themselves as a one stop shop provider, but that is unrealistic for the vast majority of the US where they are not the local provider.  Those areas they either have LD or wireless, not exactly a one-stop shop and when they see their wireless revenues tanking because of this strategy they'll go back to stand-alone product marketing.

Oh, and if you think people want their wireless and wireline bills combined think again.  As soon as you run into spouses that use their wireless phone to keep calls hidden, that bundle will blow up in your face.  People want bundles of services at access points with a giant bucket of minutes/usage, not some company cross-selling services together and telling you what a great deal you are getting.

 

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Since When Is The Net Neutral - Part 2

I just want to point out a very good conversation I'm having in the comments section of the original post.  The basic summary is "if the government would force the cable/telco companies to really open up the last mile to the home, we'd finally have competition and higher speed connections."  I couldn't agree more, but why isn't the rally cry "open up the last mile to the home" rather than "don't curb creativity"?  I won't allow comments on this post, but feel free to respond on my original post below.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Since When Is The Net Neutral?

That's the question that has been running around in my head the past few weeks as both sides on the Net Neutrality issue have been rolling out the propaganda machines.  On one side you have Google and eBay writing letters explaining why passing regulation to handcuff AT&T and Verizon is a good thing for you  You even have websites like TypePad Hacks, which I used to make changes to this site, deciding to make two posts on the issue (gee - thanks for helping me on my website - now go back and get me some more good hacks).  Everyone has an opinion, so why not give mine as a veteran of the Old and Better AT&T?

You know what side I'm on?  The side that makes it easier on my wallet.  Let me remind you that the internet has NEVER been neutral.  You pay to get access to it and if you pay enough you get to move from a narrow band connection to a broadband connection.  And, if you have broadband and want faster downloads, you pay even more.  Hmmm, isn't that how it always worked?  YES.

Now who else can pay for access?  How about the other end where companies push content out to you.  You know, the Microsofts, eBays, Amazons, YouTubes, MySpaces of the world.  Shouldn't they pay too?  And, if they push out more content that requires them to eat into networks shouldn't they pay more too?  Like streaming video.  To be fair, these sites are already paying for hosting and server costs for their site, but if their services require more use of the "pipe" to deliver content, shouldn't they be charge more too? For an interesting viewpoint, check this article out at The WashingtonPost called No Neutral Ground in This Internet Battle.

Ok, so let's look at the doomsday scenario pitched by some of these companies.  They are trying to tell you that creativity will be doomed if AT&T and Verizon can charge different rates to provide faster downloads for people.  And, that the small guy can't get big if there is an additional charge.  Don't believe it.  How much money would have to be charged for Google to shut down its doors?  Billions.   The small guy will still want to get big someday because they can still get rich on the internet, even with this added cost based on usage.  The usage cost will become another line item on an income statement and the bigger you get, the more usage you use, the higher the access fee.  Isn't that how it works for the consumer?

Perhaps they'll pass through these costs to you.  That's possible, but I'd rather take my chances on the very competitive internet space trying  to absorb these costs rather than the less competitive broadband access world.  Look I have three choices for broadband - Embarq (BTW - the worst brand name ever), Comcast, and DirectTV so the odds are high that they'll pass these costs onto me. (As my wife says, "It is all about Eric".)

Someone has to pay for these networks. The New AT&T is not in the business of giving away access for free.  It is either you or the Microsofts of the world and the last time I looked Microsoft's market cap is a lot bigger than yours, unless of course you are Bill Gates.  Me?  I'm betting on less regulation so I can keep more money in my pocket and less in the billionaires that are trying to protect their company's income statement.  That's all that I see when I read their articles and blog posts- protecting income statements with a doomsday scenario.  Whatever side you are on, vote with your wallet.  What am I missing here?

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

P.S.Please remember to vote in the poll below on whether I should keep my paper edition to the WSJ

Google Testing CPA Network - Yahoo?

Ok, so Google is testing a cost per action network.  Should you get excited?  Maybe, but personally I'm as excited as I used to be with Linkshare, BeFree, Commission Junction, and etc which means not much.  Let's take a look at the article published by the Boston Globe and further analyzed by MarketingVox. 

According to the Boston Globe article, Google's CPA test is running on their AdSense program (ie - CONTENT network) and won't compete with other AdSense ads in the online auctions Google uses to sell ads.  MarketingVox further expands on this that they will only show these CPA ads in a new network called Content Referral Network.  Just a refresher for you folks - content network include sites that opt-in to be in Google's network (like the ads on my site) and are not people searching on Google.com.  So this Content Referral Network must be a sub-segment of content.

Should you care?  It depends what action you are selling.  If it is low involvement like music, downloads, and maybe even email lead generation it might work for you.  I'd also assume you'd have to put a conversion tracking code in the action you want to pay on and that always gets me worried when I have too many codes in my eCommerce (if you have multiple tracking codes and measure latency, someone is going to get credited for an action that didn't belong to them).

Google is really all about search related business and that's what makes it great.  When people search for information, they are actively asking to be sold something.  Anything outside that core competency is just a flirtation with another ad format.  Since this CPA test is outside of their core search business, it amounts to much about nothing.  Yahoo.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

P.S.  There is still time to vote on whether I should keep my paper subscription to the WSJ.  Scroll down and vote, please.

Design Changes

Hi,

If you are seeing strange designs or if the website looks a little off, I apologize.  I'm playing around with a new look, so please be patient.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Historical Voting Trends Bump Into CGC

Just a few days ago in a lunch meeting I had with a very large political media (TV) agency, you know the ones where all the money is currently spent, we discussed the impact of the internet on politics.  Besides the normal online media discussions regarding PPC, banner advertising, tracking, and ad formats, we also discussed streaming video trends.  I primarily used the information found in my post It's A Political Digital World Part 1 and spoke about how using YouTube could cost effectively (ie - free) push out political ads that are not constrained to a 30 second spot. 

So, this meeting coupled with all of the articles written recently regarding political consumer generated media, got me thinking about what really will the impact be.  First a couple of articles on the subject with a little commentary and then a few facts that the writers of these articles have universally left out.

• At Vegas Blog-fest, It's Not Politics as Usual found over at MSNBC recaps a convention of political bloggers at Vegas and their potential impact on elections.  And, if you think it was just a grouping of these bloggers, read on because quite a few politicians were there to mix, mingle, and get support outlining the growing influence this medium has especially for Democrats (I wonder why that is - more later).
• A NY Times Editorial called Could a 15 Year-Old with a Laptop Be The New Campaign Media Guru looks at video ads created by a 15 year old girl that was shown at the Vegas Blog-fest.  Hmmm, 15 years old huh?  Sounds cute doesn't it?  What the article does point out is that anyone with budding creative skills could create their own political ad, post it for free on YouTube, and if it is interesting enough get a ton of views.  Forget about whether the information is accurate.
• Finally, the ClickZ article I posted a few days back called Political Campaigns and Nonprofits Sort Out CGM which does a good job summarizing a lot of the test uses of CGM including using MySpace, but I think over-emphasizes the need for a campaign CGM worker.  Look it is tough enough to get people to pay attention to online media like search, let alone think there will be a job created in the future.

Now, I think all of these CGC (content) initiatives are great especially the video because it gives people the ability to express themselves and best of all it is free.  Create a halfway decent ad, true or not, good quality or not, and you'll get a ton of viewership with the viral components built into YouTube and the word of mouth marketing/linking aspects of blogs.  However, who is the primary creators and viewers of these ads (anecdotally of course)?  Youth.  And do they vote in large numbers?  No.

First, the 2004 election data found over at the US Census Bureau.  It shows that about 42% of all Americans, registered or not, who were 18-24 voted in the election .  That is the lowest of any age group.  Think it is better out in the West (California), think again.  Check out this chart.  Now, the 2004 election had a huge spike in youth turnout, the highest since 1992, but is it a trend?  Lets look at a different group of data with a slightly different counting methodology found at Circle called The Youth Vote 2004.

As you can see from the chart on the left (look at the trends and not at the actual numbers because they use a different counting method), the 2004 election was a spike as was 1992.  However, as a voting group the 18-24 age bracket is the worst performing one when it comes to getting out and voting.  Is 2004 the start of a trend?  Maybe, but the odds don't look good based on historical data.

Perhaps all of this CGC will energize the youth of America to get out and vote.  Giving them the ability to creatively express themselves and then turn around and vote is a very good strategy.  That's why the Democratic Party is openly embracing (sorry for typo) this trend.  However, since 1972 there has been very little activity that pushed the 18-24 bracket to approach other age groups for voter turnout.  Do you think MySpace, YouTube, and Blogs can do it?  I'll leave you with this thought courtesy of the Wall Street Journal from June 19th interview with Disney's Robert Iger on Entertainment.

When asked is there a difference between user-generated content and the fancy Disney stuff, Mr Iger replied "....I don't think it holds a candle to what I'd call professionally generated content."  Sure he is referencing movies and TV shows, but isn't it all about capturing viewers attention?  Anything that gets the 18-24 group to vote is a good thing, unfortunately, the historical trends and the reasons behind it are the 800 pound gorilla in the political CGC room.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

P.S.  Voting is still open on whether to keep my Wall Street Journal paper edition.  Post is below.

My Print Worlds Collide

Today is recycling day in my neighborhood and it is my most hated day of the week.  You see in beautiful Long Valley you have to tie up your newspapers and magazines separately - no you can't put them in a paper bag.  It occurred to me during the thirty minutes I'm sitting in my hot garage alone, that this is some kind of wasteful tribal ritual performed by people everywhere.  Then I remembered a letter I received in the mail today asking me to renew my subscription to the paper edition of The Wall Street Journal for twice what I'm paying now. Hmmmm, talk about worlds colliding.

Within the last 6 months I've subscribed to 4 newspapers during the week.  The Wall Street Journal, The Newark Star Ledger, The Observer Tribune, and The New York Times.  Needless to say, that newspaper pile after two weeks looked like Mount Rushmore.  I canceled the paper edition of the NY Times because I was throwing out more sections then I was reading; plus the electronic edition is just about as easy to read.  Ok - now I'm down to three papers.

The Observer Tribune is my local town newspaper, so I need to read this for local news; plus their website is not that great so I guess I'm stuck.  Besides, I tried getting them to reprint the best of my posts in a week so I ought to keep it just in case. 

The Newark Star Ledger is my standby for NJ news and sports.  The website located at njo.com has all of the stories, but I think it is too cluttered with ads so I don't like spending time there.  Finally, it is not that expensive and I need something for the kids to play with Playdough on.

Now comes The Wall Street Journal which is my primary source for national and business news.  Really it should be a must-read everyday for business people.  The online version is almost as easy to read and I actually use both so this is not an either or decision.  I also use the print edition to get material for some of my ad bashing posts.  On the negative side, it is expensive unless one of my Dow Jones fans wants to comp me a subscription.

So, now I turn this over to you.  Should I keep  the paper edition of The Wall Street Journal or not? You decide.  I'll do whatever you want me to do.  And, because people are afraid to post comments, I included this survey question for you to fill out.  Don't embarrass me and not cast your vote.  It will prepare you for the 2006 mid-term elections.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Yes - A Google Minesweeper

For all you Minesweeper fans - a Google version that you can play with friends.

Enjoy.  PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Blackberry Ad

Just a quick post.  I just found this ad when I logged onto my webmail and I thought it was funny.  It is from Blackberry and the tag line is "Time. Found" which is funny because anyone that ever owned or used a Blackberry knows that you can't stop using it.  The ad should really say - "Time Thief".

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Where's Casey Site Updated

Well, I just came back from two days worth of meetings in DC and it went very well.  We had a very large (even for my standards) media buy authorized and one of our successful search campaigns has tripled their daily spend. Finally, we had three other media buys go live and I'll post those creatives in a few days.  That's quite a whirlwind tour.

On another note, the Where's Casey website had a third installment go live and I think this one might be my favorite because of its simplicity.  The Where's Casey website aims to poke fun at Bob Casey who is Rick Santorum's opponent for Pennsylvania's hotly contested US Senate seat.  The recent version of the site smartly uses flash for sound, movement, and a beautifully designed page.  Plus, the flying planes concept shows good timing for the soon to be seen daily occurence of ads flying along the Jersey shore (yes PA residents go down the shore).  Also, the bottom includes links back to the other two versions, the original western and the detective site.

Obviously through a use of humor, the site tries to sway public opinion as well as generate donations and/or email sign-ups for the Santorum campaign.  At the same time, it has a viral component because it is just plain fun. 

In a day where user-generated content and MySpace pages grab headlines for what passes as political online advertising, it is refreshing to see an agency that really understands how to generate actions on the internet - intelligently purchased media driving to targeted landing pages/mini-sites.  Judging from the Google Trends chart shown above, it looks like something is working for the ad campaign.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Marketing Rapid Fire - 6-19

Somehow I managed to stay awake after that last post (I hope you did too because I thought it was a good one) in order to bring you a marketing rapid fire.  Here goes:

1. Batting lead off is a great ClickZ post called Political Campaigns and Non-Profits Sort Out CGM.  Why is this post great?  It isn't because it talks about consumer generated content used in political campaigns which the last time I looked hasn't won an election.  Nope, it is because my friend Mark SooHoo is quoted often in the article and in typical Mark fashion gives very succinct and realistic points of view like this one: "All of politics is social networking… Really, it’s just going out and saying, 'Hi, I need your vote.' ” 
2. Speaking of politics there is an interview found at MSNBC courtesy of AP with comedian Bill Maher called Bill Maher takes politics to the internet.  Now I won't go into political commentary because you can go elsewhere to get it, but what I will point out is this quote from Mr. Maher   AP: Are you hopeful when you think about the future of the country? Maher: Not really.  That's not very funny at all, Bill.
3. An Inside View From a Google Employee looks at life over at Google.  My favorite ones are how to get hired and what it is like working there.
4. According to Google you can now search across a variety of government sites in one search box at http://usgov.google.com.  All I can say is what took you so long.
5. Watch out for the new phishing scam on paypal that uses URL/domain masking to make you think you are linking over from a valid paypal address.  This new phishing URL will then ask you to enter in personal data.  See, what the world needs now are more secure RSS feeds like the one from SimpleFeed.

That's it for today.  PardonMyFrench,

Eric

AT&T - Your World Delivered Sometime in 2008

Tonight I'm writing to you from my hotel room in beautiful Alexandria Virginia where I'll be until tomorrow night after I have a few meetings on political online advertising.  There are so many articles out there on my Bloglines RSS reader, that I hardly know where to start.  I may have to do a marketing rapid fire list, so if I'm still awake after I finish this post, I'll give you one more quick one.

The one article that deserves some attention is one written over at the Wall Street Journal called AT&T Readies Service Uniting Internet and TV and if this is the New, New, New Your World Delivered by AT&T definition of a united offering then perhaps their product management team should visit dictionary.com.  According to the article, AT&T through a new digital product called Homezone will allow users to download for a fee on demand movies (whoopee) as long as they have AT&T DSL and satellite TV from Dish Network.

Yes folks, this is just what you've been waiting for.  This the TV bundled offering that I'm sure you just can't wait to have and now you'll trade in your high-speed digital cable service so you can stick a dish on your house and get slower downloads on DSL all for the privilege of downloading movies for around $3.95 a pop (my guess at the price).  Oh wait, you get some more services with Homezone including the ability to listen to music from Launchcast or view photos on your big screen TV.

The only good news about this bundle is that the movies will be of higher quality than the versions currently found on the internet - you see when you need to make a movie for a small 300x250 pixel box unit you can skimp on the quality , but on the big screen you need quality.  The only problem with this is that you won't technically be on an on-demand platform because it will take some time to download files.  It is too bad because I wrote about this as the challenge for streaming TV shows on the internet in the post called the last few feet to the TV box.  Sure you can get on-demand internet TV shows and movies but there won't be huge demand until you can watch them in high quality on your big HDTV screen.

This offering reminded me of a bad bundle that the old AT&T launched back I think in 1998.  It was crafted by a product manager without any consumer input as I recall.  I don't remember then name of this bundle and I asked a few people but they couldn't remember it either.  What this bundle had was a kitchen sink mentality of putting all of these unrelated AT&T services together and then offering a bottom line discount.  Heck, if AT&T raised chickens back then, they would have thrown that in too. Sadly, AT&T learned after wasting much time, energy, and political capital (I actually berated a product manager who was mishandling the project so badly that after he got into a car accident at lunch time, he still showed up to his meeting with a concussion) that the only good bundle is one where the services are joined together on a single technology device, not wrapped up in a discount package that the customers can see through. 

According to the Journal article there will be a Homezone set top-box that connects to the internet, but this still doesn't qualify as a good bundle.  You still need to have DSL and a Satellite dish to participate in this offering.  It isn't until sometime in 2008 when AT&T finally delivers a TV offering courtesy of a project called Lightspeed that they deliver a TV bundled offer.  Until then, just sit this one out and wait for your neighbor to  get this new world delivered on demand with a 20 minute delay.  Meanwhile, you can watch whatever you want with your DVR.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

E-Loan Excels at Enrolling Eccounts

A few weeks back at the Forrester Finance Forum in NYC, I sat behind E-Loan's CMO Catherine Muriel and got a chance to chat with her for a few minutes before her presentation in the sessions called Best Practices in Online Sales.  And even though she had to fight through technical difficulties with the equipment in the room, I found her presentation fascinating.

Ms. Muriel went into detail on E-Loan's online sales strategy which involves a voracious pay per click search campaign while avoiding promoting a cheap rate online.  You see, the team at E-Loan doesn't believe in promoting the lowest rate available in a mortgage product because, well it is misleading.  The rates that are shown by competitors are often for a select few people the meet a bank's lending criteria.  So, E-Loan chooses to promote no lender fees in their online ads.  Just as a point of reference, they do show the best rates on their homepage, just not in ads or on landing pages.  This is obviously a tough battle in a world that revolves around using the lowest rates in order to attract attention.

So, how do they do it and get new accounts without promoting cheap mortgage rates?  Simple but very thorough.  According to Catherine Muriel, they have most of their individual keywords going into individual landing pages and when you do that, you are really tapping into what makes search activity work well.  Even when I was managing a huge search campaign at my former online brokerage company, I didn't map each keyword to a landing page.  Sure I grouped similar keywords together and sent them into group landing pages, but never individual landing pages by keyword.

I tested their search campaign out and found quite a number of different landing pages.  When I searched on mortgages I was linked over to this three panel landing page and when I searched on no point mortgage I received this smaller content page.  Obviously, people searching on finer tuned keywords get a short, more direct page.  I could have continued the search, but I didn't want to ring the cash register for them on their Google account.

Of course this got me thinking why don't more companies employ this strategy?  At Harrisdirect, we didn't implement it because of lack of staff,  but other than that, linking individual landing pages to individual keywords is really the way to market.  Back in the day, Overture would decline search submissions because your landing page didn't provide the matched content; they still reject words, but in my experience they are not as stringent as they were in the past.   If you don't do your best to match pages with keywords you really aren't playing with a full search deck.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Google Launches Daypart Scheduling - Turn it On

As announced over at Google's Inside Ad Words blog, they have just turned on daypart scheduling and now you should too.  Google will now let you schedule when your ads will run or more importantly when they won't run.  This is really big news especially if your business is skewed to a certain time of day or day of week. 

In the brokerage and financial services world this means you want to shut off or turn your bids down to a minimum on weekends; personally, I'd shut it off altogether on Saturday and Sunday and then put about 70% of my bid dollars between 7AM and 7PM on Monday-Friday.  Other businesses will have to decide what works best for them, but remember that the internet if very popular during the work day (you didn't really think your employees were looking for competitive data).

I'm not sure how we should place our political ad bids, but the first thing I'll look at is the normal site traffic to understand the distribution.  I'm sure there is a pattern in there.

MSN already allows dayparting and Yahoo will add it in later this year.  So, start keeping an eye on your traffic and bids during the day, because it is already impacting your business and now you can match it with your Google campaigns.  And, if you are in the financial services industry, trust me and use the strategy I outlined above; it comes from buying millions of dollars worth of search in this industry since almost the very beginning.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Newspapers Launch $50 Million Ad Campaign

I saw this ad in the morning edition of the Newark Star Ledger and I thought it was a waste of time, but if the Ledger wanted to waste their own print space, well why not?  I guess I was wrong because it seems that the Newspaper Association of America is wasting $50 million advertising to advertise print advertising in newspapers.

I know my wife and kids hate when I use this word, but that's pathetic. I can't take credit for finding the link because I first found it over at this great website called Emergence Marketing.  I hope the NAA is tracking their visits to their website, because they'll soon discover what I've seen which is that newspaper advertising has no measureable impact on any results; especially on internet metrics.  In fact, the only thing newspaper advertising is good for is to promote yourself to your competitors and Wall Street. 

Oh, and one more thing.  Boosting your best friends ad sales during the year seems like having your parents buy books from the Amazon link on your blog.  Sure you made a sales, but is that really effective advertising?

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

RSS versus Email - A Return Bout

I really didn't intend to right a second post today on RSS, but I'm fired up by a post from Tobi Elkin in Just an Online Minute called RSS versus Email.  I noticed it in my email (yes I did write email) because the headline mirrored two posts I made a while back. The reason it was in my email and not on a RSS feed was because I was complacent and hadn't unsubscribed, but not any more.  Why am I fired up?  Well because of the interpretation of a study published by the Nielsen Norman Group called Email Newsletter Usability.  The full study costs $398, but if you are like me you can read the 7 page executive summary for free.

The study as the name implies looks at email newsletter usability and does not focus on RSS versus email.  There were three parts of the study and only the third looked at usability with an eyetracker study of RSS and email.  In fact 6 out of the 7 pages of the summary focused on email.  Hardly a study as mentioned in Just an Online Minute as  "... the Nielsen Norman Group has a new report out on the subject. The report examines RSS feeds from mainstream users’ point of view."  Want a couple of things left out from the Just an Online Minute Newsletter?  How about these:

1. According to the report there were 93 users in the study and that 65% of their newsletters were for personal and 40% were for business use (some viewers counted them as both).  Good and sound numbers for a study on newsletters, but for RSS what does the summary say?  On page 6 you'll find this data point - ".....RSS. In our most recent study, 82% of users had no idea what this term referred to. Some users were familiar with the general idea of feeds, even if they didn’t know the term “RSS.” ....This was typically because they were receiving feeds on their My Yahoo! page or a similar personalized portal."  If I do my math correctly, 82% of 93 means that 76 people in the study didn't know what RSS means.  More on that later.
2. In the Just an Online Minute summary there is a quote from the study that says "Newsletters are a much more powerful medium than RSS feeds, and I would not be surprised if it turns out that companies make 10 times as much money from each newsletter subscriber,” Nielsen says in a statement, but the JOM email omitted this line right before the quote that says "We don’t have data to calculate the relative business value of a newsletter subscriber compared to a feeds subscriber, but I would not be surprised....". That seems like a big caveat to me from a statistician.
3. As the study says, RSS is a cold medium in comparison with email newsletters which may be true for some, but written in the beginning of the study describing the third part of the research is this -  ".....RSS readers to read news feeds.  This lets us compare the newer medium of feeds with newsletters, which are now an established media form.  When you describe something or someone as "cold" doesn't it normally mean you are not allowed or can't get to know them; perhaps someone or something that is not friendly or affectionate?  Perhaps the cold description is because 82% don't know what RSS means and they compared it with an already established (and friendly) medium.
   

Why is that last point so significant?  A while back when I originally wrote these posts, it was in response to an article from fellow MediaPost writer, Bill McCloskey, called The Trouble with RSS.  As Bill wrote a while back in response to a reported 31% RSS penetration, "only 4 percent of that number are actually accessing RSS in what I would consider the traditional way: downloading an RSS reader and subscribing to news feeds." If you remember, I agreed with Bill that the penetration is really based on people using RSS in the traditional way and not fooled by newsfeeds in MyAOL. I think the same stringent criteria should also be applied to interpreting the current study.

Unless I found the wrong study or MediaPost has the full version which differs from the Executive Summary, I don't see why they would use the Email Newsletter Usability study for hammering RSS feeds.  I included the link to the executive summary so you can read it yourself.  Sure RSS is new and there are several changes needed to make it more friendly.  I just don't think an Email Newsletter Usability study should be used to make judgments on a communications vehicle that is quickly evolving.

This post is already long enough, sorry, and I'll continue it another day.  Until then, let's just say that I don't think this study should be hailed as a conquering hero in the so called RSS versus email battle.  There are definitely gray areas where they can co-exist and other areas like when you need a secure communication that RSS is a viable alternative. The study is what it says it is, a very thorough and well thought out Email Newsletter Study not an opening blow in a boxing match.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Marketing with RSS, Where to Start? Part 2

A little over a week back I wrote the Part 1 post of Marketing with RSS, Where to Start so I figured I owe you part 2.  Part 2 is about where I would start using RSS for marketing on a website and the site I'll use as a guinea pig is www.schwab.com because, well why not?  I think financial services companies are the perfect place for RSS feeds, especially secure RSS feeds like the ones pumped out by SimpleFeed.  OK, where to start with Schwab?

STEP 1:  INTERNAL USE BABY

The best sales people for using RSS are current employees because once you get them hooked, then they'll do a better job of making sure customers understand it.  At online brokerage firms you get competitive announcements, hr announcements, new research and economic news, and everyone's favorite industry changes courtesy of the NASD or what we referred to them at Harridirect as the Pershing BIBs (don't ask me to translate what BIB stood for, but any former colleagues fill free to respond).  Step 1 would be to get your compliance, research, and HR teams on board with RSS and eliminate these needless email box fillers.  Plus, you'll get 100% delivery and won't have to listen to someone say - nope I never read that Pershing BIB on new billing notifications.

STEP 2: CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS

As you can see from this screen shot, Schwab's corporate communications group has no RSS feed sign-ups which is a damn shame.  How easy and progressive would it be to add it in for PR announcements, Financial information and SEC filings, Presentations, and Job Posts?  Once you get hooked on RSS feeds, it is really annoying when you visit sections of a website like these and find no feeds. OK, so I would make my corporate communications group very happy by adding feeds to this section of the website.

STEP 3: THE REST OF THE BORING STUFF ON THE BOTTOM MARGIN

Yes, you know what I'm talking about.  The fun tabs that say Privacy and Security, Important Notices, and Business Continuity.  Sure those tabs shouldn't have a lot of activity, but you might as well RSS 'em because the people that enroll in those types of feeds, really, really want them.  What I would do is lump all of them together in a RSS group called Important News About Your Account so there is content in their more frequently; otherwise people will forget about them.  And believe me after getting my head handed to me for not understanding these enough, you too would want them thrown together in a feed.  After all, these sections typically make up your annual notifications.

Ok, that's it for this point.  Oh stop moaning.  Do you really want me to fill up your screen with a post?

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Local TV Stations Need to Go Back To The Future

In Monday's Wall Street Journal there was an article called Local TV Stations Struggle to Adapt as Web Grabs Viewers, Revenue which I found very interesting, if not for the very long title.  Basically it talks about how buying a local TV station is not as cracked up as it used to be as the web has grabbed viewership, especially from the local news segment.

In the past, people got their news from their local TV station (6PM or 11PM) which is relatively cheap to produce while using the main programming to grab viewership.  You remember that model right?  Watch Law and Order and then stick around to check out the news and weather.  How many of you can still name your favorite weather person or sports caster (Let's go to the video tape).

Well, according to the Journal that model may not be playing out so well anymore.  I don't know about you, but I can't remember the last time I sat around waiting up to 11PM to get news.  If I want news immediately, ummm, I go to the internet and see what is going on - that's especially true for sports and weather.  Heck, weather.com turns me into the same weather bunny that appears at 11PM and if I want to watch TV then (ok - maybe the bunny reference is stretching the truth a bit :-)

What's a local news station supposed to do?  You can't stream the video of the latest TV shows because all of the major networks are already doing that and running reruns online runs into the same problem.  The best thing to do is go back to the future.

They should stick with what worked well in the past - proprietary local news.  They can still produce the local news content, but instead of just relying on TV, stream it online and build your content out on your website.  You can also start an online community with blogs, wikis, social, etc that only your local audience will really be interested in.  Heck, you can even throw in a Meetup strategy.  Then with traffic get your local businesses, like the local drugstore to advertise.  Today, these advertisers don't have a viable, cost effective alternative for advertising online because they can't rely just on IP targeting to grab their local consumers.  Basically, build on the local community, provide the content to keep them, and get the advertisers to join in the fun.

Yes it looks like a sad state for local TV stations who bought into an old model that may not work as well in the past.  Instead of sitting around wondering where the traffic went to, try joining the conversation online.   If you can't beat the movement, join it.  Local TV stations might actually take the battle to the local newspapers.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Marketing Rapid Fire - 6-12-06

A couple of quick links with some short, witty commentary!!!

• As reported by AdRants and as you may have seen already, Burger King's agency Crispin Porter and Bogusky has launched another Burger King Chicken commercial proving once again that too much of a good thing can put you to sleep.
• Another great post from Bill Tancer over at Hitwise.  Bill looks at the brand building of Lenova versus IBM (chart included).  I have to tell you for the longest time I thought there was no branding due to search, but with data like this, I think you can argue that search activity is at least a trailing indicators of brand awareness success.
• According to CNET, Citizen is working on a Dick Tracy watch.
  
• In this week's Homer Simpson "DOH" award, British Telecom CIO Al-Noor Ramj said at a Gigaworld IT Conference that Google is their biggest threat.
• And finally, as reported by TechCrunch, Google Research is working on a product that would allow a user's laptop to pick up sounds on a TV in the room and process the data.  Other than giving away a free laptop and HDTV, I'm not sure why any consumer would want to be spied upon in order to give advertisers access to their den.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Need an Answer at Yahoo? Ask Dad, He Knows

I've been playing around with Yahoo Answers for a few weeks now and I have to tell you I'm very impressed.  Ever since Richard Kosinski and Justin Merickel from Yahoo gave a presentation at the Forrester Finance Forum I've been an active participant.  Not sure what Yahoo Answers is?  Well, it is Yahoo's answer to social search that turns the web from some unknown, webmaster controlled cyberspace area to a place where regular people socialize and help each other with answers to questions that Google and other search don't answer properly.   

There is a great writeup over at SearchEngineWatch called Look Out Wikipedia, Here Comes Yahoo Answers that goes into a very detailed analysis, which you should read.  I won't summarize it for you (See Mark S - trying to keep my posts shorter), but I will drop in this chart that shows a HUGE growth in use. 

MY YAHOO ANSWERS OBSERVATIONS

The two areas I like to participate in are Advertising and Finance (no surprise) and I have a RSS feed setup so I can quickly go through them.  An unofficial, unscientific observation shows about 25% of the questions are juvenile, but the vast majority of them are either people doing research for a project, strategy, class paper, or need business support.  Here are 5 samples from my RSS feed from Sunday night. 

To use it, you would login to your Yahoo account and answer a question or ask a question.  Yahoo tracks your points and then if the person that asked the question thinks your answer was the best, then you are awarded more points.  What Yahoo Answers is, is basically people for the most part helping other people answer questions.  It is fun, interactive, and educational, plus it is a bit addicting.

BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES

This is a no-brainer.  If you are an internet marketing manager for a major corporation, you need to monitor what is being said, especially if that usage curve keeps going up.  How much harm could you do answering a few questions for people that are in obvious need of help?  If you were like me and have a strong compliance/legal team, then get their permission first, but you MUST participate in the community.  For example, imagine if you are a telecommunications company and somebody posts - where can I get the best wireless rates in Newark, NJ and you don't jump on board you are really missing out.  I'd also talk to your Yahoo rep about sponsoring a section; sure there are a couple of crappy questions in every category, but you can disregard them because they are just trying to get attention and the community usually ignores them.

As Google continues to improve upon their algorithm to answers the question with the best predicted answer, Yahoo turns to word of mouth marketing and the community at large.  I won't say that Yahoo is ceding control of the predictive answer to Google, but when someone has a commanding lead in an area, your best bet is to find a weakness and exploit it.  And, that's what Yahoo is up to.  If what you're doing isn't working and you keep beating your head into a wall, try something new and if that steep usage curve keeps climbing, Google may be the one with a headache.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

It's A Political Digital World Part 2

Two days ago I wrote a post called It's A Political Digital World Part 1 and I owe you Part 2.  No post yesterday because I'm spending some time redesigning the website - it is time for a face-lift and my fellow bloggers over the The Marketing Profs Daily Fix seem to concur (see comments section).  Ok, well time to pay you back for sitting so patiently.

The Washington Post article describes at the beginning and end how incumbents can communicate with current constituents to start conversations now and use the list of emails or phone numbers later.  And, best of all these initiatives are coming from the tax payer's dime (BTW - most of the article has little to do with technology and more to do with handicapping the mid-term elections).  Towards the end, the article describes the tools that Republican Steve Chabot has at his disposal.

Chabot is using money that normally would have been spent on junk mail communicating with his constituents and instead is using it to send out emails and building virtual townhalls to understand what issues are important to his voters.  He then could catalog their contact information and use email/telemarketing micro-targeting to remind potential voters of the issues that are important to them. 

Basically this means that he would invite people from his district into what I'm guessing is a moderated forum and then capture name, email, phone number from the people in the chat room.  He could then build a list of which issues are important by person and then re-market to them later on all while using tax payer money.  This is a very powerful use of direct marketing and something that is not possible with direct mail; plus it is DIRT CHEAP.

See it is fast becoming a world of communications, social marketing, and user generated contact.  Now, what would I do with this information and how would I advise some of my political clients?  Simple.  Here's what I'd suggest

1. Ask why You DM - Sure there are "old" models that show if you mail X number to Y targets you'll get donations and votes. But, ask yourself do these models still hold?  Is DM really the best way to reach all potential voters?  For a segment of the populations I'm sure it is, but their number is dwindling.
2. Build You Email List Now And Don't Stop- Sure you can buy a list of voters and this is a good start, but you need to continually figure out ways to generate email.  The above example is a great way to build a very targeted email list, but that's not enough.  Keep asking for an email and test out a lead generation program.
3. Don't Ignore Online Video - The YouTube example from the other day is just one use of video.  Online video is hot and you know the best thing about it?  You guessed it, you know how many times someone ACTUALLY watched the video.  No more guessing and it could be free if placed on a site like YouTube.  Plus, if you have a banner campaign, you could stream the video (more on the use of video in political banner ads hopefully next week).  You could also host your own online video show to capture attention and possibly fly under the radar because not every candidate's tracking is at the same level.
4. Get Involved in The Community - Most politicians have a blog, but how many of them are really involved?  Maybe you are afraid to actually participate and if that's the case than you need to monitor what is happening.  I've seen two products that can monitor the chatter on the internet or in blogs.  First there is RelevantNoise started by my friend Dan Lynn that lets you track and trend positive and negative blog comments.  The second one where another friend of mine works named Jeaneen Andrews is called TrendIQ which tracks overall news.   In fact, the folks over at TrendIQ are tracking the wannabes for the 2008 election.  For example, check out this Google Trend chart that clearly shows news momentum for Lynn Swann in the PA governor race at the same time Swann's google search volume has leveled off and now he is in a tie with Ed Rendell.
5. Online Advertising Is A No-brainer - Search and display ads that are in sync with the traditional advertising should be a lay-up.  They cost less, are much more trackable, demonstrate results, and you can buy on the spot where people get their news.  Seems like a no-brainer.

See, the political advertising model is changing with user generated content, social networks, and on the fly news reporting.  The above are just a few ideas and if you add in the myGOP website, you can see some campaigns evolving.  Now id the time for testing and learning new techniques before your competition does; that way you don't end up in a gun fight with a feather.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

It's A Political Digital World Part 1

Two interesting articles that came out the last few days and I finally got around to writing about them.  The first comes courtesy of Adrants called YouTube May Become Biggest Medium for Presidential Candidates and the second one which was sent to me by my friend Art. M from the Washington Post called Technology Sharpens the Incumbent's Edge.  Both of these highlight (which is why I grouped them together) the importance of community/social marketing and the need to watch and participate in user generated content in the coming political campaigns.

First the Adrants article.  It mentions how the last election was all about blogs in their opinion, however, it actually was about ballot initiatives that galvanized the conservative base.  What is clear was that the election was about opening up lines of communications, blogs or otherwise.  I do wholeheartedly agree that the next election will be about expanding communities and conversational marketing, plus the impact of user generated content.

Speaking of user generated content, the post points out how an organization called YouPrez wants people to upload favorite presidential speeches and tag them youprez.  It does say it is a joke, but hold the laughter for a second. 

Imagine looking at the youprez tag come election time and what kind of user generated content would appear?  What will be the impact on communications to a group of people that ignore TV and spend hours on YouTube?  How much damage or success could occur by a fast spreading, well tagged video developed by a voter and shown for free on the internet be worth? 

Potentially a lot.  As of today, this video found on YouTube has been viewed almost 21,700,00 times (let that sink in for a moment).  Sure it is a comedian dancing, but so what.  Look at that number.  Former AT&T VP Jack McMaster used to say that a number is meaningless unless you can put an M after it.  That looks like a BIG M to me.  Another video has over 2.1 million views month to date (I think it is June 8th, right).  Remember these are ACTUAL views and not a derived rating of potential views from the big screen TV.

Tomorrow I'll look at the Washington Post article and summarize what I would do with this information for some of the political campaigns that I work on.  Until then, enjoy the video.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

OPA Study - How Excited Are You?

This has got me fired up.  I wasn't planning on posting this, but I can't get over it.  First I read this post in ClickZ which I found very informative called OPA Study: Web Bolsters Offline Campaigns.  It showed the results of a study that tracked media consumption and found among other factoids that:

One-quarter of consumer media time is spent on the Web with the medium eclipsing all other channels during work hours. 

And

Television's reach was increased 51 percent in the morning, 39 percent at mid-day, and 42 percent in the afternoon daypart, when combined with online usage. Print experienced a similar lift with its height occurring in the evening daypart.

All this seems fine and dandy except for one sentence in the article that put it in perspective.  According to the article, "The researchers recorded the media consumption of 350 people in Indianapolis and Muncie, Indiana."  For me the story ended there.  The last time I checked 350 people in Indianapolis and Muncie were hardly representative of the US population so I filed this article as interesting, but not very expandable.

Next thing I know, this is running around the internet and within the agency I work for.    The findings were released on CNET in the article Study: Web is the No. 1 Media.  Now besides having an incorrect title which they later corrected (web is the #1 workplace media), it fails to point out that the study was limited to two cities.

Hmmm, I wonder why?  Perhaps it is because CNET is a member of OPA (quote from article - "CNET Networks is a member of the Online Publishers Association. OPA's Eyes on the Internet 2006 Tour is sponsored by CBS Digital Media, CNET Networks, the New York Times Media Company and Reuters.com, among others").  Perhaps it was left out because the author didn't find it critical to the story, but as anyone with a research background will tell you, research studies are all about the sample group used for analysis (see my old post Lie A Little More With Statistics).

The study is what I would call interesting, but not very actionable and I wouldn't extrapolate it.  Am I surprised the web is the #1  workplace media?  Heck no.  If you've ever worked in corporate America then you know the web is the only place in town until your boss looks over your shoulder.  However, the study is UNBELIEVABLY important if you live in Muncie Indiana.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Mom Always Said Share, Share Your Spreadsheet

As I posted yesterday, Google is now launching a new product called Google Spreadsheet and if it is still available, you can get an invite to test it out.  I of course jumped all over it and now I'm testing it out.

You know why I'm so excited about this?  It has to do with sharing and accessing spreadsheets on the web.  How many times did you wish you could access an Excel document that was on your work PC?  It happens to me constantly.  All you need to do is work from home on a semi-regular basis and you'll be in that spot of - darn it, I left that on my home PC.  Now no problem.

I took a screen shot of the platform and it is pretty easy to use.  The two things I have to get over are not double clicking on the column width to make text fit and not using the right mouse button for a quick menu.  Plus, I really haven't given it the once over and created a document from scratch so I can test the formulas out (look it is one thing to load up an existing sheet and change it versus creating one from scratch).

The file I uploaded is my list of Amazing Spider-man comics (yes, you need the hyphen) and you know why I uploaded it?  Now I can get access to it anytime I want and don't have to buy doubles of an expensive book I already own. The next sheet I'll upload is the one I use to track my billable hours for my clients.

There are a ton of articles out there on this launch and I listed some of the better ones below.  What I find completely fascinating is the notion of an Excel killer.  Sure it is clear now that Google is working on a complimentary and/or competing product with Microsoft Office, but the toolbar in Google Spreadsheet doesn't come close to what I can do with Excel.  So, I'm not sure Excel's death is quickly approaching.  What is clear is that Microsoft is still asleep at the wheel when it comes to sharing documents on the web.

My one big concern is how private are these sheets.  Sure people need an invite to view and edit (BTW - it is limited to Google customers right now), but it does sit on Google's servers.  So...

As a tool to create complicated spreadsheets, the jury is still out and it needs some testing.  As a method for sharing and keeping the most recent documents available, I thank Google for making my life a little easier and I can't wait for the new Writely or the inevitable Google Presentation product.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

<------------------GOOGLE LAUNCH LINKS-------------------------->

• The Mercury News
• Google Official Press Release
• Google Blog
• CNET Video Review
• Video and demo from Google Blogoscoped
• Techcrunch

Marketing Rapid Fire 6-5-06

Lots of good articles out there today and a couple of old ones I didn't write about.

1. Leading off is Bill Tancer over at Hitwise, who tracked searches of Barry Bonds versus Babe Ruth and guess what? The Babe still rules when it comes to search activity.  I wish Bill would humor me and check out the Pennsylvania Senate Race.
2. Charlene Li my favorite Forrester Analyst and the one that I was saddened not to see at the NY conference last week, looks at how much her corporate blog was worth.  Charlene blurted out in a forum that her blog could be associated with $1 million worth of revenue, but as she points out, that's how much she thinks it is worth to the company due to increased revenues from the client base.  I think she discovered for herself what i figured way back when in the post What Came First The Chicken or the Blog.
3. Top 50 Online Advertisers according to ClickZ.  Vonage continues to pour money down the toilet with their unending advertising spend. while Financial Services advertisers make up a lot of the top 50 spenders.
4. Google is launching a web competitive version of Excel.  This was announced by the Wall Street Journal but more information can be found over at Google Blogoscoped.

That's it for Marketing Rapid Fire. 

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Top Brokerage Site 6-5-06

Ahh, this week's look at top brokerage sites.  No change in the order at all, although I expected that; that's why I don't pull the data weekly.  However, volume was off by at least 5% probably due to the Memorial day weekend. 

What's still very interesting on the list is how far down E*Trade and Schwab are listed.  I guess their client bases do not actively log in.  Fidelity also continues to have huge overlap with major competitors like Schwab, Merrill Lynch, and Vanguard which probably translates into that their clients also have accounts elsewhere.  Finally, even though I don't show the data, Wells Fargo is the only brokerage company with a small majority of clients visiting the homepage.  Wells' customers visit many different pages probably pointing to a diverse product base.

That's it.  PardonMyFrench,

Eric

No Comments For U

I'm finding the heat that Seth Godin, well known author and marketing SME, is taking is fascinating.  You on the other hand may not, so I'll keep this short. 

On June 3rd, Seth wrote a blog that was part tongue and cheek and part serious about how to increase traffic on your blog (BTW - I was going to write a similar one) and opened up the blog to comments.  In this rare openness on his blog he received 43 comments as of this writing which is awesome.  However, following up that post he added a second one that explains his rationale for not allowing posts on his site.  This set off a firestorm in the blog world.  Here's the expert from his site:

Not for me, though. First, I feel compelled to clarify or to answer every objection or to point out every flaw in reasoning. Second, it takes way too much of my time to even think about them, never mind curate them. And finally, and most important for you, it permanently changes the way I write. Instead of writing for everyone, I find myself writing in anticipation of the commenters. I'm already itching to rewrite my traffic post below. So, given a choice between a blog with comments or no blog at all, I think I'd have to choose the latter.

A person I respect and fellow Marketing Profs Daily Fix blogger Mack Collier has written 2 posts, one over at his The Viral Garden blog and one over at Beyond Madison Avenue on why that seems contradictory especially for a blog.  I have to agree with Mack's view for the most part, but if Seth doesn't want to let comments in for whatever reason or because he is too busy, than that's fine.  Readers know you can't go to his blog for an open conversation.  I started thinking, well what's got everyone so fired up?  Arrogance?  Maybe, but that can't be the whole story can it?  He obviously doesn't need or care about the traffic.

You know what I think is driving this backlash? By Seth not allowing comments on his blog he is thumbing his nose at conversational marketing or social marketing.  He seems to be breaking an unwritten rule that you MUST have comments if you run a blog and if you don't go back and forth in the comments section then, is their such a thing as social or conversational marketing?  If you have a blog with only one way conversations than is it just a plain old static website?   And if a famous marketing expert and author with a HUGE internet following doesn't allow comments, then is the entire Web 2.0 strategy and conversational marketing just nothing but hype?

I think the answer is no.  If Seth Godin doesn't allow comments because he can't or won't respond then so be it.  Who says the conversation needs to take place on his website?  He still offers trackbacks so the conversation can continue to grow elsewhere, spreading out like the 5 strawberry plants that now have taken over my entire backyard.

I don't think the conversation just stops because it can't occur in the spot it started in.  Doesn't Web 2.0 with tags, trackbacks, diggs, search, etc mean that anyone, anywhere, and at anytime can continue the conversation elsewhere?   

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Marketing with RSS, Where to Start? Part 1

Ok, so you are into using RSS but maybe the rest of your organization is a little less enthusiastic.  Where do you start and how do you get going?  Well, I had a meeting this week with one of my clients regarding using RSS for marketing, so I think I can offer some advice.  First, let's take a look at the potential issues that the doubters in your organization may raise.

Lack of Critical Mass

While the number of RSS users is low <10%, the current users are often what I call the holy grail target for marketers - younger males with at least a college degree and money (reported by the IPSOS/Yahoo RSS 4Q'05 study).  So, in order to overcome this issue (which shouldn't be an issue in the near future), here's what you should do:

1. Brag about the current user profile
2. Point out the list of available major sites that now offer RSS.  I'd focus on your category - for finance check out MarketWatch.com, WSJ.com, The Street.com and if you are in retail - try eBay and Sears (yes Sears).  Banking, well email me!
3. Browsers are the key.  If you ever used Firefox or Safari then you know how easy it is to add in RSS feeds.  In Firefox, I have a one click button into Bloglines.  The new IE7 will include similar functionality.  Once IE7 is released and pushed out to the average base, RSS sign-ups should increase.

The Average User Doesn't Know What RSS Is

Yes and that's true.  How many of your Moms would click on an ugly XML link (my Mom might because she reads my site)?  So, what do you do to market this.

1. Keep pushing the orange RSS logo (see right margin).  I think people are starting to recognize the bright orange logo.
2. Name your RSS feed and don't call it RSS.  Try COMPANYNAMENewsFeed
3. Place it in highly visible pages of your website so it gets exposure
4. And, include a link to what your news feed is all about - I like the process found over at Sears.com off the link from weekly specials button.

There is a Laundry List of RSS Readers

There are a ton of readers out there and I like to split them up between browsers, desktop applications, portals, and web platforms.  Literally, you are faced with with the terrible drop down box, guessing the top readers of your client (see TheStreet.com's signup), or making the XML code available.  Personally, I think the organization that the team at SimpleFeed uses is very elegant and organizes it properly.  The one being used by Sears courtesy of SimpleFeed is my recommended organization of the RSS readers.  Check it out here.  Compare the SimpleFeed organization to the process found at the NY Times.  Please don't think the average internet user will want to go through the "coded" RSS sign-up process.

That's it for today's RSS Marketing lesson.  Next time, I'll go over my recommendations of where to start and guess what fans, it uses a financial services company as the guinea pig because I think using RSS in a financial services company is a perfect fit.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

Google Earth - Privacy Invasion Next?

Yes, this is a joke so relax.  I found this video on Google Earth and I thought it was priceless.  Enjoy.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric

 

More Bad News for Vonage

I was reading this morning's Wall Street Journal and the article, FCC Weighs Internet Phone Charge caught my attention for the article I posted yesterday regarding going back and reading Vonage's SEC filing if you own that stock.  According to the article, the FCC is looking at requiring internet phone companies (ie Vonage among others) to pay into the Universal Services Fund.  As you know, most phone companies pass this fee directly to customers and for now, internet phone companies have not had to participate.  Based on the rates that I pay, it would probably pass on about $2 to the average Vonage customer. 

So, I started thinking, what did their SEC filing say about that, if anything?  Guess what true believers there is a section regarding this tax.  In case you are too busy to read it, here's what it says:

We may be required to contribute to the Universal Service Fund, increasing our cost of providing services. If we collect those contributions from our customers, the cost advantage we offer customers would be reduced.

........We intend to collect from our customers any additional USF contributions we are required, directly or indirectly, to make. Many of our competitors are required to contribute directly to the USF and already collect those USF contributions from their customers

So, Vonage believes that if the FCC requires them to collect the USF their cost advantage would be reduced and for a company that is all about price, that is BAD news; certainly not the kind of news you would want to hear if you bought into this IPO.

PardonMyFrench,

Eric