...if this "new marketing" thing is for real.
1. Broadcasting isn't profitable -- in the long run.
2. The company is sending the message, not the consumer.
3. TiVo
4. Lack of a measurable ROI.
5. Consumers are trained to ignore interruption-based advertisements.
A bit more on my Super Bowl commercial idea. A quick Google search on "Super Bowl Commercials" and you get around 296,000 results.
The first one you'll find is this. An entire site dedicated to Super Bowl ads. Don't miss the ironic TiVo ad towards the bottom of the page.
I've been searching for a list of companies planning to advertise this year. As I mentioned earlier I'm pretty sure that any company that opts to advertise during this game will see a significant decrease in their stock price over the next few years. I'll post the list as soon as I find one.
Accessories. What a great business. I just bought a protective cover for my new iPod Nano. $34.95. You can see a couple samples here.
These things can't cost more than a few cents to produce.
I think it's true that the best new business ideas come from an entrepreneurial person noticing a problem and starting a business around the solution. Often, I fear that we're going to run out of problems and entrepreneurship is going to fade away.
But then I see a ultra-high margin business like this one built around a simple solution and, instead, my fears fade away.
Perception minus expectations equals satisfaction. I believe the first time I heard this was in reference to Disney World.
Disney's customers would spend hours waiting in line for a 2 minute ride. They would enter the line really excited about the ride (high expectations). But at the end, after waiting more for two hours, they felt like it was a waste of time (low perception).
So Disney had two choices:
You've already guessed that Disney went with the second option -- they lowered expectations.
They simply added a sign at the end of the line that would tell each customer approximately how long they would have to wait (I heard that they even added a few minutes to these estimates just to be sure that expectations were really low).
This was a brilliant (and nearly free) solution to a big problem. The net effect was that satisfaction increased because expectations decreased -- the perception of the ride itself stayed the same.
“There is something that happens to a person when they hit that publish" button - you cross a threshold - you move from consumer to producer - you put your intellectual neck on the line and I really think that you aren't the same person after that.” (Mark Oehlert) For more reasons, click here.
For me, it's about two things: 1. The greatest hitter of my generation was cheating (Barry Bonds). 2. The greatest pitcher of my generation was cheating (Roger Clemens).
That can't be good for the sport.
My company just held an all day recruiting event for computer science majors from top colleges in the Northeast; 48 students attended. Of the 48, there was 1 that was born in the United States.
What does this say about America and -- more importantly -- does it matter? One thought...
Given the skepticism and short attention span of many young people, it's about time teachers stopped keeping the applications of algebra, calculus and trigonometry a secret. Telling students with artificial attention deficit disorder to "trust me, you're going to need this someday" is unlikely to work. Let's start with easy to understand and cool applications -- flying planes, walking on the moon and building skyscrapers. We can back into the boring stuff.
I just finished reading Seth Godin's new book, "Meatball Sundae." It was excellent and I have a lot of thoughts on it that I'm sure I'll post over the next couple of weeks.
The book brought to mind a great podcast the other day from the Harvard Business Review. It was an interview with a professor from Columbia's business school (I think). Anyway, his thesis seemed to be an attack on Seth's thesis -- though I'm certain this wasn't his intent. For the record, Seth's thesis goes something like this...
Forget about interruption-based marketing. Instead build what he calls a "permission asset." That is, build a list of people that want to hear from you. How do you build this list? Basically through word of mouth. How do you get word of mouth? Build a product that is "remarkable" -- i.e. something that people will make a remark about.
I love this theory. I love it. I have to admit, though, that this seems a little bit too easy. And that is the point that this professor trying to make. That is, while Seth's theory is nice, it's not necessarily that easy. For every example that Seth gives in his new book, from iPods to Send-a-Ball's, there are probably 1,000 ideas that didn't spread. The Columbia professors theory combines a little bit of interruption-based marketing with an easy way for people to spread the word to dramatically increase the chances of a win.
More on this in the coming days...in the meantime, I should include a link to Seth's blog. He's a large inspiration for this one.
Not sure...but here's a thought....
New marketing companies leverage things like blogs, web video, targeted emails, etc. Old marketing companies -- at least the really big ones -- do dumb things like advertise during the Super Bowl -- the epitome of wasted ad spending. If there really is something to this new marketing thing, I'm going to bet that, on average, companies that advertise during this year's Super Bowl will see their stock prices decline over the next three years. I'll list a bunch of these companies the day after the Super Bowl. It'll be interesting to see if my theory is right...