Monthly Archives: April 2015

Tsimmis

This week’s Foodie Friday coincides with the start of Passover. As with most festivals of any religion, certain foods appear for the Seder that rarely show up at other times during the year. One of those is Tsimmis, a combination of sweet potatoes, dried fruit, and carrots. I use a recipe written down by my mother years ago (from her mother) and as with many family recipes it requires some interpretation and local knowledge. It calls for a “large can” of yams (how large exactly?), a box of prunes (which is how many ounces?) and a few other equally vague references. Of course, my inclination as a cook is to use fresh ingredients. Fresh sweet potato instead of canned, fresh carrots in place of the bag of frozen ones called for, etc. I don’t, however, and the reason why I don’t is a good business point too.

If I were to serve the dish made with fresh ingredients my family, who have been eating my mother’s recipe at seders for decades, would notice a difference.  Holidays are built around traditions and those traditions contain expectations.  Would the dish taste better?  Probably.  It would be more healthy as well – canned yams in syrup are not the best thing.  But the folks around that table aren’t looking for healthy or better.  They want the comfort of the familiar.

We often forget that in business as we’re always trying to make or products or services “better.”  History is littered with products that represent good companies making bad decisions by making the very familiar different.  New Coke, the Arch Deluxe burger, and others represent variants on successful products that seemed the same but resulted in an experience that didn’t match consumers’ expectations.  Of course we need to improve but we need to do so in a way that brings our customers along for the ride.  Presenting them with a dish that they expect to be one thing but which is very different probably isn’t going to have a great outcome.

It can be done.  Another Foodie Friday example.  After years of roasting turkeys for Thanksgiving I wanted to switch to frying them (it freed up my ovens, was quicker and they taste better too!).  I didn’t just switch them one year.  I did both and let the family come to their own conclusions.  My mother was able to answer her “darling, won’t they be very greasy?” question by comparing the methods side by side.  Now, we only fry.

As brand we can cajole, request, and demonstrate.  We can’t impose.  We need to meet expectations with the dishes that live in their memories and for which they keep coming back.

Leave a comment

Filed under food, Thinking Aloud

The Coming Cable Shift

I got into a discussion with someone about the major shift that’s taking place in the cable industry. Specifically, we were discussing all of the ala carte services that are becoming available. Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Video are just the start. You’ve heard that major networks – CBS, NBC, ESPN, and others – are going to provide a streaming service via broadband. I wrote about that a couple of weeks ago so I won’t repeat myself . However, in a time when 13.5% of broadband households with an adult under 35 have no pay-TV subscriptions and 8.6 million US households have broadband Internet but no pay-TV subscription with millions more likely to cut the cable cord in the next year, the times are a changin’.

The person with whom I was discussing this didn’t think it was a big deal. First, the cable guys are also ISPs so they make their money (at higher margins) there. Second, people will find that paying a lot more for fewer networks isn’t so great after all. I told him he was missing a point.

When you pay the cable bill each month, much of that payment gets divided up among dozens of program providers. ESPN takes the biggest chunk, around $6 or $7 according to reports as does sports programming in general. Other networks get fees ranging from $1.50 down to a dime. That’s per household per month. You do the math.

The point he was missing is demonstrated by HBO. HBO is never a basic network, meaning it’s never just included. You pay $10 a month or so for it. HBO uses that money to fund a lot of spectacular programming. Now, so does Netflix.

When the model changes the cable guys are no longer distributing the pot to programmers as they see fit. Consumers are paying for what they watch.

Even if the out-of-pocket doesn’t change, the money goes to a much more limited set of content providers. They, in turn, will have the ability to invest in better content. Yes, I realize that 10 cents a month from 50 million homes is better than $2 from 2 million homes. The difference is that payment from the larger audience will never get bigger unless your network is moved to a bigger, more basic tier or you can negotiate your way to a bigger fee. Providing the network directly doesn’t cap your growth and developing a hit can provide a big growth in revenues. Think of your friends who will subscribe to HBO or Showtime just to watch a favorite series.

I would not want to be a minor network in all of this. I suspect we will see some bundling of like networks that don’t share ownership. I also think we’ll see many networks go dark or end up as free, ad-supported channels on some service – Apple TV, YouTube, whatever. One thing for sure – five years from now the business I grew up in won’t resemble the one we’ll be living with.

Thoughts?

1 Comment

Filed under Consulting, Thinking Aloud

Foggy Lenses

Are you confused about what parts of your digital marketing are working?  I suspect you are and if you aren’t hopefully today I do a little bit to make you less comfortable about your certainty.  No, this isn’t some cruel April Fool’s joke – it’s me wanting to be helpful.  While sewing confusion might not seem to be helping anyone, I’m hoping what follows gets you to ask more questions and to refocus your efforts a little.  I’ll add, as any good teacher does, that if you’re still confused come see me (OK, call or email me) after class for extra help.

Source: farm2.static.flickr.com

Let’s start with a quick story from my TV days.  When the college football overnight ratings would come in they would be one number.  The overnights were 25 metered markets, mostly the biggest 25.  When the national ratings came in a few days later, the ratings would have changed.  One might expect this as the rest of the US was now included.  However, when you’d look at the Northeast region, for example, the rating might be very different even though nearly all of the population was included in the overnight ratings.  We’d get told it was two different samples which, of course, were measuring the same thing in the same area but through different methodologies and different homes.  It was extremely frustrating.

Fast forward.  We’re deluged in numbers.  The problem is that many of them measure the same thing but give us different answers.  Take search.  You want to know how people search for your site or product.  Google Analytics is mostly useless now since Google’s (not provided) result tells you nothing and represents a ton of your search traffic.  Webmaster Tools provide some search term information but when you compare some of the other information with the same data points in Analytics the results are shockingly different.  Which do you take as gospel? Add to that the data you get from AdWords – also different – and you’re now thoroughly confused.

Speaking of ads, most of the clients I know look at the top of the conversion funnel – how many people saw an ad.  The problem is that some studies say 50%+ of ads are not viewable.  Obviously that affects conversion rates, ad copy effectiveness measures, etc.  You also have these kinds of issues with content publishing on other social platforms and broad measures such as “likes” and “follows.”  The social guys are doing a better job of cleaning up fake accounts but there is still a long way to go.  The results of a content campaign shown to 5% of your followers that are real vs. 5% that are fake will obviously vary widely.

What can you do?  First, look more at trends than at any data point and second work backwards.  Metrics such as sales (lower-funnel metrics) are hard to get wrong.  Each step back up the funnel increases the uncertainty somewhat so be wary and ask questions.  Experiment, watch trends, measure sales, rinse repeat.  Just be careful about attributing that success to anything based on measurement tools that might have fogged up in the heat of battle.  You can’t see very well though lenses that are mostly obscured.

OK?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media