Tag Archives: Business and Economy

December 9, 2014 · 2:19 pm

Learning From Limewire

Gather round, youngsters.  I’m here to tell you the story of how the record industry got rid of piracy.  You see, many years ago, back when the interwebs was just a tiny series of tubes with barely anyone on it, there was this company called Limewire.  It began around the turn of the new century in 2000.  It was one of a number of peer-to-peer services that some bad people were using to share the music that they had bought thinking

English: Logo of Adblock plus Deutsch: Logo vo...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

that they owned it.  The folks that sold the music – the recording industry – sued Limewire and a bunch of the other companies too.  This, they said, would assure that piracy would end and the music business would remain healthy.  I’ll let you kids figure out if that’s really the case (hint – not so much).

Suing a company out of existence (and Limewire isn’t exactly out of existence, just sort of in limbo) rarely kills off the idea behind it.  For example, Aereo may be dead but the demand to stream local TV isn’t gone (neither is the piracy of signals).  So I read today’s story on something going on in France with a bemused smile:

On grounds that it represents a major economic threat to their business, two groups of French publishers are considering a lawsuit against AdBlockPlus creator Eyeo GmbH. (Les Echos, broke the news in this story, in French).

Plaintiffs are said to be the GESTE and the French Internet Advertising Bureau. The first is known for its aggressive stance against Google via its contribution to the Open Internet Project. (To be clear, GESTE said they were at a “legal consulting stage”, no formal complaint has been filed yet.) By his actions, the second plaintiff, the French branch of the Internet Advertising Bureau is in fact acknowledging its failure to tame the excesses of the digital advertising market.

That sums it up nicely.  The problem isn’t that people want to block ads.  The problem is that publishers have destroyed the viewing/reading experience.  There are plenty of studies that testify to consumers’ willingness to participate in the attention/value exchange.  You give me valuable content, I will give you my (and your ads) my attention. People didn’t seem to mind banner ads, even if they were for products that didn’t fit the site.  They were easily ignored.  Then came pop-up ads, leading to the use of pop-up blockers. Then advertisers/publishers started using Flash to make animated ads with sound, leading to the use of Flash blockers. Then they started using Javascript to hijack pages and force people to view ads, leading to the use of Javascript blockers.  It just keeps escalating, and finally, maybe, even into court.

The AdBlock product isn’t completely clean either.  One can question their motives when they say “We are being paid by some larger properties that serve non-intrusive advertisements that want to participate in the Acceptable Ads initiative.”  Limewire bundled spyware.  That doesn’t change the reality in either case.  The problems these products are solving were created by choosing your own business interests over those of your consumers.  You can’t solve that problem in court.  You agree?

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, digital media, Huh?

Tagged as , , , , ,

May 19, 2014 · 12:19 pm

Fee-ed up

The family and I went to a concert last night – more about that tomorrow.

CeBIT Home 1998 student day ticket with barcode

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the process of setting up the evening out with the family, I bought tickets online.  I actually bought one too many so I sold it online as well.  If you’ve done either – along with a host of other things – in the last couple of years, you’ve probably noticed that there are fees associated with those activities.  Obviously there is the price of the ticket but there are handling fees, convenience fees, delivery fees, processing fees and who knows what else.  I’m fee-ed up.  Let me explain.

I certainly don’t begrudge anyone from making a buck for providing a service.  My issue is that many businesses seem to have followed the lead of the airline industry in nickel and dime-ing their customers to death.  Let’s take last night.  The face value of my ticket was $118.  On top of that, I paid a service fee of $12.80 (almost another 11%) and a $5 facility charge (another 4%) per ticket.  There was also a $3.25 order processing fee.  The last one is, in my opinion, where the nickel and dime mentality lives.  In light of the $102 they made processing my order for the tickets, do they really need another $3.25?  At least I didn’t get charged to use my own printer to print the tickets out…this time.

Then I sold a ticket.  Since it was an in-demand show, I was able to do so for $225.  Of course, that was before I paid 15% to the site that helped me sell it – $34.  At least that fee was straightforward.  Had I been selling baseball tickets, however, there’s also a $1.50 per ticket MLB transfer fee and a $2 per ticket delivery fee. So while MLB got paid by selling a seat, they want to get paid again (as if the beer and hotdogs aren’t enough) because what might be an unused ticket moves to someone who will be there.

It’s not just tickets.  Looked at your phone bill?  What’s an “administration fee” except billions in the phone company’s pocket and a buck out of yours? Bought a car and paid a “document fee” of a couple of hundred dollars? Bank fees are among the worst and try telling the cable company you don’t want a remote control for which they charge you every month.  Then there are the airlines…

I’ll say it again.  It’s fine to  collect a fee for delivering a product or service.  Be upfront about it (you usually discover most of these fees after you’ve “bought”).  Make them clear and reasonable and in line with what the customer would expect to pay for your service.  The way to lose big bucks in my mind is to collect nickels and dimes in a sneaky way on top of those bucks.  What do you think?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Consulting, Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , ,

May 5, 2014 · 9:54 am

The Problem With Business Voyeurism

There is a lot of talk about spying these days which to me is a form of voyeurism.

Tech Espionage

(Photo credit: mirkuz)

Of course it has nothing to do with sex (well, who knows what the NSA is watching…) and a lot to do with privacy and engagement. Whether you take it in either the “spying” or “voyeurism” context, it’s basically watching something from the outside while the person or persons being watched have no clue.

You can argue that reality shows are a form of voyeurism.  After all, the shows are meant to be a window into the private lives of interesting people.  They’ve evolved from games like “Survivor” into documentaries or video diaries into staged shows that aren’t much different from scripted series.  At least with scripted shows they don’t pretend to be “real.”

What does this have to do with business?  A lot.  I think many people treat their businesses much as voyeurs treat their subjects.  They’re watching but they’re not involved.  Everyone observes, of course.  If you’re managing people, watching is a lot of what you need to be doing.  The difference is how you engage in that activity.  Never engaging with your team turns that observation into nothing more than spying.  Let’s call it “business voyeurism.” You’re there but you’re not.

You can’t be a “peeping Tom” about business.  Sneaking little looks into business activities while feigning indifference is silly.  Your team or your boss will pick up that you’re emotionally removed and if you’re not engaged how can you hope to motivate others?  Working relationships are partnerships.  Voyeurism is anything but that.

Stop peeping.  Get engaged.  You’ll be better and so will your team.  Voyeurism is a crime.  It’s a crime of a different sort when applied to business.  You agree?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a comment

Filed under Reality checks, Thinking Aloud

Tagged as , , ,