Archive for the ‘Web’ Category

Damn it not another ad break!

Sunday, December 14th, 2008

So we have all said that before at some point or another, right? You get deep into the plot of your favorite show and then it stops for a few minutes so some company can tell you about their washing powder or new better than ever dishwashing liquid.  This is the traditional model of advertising on TV; it is based on the viewing patterns of the baby boomers and their parents. This model assumes that the whole family is gathered around the tube at a certain time of day, or the mom is home alone cleaning.

This model has been dead for years, for instance I go to bed at 4 a.m. most nights my movements are so out of sync with the perceived norm it is unreal. So how will they target me, the short answer is they won’t. They could get clever and base the advertising on the content, however again it’s flawed for the reason that I don’t watch regular scheduled television and when recording the show I skip the ads anyway.

So now you have advertisers spending millions on ads that never get seen. However the producers of the shows aren’t too worried they get their ad revenue and they also sell the discs. Here comes the next problem, I stopped buying DVD’s about 3 years ago if not longer, I also stopped renting DVD’s because I am always late with the damn things and get fined. What I can tell from listening to the people around me this is normal. How do you suppose these producers and advertisers will survive with a drop in DVD sales and rentals? The short answer, again, is they won’t unless… they change their model.

I watch a popular show called Chuck; I got into it while on a trip to the US. My friend had recorded a few episodes on his XBox and I watched them when I could. Now back in South Africa I, admittently, watch it illegally - for the reason that the season in my country is what I have already seen and it is on regular scheduled television so I tend to miss it anyway. I have a friend who sources each week’s episode for me from the US. I tend to watch them while I am busy with other things such as work, blogging even reading at times.

I am impressed by this show for more than its mindless comedic scenes. They have been doing a great job of placing products in the show without it looking like product placement. If you remember a few years back there was a movie called The Truman Show with Jim Carrey where the show, in the movie, was doing some serious product placements with actors announcing the benefits of these items trying to sell it to the viewers. There was even a scene in Chuck where he rattled off some stats about a Toyota which, I think, they got away with because it was pretty contextual but they could have been a bit more subtle about it.

The key to placing products in shows is it needs to fit the profile, the story being told and it needs to be subtle. If an actor is using a product that is out of character it won’t sell, it will stand out as product placement. If you product story is framed to fit that of the story line of the show together you will come out as a winner. Not to everyone but those who subscribe to the show and the story you both tell of course.

What this is creating is an environment where advertisers and producers would start working very closely together. Ensuring that the product fits the character persona and getting the timing of the placement right. I do caution though that I don’t think the advertiser should have a hand at the plot or subtleties of the story itself because again you don’t want create a telemarketer show. The content should never fit the ad the ad has to blend with the content.

This takes care of the advertising and the producers have been paid, advertisers are getting their story out to the people who want to hear it. Now what about distribution seeing that probably very few of us would go spend the money to buy full seasons of shows we would probably only watch once.  Also the model of print, box, ship is old it has no value to anyone and isn’t very friendly to the environment. The content should be disposable, easy to get and easy to get rid of. More often than not I don’t have a TV near me to plug my USB stick into to watch a show, so I watch it on my laptop or iPod while busy with something else. The video is kept small so it not the main feature for me, so in this case I would only want to download the small version of the show and wouldn’t want to waste time downloading the 1Gb High Definition version.

The other problem with traditional distribution is it’s not trackable, there is no way Universal can tell me how many people really got to watch their show based on DVD rentals, purchases and cinema goers. I may have watched the DVD at a friend’s house or borrowed it from him etc. This will happen it is intrinsic to who we are, even people who don’t like sharing will do it if they get to be the one to show it you first.

So why not distribute it through systems such as Vimeo, you get stats on each view, duration of the view and even when the user paused and resumed. This data is honestly very valuable, knowing when someone paused is important it shows a few things. Things like how much time the user can dedicate to the show - should we get to the point sooner, did he pause for just long enough to get a beverage or when did the user exit. The producers can build the show around their audience now and advertisers will have a better understanding about the movements of their viewer.

I tend to have a bias toward Vimeo, they support HD and the viewing quality just seems way better than that of YouTube - I tend to only use those two the others have very weird and slow loading capabilities and crap interfaces.
Distributing to a central source like Vimeo allows you to still serve the shows from you site, allowing you to perhaps promote similar or spin off shows et al. Through having this video in a central location a dialog can get started per show, where you can again draw more feedback from your audience such as what people expect, what they hated and so on. Knowing what your audience expects is very useful. ;)

With the model suggested above you can enter into a per view agreement with your advertisers. If their part of the show was only streamed by say 4 million viewers they pay a smaller fee than say a placement that was viewed 40 million times - say in a really funny part, or intense scene, you know the one you rewind a few times. This creates a lot more flexibility for both producers and advertisers. Advertisers will have a better idea of the times their audiences watch their ad placed shows allowing them to attribute certain purchase to a specific show.  Also it is an ongoing revenue stream for producers; I would imagine the stream would be time boxed. A product placed today has little relevance in say 5 years and why would the advertiser pay for that viewing then.

An example of this attribution would be I watch Chuck where Apple placed a new phone or Toyota a new car. I pause - along with say a few million others - just after the introduction of the product to go check out their web site and get more info about the product. So through the union of you web analytics and viewer analytics you can attribute a certain amount of traffic to your product site and acquisitions to the show.

So there are centrally a few great reasons to distribute your show on a video streaming site, one more is organic viewers. You know those who endlessly search Vimeo for entertainment, or those who googled a product and your show came up - allowing the advertiser to advertise that product. You audience can distribute your show on their blogs without compromising statistics and helping you sell your show and products through them merely liking it or even hating it.
You can still box and ship your product the market is huge someone will still want to own the disc or download the show to watch the show later - better movie viewing software could store the info about your viewing habits and upload it when it is online again.

I am afraid this model of ad placing won’t work for everyone though, unless you are damn creative. Who would place an ad in say a Wild West show and what would they place there.
It can get tricky, but what about introducing your company, that is if you go that far back, telling the viewers something about say Coke allowing them to feel closer to the company because they got to see their humble beginnings - for example.
Documentaries I would think would be easy, what gear are they using in it? If they love the gear they will more than likely give a quick rundown of why they chose to use a Toyota Land Cruiser in the Serengeti as opposed to a Land Rover Defender. So documentaries will give you - the viewer - facts, a story, the emotion, and practical advice or recommendation from an authority or someone using it for real.
Shows shot in the future I would think are pretty simple as well; it’s a great platform to introduce new product concepts. Audi did a great job of this in I, Robot with Will Smith.

So advertisers and producers get your thinking hats on and create those shows and stream it to me for free.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Concepts, Marketing, Online Marketing, Strategy, Technology, Web, Work | No Comments »

How we will use computers in the future.

Tuesday, December 2nd, 2008

Okay so this isn’t a new concept, really just the way I see it happening. This post came about through a conversation I had with two of my friends - Ernst and Benny. We were having the usual Mac/Pc discussion and it all just unraveled from there. The way we use computers now is silly and completely ineffective. We couldn’t have done it another way though it was the route we had to go, to get to the point which I will show you now.

So the problem, why are computers so ineffective? I need to just highlight that it is only ineffective now. When it was designed it was brilliant for what it had to be and that was that the computer needs to be smaller and anyone should be able to have a computer. However with the advent and maturity of the internet and distributed cloud computing this game will and has changed. This change has made it unreasonable for us to have to have a location based machine to work from. Why should I have a home machine and then also have a work machine the thing is I don’t. The concept of having so many machines is silly, and a waste of material to create the physical machine and a nightmare to manage.

I propose that we have a single device much like say an iPod or a Zune that has a larger processor and far more memory and say 80Gb to 160Gb of storage locally (solid state of course). That device can interact with keyboards, mice, printer hubs, screens and more through lets say a USB exchange or to the devices themselves. Your cached data and perhaps some thick client software gets store locally but essentially your profiles and the data relating to it gets stored in the ‘Cloud’ - to use a buzz word.

So how I think it would work is you would get to work place your device on the desk or keep it in your pocket and be ready to work. You simply choose the profile you would like to work with and start. Once you are done at the office you go home to perhaps go work on your blog, or during lunch time you sign into your home profile. You get to seperate the data between them easily with this concept but still have a shared area or profile allowing for moving files and favorites between profiles.

Once at home, internet cafe, a friend’s house or even your car you simply just have to link up your device with the peripherals available to you at the given time and you can start working using keyboards, mice and monitors available. This allows designers to still have huge monitors and tablets; it allows stock brokers to have their multiple monitors and so on. You could be in business development and would need to do loads of presentations; with this model it is fine. You get to simply sign in with your presentation profile - a safe profile with none of your personal items on it - and sync with the boardroom allowing you to present with little or no effort.

The same business developer could be driving to a meeting and needs to have a conference call, he simply would again sign into his presentation or work profile and connect to his car - depending on the model what you have available would vary of course. This concept plays into my post about ‘Radio and the internet‘ where now your car radio is in theory always with you. This system also breaks into a new market and is something I am very passionate about. That market is real-time consumer data, knowing that I just made several purchases and knowing the details about it. This is through your device interacting with the cashier machine and actually allows the transaction to occur - your device will be the authentication method for payments. Allowing me to through some software model and view my data to better manage my life.

This whole concept assumes constant good access to the internet, which is where the problem will start. Software such as Adobe Photoshop would have to change to only bring down file data as needed. I see companies like IBM, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon playing a huge role in this with their products Azure, Surface, Zune, iPod, EC2 respectively. However I think living like this with a ‘Uniputer’ would actually do much more for the economy in terms of productivity and lifestyle. This systems would allow you to better your lifestyle, with the access to your work profile from anywhere you could simply stay home and work as though you are in the office.

I can’t wait for this to be a reality, for me to simply have one device elegantly designed, light, powerful and connected. Having access to my life from anywhere in the world is an amazing concept. Having all your favorites, your trash, your documents etc. all there and ready for you to use. Just add peripherals to taste.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Concepts, Future, Ideas, Mobile, Strategy, Technology, Uncategorized, Web | 1 Comment »

Learning Ruby

Friday, October 24th, 2008

Okay so this, so far, has been an interesting experience for me. Some are a mixture of ways that I have done things before and others completely new. So I am just going to try and show some basics in ruby and then its counter parts in C#.

The first thing I will do is show you classes from the basic declaration and then build it out from there.

C#

class Mammal
{
 Mammal()
 {
 }
}

Ruby

class Mammal
 def initialize()
 end
end

Simple right all looks pretty much the same so far. Next we want to show inheritance, but I am really just interested in showing how the constructors will pass the data up to the base or super class. A note as with C#, Ruby only allows single inheritance.

C#

class Person: Mammal
{
 Person() : base()
 {
 }
}

Ruby

class Person < Mammal
 def initialize()
  super()
 end
end

The next thing I am going to show is what we know in C# as extension methods which are Modules in Ruby. I’m not sure if it is in fact the counter part to extension methods however it certainly looks like the closest thing to it. They also have what is called a singleton, don’t confuse it with pattern I will just show an intro to that too as an alternative - at least in my mind it is an alternative. Right so you declare a module and extension in the following way. I will assume we have attributes and properties respectively defined.

C#

class static PersonExtension //I always add extension, purely as a standard practice but isn’t required
{
 public static GetFullname(this Person person)
 {
  return string.Format(”{0} {1}”, person.Firstname, person.Lastname);
 }
}

use:

Console.WriteLine(person.GetFullname());

Ruby

class PersonModule #much like with my C# I can see this becoming a common standard for me.
 def fullname
  @fullname = “#{firstname}  #{lastname} ”
 end
end

use: #notice that in my example this is on an object/instance level. like I said I am new to this so there could be more to it

@person.extend PersonModule
print @person.fullname

alternative:
#@person already exists.

class << person
 def fullname
  @fullname = “#{firstname}  #{lastname} ”
 end
end

print @person.fullname

Again you can still see the similarities and you are happy. Now the next thing would what they deem as class level variables and instance level variables. Class level in C# would be static and the other would be the same. Where in C# you would declare it as say “public static string Variable” the static keyword denoting it as such in Ruby you would you double roses like this @@Variable. Instance level variables are declared with a single rose, however they are only instance level if within a method definition. If it is declared in the class it will be seen technically as a static or class level definition.

Again like I said I am really just informally chatting here I’m not trying to sound like an expert in either languages, although the amount of time I have spent programming in C# I technically am, however it was just interesting to see the differences and I will try and document more interesting stuff next time. For now I will just forge on, its only been an hour so don’t judge me just yet. Ruby is pretty different to C# they have a mantra that Class is an object, and Object is a class. Everything is an object basically, however I read an interesting thing that only a Class can have methods though. Class in the inheritence of Object specializes it into having methods/members.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Web, Work | No Comments »

Mitcheru and Mitchell Geere now one.

Friday, October 24th, 2008

So for a while I tried to have two persona’s the one “mitcheru.com” and the other “mitchellgeere.com”. I created “mitcheru” so that I could rant, or rave about things and “mitchellgeere” as a more professional blog relating to industry matters.

I have however decided that due to my lack of time to manage even one blog that I will amalgamate them back to one blog and keep it clean. Also joining the two gave me some material to blog about quickly. I know riveting stuff right.

Now in more news my aspirations to move to New York are still there and with such force, however I have come to realize that initially I may have to settle for Miami, Seattle, or somewhere in California. Neither one of the options are terrible at all in fact given the right job or opportunity they would be amazing! However if you have ever been to New York you will know what I mean nothing but nothing comes close to that city. I literally fell in love with the city.

The other things going on in my life is I am facing a cross road where I need to make a decision between sticking with Microsoft with their - in my opinion awesome - .net platform and the C# language and on the other hand Apple and coding then in Ruby and again the amazing Rails platform. I have had a long standing like/hate relationship with Microsoft, and a long standing love relationship with Apple. Learning a new language and platform isn’t really a big deal for me I have done it a million times, however I have always maintained working on Windows as my operating system. This will be a massive change for me because I have only ever done say a ratio 1:30 hours on a mac versus pc. So I decided that I will sink my teeth into rails – have already set myself up with all the material and my server can host rails already - and perhaps kick off one of my hobby projects in ruby on rails. All aboard!

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Web, Work | No Comments »

Let people talk about your company, good or bad.

Tuesday, August 12th, 2008

We all know how to do that, just have people talk about it. Now that is much easier said than done. We tried pushing our companies viraly through Facebook, and Refer a Friend campaigns and so on. Some of us even sent Mike Arrington at TechCrunch mails so that he can talk about us.

Have you considered making due with fewer people using your company initially - start with a small core base - and in them doing so you will gain a larger user base without viral campaigns or Facebook? How about plugging your feedback system into GetSatisfaction.com or systems a like. I find so many new companies from just going onto GetSatisfaction.com to post about a companies service I use. In doing it this way you will be able to grow inline with your customer needs far better than trying to gain a huge customer base off the bat.

What I am getting at is that if your customers, those who love and hate your company, talk about your company in the right places you will be allowing your company to grow organically, which I think is more sustainable. It might take longer for you to gain that 1m customer base but the truth is you will have customers genuinely interested in your business and possibly they will be paying customers.

So to get to my point I think that for you to get your company known you should align yourself with companies that allow your customers to interact with you in a public arena with alot of spectators. Whether the interaction is positive or negative you can control it by how you respond and thus gain new customers. Good or bad exposure is still good. The conversion of someone doesn’t happen when you have good or bad exposure from a customer, or ex-customer even, it comes from how you handle and respond to it.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Online Marketing, Web | No Comments »