January 9, 2012

Prognostication correct! Free NOOKs

Robin Wauters reports today in Tech Crunch, "Barnes & Noble is now heavily discounting (and even giving away free) NOOK devices with digital subscriptions to a magazine or newspaper, the first time a bookseller has ever done this type of promotion if I’m not mistaken."

You're not mistaken, Robin. And neither was I when, (way back) in November 2009, I ventured that e-readers (as we then called them) would take off only when their business model changed. Eventually, said I, we'd get the reader for "free" when we paid for subscriptions. Just like a cable box.

Back then e-reader sales were sputtering in defiance of so many high hopes. One popular analysis held that the devices needed more features. Others thought slick interfaces and better form factors were the answer. "As soon as Apple properly address e-readers there will be no hesitation," wrote one foolhardy industry watcher on LinkedIn.

Months later came the iPad Spring that revolutionized the category and proved everybody right but me. But I hardly noticed, so thrilling were the times. The ungainly "e-reader" departed the lexicon and in flew the "tablet." Form factors, features and operating systems proliferated wildly. Intense competition kept prices flat while awesomeness climbed steeply. Indeed, some of the hungrier brands began selling devices at a loss in pursuit of market share. All the while, the only fixed variable in tablet sales was content.

Until now. Credit the intersecting challenge of monetizing digital publication, particularly of periodical journalism. All that stuff that used to be free on the Internet and that people weren't happy to pay for once the publishers erected paywalls. The marriage of paid subscriptions and free tablets (details here via Wired) works to close gaps in the perceived value of each.

In 2009, reported Forrester Research, roughly three million e-readers of all types were sold. Granted, there were only a few types. In 2011, reports Computer World, Apple sold 40 million iPads. No doubt sales will continue to rise. But increasingly the buyers will be publishers themselves. They will subsidize the cost of putting devices in people's hands as the enticement to get them to pay for digital content. 

December 22, 2011

The Toilet: A Parable (Part 1)

Suppose your business is a bathroom. At the heart of the operation is the toilet. It's old (established) but works fine, looks fine. When the toilet was made, the industry standard held that 3.5 gallons per flush would ensure satisfactory performance under normal operating conditions. And it did. Your people and your customers use it without complaint. It's simple to use and they know what to expect. They hardly think about it. So you focus on other things – the faucet, the shower head, the tiles, the lighting.

Twenty years pass. Now the bathroom market prizes efficiency. Productivity gains define success. Fear of water scarcity, a fashionable conservation ethic and responsive design innovations change the industry standard to 1.6 gallons per flush. Less than half the water your old reliable toilet uses.

Even so, this new standard isn't top of mind for your customers. Nor are you required to change your toilet. You're grandfathered in. Your operation is a grandfather. Very sexy.

You start reading about next-gen toilets that are totally outperforming yours in profits and customer sat. Your brother-in-law gets one of these new toilets and of course will not let you hear the end of it. Your no-complaints, taken-for-granted toilet has become a competitive disadvantage. Unfairly or not, it casts you as a water glutton. And you're literally flushing away your bottom line. What an embarrassment!

The top-end water-saving toilets that get media attention cost more than your first car. The purchase price would cancel the promised operational savings for years. Sure, you can get a new toilet that's adequate and relatively affordable. But your friendly old toilet still feels adequate. The cost of its obsolescence is hidden from your customers, who are anyways clamoring for a heated floor.

What to do? Well, for a few years you weigh a costly replacement against no replacement. Then one day you're at a home show. You're batting away yet another product rep who wants to sell you the latest-greatest toilet when a plumber steps into the conversation. He says that, while it makes sense for large public bathrooms to have the newest toilets, a smaller bathroom like yours could capture nearly the whole upside with an inexpensive retrofit kit. Your old toilet would flush to the new standard. You'd save on your water bill, you'd save the world, and you'd out-green your brother-in-law and his thousand dollar toilet!

Next Saturday the plumber's at work in your bathroom. It's exciting seeing the grungy fill valve and flapper coming out of the tank and their shiny, state-of-the-art replacemens going in. But it turns out that your old toilet is such an oddball that the retrofit kit won't install on it the normal way. The plumber has to modify it, and that'll take an extra day of labor. The next day being Sunday, he'd have to charge you double time. Wait until Monday and your bathroom will be out of commission during business hours.

This certainly dulls the luster of the the golden mean you've purchased. But you know from operating a bathroom that shit happens, and you agree to the change.

First thing Monday you arrive at your bathroom and hear tremendous banging noises. Rushing in, you find the plumber on his knees, his butt crack sticking proudly in the air. He's pounding on a part of the new kit with a hammer. Modification, he says sheepishly. You wonder: Is this what high-tech innovation looks like?

You spend the morning asking customers to excuse the inconvenience and hold their business just a little longer. Relief comes at last with the exit of the plumber. He's hitched up his jeans and put things back in order, more or less. He greets the crowded waiting room with a bow and a flourish, whispering in your ear that you'll want to straighten up the bathroom just a bit before you let customers in. You send in your assistant with mop and brush. As she pulls on the yellow rubber gloves she lets you know you hired her to do many things, and cleaning toilets wasn't one of them. Her other assignments will now be delayed. Oh, joy. Soon the bathroom sparkles. You note with satisfaction that this is the end of a long quandary. You decide to celebrate by christening the re-engineered toilet yourself.

At first you're thrilled. It's when you try to flush that you begin your descent into the change curve. The ordinary accounts of water-saving toilets had by no means prepared you for what you see. Your mental picture of toilets generally, your long experience with this toilet in particular, cannot impart the faintest conception either of the magnificence, or of the horror of the scene – or of the wild bewildering sense of the novel which now confounds you.

In place of the accustomed flush handle obtrudes a new button – no: two buttons, two buttons in one. Gripped by apoplexy, your usual process interrupted so close to the cortex of muscle memory, you wonder at the disorder and disruption you've provoked by attempting to solve this toilet deficiency on your own, supposedly crafty terms. Two buttons!

In desperation, and quite unhygenically, you fish your cell phone from your pocket and call the plumber. Maybe because you're so upset, maybe because he's in a septic tank, he's having trouble following you. He can't understand why you're confused. He suggests you try reframing the situation. Oh, now he understands. Yes, no more flush handle. That was the point all along. Now you're dual-flush. You've got your No. 1 button and your No. 2 button. A smarter, more specialized management system. The plumber concedes that a training might have been in order, but he withheld it from his proposal because you'd expressed interest in keeping cost to a minimum.

In time you, your people and your customers adapt to the added complexity. Most of them easily accept, even cheer, the change. They're willing to put up with minor inconvenience to realize a societal goal. To a barnacled minority, your installing the new flush system is just another excuse for a price hike and further confirmation that the lords of commerce are reordering our lives in satisfaction of a greater, no doubt malevolent, agenda.

Though the process of change wasn't pain-free, you are indeed saving money. You are no longer obligated to worry about your toilet. Your operation is keeping up with the times. And you were able to avoid a big expense that other, less shrewd bathroom executives will incur. You remain a bit leery of silver-tongued plumbers but would never again think of making a major bathroom remodel without one.




October 25, 2011

Social media honeypot



This infographic from the social media monitoring firm Reppler illustrates statistically how recruiters screen job seekers based on their social media presence. LinkedIn figures in the mix, but personal sites (Facebook, Twitter) loom larger in recruiters' scrutiny.

The statistics in and comments on the graphic reveal some obvious points and some larger points:

  • It's a Put Yourself Out There World! BTW, your drunk, naked, racist, cretinous, provocative, impolitic, uncool, weakness-revealing posts will haunt your future. 
  • Many social media users don't know how or haven't made the effort to protect their privacy using settings or pseudonyms. Read the directions. Think before you act. 
  • In the latest employer's market in the history of the world, employers are using the latest means to sort the wheat from the chaff. The march of history and all that. 
  • The architects of social media, for good or ill, have succeeded in collapsing our far-flung relationships into a small town. No secrets, nowhere to hide. Scarlet Lettersville.

As a communications professional I'm very much in the minority among peers because I've declined to get on Facebook and Twitter. This has disqualified me from consideration in several marketing jobs, particularly in B2C. Still, it's a small price to pay for a little privacy and the editorial gratification of denying eternal life to those myriad random expressions, half-thoughts, pure piffle and TMI blunders that (who knew?) are actually being scrutinized.

A final point on an earlier post on editorial best practices in infographics: Note that our subject graphic has both a title and a credit line embedded in the artwork, ensuring its editorial integrity as it gets republished here and numerous elsewheres in the behavioral archive of our world that we call the internet.


   

October 7, 2011

Dirge for the 20th Century -or- Les Paul's afterimage

Does it inspire faith in the timeless thread of genius? Or make you feel old? (Either way: Thanks, Dave.)



boyinaband via metafiler

October 4, 2011

The elements of (infographic) style

Today, under the title of "TIL:The Small blue ball is all the earth's Salt water & the even smaller blue ball is all the earth's fresh water", a Redditor linked to a graphic showing the total volume of water on Earth, relative to volume of everything else on the planet.


This is a great infographic in its sheer illustrative simplicity. But, were they to receive the image file with no accompanying context, most viewers could only guess what they're looking at.

Metatags, linkbacks and similar web devices exist to describe and provide provenance for digital images. When images get republished, however, there's no guarantee that such appended information will follow. By downloading and pasting the image into this post, I've in effect broken the chain.

So, what to do to make sure the graphic's meaning, and therefore its value, will survive its voyage through the information universe? I haven't the expertise in computer and library science to suggest curatorial best practices. But from a composition/design standpoint, I'd advise the graphic's creator, or its original publisher, to compress a title and label into graphic. A simple failsafe if a blow to artistic minimalism. 

August 16, 2011

Jon Stewart: like a boss

The Daily Show show once again exposing the hollow-hearted sycophancy of the mainstream news networks. This segment on the disappearing of presidential candidate Ron Paul is a diamond-hard, crystal-clear satire. Reminds me of Milan Kundera's telling of the fate of communist Slovak politician Vlado Clementis in the opening paragraphs of The Book of Laugher and Forgetting. You needn't be a Ron Paul supporter to hurt so good from this piece. Pass it on.


July 6, 2011

English majors

What do English majors get taught that's worth knowing?

June 9, 2011

Is creativity a bad trait for a senior leader?

This question posted at Strategy + Business, organ of mega-consultant Booz & Company. Answer given: Yes.

Summarizing a study published December 2010 in Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, the s+b article concludes thus:
Because of conflicting stereotypes about creativity and leadership, stakeholders prefer the prototype of a leader they see as fostering a stable and secure environment. However, creative people who are also charismatic stand a better chance of advancing.
I'd speculate that anyone charismatic, whether creative or not, stands a better chance of advancing. Dropping the common denominator we're left with the notion that creativity and leadership fitness are not perceived to mix.

A vexing notion for creative types like yours truly. But one my experience confirms. A few years after starting my own agency, I came to realize I needed a partner to run the business while I ran the shop. In my mind's eye this partner was a grown-up, a buttoned-down type, a steady hand who could keep the business from flipping over the guardrail. I was still looking for a partner when the business encountered the hairpin curve of the 2008 economy. Crash, burn, learn.

Of course businesses need creative types, innovators, visionaries – but don't often put them in charge. No coincidence that most religious texts portray their prophets in the range from man out of time to raving loon. There have always been polymaths that synthesize creativity and dependability at the helm. Steve Jobs, Thomas Jefferson, Hannibal Smith. At least one of these men is fictional. And I'd guess that the others, beneath their legend, had unheralded hands guiding the administration of the principal's vision. A benefit, no doubt, of their charisma.

May 11, 2011

(Space) epic parody punctuates Bin Laden story

Fin de cyc on the killing of OBL, courtesy of an hilarious and very clever sendup from "The Galactic Empire Times." Further proof of the quickening of public affairs from news milestone through orgy of commentary to internet meme. Seemingly the work of NYC web firm Visible U, this piece is a great palate cleanser for the news/infotainment gourmand. And an historical bookend to the post-9/11 "Special Report" by The Onion that snapped the commentariat back to its rhetorical senses, assuring that, despite prognostications from on high, the age of irony had not come to an end.


May 3, 2011

Light bulb goes (back) on

The Amalgam is back after a year's hiatus (benign neglect). No better way to crystallize the essence of this blog than to feature this lamp design by Steffi Min. Nuff said.


Peg from Steffi Min on Vimeo.