UBS analyst Neil Currie had been looking at satellite data on Wal-Mart during each month of 2010, and he’d concluded that there was enough correlation between what he was seeing in the satellite pictures of Wal-Mart’s parking lots to the big-box chain’s quarterly earnings, that he was ready to incorporate that data into UBS’ report on Wal-Mart (via New Big Brother: Market-Moving Satellite Images - CNBC)
damn, that is serious business.
“A charismatic brand can be defined as any product, service or company for which people believe there is no substitute … Among the hallmarks of a charismatic brand are a clear competitive stance, a sense of rectitude, and a dedication to aesthetics. Why aesthetics? Because it’s the language of feeling, and, in a society that is information-rich and time-poor, people value feeling more than information.”— Marty Neumeier in “The Brand Gap”. I am rereading this book slowly to ponder his wisdom and let it swirl in the grey cells. I thought about this quote all weekend. He goes on to explain a charismatic brand’s magical ability to bridge the gap between strategy and creativity. (via gbattle) (via caterpillarcowboy)
Yes. This.
I speak a lot at business schools, and I ask how many people are there to make money. And then I say why don’t you just quit school and be drug dealers then? Because business school is about making things for people. That’s why you should be here.
a rare, astute insight from the land of ‘crunch. mike is right, for $47.2 million, carol bartz not only gave a real shitty answer but pretty much confirmed the fact that yahoo! doesn’t know what it is or where it should be going.
seriously, it was cute but when you’re making news for telling someone to “fuck off” and not because of anything else - that’s a shame. and yes, when it happened and everyone was so proud of it, this is exactly what i was thinking.
That’s precisely the problem: the sheer volume of words has overwhelmed a business model that was once based on scarcity and limited choice.
andrew does a great job of breaking down the business predicament surrounding digital journalism. the greater publishing industry of yesterday didn’t understand the value of their content in relation to the new technology driving advertising’s evolution. so, set that aside for a minute.
his piece goes on to imply that tomorrow will look just like we think it will look. sites like gawker essentially playing “red rover” with revenue and profit until something shakes out and sticks. the issue i have with all of this is that everyone, both traditional publishing & mr. denton, are showing their hand. the majority of the revenue might sit within a common denominator of audience but what happens when we reach the point of scraping the bottom of a big barrel for 1/80th of a cent? i don’t even want to imagine what kind of stuff you’ll be reading then.
denton is right, the delivery mechanism (“blog posts”) are a commodity - the money is made in building empires based on attention. oh man, wait a minute, attention? that - to me - is the golden ticket. it’s the end game and is best captured not by vague click-through traps, rapid-fire posts within a 24hr period but by the stuff that sticks to the wall long after you’ve walked away from it.
the stuff that gets you to read the entire article, entice a desire to share publicly and even offer my own point of view on. think about where you find stuff like that and who is producing it (more so, who is capable). at the end of the day, you have to eat the food that is going to satisfy you the most and focusing on delivery mechanisms might keep you afloat for now, but what happens when someone does it better?
sustainability in our society’s intellectual culture isn’t built on the traps we set but instead the meals we make. i’m convinced the day will come when people turn and walk back towards whence they came - the thirst not for “scarcity” or “limited choice” but a thirst for quality and concise editorial.
This is a blog deserving of your love, biz+design fans.
tasty.
Delivering immediate effect might not be the best business model for designing long-term valuable marketing initiatives.
…
There is a need for long term marketing initiatives; digital concepts and ideas need to carry the longevity of product relationships. Which also implies a different way of measuring value. (What are the metrics identifying the value of a relationship? Are they the same as used for our ability to traffic people back and forth from, and around in, cyberspace?)
But these executives were frequently numb to the sorts of innovations that enable high-quality production at low cost.
proof points and unique positioning:
::exhales:: i know this is sort of open-ended and more “okay, i get it - how do we fix it?” but maybe that’s the point. everyone is looking for ways to right the ship, to get us back on track, to get “us” flourishing again. to become omnipotent and ignorant all at once again probably shouldn’t be our best intention, veiled or otherwise.
we can do this differently and it doesn’t have to be choosing between one or the other. i’m absolutely sure of that.
i’m really less into this debacle b/c of the actual tech & product but more about how arrington’s only chess piece is his blog and everyone who reads it that doesn’t take every single pixel with a grain of very big salt. begging people to tell their readers about drama surrounding a product? weak charlie, weak.
i’m not going to buy whatever pad this is b/c the price is too much but if i did, i’d do it in spite. mikey is going to come up on the losing end of a business deal he either handled horribly from the beginning or couldn’t withdraw himself out of quick enough.
this is a great case study surrounding law, business, contracts, perception, media and hedging your equity on your mistakes.
“Businesspeople don’t just need to understand designers better; they need to become designers.”
Roger Martin, Dean, Rotman School of Management
