Tags / DNS – Why are we re-inventing or am I just crazy?

Interesting discussion over at Nick BradBury Blog (FeedDemon) where he discussed adding Rank to OPML – I took a different tack to it and wrote the following comment on his blog:

Before we starting thinking of rank, we have to start thinking of categorization, and the ability to find/seek what we are looking for. Being around for while, I remember the web before Search (Altavista, Google,etc.), and how difficult it was to find something when you didn’t know were to look. Now that it has been categorized (still problems, just ask Scoble), we are now turning our attention to rank, and context to help find information from the clutter.

We all know that blogs and the contribution to blogs are growing like wild fire – and we are now producing so much that we can’t find what we are looking for, or the inverse, weed out what we don’t want.

OPML is not the answer, nor do I think a centralized search engine is as well. Thinking outside of the box for a second, I would like to think of DNS. It contains information that allows us to find what we are looking for, and it’s not centralized.

Could we not do for tags, that we have done for .net, .com, .org, etc. Could we not have tags that are registered within a library/DNS that we could then point to an “item” (defined by Alex in previous post) rather than a computer with a numerical address?

Tags is also something that I’m working on to categorize marketing messages, but I don’t want to “subscribe” I want to publish what I’m interested in – “items” delivered to me – now that would be aggregation at it finest (IMHO)

Tags are the step in the right direction, but before tags can really work we need to define them – much like we have defined .com, .net, etc. I have not thought it all the way through, as it would be great to discuss it and throw some ideas around. I bet however, that we could leverage what has worked out of DNS (decentralized, distributed, yet interconnected and update able) we could create a DNS for tags.

This base infrastructure would then allow categorization of “items” on the web, RSS feeds, etc. With that available, aggregators would return items that are marked appropriately for my interests – regardless of the feed, podcast, web, or whatever else we get going to disseminate information. What do you think? Am I way off base? If so, why?

 

Gates / Ozzie / Services / Attention Trust

It has been an interesting couple of week over at Microsoft, and even a more interesting week of reading Robert Scoble’s blog.

Before the Gates/Ozzie memos were leaked out, I wrote a comment on Robert Scoble’s blog about how I felt Robert was speaking too early about the Microsoft ship turning. IMHO I thought Robert was getting ahead of MS marketing and CXO executives and expressed caution to him. It now seems Robert had just a little more information at his disposal, and I feel I should have listened just a little more before speaking. Lesson learned….

I am thinking however that the MS announcement, the movement to services, and monetization of advertising is getting all mixed up making a few people’s head spin. I may be wrong but this is my take on it.

MS is worried by just how much money Google is making with it’s advertising model, and the return that it is making for Google’s shareholders. MS knows just how much money it takes to stay healthy in the IT world, and Google is right now very, very healthy. In addition, MS does not have a similar revenue stream that can even hold a candle to Google’s revenue stream. I believe Gate’s has seen this as a major flaw in MS, and wants/understands that without diverting some of this revenue to MS, MS will simply continue to fall behind in market share in this area.

Advertising has emerged as a powerful new means by which to directly and indirectly fund the creation and delivery of software and services along with subscriptions and license fees. Services designed to scale to tens or hundreds of millions will dramatically change the nature and cost of solutions deliverable to enterprises or small businesses. – Bill Gates “Internet Software Services” Memo

If there is one thing Bill Gates understands, is the power that market share can provide you. Google currently has market share for understanding how to generate revenue from an Internet service that is provided free of charge – and he does not want to fall too far behind.

The challenge MS now has is how to invent their service type offering that will create a revenue stream that will produce/divert the same volume and/or value than Google’s offering.

Notice however that MS also has perception that it also has to change. Google started a service that it has always given away for free. By accident or design, they have stumbled upon how to generate revenue from the remnants of that service (see previous post).

MS started by charging a licensing fee, and has continued that model until very recently. The public at large simply expects this behavior to continue. Deviation from this behavior will/has breed mis-trust, and suspicion as to why MS has changed their behavior.

Robert is combating this perception (correctly) by telling MS that it must be completely open in it’s communications, dealings, and just about everything it does. This is a good start, but Google has simply start from a different starting line.

If/When MS can change this perception, it still has the major problem of creating their own service that is unique and different than that of Google’s. What this service will look like, and how they will generate revenue from it will be interesting. In both cases, MS has their work cut out for them.

In that regard, I would like to help. MS has a very good opportunity to move an idea forward that I’ve been working on for at least 10 years. I started this blog in hopes that I could generate/participate in a discussion regarding it. My idea however does not just involve the Internet. It involves brick-and-mortar merchants and the failing of marketing/advertising to gain the attention/trust of consumers. While most of the discussion currently on the web is exclusively to on-line activity, this activity only amounts to a small percentage of the overall market.

I believe great strides can be made in merging these two worlds, as merchants in general are looking for ways to spend their marketing/advertising dollar more effectively. Bill Gates is correct in his statement:

More than any other company, we have the vision, assets, experience, and aspirations to deliver experiences and solutions across the entire range of digital work style & digital lifestyle scenarios, and to do so at scale, reaching users, developers and businesses across all markets

I wonder if MS will give this crazy canuck a chance in explaining what I think this new service might look like? Are you interested Microsoft?

Think Broader – Think Audience

Just left a long comment over on Robert Scoble site regarding the business model of Google.

Thought I would post it here as well.

 

Robert,

 

 

 

Google has a business model that not too many people really understand – their primary service is something that they give away for free. What they sell is the remnants of providing that service. What they are really doing is “tagging” groups of individuals by what they are searching for. They then sell the advertising space to this aggregation of consumers.

 

 

 

If a business whiches to differentiate themselves (including MSN Search) they must think broader than simply the service they are providing. Initially they must provide the best of class service, but that is not enough. (Competition will catch up in this technology world – see Don Dodge’s blog on that one).

 

 

 

For an example, the airline business is truly a competitive market. Consumer selection is probably based on flying times and/or price. Most, if not all airlines, are concentrating on ensuring their planes are full. If they would think a bit broader – I would say that they are flying consumers to other markets – markets where merchants would love to service those customers. This is a remnant of their service. Sure they are responsible for safely delivering a passenger to a city, but why stop there? Why not make arrangement for a special cab service that saves their consumers time and money (no wait line, better quality cabs, etc.) when they get to that city. How about a hotel and ensure luggage goes straight there from the airport (I hate lugging the stuff until I can check in..)…. I could go on and on…And consumers, via word of mouth, would then fill those planes…not because of the airline, but for the additional services that come with that service.

 

 

 

A good CRO (Chief Relationship Officier) should be thinking broader, and introduce relationships that benefit his consumer base – this is all about thinking about the audiance – not just about a consumer buying a plane ticket.

 

 

 

 

iPod – a subscription model…moves to TV!

Steve Jobs made a few announcements today, one of which was that the new iPod will be able to display video . This device represents the infrastructure, or the “last mile” limitation – meaning that with this device, it enables a couple of other developments that have me really jumping out of my seat.

iTunes will now sell videos of previously broadcasted TV shows! This greatly increases the scope of the “subscription” business model. I’m excited about it because I feel it greatly affects the world of marketing.

Regardless of how the consumer will embrace this new device, it has taken the first steps of removing advertising out of the broadcast business model (aka. Interruption Marketing). Would you pay $1.99 for *NOT* to see advertising in your favorite show? Would you pay $1.99 to save the 20 minutes of advertising in a typical hour of TV watching. My time is worth a lot more than $1.99 for 20 minutes (at least that is how I feel about it!)

Based on the reaction of the people around me – everybody is very, very excited about the possibilities.

How far behind is a subscription model for marketing?

What do you think? Would you like to subscribe to marketing? If we could, we would only get the information that we are looking for, rather than filter out the stuff that we don’t want.

Apple did it for TV!

Scoble wants an HDTV – Search not working for him

Robert Scoble is looking for an HDTV set and search is not working for him. If you read his blog entry, he talks about how search engines should anticipate a role a consumer is playing and reveal information correctly. That’s one company attempting to anticipate thousands, if not millions, of possible requests. I think this is the wrong approach. In my opinion this is only one step better than broadcast marketing, at least Google has the chance to laydown several different “ads” and returns one that it hopes meets the consumer needs.

I think this is totally the wrong approach – at least for consumers wanting information on products/services that merchants wish to sell.

If I’m interested in something, I would like to “PUBLISH” that I am interested in some information, and that those that wish to service my needs should prepare that information (in the format that I specify), and leave it where I can review it at a time when I so choose.

Thats what I call – “Consumer Managed Marketing”. Robert Scoble evangelises that RSS puts the consumer in control, and I agree that RSS does give consumers the choice to “listen” attentively, but what I want is the ability to manage the ‘right” to speak to me!

The challenge is how to a) define what I’m looking for , b) get merchants to pay attention (really hard), and 3) how to tell me where I can do to pick it up when its ready (and not have my contract points spammed to death).

So what do you think blogosphere – how can we work together to take control of marketing?

 

My kind of thinking…Marketers Must Give Up Some Control!

Interesting article from the DM (Direct Marketing) News (thanks to Alex Barnett for linking to it). I once had this client that I was trying to teach/educate about loyalty marketing – he was a very, very big in the DM world sending out millions of emails – he was the “List Master”. I attempted to show him that by working with consumers and listening to their preferences, he would send out less e-mail, but they would be much more effective. His mailing would drop, and his responses would go up! He didn’t get it, and nor do a lot of marketers. Marketing and IT mix like oil and water. Those companies that get it right are going to have a following of customers that are loyal, and hence they (the companies) will be profitable – without interrupt marketing!

Napster and new technology

Don Dodge, VP of Product Development at Napster (currently with Microsoft Emerging Business) issues a post that I wish I would have read, and paid attention to, prior to my failure of InfoQuake. Although I might have heard the words before, I did not hear them in the excitment of “my idea”. I always read and believed that you should stay focused on your goal, and not to take your eye of the ball. Believe it, and it will happen! Wrrrooonnnggggg! Like Don states in this post, don’t attempt to solve big companies problems, they will simply take you out and will do so when/if they turn their attention to you. Now you might think that – So what, I’ll fight them! Well in the world of start-ups, no investor is willing (and will run away as fast as they can) when hear lawsuit (or even legal fees). Nothing will suck your energy, or finacial resources, faster than a lawyer with a client covering his invoice that has given him direction to make you go away. You could (and probably are) totally correct in your position, but that simply will not matter.

Sorry… got going on a little rant about lawyers, and their role in business law and business ethnics. They are not all bad, but are simply used by companies to ensure/protect business models that are aging.

I’m not dead yet however, I’m taking the lessons learned from my past experiences and moving forwards. As this blog is dedicated to, I (still) have a dream! A dream where consumers control (and utimately) get paid for their willingness to expose some aspect of their consumer profile to merchants.

In my upcoming posts, I will document my little tale of spending ~$500,000 on a little start-up – and if your not careful, how a little dream can grow and have impact on people (good and bad) that you would have never guess. Also (and this is my fault) how you can lose the whole thing by not paying attention – only to have somebody else pick it up and enjoy the benefits of your labour (yet another simliarity between Don and I – only the scale was a little different )

Welcome to my (blog) world!

My first post in this domain must be attributed to Robert Scoble. While reading Roberts blog, I discovered through him how RSS is able to create a group of consumers that have some type of simliar trait amoungst themselves, and how they discover each other. More importantly he showed me how, through linking, conversations can be had that generate knowledge. I also witnessed how these conversations, and resulting awareness will at times cause moment and action. Perhaps I’m a little late in understanding this, but today I’m actioning my own little war against marketing and the current state of merchant services in the world today.

My intial set of blog entries will document how I started on this journey, what I have done to date on this journey, and my goals on where I would like it to go (stay tuned Peppers and Rogers).