ETD: 981 What are they thinking?; What Were They Thinking?
Goofs From the Web Era; The Bar Code Gets a Hip New Life
E-Tailer's Digest
etd_post at gapent.com
Thu May 25 13:39:20 GMT 2006
E-Tailer's Digest --- Everything for the Retailer
Issue #0981 May 25, 2006
George Matyjewicz, Moderator mailto:georgem at gapent.com
Published by: GAP Enterprises, Ltd. http://www.etailersdigest.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
[1] Greetings
[2] What are they thinking?
[3] What Were They Thinking? Goofs From the Web Era
[4] The Bar Code Gets a Hip New Life
---------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Greetings.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All:
Remember the good old days - the high flying days of the dotcom
era? Remember all those strange ventures, like the Cue Cat,
PointCast and others? I found an excellent article on some of these
goofs, which got me to wondering if companies aren't making the same
mistake today with mobile devices? Can today's "what are they
thinking" become tomorrow's "what were they thinking?" What do you think?
They are even messing with our beloved bar codes. Now you take
pictures of them using your cell phone to get promotional
items. Give me a break. Instead why not determine a way to link
your cell phone so that it will automatically scan products, say in a
grocery store, then have you check out automatically. That would be
an improvement.
What do you think about the goofs from the Web era? Are we repeating
ourselves? What should companies be doing with cell phones?
Now, let's get to everything for the retailer.
Sincerely
George Matyjewicz, PhD
Chief Global Strategist, GAP Enterprises, LLC
mailto:georgem at gapent.com
http://www.etailersdigest.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
[2] What are they thinking?
----------------------------------------------------------------
In 3 below we have a piece on goofs from the Web era and some of the
bizarre businesses. We reported on some of them here in E-Tailer's
Digest (remember our coverage of Cue Cat?). Well, I'm wondering if
we aren't seeing a new wave of potential goofs with cell phones.
Mobile ad spending, which was just $45 million in 2005, is expected
to swell to $1.3 billion by 2009, according to the technology
consultancy Ovum. Advertisers are expected to flood into the market
for a simple reason: Almost every consumer owns a cell phone. In the
U.S. alone, there are more than 200 million cell phone subscribers.
Most people don't lug around their TVs or PCs all day -- but cell
phones are a constant companion for many consumers, making them an
almost continuous channel for marketing. What's more, advertisers can
potentially find out a lot about their wireless audience, tailoring
messages based on demographics, usage information, and even a
consumer's physical location.
Microsoft Corp.'s MSN unit is in talks to acquire a small private
company that provides ads for the wireless Web sites of several major
content providers, say people familiar with the situation. Acquiring
Third Screen Media, whose clients include USA Today and The Weather
Channel, would give MSN immediate access to technology that serves up
ads on cell phones, as well as a network of relationships with
leading advertisers.
While I understand why they are trying to promote on cell phones, I
personally find it a problem, and believe they are really missing the
mark - local advertising. When you carry a cell phone, your carrier
knows where you are. If, for example, I am in Atlanta this week, and
I am looking for a pizza shop, I should be able to search my cell
phone for the nearest one, along with an ad from that shop. I don't
want to know about pizza in Chicago - just where I am.
I believe these companies are trying to stuff PC advertising into
cell phones, which don't work. The keyboards on cell phones are not
the best, and not enough companies have PDA sites available yet.
On a bright note, a new TLD (top level domain) has been introduced -
.mobi for mobile phones. Anybody who wants to have one, needs to be
able to provide content for use on PDAs and mobile phones.
What do you think?
George
----------------------------------------------------------------
[3] What Were They Thinking? Goofs From the Web Era
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the earlier days of the Web, "nobody seemed to care if there was a
real business there," said Alan Meckler, chief executive of
Jupitermedia Corp. and Internet industry pundit.
Here's some of them...
CyberRebate.com, which thought it could make money by giving stuff
away for free. The online retailer, founded in 1998, sold an
assortment of goods at heavily marked up prices (some items going for
up to 10 times their retail values), but promised customers a hefty
rebate that often amounted to 100% of the purchase price.
For example, CyberRebate charged about $1,100 for a 13-inch RCA
television that normally retailed for a few hundred dollars. Buyers
could get a full refund of the purchase price as long as they jumped
through some hoops -- rebate forms had to be submitted by a deadline,
and checks came 10 to 14 weeks later. CyberRebate banked on the idea
that some percentage of buyers would forget to fill out the rebate
form, or fail to do so in time, leaving the company to pocket the money.
But selling items at such wildly inflated prices just about
guaranteed customers would go out of their way to get their rebates,
quickly sinking CyberRebate into heavy debt. The company, founded by
law school student Joel Granik, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection in May 2001, listing liabilities of $83.4 million. Much of
that debt was owed to consumers who were promised rebates but hadn't
received them.
Both Mr. Granik and his business partner, Joseph Lichter, settled
with the Federal Trade Commission for $40,000 in August 2004 and were
barred from running a rebate-based business. Some rebate claimants
eventually received partial reimbursement of about nine cents for
every dollar, according to a statement on CyberRebate's Web site.
CueCat was another favorite target for mockery among dot-com critics.
The pen-sized device, which was shaped like a cat, was connected to a
personal computer via the keyboard port. A user could then flip
through magazines or newspapers while sitting near a PC and scan
special bar codes on ads, which would automatically bring up relevant
Web pages with more information. Users' Web-surfing habits were also
monitored, and anonymous data were used for marketing purposes.
Digital Convergence Corp., the company behind the product, raked in
$185 million in venture capital funds; investors included big names
like Coca-Cola Co. and General Electric Co. In 2000, four million
CueCats were given out across the U.S. (some handed out free in
RadioShack Corp. stores and others sent in promotional mailings).
But the device that generated so much excitement with marketers
failed to catch on with consumers. Unenthusiastic reviewers included
The Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg, who questioned whether
anyone would use the device while sitting in front of a PC, and
called it "unnatural and ridiculous." And there were other problems,
including a security breach at the CueCat Web site that sparked
privacy concerns.
Still, the digital feline has since managed a second life. Computer
hackers figured out a way to "declaw the cat" by snipping a small
wire that lets them use the scanner to reach sites or read any bar
code without leaving a trail for marketers. Scores of CueCats are
available for purchase on eBay, with sellers touting the device's
usefulness as an inexpensive, personal barcode scanner to catalog
books, CDs, videocassettes, and DVDs.
"The cat got butchered, but it has spawned a cottage industry," said
the device's inventor, J. Hutton Pulitzer, who now operates a patent
holding company in Dallas. Mr. Pulitzer (who changed his name in
recent years from J. Jovan Philyaw) laments that he let himself get
swept up in the Wall Street frenzy of the late 1990s. "Hindsight is
just that," he said. "You can't do anything about it."
The "iSmell," a product created by the now-defunct Digiscents Inc. in
1999, promised to enhance the Web surfing experience by engaging
users' senses of smell.
By plugging iSmell into the computer through a USB port, the device
would generate different scents. So in theory, someone looking to
purchase beauty products could smell a new perfume before buying it,
or videogame fans could conjure up the smell of a ballpark while
playing a baseball game.
But how well the device worked, and whether customers would really
spend money on it, remains a mystery, because Digiscents never got
around to actually releasing the product (a prototype was on display
at the 2001 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas).
Hit by skepticism and the weakening economy, Digiscents shut down in
2001. Its creators, biotech entrepreneurs Dexster Smith and Joel
Bellenson, now run Upstream Biosciences Inc., which is working to
develop tests that can aid in the early detection of cancer.
Big companies -- not just small start-ups -- have had their own share
of digital duds. Software giant Microsoft Corp. generated plenty of
buzz in May 2003 when it announced plans for the iLoo (an
Internet-enabled toilet), but the captivating commode is probably
best remembered for the public relations fiasco that followed.
The company's MSN division in the United Kingdom announced plans for
a portable toilet complete with a computer, waterproof keyboard and
wireless Internet connection, to be used at summer music festivals in
England. But the project was soon the butt of jokes around the world.
Microsoft initially responded by saying the project was a hoax, then
later changed its story, saying the iLoo was in fact real.
A company spokesperson blamed the mixed messages on "international
miscommunication." With such a reception, plans for the iLoo were flushed.
Then there was the "Audrey." 3Com Corp.'s Audrey was one of several
so-called "Internet appliances," or stripped-down PCs intended for
email, Web access and calendars.
These terminals -- similar products were released by Gateway Inc. and
Compaq Computer Corp. -- were marketed toward what the companies
believed were technology-shy users, namely senior citizens and
housewives. The gadgets promised simple setups, and powered up
quickly, without the lengthy boot times required by a full-fledged computer.
The Audrey, released in late 2000, was a futuristic looking
nine-by-twelve-inch box with a touch screen and clear stylus; the
stylus would blink with a green light when new email was waiting. It
retailed for $499.
But users still had to go through the hassle of dealing with an
Internet service provider in order to get the gadget online, which
added to the cost and made the Audrey more complicated. Also, as
prices on traditional computers plummeted, it was hard to justify
spending $500 on a stand-alone Internet device.
3Com discontinued the Audrey in March 2001 after sales lagged behind
expectations. The device, however, can still be found on eBay
auctions and has been embraced by hackers who reprogrammed Audrey to
play MP3 files, display photos and control household lights and appliances.
Who could forget PointCast? Computer geeks everywhere were gaga over
the company's "push" technology, which was software that subscribers
downloaded onto desktops as a screensaver with feeds from a select
list of content providers. The program would then automatically
deliver news and headlines over the Web to the user's PC. (The Wall
Street Journal was one of PointCast's content partners.)
PointCast, launched in 1996, reportedly spurned an offer from News
Corp. -- which wanted to buy the start-up for up to $450 million --
in hopes of making it big with an initial public offering. But users
complained the software clogged then-dominant dial-up networks, and
marketers began using the technology to flood users with unwanted ads.
PointCast was eventually bought for about $7 million in 1999 by
Launchpad Technologies Inc., and the service ceased operation the next year.
Then there was Flooz.com, which tried to create a form of digital
currency. Similar to the also-ill-fated Beenz.com, users could
purchase "flooz" and give it to others as a sort of virtual gift
certificate. Flooz could only be spent at participating online
retailers, which included BarnesandNoble.com and J. Crew.
The company managed to raise over $50 million in funding from
1999-2001 and even signed on comedian Whoopi Goldberg as a celebrity
spokeswoman before bad times hit.
According to Flooz founder and Chief Executive Robert Levitan, who
previously co-founded women's Web site iVillage, the beginning of the
end came in spring 2001. That's when Flooz's corporate clients began
to cut back on orders for gift certificates to be used in promotional
giveaways -- a revenue stream Flooz was counting on -- amid the
softening economy. Then a ring of thieves in Russia and the
Philippines charged about $300,000 in Flooz to stolen credit cards.
The online piggy bank officially declared itself broke in August 2001.
Several other online-payment companies also failed, though PayPal
survived, largely because it positioned itself as a money-transfer
service. PayPal's offerings became particularly popular with online
auction users, and that company was acquired by eBay Inc. in 2002.
StartupJournal
http://www.startupjournal.com/ecommerce/ecommerce/20060504-meyer.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
[4] The Bar Code Gets a Hip New Life
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the WSJ they had an article on the new uses of cell phones
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114843472842861406.html. Reading it,
I thought about the now defunct (and totally useless) Cue Cat. Folks
are looking for new ways to use cell phones, and are coming up with
bizarre apps.
A rising number of people are using new free services to connect to
the mobile Internet by PHOTOGRAPHING bar codes. The codes -- either
conventional bar codes or digital ones -- are showing up on more
products, advertisements, books and even buildings. The technology is
popular in Asia but previously failed to catch on in the U.S. after
several attempts. Now, improving technologies and the ubiquity of
camera phones are triggering a host of new bar-code services.
Who in their right mind would want to photograph a bar code? What
product could be so important?
Attaching a reader to a cell phone may make sense.
Nokia Corp. has built its own bar-code reader into new models of two
camera phones that are scheduled to become available in the U.S. this
fall. Scanbuy Inc.'s. Scanbuy Shopper, expected to be live in the
next few weeks, grabs Shopping.com prices and reviews, for example,
from a Universal Product Code, or UPC. Nextcode Corp. has launched
ConnexTo, mobile software for reading digital bar codes that are
cropping up on food packaging and posters. NeoMedia Technologies
Inc., which owns mobile-ad firms, will launch its bar-code reader
PaperClick later this year.
The codes are appearing gradually in grocery stores, embedded in
business cards, on promotional posters and T-shirts and even near
landmarks like the Chrysler Building, around where people placed a
code linking to the building's Wikipedia entry. They are piquing the
interest of advertisers who see the potential to serve up more
relevant ads -- a trailer downloaded off a movie billboard, for
instance -- and consumer-product companies trying to make products
more interactive.
The technology, part of the mobile industry's push to embed more
functions and features into mobile devices, is still in its early
stages, meaning the new services may only work with some camera phone
models and service providers. While there is vast potential for the
technology -- from downloading movies off billboards to helping
diabetics purchase food safe for them to eat -- a range of hurdles
have some questioning whether the applications are functional enough
to succeed.
I can see scanning bar codes in a store, which then links wirelessly
to the back office to give you a price. Or, scan a barcode on a
shelf to see if there are more in the back room.
Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. already offer mobile versions of shopping
Web sites or text-messaging services that pull up a few lines of
abbreviated text per query. Scanbuy Shopper promises to deliver more
information like reviews and comparison statistics through miniature
Web pages. The new service, which will allow users without the
appropriate camera phone or lens to key in the bar-code number
manually, has also been updated to read codes in dim light and at odd angles.
Sounds to me like they are searching to become the company who will
dominate the cell phone arena. Leave our bar codes alone. They
worked for 50 years, and serve a purpose. Make better use of them
via technology improvements, not photos.
What do you think?
George
----------------------------------------------------------------
Links to follow
----------------------------------------------------------------
GAP Enterprises, Ltd. http://www.gapent.com/
E-Tailer's Digest http://www.etailersdigest.com
Interim Help http://interimhelp.com
Sophisticated Me http://sophisticatedme.com/
Marketing Your Web http://www.gapent.com/myweb/
Automated Press Releases http://www.automatedpr.com
More information about the ETD
mailing list