ImaginativePRO Blog

DIGITAL OUT-OF-HOME DISPLAY ADVERTISING PREDICTIONS AND TRENDS FOR 2010

The New Year is always a good time for lists, predictions, and lists of predictions, and there are some interesting forecasts for the digital out-of-home business in 2010 from Keith Kelsen, founder of the 5th Screen Project and a contributor to Digital Signage Today. The trade publication recently posted a list of ten predictions by MediaTile's Kelsen for 2010 -- which also double as advice to DO networks and advertisers, pointing to high-priority action items to enable the medium's strong growth to continue.

Below is a quick summary of Kelsen's predictions, the full text of which can be found on the Digital Signage Today Web site.

1. Content will continue to be the No. 1 trend - As always, the most important part of any strategy remains the most difficult. According to Kelsen, DO companies really only began addressing content seriously in 2009. Kelsen sees more custom content created especially for DO networks, but at the same time more "continuity" between this content and content delivered via other channels like cinema, TV, PC and mobile.

2. Experience, engagement and interaction - Citing Gesturetek's new CUBE and new multitouch monitors, Kelsen said direct physical interfaces are definitely showing promise -- but added that mobile-enabled interaction will be the most important area for DO. Kelsen pointed to three areas of particular promise for mobile interactivity, taking advantage of location awareness to deliver extra-relevant messages: "Point of Sale Networks, Point of Transit Networks, and Point of Wait Networks." In addition to allowing engagement and user-generated content, mobile is also key to better audience measurement.

3. Strategic sensibility - While it may seem obvious, having a comprehensive strategy grounded in precise market data will make the difference between success and failure for new and established DO networks in 2010. Kelsen summarized this point best himself: "Considering how the particular digital signage network will interact with other types of communication between an organization and its target audience, a marketer can help ensure that the work of digital signage reinforces business goals, sales campaigns or other objectives."

4. Measurement and acceptance - Audience measurement has been the focus of intense activity in the DO business over the last couple years, centering on a major initiative from the Out-of-home Video Advertising Bureau to formulate guidelines for a common metric. Many DO networks are now producing measurement data in accordance with these guidelines, combined with a variety of custom studies and extra data to distinguish themselves from competitors; here Kelsen credited aggregators like SeeSaw and Adcentricity for leading the charge. But the measurement landscape is still evolving: Kelsen pointed to pioneers like DSIQ, which has created a sophisticated retail analytics system first deployed for Wal-Mart's in-store media, and Cognovision, which incorporated facial recognition software into DO measurement.

5. Software improvements in delivery of messages and ads - One of the main hurdles to successful DO campaigns is simply delivering the content to screens to reach the right audience with the right message, at the right time. Kelsen sees more use of rule-based software and intelligent, dynamic delivery of ads in 2010, with advertisers using online interfaces to plan and execute campaigns (often payment, confirmation and billing are handled through the same channels).  But Kelsen warns of potential conflict with agencies, who may feel threatened with disintermediation. On the other hand, some DO networks and aggregators have positioned their online campaign planning interfaces as services to assist media buyers in their work for clients.

6. Progress in content standards - A mostly technical issue relating to digital video format and delivery. Kelsen predicts more uniformity across networks in 2010, making it easier for advertisers to achieve greater scale and reach, boosting ad spend.

7. We will hit the 'tipping point' in 2010 - Kelsen's most general prediction is also the most encouraging: DO will "arrive" in 2010, becoming a force to be reckoned with in terms of share of ad spending. Kelsen cited developments in 2009 that foreshadow a 2010 boom. These include high growth despite the bad economy, including higher ad revenues; strategic M&A that positioned networks for even more growth; increasing membership in industry organizations and attendance at industry events, which disseminate information about DO to advertisers, leading to greater agency acceptance; and the wide acceptance of the new OVAB measurement guidelines.

8. Large-scale 2010 projects will be at an all-time high - In keeping with #7, Kelsen sees a big increase in scale, in recognition of the fact that " DOOH is getting its head on straight about what works and what doesn't."

9. More mergers and acquisitions and more investment in the space - Another continuation of the trends identified in #7, Kelsen's prediction of increased M&A activity jibes with other recent forecasts citing the increased availability of credit for funding. However, Kelsen cautions,"The funds for this media growth are going to be divided between mobile and digital signage as these two new mediums battle for attention.

10. Growth in ad-based networks and shift in ad dollars - Also in keeping with some recent analyst forecasts (and boasts from DO networks), Kelsen expects to see a substantial amount of advertising spending shift from other media. Though Kelsen didn't name names, the most frequently mentioned target has been broadcast TV.

COMMENTARY:   Having consulted for a startup OOH digital display advertising network client, I have been waiting for the Out-of-Home Video Advertising Bureau (OVAB), to establish Audience Metric Guidelines.  Admittedly, I have not tracked OOH digital advertising as much as I would like, and am pleased that the OVAB finally established audience metrice guidelines. 

Because of the wide diversity and transitory nature of the viewing audiences, it is difficult to treat OOH advertising audience measurement like you would network television or TV cable.  With OOH display advertising, the audience will vary depending on the venue (hotels, shopping malls, retail stores, movie theatres, airports, banks, etc.) where the digital displays are located.  The number of eyeballs or impressions will vary from one location to the next within the digital display advertising network. 

There are several variables that have a bearing on audience measurement: type of venue, venue traffic, number of displays in the network, time of day displays are on or off, peak and non-peak dayparts, location of the displays, time each consumer views the display ad, and other variables.

I am naturally pleased that the OVAB finally established these audience measurement metrics, which I have yet to read and analyze.  These new audience metrice guidelines would've helped tremendously back in 2008. 

For those of you interested in downloading a copy of the new OVAB Audience Metrics Guidelines click here.         

Courtesy of an article dated January 8, 2010 appearing in MediaPost Publications Digital Outsider blog

 

NUSCALE POWER PAVES THE WAY FOR SAFE NUCLEAR POWER WITH A MODULAR, MINI-NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Higher fuel prices and increased carbon emissions have been giving nuclear energy a boost. So far this year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received licensing requests for 19 new nuclear power plants. That number could increase exponentially, along with the number of suitable sites for a plant, if the NRC approves a brand-new design for portable modular units developed at Oregon State University.

Interest in minireactors has grown over the past few years, according to Felix Killar at the Nuclear Energy Institute. “They're simple and robust, with safety features to allow a country without nuclear expertise to gradually put in small plants, and get people trained and familiar with them before moving into more complex plants.” But small-scale plants could prove useful in the United States, too, particularly in areas where residents must now rely on diesel generators for electricity. Toshiba is reportedly working on a small-scale design for Galena, Alaska. But NuScale Power, the startup spun from Oregon State, is the first American company to submit plans to the NRC, which regulates all domestic nuclear power plants.

The plant's design is similar to that of a Generation III+ “light water” reactor, but the size is unusual. “The whole thing is 65 ft. long,” explains Jose Reyes, head of the nuclear engineering department at Oregon State and a co-founder of NuScale Power. The reactor unit of NuScale's containment unit is 14 ft., compared to a Westinghouse AP1000, a standard current design, which is about 120 ft. in diameter. It has to be built and serviced on-site, but NuScale's units could be manufactured at the factory, then shipped on a rail car or heavy truck to any location and returned for refueling.

As in modern reactors, the containment shell acts as a heat exchanger, Reyes explains. The water closest to the core is vented into the outer shell as steam, where it condenses and drips into the cooling pool, which is recirculated to cool the core. The whole unit sits below grade, without telltale cooling towers. The reactor doesn't use pumps to circulate the water if the unit overheats, which means it needs no external power to cool down. That's a “passive safety” feature that protects the unit from electrical sabotage.

The new unit can be manufactured cheaply, with standard turbines from General Electric, for example, rather than custom-made parts. Because the steel reactor vessel is only 9 ft. in diameter, it can be made entirely in the U.S., rather than relying on Japan Steel Works, the only manufacturer who can cast today's one-piece, 25-ft.-plus reactor vessels.

Each 45-megawatt electrical unit would generate enough power for about 45,000 homes. By comparison, plants operated today generate 1000 to 1700 megawatts, according to NRC spokesman Scott Burnell. “You can't take an AP1000, a large base-load reactor, and put it down where there's no grid to support it. A smaller design could be useful in a remote setting.”

I was able to contact Bruce Landry, public relations contact at NuScale Power and he told me that their strategy is to market power plants consisting of 12 modules of 45,000 MW each, or a total of 540,000 MW.  The estimated cost for the 12-module nuclear power plant is between $2 billion and $2.5 billion.   This is about half of Westinghouse's AP1000 Gen-III reactor, and about about 30% what a Gen-II power plant would cost today.  Not bad, if they can get NRC approval and find buyers.

Large utilities could also use smaller units to their advantage, according to Reyes. Instead of shutting down an entire plant to replace fuel, as happens today, the utility could build a modular plant and then shut down only the unit affected.

NuScale has built and tested a one-third-scale unit that uses electrical heat to simulate a nuclear core. After the design is presented to the NRC on July 24, NuScale will spend the next year and a half testing it. They will then submit a final report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which can spend two or three years reviewing documentation before approval. If all goes according to schedule, Reyes estimates, the minireactors could start to go on line in 2015.

COMMENTARY:  I am about as anti-nuke as they come, but what I like about nuclear is that it runs 24/7, 365 and is now safe enough, that there hopefully will never be another Three Mile Island or Chernobyl incident.  The problem is disposing and storing of all that nuclear waste.  It is troublesome to ship to a storage disposal site. Nobody wants it in their backyard.  Most of the current uranium waste storage sites are reaching their storage capacity, and Yucca Mountain the newest and largest storage site, with a capacity of 77,000 metric tons, is still not ready.  I get visions of barrels of nuclear waste stored twenty feet high, and slowly leaking.

In spite of my concerns, I found the NuScale Power concept of building modular mini-nuclear power plants very interesting. Their website explains the concept very well, and makes it almost sound like it is a slamdunk, which of course, it is not.  I had been doing some research on modular mini-oil refineries, and those are not cheap.  About $1 to $1.7 billion to build, but you have all those carbon emissions, and we need to get off oil, or the planet is doomed.

Apparently there is movement towards advanced power plants, something I was not aware of, with Westinghouse at the head of the pack with its AP1000 III generation nuclear reactor, which is smaller than the classical II generation nuclear reactors, but will still $4 billion to build.  I am very familiar with Westinghouse, researched the company during my days at graduate school, when they were a major US supplier of uranium, and got into all sorts of trouble when the price of uranium spiked, and they were stock with supplier contracts at a much lower price.         

I wrote an email to NuScale Power about the cost for their mini-nuclear power plants and was told in an email from Bruce Landry that standard configuration would consist of twelve 45 MWe mini-nuclear power plants for a total of 540 MWe at a cost of $2.0 to $2.5 billion.  This is approximately half of the Westinghouse AP1000 III generation nuclear reactor and about one-fourth the cost of a larger second generatin (Gen-II) nuclear power plant. 

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) funding for nuclear energy was just over $1 billion in FY 2008, almost $1.36 billion in FY 2009 and is budgeted to be reduced to $844.6 million in FY 2010, a decline of 37.8%     

The DOE budget request includes $191 million to continue developing advanced nuclear energy systems known as “Generation IV (Gen IV).”  These next-generation technologies will enhance nuclear power’s safety, cost-effectiveness and proliferation-resistance.

Gen IV research and development includes activities in support of the solving the underlying technology challenges (fuels, materials and neutronic and thermofluids modeling) of the seven Gen IV nuclear energy technologies: Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor, Molten Salt Reactor, Supercritical-Water-Cooled Reactor, Lead-cooled Fast Reactor, Very High Temperature Reactor and the Gas-cooled Fast Reactor.  I would assume that NuScale Power fits into the Super-Critical-Water-Cooled Reactor category.

The Department of Energy is authorized to provide a total of $36.7 billion in grants and loan guarantees through the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of Feb 2009, aka Stimulus Plan, but the nuclear slice is only $6.0 billion, and most of that is for nuclear waste disposal.  If President Obama, who has championed the use of nuclear energy as a way to reduce the importation of oil, more funding will be necessary, if Gen IV projects will get off the ground in earnest.     

A real factor in operating any Gen IV nuclear reactors, once they are approved, and begin going online (sometime in 2020 according to the DOE), will be the cost of uranium fuel.  Uranium prices have nearly quadrupled between 2004 and 2008, increasing from $11.91 to $43.43 per pound.  As of January 29, 2010, the price for uranium was $42.25 per pound.  Commodity experts dealing in uranium have prredicted that the price per pound could increase to $56.00 in 2010. In the past, spot prices have peaked at $106.00 per pound, which is kind of scary. God only knows what the price will be by 2020.  

World wide demand for uranium has outstripped supply since 1989, as major suppliers (US and Russia) have reduced production due to the world financial crisis, which has slowed construction of new nuclear power plants. The U.S. has not built a new nuclear power plant for nearly twenty years, and this has affected demand.  Prices are projected to increase substantially once the world economies improve to pre-recession levels. 

NuScale Power plans on filing their NRC paperwork sometime in 2011, which will take three years for approval, so that by 2014, if everything goes right, they will have their license to build one of these puppies. If it takes two years to build one of these mini-nuclear power plants, you are looking at 2016 or 2018 to go into operation.  This ties out with NuScale Power's estimate, but it is difficult to tell how the anti-nuke groups will react. New nuclear power plant approvals could be tied in the courts for years. 

I noticed tha NuScale Power listed CMEA Ventures, a San Francisco-based venture capital firm, as one of their investors.  Normally, I would not bring this up, except when taking a pot shot or two at a VC screwup, but It is highly unusual for a VC to invest in anything as risky, controversial and taboo as nuclear power.  I actually tried presenting several VC's an electron beam irridiation technology for scanning ocean containers during the early days after 911, and my attempts failed miserably. 

During these turbulent economic times and dramatic drop in venture capital fundings, VC's only invest in deals that are anticiptically clean and wringed out of any financial and business risk.  So, it comes to my surprise that Maurice Gunderson, a senior partner at CMEA, would put his venture capital career on the line, but I don't know how much CMEA invested in NuScale Power.  I am fairly sure that the amount wasn't significant, probably in the neighborhood of $3 to $5 million, which is a guess on my part.     

Out of curiosity, I looked at Mr Gunderson's resume on the CMEA website, and I noticed he is an alum of Oregon State University, the folks that developed and engineered the first small nuclear reactor with natural circulation.  Wow, what a coincidence that is.

Courtesy of an article dated July 15, 2008 appearing in Popular Mechanics       

        

5 TRENDS TO WATCH IN 2010 IF YOU ARE MARKETING TO GENERATION-Y

There is no doubt that 2009 was a fierce battleground for online marketers to reach the hearts and minds of Generation Y. Between the economic downturn, the proliferation of new media and blogs and the explosive growth of social networking sites, advertisers were challenged like never before to reach millennials and do it with the tightest marketing budgets seen in years. Many marketers, such as Vitaminwater , launched great campaigns and won, while others barely made it off the battlefield.

As we head into 2010, we expect to see these five trends , based upon findings from our editorial team, market research and insights gleaned from our advertisers.

1. A genuine approach to participatory marketing. 2009 seemed to be the year of the interactive quiz, poll or contest. Bloggers embraced the advertorial and marketers measured "engagement" as people checked the box or clicked the poll. But that doesn't mean it translated into consumers talking about the brand. The best incentives for Gen Y are ones that align with their core values, such as Pepsi's Refresh Project. In 2010, marketers and publishers will build more long term, participatory marketing campaigns that deliver an emotional connection to the brand and Gen Y's values.

2. Video will become integral to ad campaigns as it becomes more affordable and attainable. Video views have increased 26% year over year since 2008, per Nielsen. Given its increasing popularity, online video has become a must-have for every publisher. However, as the cost of entry gets lower, video will become more commoditized, and publishers will need to develop more sophisticated solutions for brands and audiences alike. Marketers will begin to spend more time looking at content alignment and the industry will begin to evolve from pre-roll. In 2010, online publishers will deliver more affordable options against branded content and integrations.

3. The blogosphere will become more cluttered; leading consumers back to credentialed sources. Of course, Gen Y will continue to read blogs -- but research shows that credibility of the source will play a bigger part. Brands need to understand what sites their ads appear on and associate only with credible sources .

4. Mobile internet access will change the way people shop. 83% of adults have cell phones or smartphones and among them, 35% have accessed the Internet via their phones -- and Gen Y IS the most active group of mobile users . Retailers need to start thinking about mobile beyond just a link to their site and deliver ease in mobile purchasing along with local, drive-to-store incentives.

5. Consumers will look for tools and "short cuts" that ease their day-to-day lives. Gen Yers are overextended and rushed for time. Marketers who create practical tools and resources that make their lives easier will have better opportunities to connect this audience with their brand. Facebook Connect made its users' lives easier by giving them one more reason to stick around. Marketers need to think about where their audience is and fit into their world versus trying to pull them in another direction. It's not about driving to a brand site -- it's about delivering an experience in what feels like an organic environment.

Over the coming months, we will continue to track these trends and provide insight into best practices. We expect it will continue to be a battle this year to reach Gen Y and marketers must continually find fresh ways to develop a better, more relevant experience. With this generation, it's about trial and error -- there is no easy path to success but it is essential to try or your brand may not survive to see the next generation.

COMMENTARY :  Reaching Gen-Y's is quite a challenge because most of them are cynical about all forms of advertising.  Gen-Y's have social networking in their DNA.  To reach this demographic you need to go where they congregate--Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Hulu and Twitter, to name a few.  Gen-Y's spend an inordinate amount of time on their smartphone, especially the iPhone.  The Gen-Y's favorite mobile media are iPhone and Facebook apps. I don't have the actual numbers, but the number of mobile apps this demographic uses has got to be up there.

Courtesy of an article dated January 29, 2010 appearing in Engage:GenY     

FIVE KEY BUSINESS FINANCE TRENDS FOR 2010, STARTUP CAPITAL WILL BE TIGHT

Karl Kaiser’s Orlando firm, which provides temporary automobile licenses to car dealers nationwide, is optimistic about 2010. In fact, he’s ready to grow his eight-person work force. But he fears the tight credit market might hold him back.

“I could double my staff this year if I could borrow the money I need,” said Kaiser, CEO of Instetag Inc., who isn’t optimistic about prospects for borrowing. “The banks said regulators have tied their hands about making more loans.”

Unfortunately, business finance experts say the ongoing cash crunch will continue to limit business opportunities, which is one of five key trends they believe will shape business finance in 2010:

1. Business credit will remain scarce.

Even as the nation’s banking system undergoes internal repairs in 2010, lenders will remain reluctant to approve business loans, said Scott Shane, a business professor at Case Western Reserve University who follows corporate finance trends.

The problem: Commercial real estate loans that have gone bad or are on the verge of doing so forced banks to divert money from capital accounts into loan loss reserves.

That skewed capital ratios, the balance between the book value of a bank and the money it holds in reserve. Regulators are demanding banks improve their ratios, leaving them two options: Raise more capital from investors or reduce the book value, which means dropping loans.

Suggestions: Business owners having trouble getting a loan could approach newer banks that don’t have bad loans on their books written during the real estate boom from 2004 to late 2006.

Also talk to a business consultant or small business resource such as SCORE Orlando at the Disney Entrepreneur Center (www.disneyec.com) to find a business-friendly bank, said David Felker, executive vice president at Winter Park-based BankFirst. “Look for banks’ reputations on the street.”

Another option: The Black Business Investment Fund of Central Florida (www.bbif.com) is administering the state’s new Economic Gardening Business Loan Pilot Program. It provides loans of $50,000-$250,000 to qualified small business owners with 10-50 employees.

2. It’ll be a tough year to finance a business start-up.

Start-up companies typically seek bank loans to get going. When that fails, entrepreneurs use their own savings and personal credit lines for necessary cash, or they rely on friends and relatives for help.

But Shane said going those routes is harder than ever. “People’s net worths have dropped, so they don’t have investment capital. And banks have cut home-equity and credit-card lines” to reduce their risk.

Suggestions: Peer-to-peer lending, often through Web sites such as Peer-Lend (www.peer-lend.com), is one alternative. Another option, though potentially risky, is using retirement account money to finance a business.

3. Selling businesses or taking them public won’t be easy.

Many entrepreneurs think up an exit strategy from the day they launch a business. They pitch the possibility of big returns to investors in order to raise money. Typically, the strategy is either to sell the business or sell stock through an initial public offering when conditions are right.

But opportunities will be limited this year. “Last year at this time, the IPO [initial public offering] market was as bad as it has ever been,” said Shane. “I see only a handful of companies going public in 2010.”

Shane expects the market for IPOs to improve gradually if the stock market continues to recover.

Jim Gilkeson, associate professor of finance at the University of Central Florida, predicts similar problems for those who want to sell businesses.

The mergers and acquisitions market dropped 21.6 percent last year, from 8,788 deals between January to November 2008 to 6,892 during the same period in 2009, said a Robert W. Braid & Co. report released in December.

Suggestion: Alternatives which are less-common, such as all-cash transactions, could allow some businesses to find buyers.

4. The outlook for venture capital investment remains cloudy.

Venture capital fueled business growth during most of the past decade, but investment plunged with the stock market crash of 2008 and has recovered only slightly since.

According to the latest PricewaterhouseCoopers MoneyTree report,

$4.8 billion in venture funds was invested nationwide in third-quarter 2009, up from $4.1 billion in second-quarter 2009. But that was down from $7.2 billion in third-quarter 2008. The Southeast U.S., which includes Florida, saw venture funds invested drop from $338 million in second-quarter 2009 to $213 million in third-quarter 2009.

Venture fund investments likely will be weak this year as funds remain cautious about the prospects for new businesses in a still-troubled economy, said Shane.

But Gilkeson expects a stronger venture market, extending a trend that began early in 2009. “Venture capitalists are looking ahead to conditions six or seven years in the future, and they back strong ideas.”

Suggestions: Ask your lawyer how to find venture capitalists who specialize in your industry, or, if you’re seeking a small amount of money, ask about angel investors instead. Plus, the National Venture Capital Association (www.nvca.org) has a membership directory available for purchase, and Angelsoft (www.angelsoft.net) helps start-up firms find angel investors.

5. Large companies will issue more bonds.

Though few doors are open to early-stage businesses, large firms could have an easier time. The reason: The bond market is healthy, and low, fixed interest rates make new issues more attractive than bank loans to businesses needing investment money. “I suspect you’ll see an upswing in bond issues from companies with decent credit histories,” Gilkeson said.

It could grow even more attractive if inflation increases and bond rates rise as the economy improves. Companies that issue bonds at 2010 levels would end up paying relatively little in the future for the money they raised.

Suggestion: If your firm is considering issuing bonds, seek advice from an investment banker. To find one, contact the National Investment Banking Association (www.nibanet.org) at (706) 208-9620.

Though market watchers agree businesses will have a hard time raising money, it might not be a bad thing, said Clay Singleton, a Rollins College finance professor. “It was normal for people to chase banks for money, not banks chasing people to make loans. That changed years ago, but 2010 could be the year for business growth based on businesses making money.”

Meanwhile, Kaiser of Instetag still plans to seek a loan, though the time frame will depend on when new business opportunities arise. He wants to add new products and expand into other states this year because the number of temporary license plates issued in Florida fell 60 percent from 2007 to 2009, resulting in less business for his firm. He wouldn’t divulge revenue or the volume of licenses Instetag handled last year.

“We have plenty of opportunities to follow,” said Kaiser. “To do that, we need up-front capital.”

COMMENTARY:  I agree 100% with these five trends. I have been telling business startup entrepreneurs to either bootstrap or raise capital from F&R's.  VC's are not looking and startups unless the risk has been completely wringed out.   Junk bonds are back, and this is not a good sign.  Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke has been quite vocal about this, and some finance experts are predicting a "Bond Bubble". My advice, don't buy bonds, and don't even bother raising capital that way unless you are AAA or BAA at the minimum. Banks and Wall Street firms seem to have forgotten about September 2008, and floating these junk bonds is very dangerous. 

By the way, if you are a high-technology entrepreneur, I strong recommend Scott Shane's book, "Finding Fertile Ground", the source for my Entrepreneur Series for technology entrepreneurs.  Join my blog group and I will fill you in.

Courtesy of an article dated January 22, 2010 appearing in The Orlando Business Journal  

KEY TRENDS AND TIPS FROM THE MARKETING SHERPA EMAIL SUMMIT 2010

Last week’s MarketingSherpa Email Summit was packed full of case studies and best practice recommendations from email marketing experts of all kinds, some of which sparked debate amongst the attendees. We have recapped some of the most prominent themes below and invite you to voice your opinion on these topics by posting a comment on StrongMail’s Email Marketing Insights blog.

Double Opt-in vs. Single Opt-in
A lot of marketers struggle with whether they should build their email program using a double or single opt-in process. Single opt-in entails the subscriber checking a box to imply consent, whereas double opt-in also sends them an email requesting that they click on a link to confirm their intent to subscribe.

Email marketing purists and deliverability experts tend to favor double opt-in, because it ensures that only the most truly engaged and enthusiastic subscribers become members of your list. While double opt-in limits the size of your list, it theoretically increases the quality, which in turn increases response rates for programs across the board.

Dela Quist, the CEO of London-based email marketing agency Alchemy Worx, took an alternative view during his MarketingSherpa presentation. Assuming that a brand doesn’t send email to anyone who hasn’t provided their initial permission, Quist said "Double opt-in is one step too far. Email is the only marketing channel that you can unsubscribe from, so let them." He has a point. While double opt-in is wise for specific use cases (e.g. to stop people from seeding your list with bad email addresses), it may not be so wise to put up an extra barrier for subscribers that are truly interested in hearing from you.

Which approach is the right one? Marketers appear to be divided on the issue. One third of marketers use single opt-in, 17% use double opt-in and nearly half use a mix of both.

List Growth
On a related topic, many speakers at this year's event talked about list growth. A lot of great tips were presented, such as offering opt-ins at every touch point and most importantly, giving your subscribers valuable content that they choose to engage with. But whatever strategy you employ, capturing opt-in email addresses is critical. As Jeanne Jennings, Director of Email Product Development for Cahners Business Media stated in one session, "If you can get [website] browsers to opt-in to your list, you can market to them again. Otherwise they leave your site and are gone forever."

Everyone agreed that building your own list is significantly more targeted and effective than buying or renting. However, hybrid approaches can also be effective when executed properly. According to Jennings, 32 percent of marketers using co-registration see performance equal to that of their house list.

Email Frequency
With regard to email frequency, the ever provocative Dela Quist asked, "Why is email the only marketing channel where frequency is a dirty word? Stop beating yourselves up!" In every other marketing channel, frequency is seen as positive because it increases brand impressions. He illustrated the power of these impressions though a video by UK magician Darren Brown on the power of subliminal messaging. Quist proposes keeping inactive subscribers on your list and using the subject line as a branding opportunity. Just because they’re not opening your email doesn’t mean that seeing your brand in their inbox isn’t going to remind them to engage you in another channel.

Dr. Flint McGlaughlin from Marketing Experiments also presented a detailed study showing a direct correlation between email frequency and revenue for one retailer. The more email they sent, the more revenue it generated. If a recipient is engaged with your brand and you are providing them value, there is no such thing as mailing too often. It’s fairly certain that the millions of frenzied bargain hunters that subscribe to shopping sites like Gilt Group, HauteLook and Rue-la-la would be thrilled to get more than one email a day featuring access to exclusive designer sales.

On the opposite side of the issue was a case study with AirTran, which showed that raising frequency beyond three emails a week resulted in a 4X increase in unsubscribes. Such discrepancies highlight the importance of testing to determine the right approach for your business, but the key takeaway seemed to be that as long as you are providing value to your subscriber base, you shouldn’t be afraid to push the frequency envelope.

COMMENTARY:   Unfortunately, the vast majority of email that consumers receive is from spammers.  No matter how good your email security filters, some of it still gets through. 

Compared to other media, email is the most cost-effective.  You can mail out 25,000 emails for under $100 bucks and many online services like Strong Mail also provide tracking and returns data and reports almost in real-time so that you can measure the effective of your email campaigns.

To download the FREE Email Breakthrough Report Q409, click here.

Courtesy of an article dated January 2010 appearing in Strong Mail Advisor

SENSITIVE OBJECT, FRENCH TOUCH SCREEN TECHNOLOGY STARTUP, SOLD TO TYCO FOR $62 MILLION

Sensitive Object SA, a maker of touch-screen technology for electronics, has been acquired by Tyco Electronics Ltd. for $62 million, giving majority shareholder Sofinnova Partners an internal rate of return of between 30% and 40%, the firm said. Sofinnova held about 70% of Sensitive Object after investing about EUR10 million in the company since 2004, according to Jean Schmitt, a managing partner at the Paris-based investor and a Sensitive Object board member. Sofinnova was the only venture firm to invest in Sensitive Object until Motorola Ventures joined the final financing round late last year.

Sensitive Object touch screens It's the latest exit for Sofinnova, which in the past year has sold CoreValve Inc. for $700 million cash plus milestones, Fovea Pharmaceuticals SA for up to EUR370 million and Novexel SA for up to $505 million in cash and milestones, in addition to an EUR85 million initial public offering for Movetis NV. Sensitive Object needed more funding to expand its technology and reach, Schmitt said. Sensitive Object touch control panels "The technology they have is incredibly versatile," Schmitt said. "You can turn anything to be touch-sensitive. That level of versatility requires a lot of investment and significant know-how in user interfaces. To create that within Sensitive Object would cost tens of millions." Sofinnova decided to sell rather than try to raise more venture funding, which would require seeking a much higher sale price. "It's a great return...We had to make a difficult choice between raising more money and selling right now," Schmitt said. "If you do the math, if you raise EUR20 million more, you get seriously diluted, even if you also invest. So to get the same amount of money in return, you need to sell for twice as much." Tyco and Sensitive Object had been working together for a year and a half, and remained interested in working together, so the decision was not just about generating a high return, Schmitt added. Sensitive Object was founded in 2003 as a spin-off from the French Public Center of Research. The company's technology can essentially make any surface touch-sensitive. Using acoustics, the technology can "hear" a finger or stylus touch the device and determine where exactly it has been touched. With interest high in Apple Inc.'s iPhone and new iPad, the technology can be used on a variety of devices from personal computers to washing machines. It's the latest exit for Sofinnova, which held 70% of the company after putting in EUR10 million. COMMENTARY:  Sensitive Object SA, founded in October 2003, is a spin-off from the French Science National Research Centre (CNRS).  In August 2004, Sofinnova Partners became an investor in Sensitive Object. Sensitive Object provides a new Acoustic Touch Technology that will revolutionize the usage of many products such as Computers, internet Devices, Mobile Phones, Multimedia, Home Appliances, Home Automation, Transportations, and beyond. The Acoustic Touch Solution is software-based and features high configuration flexibility and opening doors for new design and concepts, for any solid surface and shape (glass, plastic, metal, wood, gypsum walls, ¡K) I had a look into Sensitive Object SA, and the company has developed two proprietary touchscreen technologies: ReverSys - ReverSys® is based on the recognition of sound waves propagating in an object when the user touches it. A Touch on an object produces a pattern of sound waves through the material. This pattern creates an acoustic signature that is unique to the location of the impact. This property was discovered through the study of a process known as Time Reversal Acoustics, which can be used to precisely identify the source of radiated waves. We use acoustic sensors linked to a computer or a DSP board to capture the audio vibrations within an object and generate the acoustic signatures.ddk 4Sensors - Solutions for large touch zones on large surface. The 4 Sensors solution enables large zones on large solid surface of any kind of materials, allowing reconfigurable virtual buttons.  The technology uses 4 piezo electric sensors to pick-up acoustic bending waves generated by Touch. Sensitive Object's offers two product lines, touch control panels and touch screens.   The touch control panels can be mounted on a wall like the security alarm panels you find in many buildings.  The touch screens are designed for large touch zones on large surfaces. Looks like Sofinnova Partners made out pretty good selling its EURO10 million investment to Tyco, a company whose former CEO and Chairman is now serving prison time for tax evasion and other corporate sins.  Just thought I would throw that in.

CHINESE KNOCK-OFF GOOGLE AND YOUTUBE WEBSITES WITH TWO OF THEIR OWN

Google's threats to pull out of China appears to have sparked some cheap imitations in the Asian country.  Goojje.com, a Chinese imitation of the search engine, replaced the last three letters with of the name Google with "jje".

Goojje.com doesn't have paid-search ads. Searches on keywords, for the most part, appear to return queries that pull data from Google.com.

The Goojje logo combines parts of the logos from both Google and Chinese search engine Baidu. Google.com isn't the only knockoff in China. YouTubecn.com also emerged around the same time. Videos on the site are sluggish. It appears that the videos on the site originated on YouTube, but some of them do not play. The site does not support embedded tags.

 

China's counterfeit industry dates back years. From designer purses made by Gucci to electronics from Hewlett-Packard and software from Microsoft, China has been known for producing a steady stream of counterfeit goods throughout the 2000s.

Hewlett-Packard, for example, working with Chinese authorities, seized $1.2 million in counterfeit computer parts in May 2002, during a raid on an illicit operation in the southern province of Guangdong.

COMMENTARY:  I bet Larry and Sergey, and especially Sergey, got a little teedoff over some Chinese entrepreneurs launching Goojje and YouTubeCn.  I don't miss Google.  I weaned myself off of Google months ago, and now my search engine of preference is BING, which by the way, I believe is a better search engine. 

Just for the heck of it, I used the Goojje.com search engine to find my PBT Consulting site, and it came up No 2 instead of No 1 compared to the real Google. But, I can live with that.

I would also like to add, that the YouTubeCn search engine is pretty crude, but doesn't appear to have any filters for adult-oriented material, which I have a feeling the Chinese government is going to clamp down on real fast.   

Face it folks, the Chinese knock-off everything. Now, wouldn't it be cool if the Chinese actually hijacked the Google site?  THAT would be cool.   

After having the Chinese hack into their servers and attack their Google site in China, I don't know why it is taking Larry and Sergey so long to make up their damn minds whether they will stay or leave China.  I guess it must be those advertising dollars and drop in their traffic numbers that leaving will cause.  Who cares.  Larry and Sergey are cashing out 5 million Google shares, or roughly $5.5 billion.   Money talks, bullshit walks.        

Courtesy of an article dated January 29, 2010 appearing in MediaPost Publications Online Media Daily

STEVE UNVEILS THE IPAD THING

Hey, gang.  Check out this cute cartoon of Steve Jobs introducing his Apple evangelists to that thing, the iPad, I mean.

Enjoy.

 

 

SURVEY: NEARLY 50% OF SMARTPHONE OWNERS NEVER BUY AN APP

 

 

 

 

 

Consumers may have downloaded upwards of three billion Apps for their smartphones, but there is a limit to what they will pay.

According to a survey of 400 smartphone users conducted by Asknet, nearly half of the respondents (45%) said they had never bought an application or software for their smartphones (34% said they hadn't done so because it "wasn't worth the time or the effort"). Of those who did purchase apps, 87% of them said they spent less than $50 in a year on them, while only 4% said they spent more than $100.

Of those who bought apps for their phones, 61% bought music, while 41% bought games, 35% bought ringtones, 33% bought news, 29% bought GPS/location-based software and 27% bought business applications within the past year. However, when asked what they would like to buy more of, 63% said music, while 51% said business applications, 48% said GPS/location services and 37% said games.

Meanwhile, more than a third of the survey respondents (38%) said they were frustrated with the cost of certain applications. At the same time, 29% said they were uncomfortable entering their credit card details to purchase them.

"The mobile area is still developing. Pricing is still an issue and the consumer is still in the process of pronouncing himself," Aston Fallen, CEO of Asknet, tells Marketing Daily. "The payment element is and will remain an issue."

Not all app purchasing follows the same process, of course. Apple's App Store, for instance, uses a similar interface as its iTunes software, which may account for Apple's enormous success in selling apps, while other companies have struggled to gain the same foothold. "There's an element of trust that goes along with that product," Fallen says. "The target market is more secure in that environment. Part of what is preventing others' level of success of Apple is that [lack of] familiarity."

COMMENTARY:  The number of smartphone owners that have not purchased an app does not surprise me.  If I ever bought an app, it would be a business app, but most of the apps that I have seen on Facebook and Apple app store are mostly junk.  I think I will write something myself, now that the app software for do-it-yourselfer's is out.  I guess you can call me cynical about these apps, but I am entitled. THere is no law that says I have to, and I just don't see a need.   

If the top five apps are games like Farmville and travel and weather conditions, I am not interested.  I have better things to do with my time, than grow crops, and I don't ski anymore.  Besides, that little postage size screen on my phone just does not offer the kind of online experience I want.   Like I stated before, its a mistake to use a smartphone to surf the web, and I hardly ever do this unless I really have to.  Looks like Steve Jobs realized this too, because he unveiled that new thing, the iPad, I mean, the other day.  It has been described as a larger iPhone.  It actually looks like one, too.

Courtesy of an article dated January 28, 2010 appearing in MediaPost Publications Marketing Daily   

THE APPLE IPAD IS FINALLY UNVEILED, BUT IS IT A GAME CHANGER LIKE THE IPHONE?

�

SAN FRANCISCO — Apple CEO Steve Jobs on Wednesday unveiled the company's latest creation: the iPad, a state-of-the-art tablet computer that all but challenges traditional print and media companies to create content for it.

The device, which will be available in March, becomes the leading example of a new generation of portable entertainment centers.

With a 9.7-inch, high-resolution screen, the half-inch-thick device gives book, newspaper and magazine publishers — as well as movie and TV producers — a chance to show they have a future in the digital age. The iPad, which uses the same operating system as Apple's popular iPhone, promises to show off news and entertainment as well as, and maybe better than, print media and many TV sets.

VIDEO:�

It's a "truly magical and revolutionary product," Jobs said at a media event that finally confirmed weeks of speculation about Apple's new tablet.

Sales hype aside, it's fair to ask: If traditional media can't make it on devices such as the iPad, can they make it anywhere?

"What I've seen (of the iPad) does create a new space" for media, says Ned May, a lead analyst at the research firm Outsell. "There's an opportunity here, but they need to come up with more compelling experiences."

A lot also depends on Apple's ability to grab the imagination of ordinary consumers — not just eager tech enthusiasts — to turn the iPad into a hit on the order of the iPod and iPhone. That will require Apple to butt heads with some of the biggest powers in consumer electronics, telecommunications and media retailing.

Hewlett-Packard, Intel and Dell�are showing off prototypes for tablet computers.

Meanwhile, those who want to access the Web on the run already can do so through netbooks and smartphones. About 18% of mobile phones are smartphones, according to Nielsen.

And people who mostly want to read can take thousands of digital books with them on an e-reader such as Amazon's Kindle, the Sony Reader or Barnes & Noble's Nook. With so many alternatives in the market, some analysts say, Apple may have come up with too little, too late.

"To really change the way we consume media, it has to offer a lot more media in a new way," says James McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester Research.�With no memory card slot to input photos or music, and no USB port, "There's no new way to get video content here. Your laptop is a better competitor for delivering video to you in the home and on the go."

McQuivey says Apple likely will sell 2 million iPads to early adopters, folks who had been thinking of an iPod Touch, "and those who want something to make them look good at parties."

Something for everyone?

Apple hopes to secure its place in the emerging market for portable digital devices by offering something for almost anyone. "We want to put this in the hands of lots of people," Jobs says.

The iPad starts at $499 for a model with 16 gigabytes of memory that connects to the Internet via a wireless network. The 32-GB model is $599, and the 64-GB one will go for $699.

You have to pay more for a unit that can use 3G cellphone connections to the Web. They'll run $629, $729 and $829. The actual connection, from AT&T, costs $14.99 a month for 250 megabytes of service, or $29.99 for unlimited service — but it doesn't require a contract and can be canceled at any time, Jobs says.

As with the iPhone and other smartphones, including the Motorola Droid, images on the iPad rotate to landscape or portrait mode depending on how it's held. The device also has a GPS system, enabling it to highlight nearby stores, restaurants, movies and other attractions.

The battery can run for 10 hours before it needs to be recharged, Apple says.

"It's the best browsing experience you've ever had," Jobs says. He adds that it's also "awesome to watch movies and TV shows on." The iPad can handle any music or video that's available from Apple's iTunes Store. But you won't be able to view online videos from popular video sites such as Hulu and Dailymotion, because the iPad doesn't support Adobe's Flash video format.

"The strategic power here is in reading and viewing, and what that could do to all the folks who want to run their content to the reader and viewer," says Harvard business historian Nancy Koehn. "If this looks anything like what the iPod and Touch did, there'll be a chokehold," as Apple tries to dictate terms to publishers and producers aiming to reach audiences — and to consumers buying news and entertainment.

That may be one reason so many news and entertainment providers were absent from the iPad announcement. Book publishers Penguin, HarperCollins,�Simon & Schuster, Macmillan and Hachette were represented at the announcement. The New York Times, Electronic Arts,�MLB.com and Gameloft�also were there.

"We thought there was going to be more content announcements," says Gene Munster, an analyst at Piper Jaffray.� "The reality is, they're just launching it — it's not even out. It's going to take time. It would have been nice to see more (content), but that doesn't change our belief that, ultimately, (it's) going to come."

Software developers should find it easier to write programs for the iPad now that Apple has released a toolkit for them.

'Part of a big shift'

The combination of so many media capabilities in one device could have some unexpected consequences. For example, makers of video games see an opportunity to draw iPad users away from TV.

"It will increase the presence of the iPhone platform in the living room and the bedroom," says Bart Decrem, CEO of Tapulous, which makes games for smartphones. "That means users will spend less time in front of their TV and traditional console devices. This is part of a big shift from traditional console games aimed at serious gamers, and toward casual, social games enjoyed by everyone during their spare minutes."

The iPad's extensive media capabilities also could inspire software developers to come up with innovative applications.

"This will enable people to do things they didn't know they wanted to do," says Ge Wang, a Stanford University�assistant professor who develops music applications for the iPhone.

Even Apple is unsure how the iPad will evolve.

"This is about all of the things that you might have done with a lower-end computer, but now this is a better device," says Phil Schiller,�Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing. "That's what's really exciting. Under-$500 range that lets you do all your e-mail and Web browsing and get all the benefits of the apps in the App Store. That's a whole new thing we've never seen."

But the iPad may have the biggest impact initially on books, newspapers and magazines that are trying to find a home in the portable digital world.

Book publishers are eager to find an alternative to Amazon's Kindle. Many are irked by the online retail giant's low $10 price for many best-selling e-books. Some, including Simon & Schuster and HarperCollins, are fighting back by refusing to release some titles in digital form for several weeks, so devoted fans will pay for the higher-priced hardcover editions.

Apple, though, seems confident it can get consumers to pay higher prices for e-books. In a demonstration of its upcoming iBookstore, it showed the late senator Ted Kennedy's�memoir, True Compass, selling for about $15, vs. Amazon's $10.

"Amazon is subsidizing some of the costs," says Michael Gartenberg, an analyst at Interpret. "But the e-book wars are just heating up, and Apple is giving you a reason to rethink your choice of an e-book reader with the device that does a lot of other things."

Sony says it isn't worried about competing with a device that could turn out to be a Jack of all trades and master of none.

"It'll expand the digital reading space," says Steve Haber, president of Sony's digital reading division. "We'll find out how optimized the device is for reading and what features it includes for note-taking, highlighting, tapping a word and having a dictionary pop up, and battery life. And I don't know what it's going to be like reading on a (bright, lit-up) screen. We'll find out as we get the chance to play with one."

So in the near future, consumers, electronics manufacturers and news and entertainment producers will try to figure out which products make sense and which ones are just overkill.

"We're increasingly competing in terms of form factors, not just products," says John Hagel of consulting firm Deloitte's Center for the Edge.

"The jury is still out."

The iPad:� What's good, what's not.

PROS:

• Starting at $499, it's priced affordably, between a $199 iPod Touch and $999 MacBook.
• Its design is elegant.�
• If you own an iPhone, the learning curve will be very iPad.
• It can read e-books in color and with video.
• It has a 9.7-inch display to watch movies and TV shows, compared with the iPhone's 3.5-inch screen.
• Web pages can be viewed in landscape mode, an easier read for some.
• Its battery�can run for 10 hours before it needs a re-charge.

CONS:

• It has no USB or SD storage slots to input media.
• There is no built-in camera.
• It can't play Flash video, the dominant format for online video.� That means it won't work with Hulu, Vimeo or several other online video sites, unless they're in stand-alone applications.
• The battery isn't removable.

COMMENTARY:� What I liked about this article is that it did not go overboard with one-sided overzealous enthusiasm, but asked some�serious questions and�showed serious concerns.� My sentiments, exactly.�� I have yet to try the new Apple iPad, but in a previous post, I described this thing,�I mean, the Apple iPad, as nothing more than a�larger version of the�iPhone.� I still have to try it out, before I offer a final opinion.�

You can't be too careful, but�as an�objective outsider, someone who knows a thing or two about technology, I don't see how this thing is going to to be a game changer, or redefine how we�read books and view digital media.��And, from what I have read so far,�the reviews are a mix of�both positive and negative.�

When I first saw the iPhone,�there was something magical, I knew it would be a huge hit, but it wasn't perfect, but�within fifteen months,�Apple had sold 10 million iPhones.� The rest is history.

This new thing, the iPad, I mean, is not perfec eithert, as pointed out by the reviewer.� It has some real serious flaws which I find unforgiveable.� Reminds me a lot of the MacIntosh and iPhone, but inspite of those imperfections,�both the Mac and iPhone�were very successful.� Perhaps it is the magic of Steve Jobs, but�most likely the confidence that Apple evangelists have, that�even if it is not perfect the first time around, "Steve will make it perfect".��

As for myself, I am cautiously optimistic, because this time around, Apple will be competing against at least a dozen companies coming out with tablet computers and eBook readers of their own.� There is not a lot of product differentiation.� The field is not wide open like it was the last time.� This is going to be a real slugfest for tablet computer/eBook reader�dominance, and the product life cycle could be very short lived, with no one player, even Apple,�being�able to capture all the returns from innovation and establish a dominant design.���

Courtesy of an article dated January 27, 2010 appearing in USA Today�

�

�

�

�����