Michael Myers

As most of you heard, Starbucks is actually closing stores to avoid more losses. I have posted about Starbucks inner conflict as of late (not latte) and believe I have some answers as to how they can increase their revenue and get that store back in the Forbidden City in China.

1. The first thing they should do is partner with FedEx/Kinko’s in specific locations (such as the location at I-25 and Belleview). There’s more business deals going on during the day then at an ACG meeting. They should have a doorway were suits (such as myself) can walk over and get copies made or fax a signed contract to the mothership. This of course does not work for every location and it would be pretty easy to determine which ones work and then select test stores.
2. Create more drive-through only stores. I think the concept of creating a “third place” similar to what Italians have as a caffeine laced experience is a great idea and in the US, that third place, unfortunately is our cars. Sometimes when I go to Starbucks in the morning, I go inside just to avoid the long line at the drive through.
3. Combine Starbucks with gas stations. I have timed it and it takes almost exactly the same amount of time to fill the tank as it does to order and pick up my iced latte. This would be an example of honoring our third place. Now if we could just get them to pay for gas. They could call these FUEL stations; for you and your car.
4. I would recommend breaking away from the McDonalds factor and let the community collaborate on the design of the place. This could make it feel more like a local joint similar to Common Grounds in Highlands. Hell Walmart has done this to lessen the backlash of being the 800 pound gorilla.
5. Go ahead and sell all legal stimulants, such as beer, wine, pastries, etc. I would try this out by opening new stores *gasp* and calling them VICE. I would have wine tasting parties and coffee tasting parties. I would also make these based on membership. (Taking a page out of The Experience Economy.) The membership would be free and the perception would be of belonging.
6. The last thing I would do is open a Starbucks inside a Starbucks. I believe this was on a Simpson’s episode eons ago and I think it would be a good time to show a little sense of humor. I guess the worst thing that could happen is that they would need to close it. Now that I think of it . . . which one do you think they would close?

Yesterday it was announced that Virgin Mobile would buy Helio for $39 million. Helio has been one of my favorite businesses/products since their inception. I love the design of the Ocean and wish that the iPhone would utilize some of the design ideas.

Since the demise of Amp’d there have been questions about the health and well being of Helio, which were only magnified when Earthlink founder Sky Dayton stepped down as CEO earlier this year.

When I went shopping for a Helio Ocean earlier this year I ended up in one of their stores in Cherry Creek. (All stores have been shut down.) The sales person was a very young girl and knew everything about the device. She told me she loved her Ocean and when I asked her why, she replied; “It’s the closest thing to a computer that I can make calls from.”

I have to say that lately I have been paying attention to how the younger generation is using their cell and much to my surprise, there are a lot of people making calls on them. I think there are still going to be kids that don’t have “the knack” when it comes to technology no matter how accessible we make it. Of course the real taste makers are the technologically elite.

I do think that the acquisition is a win for consumers. Virgin Mobile has always offered cutting edge services (not to mention commercials) but have seriously lacked when it came to hardware. Now that issue could be resolved with the release of the Ocean 2 and other phones.

As for remembering Helio as it was, I offer this video and would politely ask for a moment of silence.

I pick up the phone and say hello. I then hear; “What the hell is a social object?” I check the number and realize it is a friend of mine (not at all involved in online marketing) and told him that my definition comes from Hugh MacLeod that states a social object is:

. . . the reason two people are talking to each other, as opposed to talking to somebody else

He then says; “So our friendship (shared experiences) could be considered a social object?”

“Yes”, I reply. (He had been talking to one of those “marketing freaks” at work and had heard the term being batted around and was perplexed.)

The implication in Hugh’s definition is that there is interaction involved. This also just happens to be the primary strength of the Internet when compared to other mediums; it promotes interaction. Interaction can be in the form of entertainment (Paltalk), information (Howcast) and/or communication (Digg). The Internet as the platform combined with the maximum amount of peers and the maximum exposure to products/services makes the concept of social objects essential.

I want to clear about this. In my opinion, the Internet extends a person’s social network the same way having a job does. You will solicit/give advice on products/services and you’re most likely not sharing intimate details with people at work or within your social network. (This is of course not true for young punks who have not learned their lesson yet.) According to a recent study:

Word-of-mouth is highly influential on purchases made by at-work consumers, with 95.6% indicating they regularly or occasionally give advice to their peers about products and services, and 92.9% indicating they also seek

This makes sense as we all spend the majority of our waking hours, at work. The objective for marketers is to create products/services that are inherently viral and therefore become social objects. This is of course easier said that done and yet possible for most products. Even blenders.

I’ve been listening to DJ Danger Mouse’ Grey Album lately and thinking about how the mash-up culture Wired Magazine discussed several years ago will impact businesses. Wikipedia defines a mash-up in regards to music as:

A mash-up or bootleg is a song or composition created from the combination of the music from one song with the a cappella from another

The Grey album is an amazing feat and does take some listening to get used to. What the DJ did was take the instrumental pieces from the Beatles White Album and remix Jay Z vocals from his Black album over the top. This same thing was also done by Duke Ruckus with Metallica and Jay Z. (This is very old news for anyone reading this who is young.)

This concept has been around for quite some time and I first became aware of it in 1975 with Dickie Goodman’s Mr. Jaws or Monty Pythons animation (below) and later with De La Soul’s, 3 Feet High and Rising (which was a fantastic CD and got the band sued for sampling people’s music because they forgot to give the original artists credit). This is an important distinction in my mind.

Sampling is taking bits and pieces and putting them into something you have created. Mash-ups are taking two individual pieces and putting them together in such a way that a new item is created. As you can see from the Wikipedia link above, there are several different variations on the definition based on the medium.

In the past I have talked about the impact that individuals online can have on brand equity and how businesses should create tools that allow customers to assist them in marketing. These tools should encourage the creation of mash-ups within those online venues. These mash-ups, of course, then become apart of the corporation’s brand. This means that your customers own your brand. This is already true due to the amount of online interaction between customers & potential customers on venues such as blogs, social networks, etc. This is referred to as the reputation economy and is nothing new with the exception that you and I, now have a much larger audience for our opinions. What are we to do when customers have partial ownership of our brand and the distribution to get their message out?

Partner on an individual level.

I just saw this video on MobileCrunch. It’s a demo of how the Firefox mobile browser could work and it looks pretty amazing.

As of today people’s mobile Internet behavior is markedly different from terrestrial use. I’m excited about this type of functionality as it will help us shed some light on what people’s behavior will be if they are holding a window to the Internet instead of a very limited WAP based tool. Currently the factors that shape people’s mobile online Internet behavior are:

1. Limited screen real estate
2. Being in an open environment
3. Interface limitations (screen navigation, keyboard, etc)

Even if browsers get better the first item is still going to be an issue as we want a mobile phone to be . . . mobile. There could be options to resolve those moments when you must have a larger screen and yet it is a condition of the medium. The second factor could potentially make it more of a fractured experience and yet it does enable location based services to happen; and with a better browser, those experiences can be more robust. The third issue is most likely one associated with age or experience level and I have offered a potential solution for these interface limitations.

It will be interesting to see how search will be impacted by these newer more enabled browsers. As of now when people search for something online they are doing it through a WAP enabled portal. As a consequence, most bookmark things and then look for more detail when they get to a better screen. I’m not sure if this is an issue with navigation or screen real estate or both. Many would site the use of mobile video as a sign that people will use the Internet as they do on a terrestrial connection and yet it is important to realize that video is passive and search is active. Of course text messaging is active.

All that I’m sure of is that we will know more soon about how people use the mobile internet.

I was recently having a conversation with a client about digital signage and how this could be used in different types of venues. Everything from retail to hotels could easily find a clever usage for this technology as it is.

We then started to talk about the potential of digital signage as the “anchor” for location based services. In brief, these are marketing efforts provided by businesses to your mobile phone, based on your physical location. Steve Jobs just talked about the potential for these types of applications at the release of the new iPhone and I agree that these services could provide compelling offerings. I also believe that the user should be in complete control of whether they receive offers based on the online persona they have built.

I brought up businesses like Whrrl and Lightpole that are allowing users to geotarget products and services to share with their peers. This could be thought of as user generated marketing or at the very least user facilitated marketing.

I then started to think about how location based services could interact with user generated geotargeting. For example:

A person is in a store and they see a book that their friend would like. They go to their Lightpole application on their mobile and start to create a geographical marker. They then receive a notice from that bookstore that they can select from a number of items that can be personalized. Such as a video or a photo. The person selects the video and then records an audio message onto the video and then saves the marker. A text message is sent to their friend letting them know about the recommendation with a map showing how to get to that location. Also, the next time the friend is within 1/2 mile of the book an alert will be sent to their cell reminding them about the book.

Of course a person could do the video or photo on their own and this makes geotargeting so powerful with respect to marketing. This concept is not new and was first mentioned back in 2006 as user generated marketing. This personalized marketing through web enabled word of mouth could also be thought of as another aspect of the corporate social graph. No matter how you define it, the potential is obvious.

I have been keeping a list of what functions I want on my cell phone in the very near future. The list as of today is:

garage door opener, car alarm, remote control, drivers license, credit card, quality camera, HD recorder, audio recorder, watch, geo-targeting tool, MP3 player; with wireless headphones, alarm clock, organizer, mouse/computer and a phone. All of this with a full QWERTY keyboard and a 16×9 ratio screen.

Many of the things on the list beg the question of security. I really don’t want anyone walking around with my cell charging things to my account or stealing my car. I also happen to have recently received a new IBM ThinkPad with the fingerprint scanner which I’m finding is a very handy thing and would be even more essential on a cell phone.

I then wondered if anyone had out a put a fingerprint scanner in a cell phone; yet. And of course, they have. The Toshiba G900

I have been thinking about how product placement might play itself out in a mobile video environment. Screen size is the obvious limitation and I’m not convinced that short-from video will be the primary form of accepted video. I have mentioned in the past some of the amazing things that Japan has done on the mobile phone and the potential future that mobile discovery holds (which is another form of “product placement”).

I was trying to think of ways that businesses may be able to utilize product placement on the mobile phone and this is what I came up with.

• Verbally address the product being supported since you cannot rely on someone seeing the product alone. Now we all know how cheesy this can sound (like Laura Linney in The Truman Show) and there is definitely a right way to do it.
• More creative filming. I can’t remember which Charlie’s Angels movie it was (as I never saw any of them) but I did catch some footage of one of the Angels on a motorcycle and they turn the motorcycle around to face their adversary right in front of a huge Pepsi sign (or was it Coke). It may have been both, with the adversary in front of the competing soft drink. This didn’t feel very creative to me. I’m thinking of something more subtle like the logo of a company on the bottom of a snowboard as a trick is done in the half-pipe.
• Interview the actors to find out what products they currently like and make this apart of the video extrase. In this day and age of transparency, what celebrities really like carries much more weight than what they sell.
• Use the product as the “tool”. The Bourne Ultimatum featured Audis and Volkswagens being destruction resistant as the cast hurtled themselves through scenes. This is a great way to show the product and you would still need to be creative with cinematography to highlight the brand.
• Use the product as an anchor for the story. Remember Elaine’s love for the IUD in that Seinfeld episode. This could potentially be thought of as destination advertising such as BMW films.
• Voting or rating a product featured from your cell while watching a video (on your cell). This type of interaction is growing in popularity and will only become more prevalent.
• Do not re-purpose content intended for a larger format. Simply does not work.

To wrap this up I thought it would be good to see what film director David Lynch thinks about product placement and watching films on a cell phone. (If you’re easily offended, do me and you a favor; don’t watch either video and rest assured that Mr. Lynch frowns on these sorts of things in general.)