iMediaConnection: Online Marketing vs eCommerce

I am starting to write for imediaconnection of DMG. The first article is about the difference between online marketing and eCommerce (excerpt):

====
The difference between online marketing and eCommerce, and how to make sense of it all.

The internet is such a vast and confusing medium that a plethora of roles and job titles that were created to make sense of it all. Gurus, evangelists, optimizers, specialists and demand generators have all stepped up to the plate to take over the world of new media, emerging media, ebusiness, online marketing and ecommerce. But just because the terms are used regularly does not mean that the roles are clearly defined.

Having been an eCommerce Director for a hotel group, I can't tell you how many people have asked me: "What does that mean, are you like a webmaster?", or "You do online marketing, right?" So the oversimplified explanation is:

eCommerce is to online marketing as sales is to marketing in the traditional off-line business world.
===

Click here to read the full article.

Joe out

Web Wednesday 7.0 - Kevin Huang - Pixel Media Asia

Kevin is in town and agreed to speak on his experience in China.

This was the first time at Brewerkz for Web Wednesday Singapore. We had about 200 people turn up. It's great in that we did not know most of them. I think 30% are recurring guests that show up now and then. And 70% new faces.

Then again, the numbers are increasing - so 30% last month represented over 40% of visitors in July. Hey, I am data geek.

Akamai: "How Secure Is The Internet"

I ran across this the other day and thought it was interesting so thought I would post it:

===
In addition to the more well-known threats such as viruses and "phishing" (the practice of sending bogus e-mails purportedly representing a business in an attempt to get access to a person's password and account), Leighton described the following problem.

* Denial of service attacks. In a "denial of service attack," a Web site's IP address is bombarded with traffic in an attempt to overwhelm the infrastructure managing the site. "Bad guys," Leighton explained, can use armies of "bots" - computers controlled, often unbeknownst to their owners, after having been infected with a virus or a worm - to launch denial of service attacks. Such an attack can be targeted at a company or more broadly. For example, InformationWeek reported on February 6, 2007, that on that day a denial of service attack "nearly took down" three of the Internet's 13 so-called root servers, temporarily slowing the three servers. Though the attack did not have a significant effect on Internet endusers, what would happen if a denial of service attack ever actually succeeded in bringing down all 13 of the Internet's root servers? Were that ever to occur, it wouldn't take long before "your browser wouldn't be able to go anywhere; you wouldn't be able to send e-mail. Nothing on the Internet would work," Leighton said.

* "Pharming." "Pharming," Leighton explained, often exploits a weakness in the DNS, an Internet protocol that allows a "bad guy" to tell a device known as a name server, of which there are millions, that it owns the IP address of an organization such as a financial institution. The hacker will then receive the traffic from that name server meant to go to the financial institution, and the hacker can then send that traffic to a bogus Webpage that looks like the financial institution's own sign-in page. In the process, Leighton explained, criminals can gain password and account information. What's more, the user may not realize what has happened. Leighton added that another type of "pharming" can use a different Internet protocol known as BGP protocol, to siphon off some of the traffic intended for a given site to a bogus site, again in an attempt to gain password and account information.

More troubling still are the larger implications of these techniques if applied against a nation rather than for commercial gain. For example, Leighton noted that one worry is if terrorists could gain account and password information to access critical infrastructure, such as the nation's utilities system.
===

Link to article here.

Web Wednesday Singapore V 5.0

===
It's Wednesday again. That's Web Wednesday. And yes, it is technically Wednesday since this is posted at 1am on Wed, 25th June 2008. Here's what we are up to:

------------------------

Hello again, it is Web Wednesday time again – Version 5.0. Funny how time flies, we are now halfway through the year. Things seem to be heating up in the interactive sector for everyone.

One of the hottest topics in the interactive advertising space at the moment is in-game advertising. This month, Web Wednesday Singapore is proud to present one of the leaders in this sector, Massive Inc. We will have a presentation this month by In-Jun Jung, the regional lead for Massive who will give us an overview of the In-Game Advertising market in Asia and show us examples of some of the most innovative In-Game Advertising around.

Last month’s panel on Advertising Networks was well attended and generated a very good debate. Thanks again to Charles at Faciliate for moderating and to our panelists Fred from .fox, Matt from AdMax and Alex from Aktiv. Last event we had over 80 industry professionals in attendance. Unfortunately, we have outgrown the J-bar at the M-Hotel (thanks to them for their support through 4 good rounds!) and will now be moving to a NEW LOCATION with a good AV system (better to hear you with) and more space for drinks and discussion.

This month the Web Wednesday Event will be at the Victoria Bar at the Intercontinental Hotel at Bugis Junction on Wednesday the 25th of June from 6:30-8:30pm.

The event is the night before Ad:Tech Singapore, so feel free to bring any friends or colleagues from the interactive community that happen to be in town for the event. (Also remember to sign up and attend the Ad:Tech Singapore conference – it promises to be a fantastic event. http://www.ad-tech.com/singapore/).

Also this month, BBC.com has come on board as a sponsor for Web Wednesday Singapore and will be hosting the ‘first drink of the evening’ – register at the entrance and get your first drink courtesy of BBC.com!

As usual, no sales pitches, no boring speeches, just discussion, drinks and networking!

See you all on Wednesday the 25th at the Intercontinental Hotel!

Best,

Andy, Joe and Kevin

Web Wednesday Singapore


----------------

About Massive Inc:

Massive Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corp., is the creator of a leading network for dynamic video game advertising. The Massive Network offers advertisers the ability to engage an aggregated gaming audience in real time across multiple platforms. Over 200 blue-chip advertisers have run campaigns across the Massive Network throughout North America and Europe. Now they are coming to APAC. Massive’s technology allows for all forms of downloadable media and advertising content to be contextually integrated into the game environment, including image, audio, video and game object formats. More information can be found online at http://www.massiveincorporated.com.

Join us on Wednesday June 25 at The Victoria Bar at the Intercontinental Hotel to meet Massive and learn a bit more about their offering in APAC.

Last Post?

Well, I have not posted for almost a month and there are good reasons for that.

1) I was on vacation for the second half of May, and

2) I resigned from Millennium hotels

I have joined Omniture (the Leader in Online Business Optimization) and there are rules concerning employee blog. So I have to navigate that one before I start blogging again. And in any case, I may have to change the blog name to something else ... like analyticsfordummies.blogspot.com.

Peace.

Joe

SlideShare: Show Me the eMoney and Eye For Travel 2008

...
A buddy told me about Slideshare.com and I finally got onto it. Very cool stuff. Essentially you can upload any presentation - powerpoint, pdf, keynote - and they will webinize it. You can make it public or keep it private. You can add mp3 files to make it a Webinar. The main problem thus far is that it does not do the animations from powerpoint, and also it does not allow you to edit the slides onces it is uploaded. Though you can upload a new version.

Anyhow, I figure I would upload two full presentation that I have discussed before:

Show me the eMoney! from my post in February after my Web Wednesday presentation.

| View | Upload your own

The second one is Web 2.0 and the Online Marketplace from my Eye For Travel 2008 conference here in Singapore.

| View | Upload your own

Enjoy!

Web 2.0: Hotel ROOM review with TripKick.com

...

Just ran across this on site on TechCrunch . Apparently Tripkick.com just launched yesterday on 13 May 2008. What's their unique selling point in this mass of web 2.0 travel portals?

"We prepare you with the little known facts about each hotel room so you can make an educated decision when choosing your perfect room."

That's right! Facts... about EACH HOTEL ROOM. Remember I talked about Web 2.0 increasing transparency? Well here is the microscope.

Out of the 250 hotels that they have information on, they happen to list one of our most popular hotel for online bookings - the Millennium Broadway Hotel New York:

Here is the listing details:


Underneath that are the following tabs:


With the default tab at "Rooms to Request", and it lists the following information on our rooms in the main building:


Our Premier Tower details are as follows:


This is all great stuff. There is tab for "your experience" which is user generated reviews; this currently has no feedback since the site was just launched. The next tab is "Compare Rooms" and here is what you see.


The "Room Basics" tab gives you this useful information. Man, I don't even have some of this info on MY OFFICIAL SITE. Sigh.....


I think this will be great. Just like Seatguru.com for the airlines!

BTW, if you click on the "Book now" button, it goes to Expedia. Are they an affiliate of Expedia? What's their business model? Get bought?

"Experience" from HEDNA Lisbon Conference

...
HotelMarketing.com has put out an original article summarizing comments from various speakers at HEDNA's Lisbon Conference at end of April: Henry Harteveldt from Forrester, Michael Ball from WORLDHOTELS, Mike Nelson of Orbitz, Heiko Siebert from Mövenpick and Marc Charron from Trip Advisor.

So I will summarize it even more and, as usual, write some flippant comment. :-)

Henry Harteveldt, VP & Principal Analyst @ Forrester Research:

- Hotel e-business is evolving from selling to engaging the customer and “To succeed, hoteliers need to fulfill the experience expected by customers, not just think of them as heads in a bed"

Oh come on.. They eat too... Seriously, "experience" is about the product. It is about the operations as well as the infrastructure as well as the product position of a hotel. E-business has very little control over that "experience". The control is with the Hotel Owners, Hotel Management Company, the General Manager, the EAM, and the Front Office Manager before it goes to e-business. I am not disagreeing with Forrester by any means, but "experience" is too easy to throw out there. Everyone has been telling us to differentiate our brands, don't become a commodity, and let people "experience the brand". This does not help e-business.

- Social computing, which Harteveldt calls the fifth generation of electronic distribution; “Travel plays a big role in social computing, making social computing a blend of marketing and distribution”

They did not tell me what the first 4 generation was but I guess travel agents, GDS, OTAs, etc. .. Anyway, integrating social computing into a hotel brand website? hmmm... "like maybe not". At least not anytime soon. For an OTA? It's a must have.

- The sixth generation for electronic distribution is mobile technology; “Travelers are an ideal group for mobile-based services and activities”

Ah, THAT's the 6th generation. I never knew. Anyway, this is bull as I wrote here. 1) people don't book hotel rooms and flights on their mobile (imagine filling in your details), 2) roaming data charges are TOO high because the telecoms are ripping us off, and 3) we are talking about users receiving info and offers WHILE ON THEIR TRIP. Us hoteliers, airlines, and online travel agents (which makes up a huge chunk of the travel industry) would prefer users to get offers and info BEFORE THEY MAKE THEIR TRIP and while they are planning their trip.

I agree that these people want these services and this M-info will be provided (possibly by OTAs), but it ain't "e-business". It will provide better "experience" i.e. more capex costs.


Michael Ball, CEO @ WORLDHOTELS:

Five important trends affecting hotel e-business. According to Ball, these trends are: 1) more demanding consumers; 2) more complex distribution channels; 3) changing business models where companies must give more but expect less in return; 4) an emphasis on technology and richer content; and 5) a change in the structure of hotel e-business.

1) is related to 2) and 4) ... and 2) and 3) is related to 5). So it is really only 2 trends right? Demanding costumers will want richer content and better ways to shop, and changing business models lead to more complex distribution channel will force hotel e-business to adapt.

“Five points to ponder.” First, don’t let opportunities for the hotel e-business get hijacked again. The industry must do a better job at managing downturns, says Ball. The other points are: 2) strive to simplify; 3) put distribution at the heart of your planning process; 4) recognize the need for capital expenditures on new technology; and 5) add the social agenda to your agenda, before the environmentalists and regulators do it for you.

1) Right on, brother. Don't let the OTAs get ahead of us... if we can. (see my post OTAs are smarter than us hoteliers.) 2) I always do. 3) I wish we had a heart ... and a planning process. 4) it's easier to pull teeth, and 5) this social is "going green" and not going "social network".


Mike Nelson, COO @ Orbitz Worldwide:

Are globalization and localization competing strategies? "No. You need to incorporate local and global to be successful," Nelson says.

It depends on what you are trying to sell I would say. For example with search engine, different markets uses different keywords - even in the same language. How you structure your PPC campaign and ad groups will affect the quality score and hence rankings and cost. But there are commonalities that you can implement across markets, like misspellings, long tail keywords, etc. Also we have to be mindful that some products (i.e. hotel brands) have different brand positioning in different market so you would have to be careful. YAAAWWWNNNN......


Heiko Siebert, VP Distribution @ Mövenpick Hotels & Resorts:

Shaping customers expectations is becoming crucial as customers look for an ‘experience’ rather than just a room.

YIKES!!! The word "experience" again. Yeah, that bloke booking a couple nights at my 45 year-old 3-star hotel in central London is looking to have an "experience", all right - but not at my hotel. He just wants a cheap room.

"No Joe, its about the service experience too!" you say? - Right, you mean the service offered by the Eastern Europeans in the UK, the mainland Chinese in Singapore, and the central Americans in the US? With their perfect command of the English language and 2 month's job "experience"? That service, right? Then I would say, "That's what we pay GMs for. They need to straighten out that service. What's this got to do with HEDNA and e-business?" HEDNA = Hotel Electronic Distribution Network Association

“Content will replace price as a deciding factor for customers”...But who then owns that content and the customers that are attracted by it? Is it the hotel or is it the online service? Siebert strongly believes that his hotel has ownership of its content and customers. But online services feel otherwise. Since this is an area of debate, the panel believes this is an area where HEDNA can make a substantial impact in the industry by developing a solution.

There is a debate in this day and age on "who owns the content?"?!@#$# THE AGE of the internet where music and videos and movies are "freely" distributed - left, right and center? You may legally own certain content, but once you put it on the web, good luck in enforcing that ownership.

1) We are in the hotel business. We sell rooms (oh and "experiences"). And we use content (words, pictures, videos) to sell our rooms (and "experiences"). The more people see them, the better (as long as they are positive of course). AND we are stuck on the ownership of the content issue? We are not recording labels, not movie production studios, and not struggling artists/actors. Content is not our core business.

2) Everyone in the chain - hoteliers and OTAs - need to provide their own UNIQUE content. Yes we may borrow from each other, but hoteliers know how to market their hotels better than anyone (they should anyway) and OTAs offers the choice, information and value that consumers look for. So hoteliers go and keeping on pushing out regular unique content about their properties and OTAs go get traveler reviews, city guides, etc. that will bring in traffic. If we all offer the same content (and if we can agree who would own it), then what's the value in each of us to the consumer? (P.S. Google hates duplicated content in case anyone has not noticed.)

3) And lastly, what kind of "solution" can HEDNA hope to come up with? Not a technical one for sure. A policy perhaps? One that all HEDNA members must abide by? What about non-HEDNA members? What about the 100,000 websites that are "affiliates" of HEDNA members? The entertainment industry is still battling with Digital Rights Management (DRM)... And THAT'S their bread and butter.


Marc Charron, MD Europe @ Trip Advisor:

Consumer generated content, which is more and more in demand, is all about a traveler’s experience, explains Marc Charron

ARGHHHH!!!! "Experience!@#$!#$@" I used to work for Discovery Channel, and back in 2000, our branding team all agreed that the word "experience" is overused and should be retired from our advertising and promotions campaigns. Almost a DECADE ago.

OK OK. Marc is talking about travelers posting up their adventure, exploits and challenges - after the fact. He is not talking about trying to promote an "experience"... OK.. I am calming down.

There’s an incredible reluctance by hotels to post consumer generated content, fearing that it will be negative. However, most people that take the time to write have positive comments about their travel experience.

Well we don't mind putting up the positive experiences, but we don't like the negative ones. You know it seems to go against our Marketing 101 course to put up product defaults or negatives feedback right next to the product that we are trying to sell. You don't see that at a retail store - except for warning labels on pharmaceutical products and cigarettes.

We are totally ok with OTAs having CGM on their sites, but yes, it should be within the hoteliers' responsibility to monitor and respond to feedback and comments properly. By "properly", I mean in an official capacity as the GM, EAM, or whatever. Treat these people as if they were standing in front of you. And if you are really confident in your ability to manage the CGM on TripAdvisor, or VirtualTourist, then - by all mean - link to them from your site. But beware that you do not want they to book from those sites (TripAdvisor = Expedia and VirtualTourist is everyone's affiliate).

Save that 15+% commission!!!

======

Oh that was a fun post.... definitely an "experience".

Joe. Out.

Proof: I coined "Consumer Computing Cloud"

...
Awesome!

Within half a day of my last posting on Consumer Computing Cloud, I now "own" the term on Google search with all 7 of 7 results pointing to this blog. See below (click to see larger image):


Alright alright... I know.. I know... don't get ahead of myself. It's not that hard to pick some phrase that has not been used - EVER before. Put a couple of references on a blog and let Googlebots do their work.

But hey, it's still fun! BTW Who the heck are those companies doing PPC on this term? It looks like they are going after %cloud computing% wildcard keyword match.

Have a good weekend.

"Consumer Computing Cloud"

...
So I have been talking about the future marketplace for Google and Microsoft(+Yahoo?) and what they would really be competing on (which is NOT search). I have taken to calling it "Consumer Computing Services". But Google has been referring to it as "Cloud computing"; see the Forbes' article called "Google's Cloud".

Forbes' explanation: "Cloud computing is a simple concept: Software and services are delivered over the Web and through a browser. No servers or client software to install. Available anytime, anywhere, from any device connecting to the Internet. Businesses call it software-as-a-service, or SaaS, but for most people, it's just the Web."

That's a pretty good concise explanation.

"Search engines are not the end but the beginning, like Edison's first light bulb illuminating a single room. Where information initially flowed in one direction, it now moves freely across both time and space. The increasing interactivity of life in the cloud creates a worldwide conversation, a multi-dimensional collaboration that seems endlessly possible."

Now we are getting a bit more ethereal (pun intended). Time and Space. Interactivity of life. Multi-dimensional collaboration. Is this a PH.D thesis?

Anyhow, in the CNBC interview with Eric Schmidt, which I covered earlier this week, he also mentions the "cloud".

So I give in. I am going to rename my coinage of "Consumer Computing Services" to "Consumer Computing Cloud". Which can also be known as "CCC", "C-Cubed" or "Triple C"; it definitely rings better. The term "consumer computing cloud" (in quotes) is not yet found on Google as of today (9 May 2008); hence I can lay claim to have coined this term. See result below:

In the days that follow, this blog entry should be listed on there as our friend spiderbots will come and read this page. I am going check using this link. Let's see if this term starts to catch on. Hahahahha.

Peace. Out.

Study: Most Facebook apps are silly, pointless

HAHAHAH.........

The title of the article from CNet is "Study reveals shocking truth: Most Facebook apps are silly, pointless".

"Shocking truth"???? It may be a shock to CNet, but I bet it is not shock to the millions of FaceBook users who wastes their time on FaceBook. Here's my post on why Social Networking = Social, NOT Working back in Feb of this year.

So according to the chart below by Flowing Data, roughly 14,000 of the 23,160 FaceBook apps fall under "Just for Fun", "Gaming", or "Sports" Category. We have yet to count in "Dating", "Chat", "Messaging", "Photos", "Fashion" and "Filesharing" which each have between 200 to 1800 apps.


Again, this is not me bashing Social Networks - I use them. I am just saying that people waste their companies' time on them.

Now from a brand advertisers perspective, this is a goldmine of niche marketing, or dare I say, "long-tail" marketing.

One thing to remember though, this is NOT a Google killer, and will never be. People go to social networks to be "social". They go to Google when they are looking for something. Advertise on the former and you are trying to get their attention when they are doing something else. With the latter, you are advertising when they want your product (or your competitor's product). The second one gets the better ROI every day. As I say, this is the difference between Online Marketing and Ecommerce, between Marketing and Sales, between Yahoo's business model and Amazon's business model.

CNBC's Interview of Google's CEO - Part 2

...
OK so continuing on from Part 1 with the really long interview that CNBC's Maria Bartiromo gave to Eric Schmidt last week...

Schmidt: And most people in most developed countries have a roughly 100 percent coverage of mobile phones. So it really is a tremendous phenomenon. Over the next three or four years, there'll be more than another billion or so mobile phones added. Eventually our numbers indicate that there'll be five or so billion mobile phones in a world of six billion or so. People, this is a phenomenon. It's an unprecedented reach, even greater than, for example, television, or even electricity in some cases. So that's a platform that we can exploit. Our mobile phone, both search traffic as well as advertising is growing very rapidly, and we think people will do more and more interesting things in mobile phones. And, I mean, small phones, big phones, big screens, things that don't look like a phone, things which are mobile. Furthermore, the telecommunications industry is helping because they're deploying billions of dollars of literally excess data capacity so these things will have fast networks wherever I go. One of the greatest things for me is whenever I fly somewhere, I open up and I open up my iPhone or my BlackBerry, and, boom, there's everything in my world as I've landed in a country I've never been in. It's a remarkable achievement.

Bartiromo: Yeah. What needs to happen before we actually get to that world that you're talking about? In other words, do we need to see the providers create different screens? I mean, do you need a larger screen to access some of this data? How do we get there?

Well, Eric's already got the best mobile surfing product on the market right now.. the iPhone. And hmm... he ALSO carries a BlackBerry. I am still waiting for the 3G iPhone and also 3D holographic displays from my mobile. Those mini/pico projectors are coming.

Anyhow, they go on to talk about small fingers and large screens but nothing about how Googles plans to tackle mobile advertising. Yes they have Google Maps on Nokia and iPhones and yes marrying the location based searches are great stuff. Where's the business model? It's a secret.

Bartiromo: Let's--that transitions right to the rest of the world. Global has been really the hot spot for Google. Tell me how you keep that going. Where are the biggest opportunities for Google right now outside of the United States?

Even reading this transcript I can totally see Maria smirking at the whole Comscore/Google incident, where ComScore's US data were used by Wall Street "analysts" as the basis for projecting Google's 1Q08 revenue (which went up instead of staying flat because of Google's international revenue). See Magid Abraham (ComScore's CEO) blog post here.

People... Trying to use Comscore's Marketing Research data to predict a company's financial performance is like using Nielsen's PeopleMeter TV data to determine share prices of Disney, TimeWarner, and GE (NBC owner). Those "analysts" are NUTS!!!!


Dr. Schmidt: Well, first place, the Internet is growing faster outside the United States than in the United States. Also advertising online growth rates are higher outside the United States than they are in the United States. You've got--and of course you have a weak dollar strategy --because the US has a very weak dollar--so that also helps. For all of those reasons, revenue outside of the United States should grow dramatically over the next while, and that's great.In our case, the biggest difference--and, in fact, perhaps the only difference--between people in the US and other people is language. Other than that, simple rule: Everybody wants the same thing. They want fashion, they want information, they want products, they want e-commerce, they want it now, they want to have fun, they want to use credit cards or debit cards. So we work very hard to make that true globally. I think most of the large, successful US corporations, the ones that you certainly cover all day, all are going to see that kind of growth if they'll well positioned internationally.

Eric's oversimplifying things there. Online Advertising growth rates are higher outside the US because they are further behind on the evolutionary timeline. UK is almost caught up. Europe is 50% to 80% there depending on country. Asia is schizo with countries ranging from 10% to 90% there depending on how you measure and what you measure. Mobile is nuts in Japan. Broadband and eCommerce is nuts in Korea, but they like to buy in Korean (duh!).

So going forward, people will look for more things and buy more things online, but they are going to prefer things in their own languages. The early adopter and Gen Y's will be somewhat comfortable surfing and transacting in English, but your Gen Xers and babyboomers will not (and they are the ones coming online and on mobile). So eCommerce needs to get local!

Bartiromo: What's happening there, though? You're number one in every market except a handful in Asia. How do you break in, and really with a solid foothold.

Schmidt: Well, in each case, they're different. In China, of course, there's all the issues of regulation and censorship. We delayed our entry for good reasons, and as a result we're not number one there. In some of the other countries, it's because we didn't get the language right. It turns out Asian languages often have what you and I would think of are nonsensical ways in which words are put together. So, for example, all the words in Thai are put into one very long sentence. They don't have word breaks. So developing the technology to do that right and then search and index against it took us a little while longer. We've now addressed that, so we think we should do well now.

Like I said. People want local languages. In any case, Google is in a prime position. Their business model is based on getting computers to analyze what people do and their preferences. They don't really have to understand the language and they don't have to set up an online shop. As I mentioned in Part 1: "Then they become online retailers without any warehouses, order processing and payment processing headaches and overheads - and without any customer servicing or warranties to worry about!!!!!"

Bartiromo: Let me--let me go back to something on the DoubleClick acquisition. Are you seeing any pushback from some of the advertisers who say, `Look'--the ad agencies who say, `We're already spending a ton of money on Google. Why do we need to spend more on all this other stuff away from search?' How are you going to get them to devote more money to display, to audio, to print and TV ventures, which are--and everything else you're--and the display ads, obviously.

Schmidt: Because we earn it. Because you can measure it. We never want people to give us--give us money that we don't earn and that we can't prove that they--that they--that it really provides value.

So Eric Schmidt was watching TV in the 80's. Remember the Smith Barney commercial's with the two old guys from Eddie Murphy's "Trading Places" - "We make money the old fashion way - we EARN it!".

But goes on to say: We measure it. We know where that marketing dollar is going, how many people saw your ad, how many interacted with it, how many people came back later, etc. etc. DoubleClick was infamous for that in the late 90's where they were collecting a little bit TOO MUCH info. But how much of that will be going on now, that Google + Doubleclick ties up their cookies???? Scary.

Bartiromo: Right, because it's so measurable. That's why you don't really see a real dry up in the advertising during a recession.

Schmidt: That's our hope. Our hope is that, again, in a recession, people would say, `Look, I'm going to put my money where I know my money's being well spent.' Now, we don't know that we're in a recession, but if we were, we hope that's what will happen.

Let's collectively cross our fingers and hope that the Marketing folks see it the same way.

Bartiromo: As a steward of technology and innovation your entire career, what would you say is the most innovative thing out there? What's the next big thing, from your standpoint?

Schmidt: I've always thought that the scariest piece of innovation is knowledge understanding and language translation. I don't understand how it works, but to watch a computer--literally watch it--read something in English, dissect what it's about, translate it into a language that I don't speak and having that other person say, `Wow, that's incredible,' to me, that's magic. And it isn't magic, it's just very good computer science, very good artificial intelligence, very good physics. And that's where we are. So the things that are most impressive to me are the things where the computer does something that nobody could do, literally translate things 100 language in parallel, summarize something for me, take me to something which I didn't know I was interested in but knows that I cared about it. And we're right on the cusp of that.

Semantic Web. Better start reading up on it. Some are calling it meta-meta-data. But it boils down to Google and the like categorizing content on the web so that it can better "guess" at what YOU want when you search for it. Actually, the hard part about it is that it involves content owners providing this semantic categorization based on standards. Digg.com says they have just done this.

Seems like it is going to be great for the Search Engine Optimization companies out there. I mean, which company is going to do this themselves? which ones even understand it? They will just shove it under "SEO".

Schmidt: ... We're really focused on this huge opportunity before us, which is automating the trillion-dollar industry that is advertising. We won't get all of that, for sure, but we should be able to get a significant part of that over the lifetime, certainly of my service to the company. And our goal is to build this into an institution that lasts for many, many years and is the greatest innovator in technology in this space.

Bartiromo: So the biggest priorities right now, continuing to access that potential huge, huge advertising market. What else?

Like I said before, Google wants the advertising dollar. Not the eCommerce dollar. They don't want to have to build physical products or hold physical inventory of other people's products.

Schmidt: Well, our number one priority is end-user--end-user happiness. Literally, are people happy with the results that they get using Google search? So it's literally search, and every day we bring out new improvements and indices that are--taxonomies that are understanding of language, more content, bigger--all of the things that make Google such a great search experience. That's our number-one priority, even more important, for example, than advertising. The way we pay for it, of course, is by improving our advertising solutions, as you described. That's what we do in the core. Our next big play is in this applications phase, where we think people spend a lot of time online with information, and we can help them, whether it's their e-mail, which is an easy one to understand, but what about their personal data? What about their spreadsheets and their calendar, keeping it all there? And we can help them search. We can solve the problem of `how do I live in this digital lifestyle?' If we do that right, they can do it on mobile phones as well as at home, in their office and on a Mac and on a PC, and it all works great.

Well that priority works well for me as a user and it has worked well for them. When it comes to advertising, what counts is the eyeballs. When it comes to owning a media empire, what counts is the eyeballs. And whether we realize it or not, Google is a really just huge media company, but one that understands today's technology, tomorrow's technology, human behavior, interface design, and more and more the advertising industry's evolution.

Not Naisbitt's "High Tech - High Touch" (which is more Apple), but more "High Tech - Mass Touch".

CNBC's Interview of Google's CEO - Part 1

...
CNBC's tech sweetheart Maria Bartiromo interviews Eric Schmidt on Wednesday 30th April. Here are some highlights IMHO....

Schmidt: ... In our case, we focus on quality, and we have a very simple model. If we show fewer ads that are more targeted, those ads are worth more. So we're in this strange situation where we show a smaller number of ads and we make more money because we show better ads. And that's the secret of Google.

He forgot to add that more targeted ads mean that advertisers will compete and try to outbid each other and drive up the price of the ads. Hence, "those ads are worth more". Not strange at all. It's economics. And it's not a secret. Well not any more.

Bartiromo: ... what Mary Meeker was saying. She's saying, `Look, it could be that they're actually benefiting from a recession because they're monetizing the ads better.'

Schmidt: There's been--you you know, if you were running a business today, you would be looking very carefully at where is your marketing spend going? And we think that you'll choose to put your marketing spend on the thing that's most measurable, the thing that's most, you know--because you can always defer a branding campaign that may or may not work, but you want to get those customers and those leads right now, and that's what we do.

Those of us in Digital Marketing have been saying this for years. And we are all hoping that Mary Meeker and eSchmidt is right: Digital will do better in a downturn. It seems very straightforward; when you need to be more careful with your marketing dollar, you should spend it where you can see results and KPIs. However, many marketers can not tear themselves away from Print and TV. And obviously the big ad agencies don't want to move away from that cashcow either. So you got Digital and Traditional people in the same ad agency telling clients to do different things - fighting for that same dollar. It's not going to be pretty.

Bartiromo: It's no secret that Google owns search, but what about the display ads? Is it--is it fair to say that's sort of up for grabs? You know, you've got DoubleClick, Microsoft has aQuantis. It's up for--up for grabs, that part of the business.

Schmidt: Well, it's fair to say that that Google is not the leader in display ads, but our customers want to be able to purchase text ads and display ads and other advertising in one purchasing bundle, and the combination of the tools that we're developing, plus the DoubleClick integration acquisition and so forth, allows us to offer a single product for those advertisers. So we think that will help us with our display ads competitiveness. We think our technology is better. And so really now it's a question of earning those customers' respect and knowledge.

1) Recently Wired, now CNBC. GOOGLE OWNS SEARCH.

2) Eric humbly says that Google is not the leader in display ads, but with DoubleClick, they (not so humbly) have the best technology to combine text and display ads on a single platform.

3) Customers want to purchase text and display ads and other advertising in one bundle perhaps, BUT not from necessarily from ONE VENDOR. So yes, GOOG better earn those customers' respect and knowledge.

4) So in this scenario, ad agencies are then reduced to ad creative and media scheduling. OUCH! Media buying? Who needs that when you (like us) have a Google MyClientCenter (MCC) account?

Bartiromo: So what do we know about Microsoft and Yahoo!? Tell me this. I mean, I know that, you know, we're waiting on possible news from Microsoft, possibly, a hostile--we don't know what's going to happen next. But what kind of a challenge would Microsoft/Yahoo! be for Google?

Schmidt: Well, today we actually do not know what's going on. We read in the press that there's discussions and we'll see what they decide to do. If they go ahead and the merger's ultimately successful, it would be possible for Microsoft to integrate some of the properties and essentially eliminate consumer choice, particularly in electronic mail, instant messaging, the things where they have 80 or 90 percent market share, and that's a sweet spot for Microsoft in its ability to eliminate choice.

Eric is just skirting around the question. Not giving away what he really thinks. Like I said about this whole MicroHoo! and Google thing: it's all about "Consumer Computing Services". See here and here. I coined this term back in Feb.

But Maria digs in and brings it out from Dr. Schmidt. (The transcript refers to him as "Schmidt" and "Dr. Schmidt" while Maria calls him Eric. Schizophrenic I tell you.)

Bartiromo: Mm-hmm. And, of course, Google has been getting all these new killer apps, whether it's Gmail or Maps or, you know, spreadsheets. Ultimately is the game to compete direct, head on, with Microsoft?

Schmidt: Well, Google is actually trying to be an innovator, and we're always concerned about competition. We have found that if we can simply invent a brand-new product that really solves a problem that really does matter to you, we can get your business, we can get your attention, we can get your traffic and your customers or what have you. We're trying in a new thing called cloud computing to offer very powerful Web services that do the common things--e-mail, word processing and so forth--where the data's kept in the cloud, it's kept by somebody else, it's managed by professionals. You don't need to worry about where you keep all that information. We like that model a lot. We're getting traction. It is a competitive threat to other companies, but we think it's a technological breakthrough.

So Eric obfuscates the issue (yes he watches X-Files). Obfuscate means "to make obscure or unclear", and - classic Eric - he obfuscates with .... cloud computing!!!!! hahahahahha...

What he really wants to say is:
"YES!!! Google and Microsoft will be competing for these Consumer Computing Services - direct, head on, 'in your face', 'winner takes all', 'bust yo ass!' - kind of way. Because they are EVIL, and we are not!"

Schmidt: We believe the best products are coming out this year. And they're new products. They're not announced. They're not just putting in-line ads in the things that people are trying. But we have a number -- and, of course, Google is an innovative place. The Yahoo! team are trying various new forms of advertising, ones which are much more participative, much more creative, much more--much more interesting in and of themselves. Google believes that advertising itself has value. The ads literally are valuable to consumers. Not just to the advertisers, but the consumers.

Bartiromo: They want to look at them.

Schmidt: When they're targeted. When they're the right ad for what you're doing or what you care about.

Alright.. so YaGoog is colluding to do what FaceBook fcuked up with Beacon, but do it right this time. Don't publish the freaking data about what they purchased to their "friends". That's valuable data... that's like throwing money away. Keep that data, build up their profile and keep serving the right ads. Ads that will go beyond CPC model and into CPA model. CPA model that will eventually go into Commission model. Then they become online retailers without any warehouses, order processing and payment processing headaches and overheads - and without any customer servicing or warranties to worry about!!!!!

Schmidt: ... We have pointed out, and I'll repeat again, that the whole social networking space has been harder for us to monetize--that is, develop advertising businesses again--than some of the other--than some of the other spaces that we're in. It has to do what people are doing. When you think about it, you're in a social network, you're looking at people's photos, you're figuring out where your friends are. You're not as likely to be purchasing a new car at the same time or purchasing clothes or purchasing a book or what have--whatever business that you're in. So the development of the advertising tools and techniques, literally the platform, has been more difficult than we have thought. But we're working on it, and we're hopeful.

So besides telling us what we already know. He is also sending a message to all those ex-Google defectors who have left to join FaceBook: "Those new shares ain't worth much.. MWAH...MWAH...MWAH...."

Bartiromo: You've got $12 billion in cash right now?

Schmidt: A little more than that.

So according to Finance Y!, the cash position is at USD 12.13Billion. So Dr. Schmidt was not really right about the "little more than that" or is he? The Y! Balance Sheet from YE 2007 shows:

$ 6 billion in Cash and Cash Equivalents, $8.1 billion in Short Term Investments.

How much of these Short Term Inv can be converted to cash as needed?

Anyway... This a long interview with lots of nuggets. Part 2 coming up later.

"Travelers don't believe hotel marketers anymore"

As if they ever did!

This was an original piece on Hotelmarketing.com.

"They don’t trust our pictures or our adjectives. They believe each other, writes hospitality industry consultant Carol Verret."

OK so I know we are all on the Web 2.0/Travel 2.0 bandwagon but isn't this a little sensationalist? A good chunk of our visitors check out the pictures gallery, and we get millions of page views per month. The 3/4 million of visitors per month read the content on our pages and make booking. We had the best quarter ever in 1Q2008 with our direct to brand bookings online. So they have not gone away.

So please relax....

"In the hospitality industry, the customer is less likely to blindly believe the ‘marketer’s’ story as there are so many ways to access stories written by people like them about the experience they had or want to have."

Yes, Web 2.0 and customer review certainly do influence consumers and also makes hotel operations and experience more transparent to the consumer. They know better and better what they would be getting for their value.

In actuality, this drives the capitalist supply and demand economy and "survival of the fittest" mentality. If you have a crappier room than your neighbors, then you should charge less... period. If you have not spend money on renovation in the last .. oh, say ... 15 years, then you should not be charging the same as that new Hilton with LCD TVs, club floors, and new bedding.

They quoted Seth Godin: "… marketers aren’t really liars… they’re just really good at telling stories that customers want to believe."
The thing about the hotel industry is that our product is as much the physical infrastructure as it is the service. There must be a balance between what we naturally exaggerate in order to sell/market and what we deliver. And delivery is the problem now with staffing crunch and higher expectations because of higher ADRs.

"The good news is that price isn’t the only driver the bad news is that our customers don’t believe hotel marketers anymore – they don’t trust our pictures or our adjectives. They believe each other!"

I am not sure about that. People have always believed in word of mouth, but the web is full of crap. There are tons of uninformative reviews and it takes a while to sift the good from the bad. And pictures still help, if nothing than give users a view of the hotel or room. Consumers however do understand that the hotels need to "put their best foot forward".

In my own personal searches, I always look at both the hotel's site and other sites. Consumers are just doing more research and they can do it so much easier now with the web. They have lots of choices. As the flight attendants often say over the loudspeaker as you are deplaning, "Thank you for flying with XXX Airways. We understand you have many choices, and we appreciate your business. See you again."

Maybe we should get our Front Desk staff to say something similar as well....

Google and eCommerce(?)

Another late night out, so of course, I can't sleep - which means I surf and - at times like these - blog.

Anyhow, I ran across this article in eWeek with the above title. The lead-in was:

"The better question might be, what doesn't Google know about us, according to Gartner analysts."

A couple of things, they highlighted:-

- Google knows a lot of what people do online and their surfing habits as they have access to exabytes of unencrypted data and enough computing power to process them. "Clearly, Google knows the behavior patterns of its users. Do a search and the company will tailor ads based on your searches. Do some more searches, open your Gmail account and you will find about four paid links related to those searches. The company also knows a lot about the computers where its Google Apps are installed."

- BUT there is one major area that they have "scarcely touched" and that is eCommerce transaction - which is HTTPS encrypted.

- They have Google Checkout which handles about 1% of "what is sold on the internet" but they are missing out on the other 99%

- Gartner then puts forth: "think about what e-commerce giant Google might be inclined to target to fill out its information and online ad holes. Will it be Expedia? Amazon? eBay?"

OK so while I agree that this would be a scary premise, I don't necessary think that this will happen. At this point in time, being an eCommerce storefront is not what Google wants to be.

I mean - they are doing fine - actually pretty damn good - at selling advertising. That's USD 12billion per year good. They bought DoubleClick to help get into the brand advertising since they already more or less own search advertising. So strategically, they want to increase their share of the total USD 44 billion (2008) of online advertising spend (this number is according to ZenithOptimedia. )

So from Google's perspective, they are currently only getting a quarter of the pie, and there is much room to grow in the "traditional" online advertising on major ad portals (and minor ones too.) And since this space is still fragmented, Google can dive in with all of their computing power and clever gen-y scientists to optimize the efficiency AND measurability of these ad networks.

And of course, if they tie that into their search marketing platform, Google can then give advertisers an almost full, 360 degree picture of their online advertising campaigns.

Now THAT, my friends, is what you should be wary of.

They may eventually start to want to own eTailers to satisfy the Wall Street shareholders to keep on increasing their revenue (by acquisition), but that is not yet the case (I don't think.). To do so now would invite cries from all segments of the economy - consumers, business, and governments. But never say "Never".

Millennium & Copthorne wins Ad-Tech SEO Awards

It's official as of last week's Ad-Tech Conference in San Francisco.

EmarketingEye's SEO campaign for Millennium & Copthorne Hotels has won the 2008 Limelight Award for "Best Search Engine Optimization Strategy/Campaign". There is a cool full-flash, SEO-unfriendly, and long-download-time-from-asia site here.

The "trophy" award looks like THIS!

This award is dedicated to all those people who said:

"What!@!# You are giving you SEO work to a small start-up instead of a big agency like us?"

"What!!@# You are doing SEO with a company in SRI LANKA!?!? Is it safe there?"

People... This is the information age. As long as you have decent internet access (which Sri Lanka has), you can participate in the Internet economy. As long as you have a decent education (which Sri Lanka provides), then you can participate in the knowledge-based workforce. As long as you are hardworking (which Sri Lankans are), you can succeed. Virtusa did it. MAS Holdings did it. So can EmarketingEye.

"The World is Flat". Peace, out.

Microsoft Bought Farecast!

In my post earlier this week, I speculated that the secret buyer for Farecast might be:

Kayak/Sidestep (40% chance)
Google (30% chance)
NewsCorp (20% chance)
Others (10% chance)

Well according to the Seattle PI which broke the original news about the purchase, the confirmed buyer is Microsoft. There goes my predictive ability. According to them, a Microsoft spokesperson said:

"We are pleased to announce that we have acquired Farecast, a Seattle-based smart travel search engine, and we welcome them to the Microsoft family. Farecast has been a partner of ours on MSN Travel and we look forward to working closely with the Farecast team to incorporate and apply its technology in new and interesting ways."

There is also a blog post from Hugh Dean confirming this.

I should have seen this coming since Farecast and MSN have worked closely. See this press release last year:

MSN and Farecast.com Launch Free Airfare Predictions, Planning Tools

But I thought that after Microsoft sold off Expedia to InterActive Corp years ago, they were getting out of the travel biz. I guess that was before their OSG (Online Services Group) was re-energized by Ray Ozzie, Microsoft's Chief Software Architect.

So it looks like Microsoft is taking out its checkbook and getting into the consumer space even more. And purchases like this will certainly push Yahoo! shareholders into a loveless marriage with the Ultimate Geek!

The game just gets more interesting every day.....

"The search wars are over, and Google has won."

I made a similar comment when blogging about the MicroHoo? merger back in Feb. ("The search engine game is over. GOOGLE WON.")

But it is now OFFICIAL, because it is printed in Wired Magazine. See here.

I had postulated that Google and Microsoft are in this fight over Yahoo! for the future of "Consumer Computing Services".

In this Wired article however, they have a different theory:

"Microsoft's Bid for Yahoo Is All About Big-Budget Brand Advertising" was the title of the article.
"But the good news for all of Google's rivals is that online advertising is about much more than search. The new battleground is display — the kind of graphics-intensive spots that were left for dead after the Internet bust — and the emerging category of video."

Great stuff. While I still think on the tech side they are going after those services, advertising is a major source of revenue. For any media owner (TV, PayTV, Radio, yahoo, etc), there are two main sources of revenue: Subscription and Advertising. Consumer Computing Services follows the Subscription revenue model whereas this article suggests that adverting - brand advertising in particular - will be the main source.

"... ultimately it comes down to advertising. Web advertising is in the midst of a metamorphosis. As television implodes, marketing chiefs are turning to the Net to create branding initiatives. They know you can't build a brand with little text ads that pop up next to search results."

I would have to agree with that, but search engines and content networks are more targeted rather than shotgun advertising approach.

"Web advertising, which passed $20 billion last year in the US, is expected to surpass $60 billion in four years, and display and video ads will account for more than a third of the total."

"mmmm... money" - says Homer.

So what would MicroHoo! look like in the brand advertising space?

"What Yahoo brings to the table is numbers: It is the world's most popular Internet publisher, delivering Web pages to nearly 140 million people a month in the US alone. Yahoo also delivers ads to a vast network of independent sites, increasing its advertising reach to 85 percent of US Internet users, according to comScore. Microsoft reaches 56 percent of the US Internet population through MSN and Windows Live, but it still lacks credibility with Madison Avenue. Put it together with Yahoo, however, and you have a scale that even Google can't match."

I don't disagree, but I can't help but refer back to the classic advertising problem of "Half of all my advertising is wasted. I just don’t know which half!" You spend money on brand advertising but you don't know what works because you can't always track people to the ultimate interaction with a brand.

But online brand advertising is soooo much more measurable than offline advertising --- with the right analytics tool - like Omniture. So the shift in ad dollars from offline to online will accelerate as the Google and MicroHoos get their platforms into shape.

Farecast sold to unknown buyer at USD75 million value

A) The only source of news for this (at the moment) is the Seattle Post Intelligencer. They seem to have gotten it first hand but no more info.

B) The CEO, Hugh Crean , declined to comment on Sunday.

C) Speculations - echoed by Hotelmarketing.com - is that the "one natural choice would be Expedia"

Well that was it for any "news", so let's spin up the rumor mill:

1) Expedia, Orbitz, and Travelocity all would love to get their grubby hands on this web property, but I think USD 75million is cheap. The FareCast founders would demand a higher price for their scruples. So I do not think anyone of them managed to charm this fair maiden.

2) Right on the FareCast website in the About Us section: "We Support Suppliers... We are committed to supporting airlines and hotels. We strive to help our suppliers lower distribution costs and build customer value." So going with an OTA is like "going to the Dark Side."

I think there are only two suitors that FareCast would not mind dancing with:

Firstly, the Kayak/Sidestep merged entity that I blogged about here and here. Together, they would make a potent force. What Kayak/Sidestep missed in their offering is what FareCast has: an algorithm and data to PREDICT fares. What a ménage à trois this would be. There is no inherent conflict of philosophy (be nice to suppliers). The three together would be a powerful meta search engine indeed. Powerful enough to demand ... say.. USD 1.5billion or so from the second possible suitor..... I'll give you a hint:

"Don't be evil."

Yep, if it's not Kayak/Sidestep, then it may very well be Google. FareCast's prediction engine is quite attractive and perfectly in line with Google's overall direction to foretell or create the future. The religious belief of "Don't be evil" can easily tie in with "We Support Suppliers" and wouldn't Google want to work directly with suppliers too? And what start-up would not want to join Google's work force and enjoy all the benefits that are tailored to this Gen-Y workforce?

Lastly, there is a "dark horse" that may be involved here. Remember bezurk.com? Remember that they "received investment from and sold a minority stake to News Digital Media, the digital media arm of Australia-based News Limited." And News Limited belongs to...

... you guessed it...

News Corp. Rupert Murdoch is gettin' in the game people. He can't let Barry Diller have ALL the fun with the travel industry. This charming, genteel old man may be able to convince the fair maiden that he supports her naïve belief of "We support suppliers", as New Corp does not have stake in any OTAs. We will have to see...

=====

Well that was a bit of fun speculation. I would say 40% chance that it is Kayak/Sidestep, 30% chance that it is Google and 20% chance that it is News Corp. The balance 10% are OTAs and whatever other flotsam and jetsam (i.e. vulture venture capitalists) out there.

Google & Friends need more power!

Alright remember the mentions in my posts about Google put buildings and server farms near powerplants? This was in Google vs MicroHoo? and in Consumer Computing Services.

Now there is evidence that Microsoft, Yahoo! and Ask.com have done the same thing along the Columbia River in Washington State, and Google is credited with starting this new "arms race".
Here is the article from Harpers with more details. It's entitled: "Keyword: Evil"

With a title like that, this article is obviously targeting Google's efforts. It is written by Ginger Strand who is the author of "Inventing Niagara: Beauty, Power, & Lies".

Google's recently announced plans "to develop a gigawatt of new renewable energy" is questioned as they also have many other negotiations to draw energy direct from the grid (near power stations) at a lower cost. The article also puts questions on Google's tactics of getting tax breaks, state givebacks and subsidized power: "YouTube is bankrolled by us."

Well, we ARE getting gmail, Google Docs, YouTube, Picasa, Blogger, etc without paying upfront. These things are worth something...

The "arms race" points to all these companies' need to "compete to offer software, music, and videos over the Web in the new era if 'cloud computing'."

"Even if Google offsets its own energy use with green power or carbon credits, it cannot guarantee that its competitors will do the same. The company's motto is perhaps due for an addendum: 'Lead others not into temptation'."

This is not realistic. It is capitalism no matter what their current or future motto says. They have to remain competitive and that means on costs as well as services.

This is a great article for highlighting these issues but there are no solutions. (Nuclear anyone?).

"American data centers consumed more power than American televisions." Scary thought, but less people are watching TV now right? And they are buying Plasma TVs and LCD TVs which hog up less energy.

SIDENOTE: Heard from the last Web Wednesday Singapore - "The new color of the Green movement is blue.".

Microhoo! Courtship Continues a la Meatloaf

So there is a flurry of activity over the last week between these two lovebirds.

5 April 2008 - Wired has "Microsoft Threatens to Go Hostile on Yahoo". According to Microsoft, since Yahoo! did not respond to its offer back in Feb, the jilted lover wants to enter formal talks with his love. If not, then he will go to talk to her mommy and daddy directly:

"If we have not concluded an agreement within the next three weeks, we will be compelled to take our case directly to your shareholders, including the initiation of a proxy contest to elect an alternative slate of directors for the Yahoo! board. The substantial premium reflected in our initial proposal anticipated a friendly transaction with you. If we are forced to take an offer directly to your shareholders, that action will have an undesirable impact on the value of your company from our perspective which will be reflected in the terms of our proposal."

The press release from the Microsoft here.

Also: "During these two months of inactivity, the Internet has continued to march on, while the public equity markets and overall economic conditions have weakened considerably, both in general and for other Internet-focused companies in particular. At the same time, public indicators suggest that Yahoo!’s search and page view shares have declined."

Translation: When you come out into the light, your age shows. We know what you look like and take the one-carat diamond that we offered. 'cos you should only be getting 3/4 carat.

========
7 April 2008 - The lovely Yahoo! maiden (choke. choke. aheh..ugh..) responds with a "Dear Steve" letter. Jerry is still flirting. Y! did not do a "Dear Mr. BALLmer" (mocking, superior tone signifying "oh pleeeaase, go away already!") or a "Dear Stephen" (formal, genteel way of asking for "mo' money mo' money MOFO!". A "Dear Steve" is like "I know I am up there in age and past my prime, but you gotta give me some respect ... and some mo' money mo' money MOFO!" See the letter here.

Jerry signs of the letter with: "we will not allow you or anyone else to acquire the company for anything less than its full value."

Translation: "Mo' money. You may be rich, but you are still a geek. Geeks need to pay a premium for pretty ladies. After all, at my age, I need Botox and some skillful scalpels to keep me pretty. And that don't come cheap here in the Valley, honeychild. This ain't Seattle."

===========

Anyway, I am listening to Meatloaf on my iPhone right now and it seems appropriate to this situation.

As Meatloaf (i.e. Microsoft) sang: "I want you. I need you. But I ain't never gonna love you.... Two out of three ain't bad."

Come on Yahoo!... Can't you see Paradise By The Dashboard Lights?

We (Millennium & Copthorne) have a new boss

Yup! it is all over the wires now. Richard Hartman has joined Millennium & Copthorne Hotels as Chief Executive Officer. See coverage below.

Yahoo UK newswire

TimesOnline.co.uk

Telegraph.co.uk

It seems that the stock has gone up slightly in the last day or so.

But alas, I don't own any of it.

marriott.com 2007 online revenues at USD 5.2 billion

This was reported in the Digital Life section of the Singapore Straits times (registration required).

"Marriott.com rings up the tills"

- In 2008, Marriott.com achieved sales of USD 5.2billion which represents a 28% increase over 2006.

JN: Alright so we did not do USD 5.2 billion. We kinda did 1% of that. But hey we got 50% increase over 2006. B-okay?

- George Corbin, VP of eCommerce: "Five years ago, online sales contributed to 5-8 percent of our revenue. Last year, it was 20%."

JN: I would have to assume that these are direct sales excluding any OTA sales. The industry is expected to average 28% in TOTAL online sales in 2007.

- Marriott.com's booking is at "2,000 per hour, and more bookings are done online than through the phone".

JN: D@mn Yo! I would be lucky to have that many reservations PER DAY! OK. so they got 3,000 properties versus M & C's 90. So let's see, by their standards, we should be gettin' :
2000 res per hour X (90 hotels / 3000 hotels) X 24 hour per day = 1,440 reservations per day.

JN: We have a got a long way to go. Oh yes, would be nice to have a better brand like Marriott too.

- GC again: "We are the eighth largest Internet Consumer retail site and we actually sell more than HP and Dell on their Websites"

JN: I wonder where IHG is then. I would assume they do more...

- Over 70% of customers are actually registered members of its rewards programme.

JN: That's one for you CRM peeps. Read it and weep - 'cos I am.

- The confirmation/welcome email "also has information about local attractions, travel alerts and a virtual concierge service which lets customers personalise their stay."

JN: Huh...huh... WAAAAHHHH.... WAAAHHHHH... I want.... I want.... WAAAAAHHHHH...

JN: Sorry about that. Envy is one of the seven deadly sins. I have been lusting after those functionalities too. Ok so that's two. But we have been too lazy to do it (sloth). In any case, we don't need it anyway (pride). Maybe Greed will eventually help us get there. hehehehe...

- GC: "The customer is interacting with an interface that is 35cm by 35cm and that drives over USD 5 billion a year. That space has very big impact."

JN: Could not agree more. Move over Walmart. Online is measuring "shelfspace" by millions of $ per cm, not hundreds of dollars per foot.

Millennium & Copthorne in SEO and PPC Awards Final

We have been working hard over the last year on our Search Engine Marketing (and yes SEM = PPC + SEO by Wikipedia definition)...

Or rather we have been working hard with our SEO agency and our PPC agencies on SEM. And we are being recognized for it.

It's "awards season", baby!

1) ad:tech San Francisco conference will feature the ad:tech 2008 Awards. Millennium & Copthorne is a finalist in:

=====
Best Search Engine Optimization Strategy/Campaign

• ESPN Breaking News: Mitchell Report, SMG Search
• Lincoln Educational Services, iCrossing
• Millennium & Copthorne SEO Campaign, eMarketingEye (Pvt) Ltd

=====

We have been working with eMarketingEye for a year now and the results are great. Our organics traffic has grown by 84% since they began their magic. And honestly, their reports are the clearest with the best methodology I have seen. I would pay them for the reports alone.

2) Travolution Awards 2008 has released their shortlist, and we are on it. NetBooster runs our PPC campaigns for Europe and other locations. Here is the list for our nominated award:

=====
MARKETING AND INNOVATION AWARDS
Best Agency for Search Engine Optimisation

• Netbooster for Millennium & Copthorne Hotels
• Webcertain for Icelandair
• Occupancy Marketing for VisitScotland.com
• Propellernet for Sovereign Holidays
• Greenlight for Monarch
• Neutralize for JustTheFlight Mobile
• BigMouthMedia for SuperBreak
• iCrossing for Alamo
• Latitude for Haven Holidays
  

===========

The Netbooster PR engine is at work about this shortlisting. NetBooster is very good for PPC in the UK. We have also begun working with them on the Affiliation network.

I think we have a decent chance at both of these awards considering the amount of work we put in and the results we have garnered.

OK.. OK.. the agencies also put in a lot of work...

Well... OK.. OK... they did most of the "heavy lifting"...

BUT, they could not have done it without us... so there. ;-)

Anyway, ad:tech Awards will be announced on 15th April in San Fran and Travolution Awards will be announced on 24th April. Keeping our fingers crossed.