It's Fixed in the Next Release - Marketing

Viral Marketing from a Venture Capital Company?

nospam@example.com (Alan Langford) — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 12:56:08 -0600

Two interesting things about viral marketing:

In a lot of cases, you can't even be sure if there was originally a marketing intent behind it.
Just about any business can wind up as the subject of a viral "buzz".

That's any business, even including a Sand Road Venture Capital firm. Take a look at this "Anti-Portfolio" from Bessemer Venture Partners.

I've had that link sent to me via IM twice today. That's buzz.

Why does it work? It's true, it's funny, and it's out of the box. Every VC I've met to date seems to like to put forward the image of near-prescient infallibility. Openly admitting to your mistakes, and naming names is an utter reversal of this image-making. It is so novel and unusual that it's immedately worth passing along. Not only that but it instantly humanizes the entire firm and makes them seem like the sorts of people you'd like to pitch to first.

Its both superb and brilliant — be it intentional or not.

OpenProj: Proprietary Spin Meets Open Source Product

nospam@example.com (Alan Langford) — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:56:34 -0600

Notification of the 1.0 release of OpenPrjoj came through my news feed recently. The contents were a typical press release. The release quickly gets to making the statement "Projity announced the initial OpenProj beta in the Fall, over 200,000 users joined the beta testing in over 132 countries." Now this is interesting, because a news item just five days previous claims "OpenProj has now been downloaded over 200,000 times with deployments accelerating around the world."

It seems to me that someone has drawn an equivalence between "downloads" and "beta testers". What they can really claim is "200,000 tire kickers" or without the metaphor, "200,000 evaluations".

I can speak to this because I'm one of the people who downloaded it. I have to say that I was impressed, both with the concept and with the obvious level of effort that's been put into it.

I used it to import a Project file, with the intention of making some changes and printing a report. Although I was able to change the data, the report they produced was wholly inadequate. Butt-ugly, rasterized fonts, and so on. It sucked. I wound up exporting it to an OpenCalc file and reporting from there.

Now if I was a beta tester, I'd probably have provided some feedback to let them know about my experiences. If it was really a beta release (instead of just another one of thousands of projects with "v0.9" releases) you think it might have told me. After all user involvement is part of the "social contract" of open source.

I resent being placed in a group (or so it seems) that I never thought I belonged to. This press release smacks of the kind of marketing over-hype that isn't — and shouldn't — be associated with an open source project.

So make that "over 199,999 users".

Ranked #1 on Google!

nospam@example.com (Alan Langford) — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:15:00 -0500

A year or so ago, I needed a tool to generate thumbnails of Web pages. I found a lot of inadequate tools and a server based solution with limited flexibility (thumbshots.org). So I decided to throw together Thumb-Page to do the job, and then I decided to release it as open source.

Since then, it's been a surprisingly popular application. I figured maybe a few hundred people would be interested in it... instead it's clocking in at about 400 per month. Now compared to a "hot" shareware application that can pull in 400,000 downloads per month, that's not so hot, but it's still pretty good.
Continue reading "Ranked #1 on Google!"

When Advertiser Integration Goes Terribly Terribly Wrong

nospam@example.com (Alan Langford) — Tue, 07 Mar 2006 12:25:00 -0600

I caught an episode of HGTV's "Designer Superstar Challenge" last night. It's a pretty hokey pseudo-reality show where a bunch of hopeful "designer host" candidates compete in hopes of landing a job hosting a show on HGTV. Sound like a premise for bad programming? You bet it does. You keep on thinking that the winner will wind up hosting the next challenge, and they'll just keep on endlessly searching for a new host until they find one that's good. It's the perfection of cannibalistic programming, each new season consuming the previous winner.

What takes this from merely cheesy to "bad movie bad" -- as in so bad it's funny -- is Home Depot's sponsorship. More accurately, it's the gymnastics the show goes through in an attempt to integrate Home Depot that took this episode from bad to laugh-out-loud awful.

Continue reading "When Advertiser Integration Goes Terribly Terribly Wrong"

Consumer Culture is Consuming Culture

nospam@example.com (Alan Langford) — Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:19:00 -0600

The way I see it, there are two classes of activity that people engage in: creating and consuming. These classes apply quite broadly, from creating wealth and consuming goods, to creating art and absorbing information (a form of consumption) by reading a book.

Left to their own devices, I believe most humans have a need to create. Whether it be knitting a scarf or developing a cancer fighting drug, creating is an intrinsic part of human existence.

Yet in our mass-marketed, consumer driven culture, individual creativity seems to have suffered greatly. Cultural gateways such as large publishers and mololithic music and entertainment companies arbitrate and edit our views, selecting what we see based more on economic potential than cultural value. Thousands of people are creating works that may be of value, but we rarely discover them. Individuals who might otherwise be creating their own works are watching television with their minds only partially engaged, or worse, expressing their creativity by assembling the latest and greatest over-branded, over-promoted consumer goods into a "personal statement" of cookie-cutter uniformity.

The Internet is an immensely positive disruptive force that provides hope of to reversing this destructive trend. Once musicians discover that they can both find an audience and earn a substantial living by dealing directly with fans, record companies will cease to add value. They will lose control and become "disintermediated" in short order. New intermediaries who provide value that is relevant to the Internet age will thrive (officialcommunity.net is a good example).

Large entertainment companies will be restricted to projects that require large capital investments, but even then the prevalence of easy copying will limit their potential returns, which will be reflected in smaller production budgets. The days of the quarter-billion dollar blockbuster are numbered.

Sites like lulu.com will revolutionize publishing. Blogging and photo upload sites give a stage to hundreds of thousands of people with something to say, or with images to share; They provide a platform for creativity.

Idealists refer to this as the "democratization" of culture, but they couldn't be more wrong. Any widely distributed, truly democratic process is subject to displacement by larger commercial interests with profit as a motive. Ironically what's required are large, strong, profit-oriented corporations who embrace "quasi-democratic access" as a paradigm, and who find a way to profit without interfering with the mechanics of that paradigm. This is why Google, Yahoo, eBay, and even Amazon have become culturally important institutions. These companies will serve as the seed for a new cultural renaissance.