Mitch Joel's Blog: Six Pixels of Separation, page 325

The Next Billion-Dollar Startup

The truth about Instagram.

There wasn't a building high enough for me to jump off of when I first heard about Facebook acquiring Instagram for a billion dollars two weeks ago. I know that sounds extreme, but I'm honest enough to admit that I could not see straight for a couple of days post-deal announcement. It was nothing against Instagram (I love the app), it was the purchase price that made me all weak in the knees. While everyone is still wondering how the valuation of a twelve-person employee business, that hasn't been around for three years and has no revenue could go for that kind of whopping amount, many conspiracy theorists think that it's more of a Facebook play to prove to the market that if Instagram is worth a billion dollars, than Facebook must be worth (at least) one hundred billion dollars. Between us friends, just writing out sentences like that makes me feel like I'm typing a script for the next Austin Powers movie, instead of what I'm really trying to do: write a legitimate business blog post. Some may call it a bubble, others may claim that it's a gross over-evaluation... either way, we're now evaluating startups using the "b" word and that changes everything. Again.

If it happened to Instagram, the next logical business questions are...

Who will be the next startup to get that kind of deal going?

Will it be for more money?

Believe it or not, there is a laundry list of great, new companies who had very interesting valuations prior to the Instagram acquisition, but now they're looking prettier than ever. Companies like Rovio (makers of the highly addictive Angry Birds video game), Foursquare (the location-based mobile social network), Spotify (the socially-driven music streaming service) and even Airbnb (instead of staying at a hotel, you can pay to crash at someone's pad) could be next. While I like each and every one them (for different reasons)...

Here are four other hot startups that are more than capable of cracking an Instagram-esque sale price:

Square . While Square has over one hundred employees and is already valued at over one billion dollars, I've been smitten with this business since it was first announced. The company was co-founded by Jack Dorsey (known as one of the creators of Twitter) as a simple way for anyone to accept an electronic payment through their mobile phone, by either swiping a card through the Square card reader (which clicks into the headphone jack of an iPhone) or by manually entering the information through an app. I love their vision statement: no more cash registers. The company makes money by charging 2.75% on every credit card transaction. You could see how financial institutions, credit card companies or any company dealing in monetary transactions might find Square to be a valuable asset.

Pinterest . Out of nowhere, this social photo sharing site that allows users to "pin" visual content that is appealing to them, create their own "boards" to display those pins and share them, has quickly become the third largest online social network (beating out LinkedIn) and an online darling. Once the Instagram sale was confirmed, many figured that Pinterest would be next. The company, which just celebrated its one-year anniversary, was founded by Ben Silbermann and, according to Wikipedia, the site is managed by Cold Brew Labs and funded by a small group of entrepreneurs and inventors. If Twitter or Google are still steaming over not getting Instagram, Pinterest may be their golden goose.

Fab . Originally launched as the Facebook for the gay and lesbian community, CEO Jason Goldberg and Chief Creative Officer Bradford Shellhammer soon realized that Facebook is the Facebook for the gay and lesbian community, so they turned their eyes to social commerce. Fab is an e-commerce company that creates flash sales (usually only lasting a few days) of very modern and contemporary design items (everything from artwork and t-shirts to furniture and accessories). The company has received over fifty million dollars in funding from people like The Washington Post, Ashton Kutcher, Guy Oseary (Madonna's manager) and some of the valley's more impressive venture capitalists.

Path . Path's founder, Dave Morin, allegedly turned down a one hundred million dollar offer from Google before his mobile social network started getting the attention and users it is currently enjoying. Better known as, "what Facebook should be," Path is a mobile-only online social network for your true friends and family. The app actually limits the amount of people you can share your online journaling with to one hundred and fifty friends. Path's focus is on helping people build close, tight-knit social networks to deliver true value. Think of it as the social media version of "quality over quantity." With about a dozen employees, it's obvious how some of the more web-based businesses (Facebook, Google, AOL, etc...) would be enticed to acquire this company that understands how to help people connect through their smartphones. 

While many of these companies have raised enough money to put their valuations in the billion dollar-plus range, it's going to be an interesting few years as the general economy claws its way back to a sense of normalcy (hopefully), while these new, brash and unique digital business models unfold before our eyes. Who could have ever imagined a business landscape where a company of less than twenty-people, an Internet connection and a handful of MacBook Pros could have these types of engaged customers and these types of wild valuations?

Which new startups do you think have the billion dollar magic touch?

The above post is my twice-monthly column for the Montreal Gazette and Vancouver Sun newspapers called, New Business - Six Pixels of Separation . I cross-post it here with all the links and tags for your reading pleasure, but you can check out the original versions online here:

Montreal Gazette - After Instagram, which startup will be Internet's next billion-dollar baby?

Vancouver Sun - not yet published.

Tags:

airbnb

angry birds

aol

ashton kutcher

austin powers

ben silbermann

bradford shellhammer

business blog

business column

cold brew labs

contemporary design

dave morin

ecommerce

electronic payment

entrepreneur

fab

facebook

flash sale

foursquare

google

guy oseary

instagram

iphone

jack dorsey

jason goldberg

linkedin

macbook pro

madonna

mobile app

mobile phone

mobile social network

modern design

montreal gazette

newspaper column

online social network

path

pinterest

postmedia

rovio

smartphone

social commerce

social network

social photo sharing

spotify

square

startup

the washington post

twitter

vancouver sun

venture capital

wikipedia

Intent Is Everything

What are you trying to accomplish?

There is a story told in the amazing business book, Freakonomics, about a study that was being done to figure out what makes a good parent. The genesis of this came out of the massive business that is parenting books. If you are a parent, it's always surprising when you realize that for centuries, so many people have been parents and yet, there is no real manual for how to be a good parent. Most people who were parents before you rarely have any tangible advice beyond spurting out trite sayings (like "one is one and two is ten") or having no memory of what it was like to have a newborn or a toddler around the house (did they completely black out the experience?). So, the question is this: does reading a lot of parenting books make you a better parent? The answer is no. But it doesn't end there. What the Freakonomics authors uncovered is that it doesn't matter whether you read the books or not, it's the simple act of buying the book that moves the needle. That's right, people we would consider to be great parents have bought the books, but have never read them.

Intent is a powerful thing.

There is a correlation between this story and our business lives. If parents are thinking about the content that they need to consume to become better parents, then they have the intent and self-awareness to be a better parent. So, is being a better marketer about reading every single blog and trade publication, listening to every marketing podcast or following and engaging with every luminary on Facebook or Twitter? Is being a better marketer about having your own blog, creating a tumblr about great marketing initiatives of having some boards on Pinterest about the most awesome print ads this year?

Perhaps, it's less about consumption and creation and much more about simply being aware.

I have not looked at my Google Reader RSS feeds in a very, very long time. I tend to get the information I need from e-newsletters (I know, this is very old school of me) or people I respect and follow in places like Facebook, Google Plus, Twitter and beyond. I have every intention of following, reading and then even creating content based of these interactions, but I don't. I have a massive list of unread articles in my Instapaper feed that I would love to get to (anyone have an extra spare three weeks that they can loan me?), but I'm starting to realize that in a world of too much to know (for more on that, please listen to my podcast with David Weinberger - co-author of The Cluetrain Manifesto and his latest book, Too Big To Know: SPOS #301 - Knowing Things With David Weinberger), perhaps it's simply my intent of wanting to learn and grow that matters most?

What this means to you.

The majority of business professionals that I interact with simply don't have any consumption plan. They're not infovores about their industry and they're not all that regimented with their time in relation to what they're capturing. When people marvel at my ability to create so much content, so frequently, it forces me to remind myself that although I'm not reading, listening or watching everything, it's my intent to do so that makes all of this somewhat easier for me (and perhaps creates the perception that I am engaged with a lot more content than I truly am). You can chalk it all up to passion or care, but (for me) it's mostly about surrounding myself in content with the hopes that some of it trickles down into something more valuable. In short, don't be hard on yourself for not reading or commenting on everything. Be hard on yourself only if you're not even bothering to expose yourself to all of this great content.

While this may sound obvious, it's amazing how many people don't even have the intent.

Tags:

blog

business book

content

david weinberger

enewsletter

facebook

freakonomics

google plus

google reader

infovore

instapaper

marketer

marketing initiative

marketing podcast

marketing publication

parenting

parenting book

pinterest

rss feed

the cluetrain manifesto

too big to know

tumblr

twitter

Six Links Worthy Of Your Attention #96

Is there one link, story, picture or thought that you saw online this week that you think somebody you know must see?

My friends: Alistair Croll (BitCurrent, Year One Labs, GigaOM, Human 2.0, the author of Complete Web Monitoring and Managing Bandwidth: Deploying QOS in Enterprise Networks), Hugh McGuire (The Book Oven, LibriVox, iambik, PressBooks, Media Hacks) and I decided that every week or so the three of us are going to share one link for one another (for a total of six links) that each individual feels the other person "must see".

Check out these six links that we're recommending to one another:

World War 3.0 - Vanity Fair . "Deciding who should control the flow of information is the defining issue of our time. Our society is mostly based on systems to overcome the coefficient of friction of physical things -- representatives to Washington or Ottawa; goods to their destinations; etc. But when we deal with something frictionless like information, all those old power structures crumble. In this long, scathing, chewy piece from Vanity Fair, Michael Joseph Gross does a great job of explaining the issues at stake. It's an investment in time that's well worth it." (Alistair for Hugh).

Corporate Twits - tumblr . "Pranking customer support reps online, with varying amounts of success. A bit evil, and mostly funny." (Alistair for Mitch).

Today is not tomorrow (or, how to beat Amazon) - Baldur Bjarnason . "If you are at all interested in publishing, and the business of books, you may have heard this past week about a Department of Justice lawsuit against Apple , and some big publishers. And whenever you hear the business of publishing, you're sure to hear about Amazon . This article might be a bit technical (talking about pricing, design, standards, DRM among other things), but it's the best most up to date analysis of the ebook world you are likely to find." (Hugh for Alistair).

Whiteys Lindy Hoppers .. Helzapoppin . "Possibly the greatest thing I have ever seen." (Hugh for Mitch).

DARPA Humanoid Robot Climbs Stairs - Laughing Squid . "I think that Hugh once posted (a while back) a similar video where these freaky robots moved about like animals. Well, it seems like evolution is not just about human beings: now, these robots are evolving and starting walk upright. OK, this is not a perfected technology, but it's pretty amazing. Watch this video... it will blow your mind." (Mitch for Alistair).

The Kindle Index - Priceonomics . "I don't know where to begin on this piece. It is full of very surprising data and stories about our e-literacy. Which city do you think has the most e-readers? I bet you don't know the right answer. Will Apple or Amazon win the e-reader war? All of this and more is revealed in this piece. Don't miss it." (Mitch for Hugh).

Now it's your turn: in the comment section below pick one thing that you saw this week that inspired you and share it.

Tags:

alistair croll

amazon

apple

baldur bjarnason

bitcurrent

complete web monitoring

corporate twits

darpa

gigaom

hugh mcguire

human 20

iambik

laughing squid

librivox

link exchange

linkbait

managing bandwidth

media hacks

michael joseph gross

pressbooks

pricenomicas

robot

story

the book over

tumblr

vanity fair

whitneys lindy hoppers

year one labs

The City Of The Future

Are you fascinated by humanity?

Great ideas happen when we come together as a group of people. This is why the role of our cities in our society plays such a critical and fascinating role. It's true, that everything good about humanity probably comes out of our cities, and that everything bad about our humanity probably comes out of our cities as well. This concept struck me as being deeply profound when it comes to business and success after I came across the documentary titled, Urbanized (by the same people behind Helvetica and Objectified):

What have we learned after 5000 years together?

We've learned that we have limited resources and unlimited resources. As more and more people move to cities, we are putting an increasing amount of strain on our planet to sustain us and our growth, but the only solution to this problem comes from that amazing moment in time that we can meet face to face and work on our challenges in the hopes of overcoming them. The movie Urbanized moved me because it made me realize how much love the urban lifestyle. Yes, I'm an urbanite. I prefer a shopping mall to a beach and I prefer a air conditioning to a tent out in a national park. You can make fun of that as much as you want in the comment section below, but I spend my time marveling at the many things we - as a human species - have created. My first viewing of Urbanized happened while I was flying to this past year's TED conference, so imagine my surprise to see that the TED Prize for this year was awarded to  The City 2.0.

What will the city of the future looks like?

I am fascinated with this question. As a Digital Marketing agency, our future success is dependant on our ability to understand new technology and media and how it connects with people. The truth is that we cannot have a strong business without a strong community. On top of that, our world is changing at a rapid pace and these digital environments (Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, Pinterest, LinkedIn, etc...) are all cities and communities unto themselves where new social contracts and values are being built and shared by the people who populate it. The digitization of business also affects our cities in powerful ways that we have yet to even absorb. Editor & Publisher published a news item today titled, Google Pays $52 Million For Abandoned Paper Mill. That's what happened in Hamina, Finland back in 2009 and by 2010, the seawater was helping to cool down the many data servers that Google houses there. What we now have to think about is this: do we have the right people to fill these jobs, where does education fit into our urbanized evolution and how prepared are we for the future of life in these cities? Big, massive questions and challenges. A recent episode of Charlie Rose featured a discussion with the Mayors of Chicago, Louisville, Baltimore and Jacksonville. It's worth the twenty minutes of your time to watch, and please pay close attention to the comments about Google's Eric Schmidt about how Google gets the best results from its people (hint: it's when they're collaborating in close proximity and face-to-face). Cumulatively, I've become somewhat infatuated with this notion of the city and how our lives continue to evolve. I'm hopeful that this content gets you thinking differently both about your own city and the global connectedness of our online lives...

Tags:

business

charlie rose

city

city of the future

community

digital environment

digital marketing agency

editor and publisher

education

eric schmidt

facebook

global connectedness

google

google plus

helvetica movie

humanity

linkedin

media

objectified

pinterest

social contract

society

success

sustainability

technology

ted conference

ted prize

the city 20

twitter

urban lifestyle

urbanite

urbanized

Twitter Is Not Easier Than Blogging

Somebody had to say it.

There was another "Blogging is dead" news item that crept out of USA Today today titled, More companies quit blogging, go with Facebook instead. Here's what the article is saying: "A survey released earlier this year by the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth says the percentage of companies that maintain blogs fell to 37% in 2011 from 50% in 2010, based on its survey of 500 fast-growing companies listed by Inc. magazine. Only 23% of Fortune 500 companies maintained a blog in 2011, flat from a year ago after rising for several years.

The trend in business is consistent with the broader loss of interest in blogging among all consumers. In late 2010, the Pew Research Center said blogging among adults ages 18 to 33 fell 2 percentage points in 2010 from 2008."

This isn't about what's easy, it's about traffic and laziness.

We need to better define the word "easy." People think that Blogging takes a lot of time and just blasting out a tweet on Twitter or updating a Facebook page is much easier. It's not easier, it's just takes a little less time to create the content. Is that the benchmark we're going after as a marketing industry? How quickly we can produce content? You will not see me arguing that pinning something to Pinterest is way quicker than tweeting, which is way quicker than writing a Blog post or shooting a video for YouTube, but is it really all about the speed (and from the speed we get volume) that matters? Be honest. If I pulled you aside, is the marketing you're doing for a business about how fast you can put a message into the market or the quality of the message? It is about how many people see and connect with that message or who connects to the message?

New media. Old mistakes.

That's the four word summation of the USA Today article. With all of the tremendous opportunities we now have available to us - as brands - to connect with consumers in a world where we are all publishers - in text, images, audio and video. You can, without question, have an idea and share it with the world, and all we're really doing is rallying around the latest and greatest shiny, bright objects in the hopes that once the masses are there, we can blast them with an inane amount of inane messaging as quickly as possible (and because it's easy, it's better). 

Here's a truism: It's not about Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest or your blog...

It's about being relevant. As someone who follows a lot of brands in the many channels that they can now play, it's safe for me to say that brands that sucked at blogging are sucking at Twitter and Facebook too. Sorry, but it's true. Just because it's easier and quicker to post, it doesn't make the brand any more relevant or interesting. What these brands are actually doing is fooling themselves and creating a very false sense of brand security.

Get over the channel. Get into the story.

Yes, it's obvious, Facebook and Twitter lets a brand be more agile, but if you have nothing to be agile about, it's all for nothing. Too many brands are chasing likes, follows, +1 and retweets as if they are an elusive customer acquisition, when what we're really talking about is an instant attention grabber... and not much more. Is Twitter really easier than Blogging? Here's the test: start a brand new Twitter account and start trying to get people to follow you, retweet you and connect with you. How's that working out for you? You see, it's not really about the channel at all: it's a mindset that whatever it is you're going to be doing in the social spaces will be creative, innovative and help to tell your brand story in a new and interesting way (that actually fits the channel and is accepted by your audience).

If you think that any of this is fast, easy or free... you've got another thing coming.

Tags:

blog

blogging

brand

brand story

business

content

facebook

fortune 500

inc magazine

marketing industry

media channel

new media

online video

pew research center

pinterest

publishing

twitter

university of massachusetts dartmouth

usa today

youtube

Finding The Perfect Pitch

Pitching new business is never easy.

I was deeply moved by the book, The Art Of The Pitch, by Peter Coughter (you can hear my conversation with Coughter over here: SPOS #296 - The Art Of The Pitch With Peter Coughter). While I have been pitching new business in the marketing and communications space for nearly two decades, it's always surprisingly when you win the business and when you lose the business. After years of building teams and pitching new business, you come to realize how subjective and arbitrary the process is. In short, it's not a science. It comes down to ideas, relationships, chemistry, how everything is presented and a host of other hard-to-define feelings and intuitions. With that, the marketing industry has changed as the corporate world has evolved. Now, it's increasingly more common to have both search consultants and procurement as a part of the process. It can be a good thing and it can be a bad thing. That all being said, there are certain things that could make the request for proposal or request for information process that much more streamlined and fair from both the agency and client side. While the 4A has their own pitching guideline (which you can see here: Best Practice Guidance: Ownership of Agency Ideas, Plans and Work Developed During the New Business Process), here are some of my own thoughts...

How to get the right fit from a perfect pitch: 

Create realistic timelines. If you're asking an agency partner to deliver an entire marketing platform to present in one week's time, have an expectation that you're going to get only a few days of work and not something that would normally take four to six weeks to complete. If you're in a rush to choose an agency, offer up a smaller proposal so that the agency can truly demonstrate what they're capable of within the time you are allotting.

Define the deliverables. It's shocking to see how many brands don't explain (using explicit words) what they would like delivered as the net output of the first stage. Is it a presentation, a document, a meet and greet, etc...?

Give the true budget. The budget isn't just about how much money the agency stands to gain should they win the business. The budget is also very indicative of the client's level of experience. It sends a message that you understand what the work is and what the value is. On top of that, budget is also an indicator of fit. Not all agencies are created equally. Some work better on smaller budgets while others are scaled for more significant dollars.

Box in your weight class. I've seen small shops attempt to work with massive agencies and I've seen massive brands attempt to work with boutique agencies. A lot of these relationships work because it's not about size... it's about the weight class. You have to make sure that the agencies you're looking to work with can compete with you (and your competitors) at the levels that you expect. Yes, size can be a factor here, but it can be overcome by experience, knowledge of the industry and more. Lastly, if you're a smaller brand looking to grow, ensure that you have the resources within your company to not only manage this bigger relationship but that you have the time, energy and finances to work with an agency partner that has, traditionally, worked with bigger clients. Sometimes the brand has to fight to fit the agency (and not the other way around).

Inform everyone of the competition. I've heard brands tell me that there are fifteen agencies pitching for the business and that they are not saying who those agencies are. There is no value in hiding this information. In fact, the brand will get a better response from each agency if there is full disclosure of the competition. Why? Agencies are hyper-competitive and so is the pitching process. The advantage to the brand is that they'll now see not only what the agency knows about their business, but how to beat the other agencies - which is what you really want. Nike and can say that they want to beat Converse in the marketplace, but what's really happening is that the agencies are trying outwit one another.

Bail if there are too many agencies. There is no reason for any brand to request that fifteen agencies take part in a RFP process. Brands should meet as many agencies as they like and then choose a small few to compete for the business. It's a waste of time and resources on both the brand and agency side to do anything else.

Clear scoring. While pitching is always a subjective process, it should be clear to all parties what the score card will be: everything from weight of the response to when agencies will be notified of outcomes.

Don't share all of the information. Almost all formal RFP processes have a Q&A session where agencies can submit questions and the brand responds. To keep things "fair" all questions and answers are shared with all competing agencies. I don't like this. If one agency asks a very smart question, because the other agencies didn't think of it, they should be rewarded with having that tidbit of information. The RFP process is about finding the smartest partner. This process of sharing everything makes no sense.

Ownership of ideas. Most RFPs are filled with legal jargon. A more common practice is for all brands to retain the intellectual and creative property of anything shown in the pitch. This is not only a stupid practice, but it's unfair. I understand the legal reasons (what if the brand chooses another agency partner and a similar idea goes to market, could the agency that didn't win the business not sue?), but it's not ethically sound. An agency is their ideas. Ideas live and ideas die. If one client doesn't like an idea, it should be the agency's prerogative to hold on to that idea, tweak it and try to sell it to a client that may want it. From the agency's perspective, there is a feeling that brands use the RFP process to see a lot of creative and strategic work for free, so while they only chose one agency, they have a handful of agency ideas and thinking. Brands should not have a right to own that. If they want to own the ideas, they should either pay for them or hire the agency.

Commit to the process. If you're looking to hire an agency commit to the process. I can't tell you how many times I've been in pitches and had members of the brand team not show up, cancel, have some people there (while others went missing), not pay attention because they're busy on their smartphones, start having discussions amongst themselves while someone is presenting, etc.... Most agencies put everything they have into the pitch (and they're doing it on their own dime). The least the brand can do it commit to it and be respectful of it. Sure, some agencies blow the pitch (it happens), but more often than not, I see brands behaving badly in the process.

Pricing. Prior to the formal pitch and being chosen as one of the three agencies that make it down to the finals, there is usually a quick RFI phase where the brand can better understand the agency. This includes, history, client work, size, revenue and pricing models. While pricing can be negotiated, the pricing structure should be defined in the primary phase of the RFI, I've heard of agencies walking away from a pitch win because suddenly the compensation became an issue when the brand had already known their pricing structure on the up front.

Moving forward. Before moving forward and signing contracts, there should be two tissue sessions - one at the brand's location and one at the agency's office. Sit down, meet the people and truly spend time talking about the business - outside of the RFP process. This will give everyone a much better feel for the people, the thinking and what it will be like to work together going forward.

What do you think it takes to find the perfect pitch?

Tags:

4a

boutique agency

brand

business pitch

communications

converse

marketing

marketing agency

marketing budget

marketing industry

marketing platform

new business

new business process

nike

peter coughter

pitch

procurement

request for information

request for proposal

rfi

rfp

search consultant

the art of the pitch

Learning About Creativity

There must be something in the air.

While I am no Julien Smith when it comes to reading books, I am doing my best to maintain a high pace of book reading. I recently started digging into Imagine - How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer and it took me aback when I realized that I've been reading a whole bunch of books on creativity and I have a whole bunch of new books in my Kindle on the same topic. I consider myself a creative-type, but I'm often fascinated with both where ideas comes from and if there's anything I can do to help myself come up with even bigger ideas. In the end, what we learn is that creativity isn't only a mystery, but it's something that consumes those who create on a full-time basis.

Whether you consider yourself a creative or not, here are some books on creativity that are well worth checking out: 

The Creative Habit - Learn It and Use It for Life by Twyla Tharp. I bought this book after seeing that Julien Smith had read it and recommended it. I had a lot of apprehension with it, because I'm not shy to admit that out of all of the arts, I struggle with dance and what it's all about. Not only have I never been to the ballet, but I've put in the time to experience dance on TV, I've been to a friend's recital and I've even watched documentaries on the topic. I can appreciate what the dancers and choreographers are doing, but I'm just not into the experience of it. That being said, I enjoyed this book. Tharp tells some great stories and re-iterates the commitment and hard work that is the true root of creativity.

Freedom Is Blogging In Your Underwear - Hugh MacLeod. I love everything that Hugh MacLeod does over at gapingvoid. This book isn't out yet, but I just pre-ordered it on my Kindle and I'm looking forward to diving in. MacLeod makes you push your life to be a little bit more rough around the edges. Getting creative has a lot to do with getting a little bit uncomfortable with your life as you know it to date. I'm sure there is some kind of link between the freedom of blogging in your underwear and doing the work that really matters in your life.

Imagine - How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer. Lehrer is the best-selling author of How We Decide and Proust Was A Neuroscientist. In this book, he examines everything from how our brains work to how we make decisions to help us understand where creativity comes from and why creativity is such a powerful force in our world. I'm about 25% through this book and I'm loving the way Lehrer blends the science of the brain with the mystery of art and what attracts us to it.

In-Genius - A Crash Course on Creativity by Tina Seelig. I have yet to read this book (it just came out this week), but it is cued up on my Kindle. I saw this book in the Kindle store and, to be blunt, the copy just spoke to me. Seelig has impressive credentials (executive director of the Stanford Technology Ventures Program, the director of the National Center for Engineering Pathways to Innovation, and a faculty member at the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford University School of Engineering). If the book is half as good as her credentials, this should be a gem!

Spark - How Creativity Works by Julie Burstein. I loved Burstein's approach to this book. Over the years, she has interviewed hundreds of people we would define as "creative." In Spark, she walks through some of these amazing stories. It's a true collage of the creative process and how our different experiences truly do spark new ideas that capture the attention of mass audiences. I was also fortunate to see Burstein speak at this past year's TED conference and we even managed to record a podcast together (you can hear it here: SPOS #297 - The Hard Work Of Creativity With Julie Burstein).

Steal Like An Artist - Austin Kleon. I'm a fan of small, well-designed books that can be read quickly, but that are filled with magical gems. This seems like one of them. It was sent over to me as a gift by Ricardo Bueno (thank you!). The title says it all: great artists steal... they take ideas from all over the place and turn them into something magical and new. Without inspiration, there is no creativity. Inspiration comes to us in the many shapes and forms of creativity that we expose ourselves to. It seems like this book is filled with ways for us to think about stealing (in the best possible way).

Before you read those books, here are my two staples for getting creative:

The Accidental Genius - Using Writing to Generate Your Best Ideas, Insight, and Content by Mark Levy. I don't believe in writer's block. The reason I don't believe in writer's block is because I read, consumed and use the many techniques that Levy discusses in this fantastic book. If you think you're not creative, I challenge you to buy this book and do some of the exercises. Yes, it's just that easy. If you're not sure, please take a listen to this: SPOS #221 - Unlocking Creativity And Your Accidental Genius With Mark Levy.

The War of Art - Break through the blocks and win your inner creative battles by Steven Pressfield. My close-quarters combatives coach, Tony Blauer, introduced me to the book The War of Art when it first came out many years ago. More recently, Seth Godin's publishing imprint, The Domino Project, published a re-vamped twist on it by Pressfield titled, Do The Work. Read either or both if you're having trouble getting over the hump of getting started (the hardest part of the creative process). Pressfield delivers a blue collar work ethic to the creative world that is both inspirational and practical. If it doesn't kick you in the pants to get creative, nothing will. You can also take a listen to our conversation right here: SPOS #251 - Do The Work With Steven Pressfield.

Which books on creativity have captured your attention? 

On May 22nd - 24th, 2012, the C2 MTL event will be hosted in Montreal. This event's content is focused on the intersection of creativity and commerce (two topics near and dear to my heart). I'll not only be attending this event, but sharing the stage with Arianna Huffington ( The Huffington Post ) to help her launch a new project called, GPS For The Soul . Take a look at some of the other speakers and sessions and think about making the trip to my hometown to spend a few days immersing yourself into the power of creativity. I can't wait to take part. You can also enter a contest to win a ticket (and learn more about creativity) right here: C2 MTL contest (full disclosure: my agency, Twist Image , created this contest and is handling social media marketing for C2 MTL).

Tags:

amazon

arianna huffington

arts

austin kleon

ballet

business book

c2 mtl

c2mtl

c2mtl contest

choreographer

creative

creative type

creativity

dance

do the work

freedom is blogging in your underwear

gapingvoid

gps for the soul

hasso plattner institute of design

how we decide

hugh macleod

ideas

ideation

imagine

in genius

innovation

jonah lehrer

julie burstein

julien smith

kindle

mark levy

national center for engineering pathways to innovation

reading

ricardo bueno

rpoust was a neuroscientist

seth godin

spark

stanford technology ventures program

stanford university

steal like an artist

steven pressfield

ted conference

the accidental genius

the creative habit

the domino project

the huffington post

the war of art

tina seelig

tony blauer

twyla tharp

writers block

Sharing Is Caring (And Selling)

What makes media a social media?

There's a long-standing answer to this question. For some, it seems both obvious and clear as day. If you ask someone what social media is, they will inevitably say that it's all about the conversation. I'm no longer bullish on this notion of conversation within social media. At its core, what actually makes any piece of content (whether it's generated from an individual or a company) have any semblance of social-ness to it, is the ability for it to be as shareable and as findable as possible (if you do that and people like it, they will naturally talk about it). Look no further than the meteoric rise of The Huffington Post as a prime example of this. The Huffington Post generated conversation (comments, engagement, links and the like) because, unlike traditional newspapers and magazines that were making time online, The Huffington Post "opened up the window" and let their content be cross-posted, it linked out (not to be confused with LinkedIn) and did everything in its power to garner attention by leveraging the power of a sharing economy over one that was looking for a return on investment (or advertising).

Can you make money sharing?

On March 30th, 2012, Marketing Charts published a news item titled, Social Shares Drive 1 in 4 Online Shoppers to Purchase. This is the kind of data that more businesses need to think about: "62% of survey respondents said they had ever read a comment on their Facebook page from a friend talking about a product they purchased, while of those, three-quarters clicked on the product link in their friend's comment. Once at the retailer's site, 53% purchased the product they learned about through their friend's comment. Additionally, these eventual customers are happy to pass along the favor, as 81% identify as sharers themselves." The social web turns out to be an engine of word of mouth marketing unlike one we have ever seen before (no big surprise there).

Scaling your social media efforts back is the best way to scale them for true growth.

When reading through the Marketing Charts news item, something become abundantly clear and amazingly simple: the best brands do two things extremely well:

Deliver. The products and services deliver. They do what they say they are going to do. You would be surprised how non-obvious this notion is in our current world. We see constant streams of customer service issues for so many brands, that it's actually the brands who are doing the baseline of delivery that are capturing market share. If you're looking for some prime examples this, head over to Trip Advisor and look for reviews of a hotel that you know. Don't choose an overly fancy one and don't choose a roach motel. Choose one that you know delivers a good night's stay and read through the varied reviews. More often than not, you'll see comments like: "I stayed here on business and the hotel was great because they delivered a clean room, decent service and a hot shower. I'll be back." Brands have under-performed for so long, that delivering the bare essentials is enough to garner a glowing review. It's somewhat tragic to see the number of hotels that can't actually deliver a clean room, decent service and a hot shower (what, exactly, are you paying for then?).

Share. Brands are still afraid to share. They're afraid of the discourse (especially if it's in channels and platforms that they can't control). It's not only a silly way to think in this day and age, it's dangerous. Thanks to Amazon and other online retailers, consumers have a baseline expectation that they will be able to share, discuss and debate whatever it is that you do, say and sell. Enabling and empowering this type of sharing is baseline, so when brands are not allowing consumers to share, the default position is that they have something to hide.

A social business is a sharing business.

The bigger consulting firms are getting all hot and bothered by the notion of social business. We've gone from social media to social CRM and then straight to social business. Those working on the inside of an organization have a baseline expectation that everything that happens within the organization can be shared easily (through the magic of intranets, wikis and internal social media platforms), and consumers expect a more social experience from the brands that they do business with (seriously, no Facebook page?). What's actually happening is that businesses are running their social activities like advertising campaigns, so they're struggling to see their initiatives take hold.

Move from social media tactics to a philosophy of sharing.

When a corporate blogs lack attention or a corporate Twitter feed is not engaging for its followers, more often than not, it's because the corporation is not approaching these media with a sharing attitude. They're looking to shill, sell or convince others of something. Part of the challenge is that sharing takes time to validate. That being said, this form of social proofing is critical in the long term. The Marketing Chart news item is quick to remind us that social proofing makes people more engaged with our brands: "Significant opportunities exist for retailers to drive higher engagement through social proofing, suggests the report. In fact, more than 3 in 5 respondents said that they are likely to stay and shop on a website if they are shown their friends' activities on the site. Additionally, 57% are more likely to make a purchase there if they see a list showing their friends who have made a purchase on the website."

It may not seem that obvious, but the more you share... the more you sell.

The above posting is my twice-monthly column for The Huffington Post called, Media Hacker . I cross-post it here with all the links and tags for your reading pleasure, but you can check out the original version online here:

The Huffington Post - There's Nothing Free About Sharing Content.

Tags:

advertising campaign

amazon

brand

business column

content

corporate blog

corporate twitter feed

customer service

data

facebook

intranet

linkedin

magazine

marketing charts

media hacker

new column

newspaper

online conversation

online retailer

online shopping

product review

publishing

selling

sharing

sharing economy

social business

social crm

social media

social media platform

social proofing

social share

social sharing

the huffington post

trip advisor

web analytics

wiki

word of mouth marketing

In A World Of Too Much To Know

Episode #301 of Six Pixels of Separation - The Twist Image Podcast is now live and ready for you to listen to. This is also episode #21 of Across The Sound 2.0.

David Weinberger is a true think (writer and doer) when it comes to the Internet and all things new media. He is one of four co-authors of the seminal Marketing and Business book, The Cluetrain Manifesto. He is also the author of two other amazing books about Marketing, Business, the Internet and the future titled, Small Pieces Loosely Joined, and Everything Is Miscellaneous. He's been on the Six Pixels of Separation Podcast a couple of times in the past, and always provides enlightening commentary about how we - as a society - have been dealing with the impact of the Internet in our lives. Weinberger just published another masterpiece called, Too Big To Know - Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren't the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room Is the Room. The subtitle makes it pretty simple to understand the complex things that Weinberger has been thinking about for the past few years. Enjoy the conversation...

You can grab the latest episode of Six Pixels of Separation here (or feel free to subscribe via iTunes): Six Pixels of Separation - The Twist Image Podcast #301.

Tags:

advertising podcast

blog

blogging

david usher

david weinberger

digital marketing

everything is miscellaneous

facebook

itunes

marketing

marketing podcast

online social network

podcast

podcasting

small pieces loosely joined

social media

the cluetrain manifesto

too big to know

The Billion Dollar Questions

We're all experts.

We're all experts... until Facebook buys Instagram for one billion dollars. At that point, we all have opinions. Nothing more. Nothing less. I'm still shell-shocked about this deal. There, I admit it. A lot of my peers chest thump trying to impose some kind of posture based on knowledge, but what has become abundantly clear over the past few days since this acquisition was announced is that no one really knows or understands this deal. Including me. It's all speculation.

Was this a smart move for Facebook?

Before moving forward, I will be unabashedly honest:

I love Facebook. I'm a huge evangelist.

I love Instagram. While I'm not a big photo person, their app is great and I get it.

I am a Digital Marketing evangelist. I believe in this space.

Let's put the money behind the deal aside (for a moment). Instagram is a great acquisition for Facebook. The prevailing views about this are spot-on with my own thinking:

Facebook struggles to understand mobile.

Facebook is a web-based platform.

Facebook's Achilles heel is photos. It's the biggest part of Facebook and having someone like Instagram rise up (30+ million iOS users and 5+ million on the recently-launched Android platform) is a lot of people using their app and that could slowly be eating into Facebook's photo play.

Instagram nailed the UI and design of a mobile, social photo app.

It's a Meatloaf song.

Instagram is, ultimately, photo, mobile and social. Facebook still has the social component down, but the other two make it a "two out of three ain't bad" scenario.

Was this a bad move for Facebook?

I can't wrap my head around the price tag. I'll put aside how long Instagram has been in business (two years-ish). I'll put aside how many employees they have (under 15-ish). I'll try not rip my own arms off of my body when I think that founder, Kevin Systrom, was born in 1983 (I was busy listening to Motley Crue and trying to figure out how to make time with the ladies). I'll try not to think about the lack of revenue or business model (admittedly, this is a tough one to ignore). Here's what I want to know:

How many of Instagram's users are Facebook users already?

How many of those people use Instagram exclusively for their photos?

How many of those users re-post to Facebook versus using Instagram and Facebook to post different kinds of pictures?

How does Facebook define the value of someone seeing a tweet on Twitter to an Instagram photo and clicking on that link?

The bigger business questions. 

I'm not dumb. I get that this move is a defensive one (don't let Twitter, Google or someone else get them). It could also be defensive if Facebook thought Instagram could scale to the point that it truly does affect the Facebook business. I get that this move is a proactive one (this gets Facebook into mobile and photos in a big way... and fast). I get that a billion dollars to Facebook may be like you asking me for a quarter. Yesterday, I was speaking with a very senior digital marketing expert whose opinion I value. They too were clueless as to how that dollar amount was realized. They also speculated that if they were a conspiracy theorist, perhaps it was an acquisition that screams to the world: "If Instagram is worth a billion dollars, then Facebook is worth one hundred billion dollars!" A statement that comes on the eve of a pending Facebook IPO. It sounds juicy, but a still seems like a little much. Fast Company published a fascinating read about this deal yesterday, What The Tech Pundits Don't Get About Facebook's $1B Instagram Deal. In it, Cliff Kuang states: "There's nothing more profitable than having a great, well-designed product. And somehow, that point has eluded many in the tech press." It's also a fair point (just ask Apple), but I'm just curious: what does a billion dollars of a great mobile experience look like compared to - let's say - a one hundred million dollar mobile experience? Do we really know the answer to this? Is the chasm that vast and deep when you're at that kind of dollar count?

Welcome to the bubble.

Is this deal the "jump the shark" moment where we all realize that this is a bubble? I don't think it is. Simon Khalaf of Flurry had a data point that he shared last month: "In 1999, there were 38 million broadband Internet users worldwide. Today, there are 1.2 billion people getting broadband Internet access on their phones." The consumers are here and connected (we weren't quite there in 1999). Yes, valuations can get out of control and people who do not know what they're investing in could inflate the market, but we actually have a well-worn marketplace here with consumers who are buying. This is what makes me hope that it isn't a bubble. Instagram is a great experience. Facebook is a very smart company. It's that one little thing (the price) that still has me dumbfounded and reminds me of the old joke: "why does a dog lick himself?... Because he can."

No answers... just more questions.

Tags:

android

apple

broadband internet users

bubble

business model

cost per user

design

digital marketing

digital marketing evangelist

facebook

facebook ipo

fast company

flurry

google

instagram

ios

meatloaf

mobile

mobile app

mobile experience

motley crue

photo

photo sharing

simon khalaf

social

twitter

ui