Red Zen Marketing

For four years, and ending only recently, NPR ran a revival of a 1950's era personal essay segment every week entitled "This I Believe". It was just a few short minutes in which the essayist--sometimes a well-known public figure, but just as often just an ordinary individual from across the spectrum of the American Experience--with a strong desire to say what was on their mind and heartfelt conviction had the opportunity to speak their own Truth as they saw it. It was thought provoking and often very moving.

I guess this post is my own little essay.

I've been waxing philosophical lately about the time I spend online and on the phone that is not directly relevant to my paid occupation or my job at hand. There are a number of friends--and some acquaintances--for whom I've taken time out to give of myself without expectation of anything other than the opportunity to talk with them about their situation, and share what perspective as I can in hopes that it may be helpful. I have no illusions that it is always so--they don't call or email me daily, so perhaps my perspective is not so illuminating as I might sometimes think! <grin>

Regardless, the growth of the Twitter phenomenon has had me thinking about this more of late.

My thought is that, although, yes, Twitter is incredibly powerful for pushing out news of important happenings "under the wire" from places like Iran and Tehran, it is also useful for "crowd sourcing" great business ideas and best practices across a wide realm of segments. Graphic designers are using it to share information--freely sharing links to other great sources for Wordpress themes, and other great tips. Enthusiasts of all things gadget-y find their true brotherhood online with updates posted seemingly by the minute to help others pimp their XBox or tweak their iPhone in the-land-down-under. And, incredibly, they do it all -- free.

Why?

Well, true enough, some might be after followers, believing that there's a monetization path before them. And well there might be. But the information offered is out there for the rest of us all the same. It's the classic Internet Freemium offering-- gather a user base (in this case a base of those 'using your tweets') and hope to see some of them make the transition to pay for something being offered.

There's also a good number of these Twitterers who are tweeting away, gathering followers, simply for the sake of tweeting and entering into the conversation. Else why would they devote such time to it with no apparent business model? It was at this realization that I realized I was doing the same thing with my time-- each time I spent time on the phone, or via email with Kevin, Chirag, Jeff, Dave, Elia, Gabe, or any of the perhaps dozen others.

Was I so different? I was not expecting anything of my interactions with my friends. It was time given back--or perhaps more appropriately stated-- time given forward. It's encouraging to see the indictors of this permeating new technology--to see that 'social media' is not entirely taken over by those who would relegate it "New Marketing Tools" but also being used by those simply reaching out to lend a hand.

I have worked remotely from my home in western Pennsylvania leading projects and creating products and helping companies grow for ten years. I could not have done that without the strength of an incredible network of friends and colleagues that reaches around the world. And, I can truely say that some of my best friends are half-way around the world from me right now.

I believe that as the world becomes increasingly smaller, and our many technologies for touching and communicating with each other expand and multiply, we have to remember that humans will always demand a channel for pure human interaction--that 'business models' and 'ROI' and 'justifiable business purposes' will never be enough to satisfy the insatiable human need to reach out and assist another, simply because.  Twitter may die--as some have foretold. But having tasted this new communication medium, I believe the masses will not rest until it is replaced by something that does not depend upon a slick Silicon Valley business plan. 

Loading mentions Retweet

Belly Up To the Buffet?
Ever since the legitimization of Napster and the introduction of the Zune (put jokes back away, we're moving on), why have smartphone makers failed to see the elements of success in business models used by these adjacent markets? Now, I grant that these folks have not overturned the iTunes/iPod market share dominance, but that is not to say that the lessons to be learned could not help. Rhapsody, Napster, and the Zune all took a different approach to their market in order to compete, and it bears some examination.

Think of it as not a one-at-a-time app store, but an AppBuffet, in which owners could try out (there's a concept, Apple!) the full inventory of applications available, and simply pay a tiered monthly fee based on how many applications they leave installed after X number of days.

The iPhone AppStore has shown--through 990,XXX,000-odd app downloads to date--that there is revenue to be found from getting customers engaged in other uses for their phone than simple voice, texting and checking sports scores or news headlines. So, this shows the power of a single location, and on-phone app browsing. But there is so much potential for competitive advantage in taking on Apple by approaching the question in a different way, and moving beyond what has already been done to foster an even more thriving developer base.

Making it Happen -
What would need to be done by a device maker and carrier to create this scenario?  A few obvious things occurred to me:

1. Think about the full solution. This is what makes the iPod/iTunes/iPhone/AppStore product offering so compelling to so many. It's simple. It's integrated. Too often, third party developer support is something that is thought about far too late in the game, and rarely is the ecosystem creation, maximization of developer revenues and full business model design something that is discussed at the point of device product development. If it's true that the more developers supporting your platform, the stronger your position, there's room for competitive advantage here in taking a different tact.
2. Incorporate great categorization and search capabilities to allow customers to find solutions they would like to try out on their phone. Anyone who has struggled to find a particular application for a particular need in the iPhone AppStore understands the value of this. There are lessons to be learned from Handango.com in this respect.
   
3. Incorporate the subscription and DRM protection technology layer as a part of a systems thinking approach.  For those applications that participate in the AppBuffet, there is full control of the user sales/installation experience and the business outcomes are shared, within a Darwinian approach that rewards the best participants. Those developers whose products don't measure up will drop out based upon their business requirements. The desired uniform sales experience for customers is preserved--as provided by Apple--but a much larger number of solutions gain exposure as a result.
   
4. Build the necessary community for owners to share their experiences with apps, make their comments known, and ensure this is available on the PHONE. Excitement about a new cool phone and the things that can be done with it is the perfect reason for people to want to share their experiences with others. Heck, Amazon taught us long ago that it's a best practice to allow peer testimonials to help drive sales. Apple has completely ignored this aspect of their marketplace for some reason. There is a real opportunity to bring Social Media elements to this part of the user experience.
   

It's my expectation that a potential outcome of this approach would be a) more applications and greater variety of applications tried, b) revenue shared to a broader array of developers, making the platform more attractive for solution development, c) facilitated word-of-mouth and greater niche identification of great solutions, and d) a higher quality of applications being achieved, sooner than via other mechanisms.

What do you think?  What device maker and/or carrier would take this on? What would stand in the way?

Loading mentions Retweet