I like to think that I have adequately
addressed all these issues in the development of MyMindshare
(it has been many years in dev).
Let me see if I can break down the issues you are raising:
"most consumers can barely update an app let alone update
their data" -- This is a user interface design problem. At
MyMindshare I address it by integrating data
creation/maintenance in the operation of the messaging system.
So, the user is not presented with a seperate, tedious task.
The principle is to make it simple, make it easy, make it part
of the user's natural path.
"who determines the ‘correctness’ of the data" -- The
user(consumer) determines the correctness of their own data.
"verifies the identity" -- A starting principle at MyMindshare
is that we are dealing with real, honest people, until there
is an indication otherwise. Real, honest people behave one
way, and unreal or dishonest people behave a different way,
however slightly. A LOT of dev work has gone into sensing the
differences. One of the major differences is motivation and
goals. We facilitate the motivation and goals of real honest
people while making it difficult for the others.
"dependence now shifts to the consumer" -- absolutely, it
shifts to a consumer that we are empowering by making them a
real market participant, with all the incentives that market
participation entails.
"do nothing and care less about your privacy as long as the
service is free and you get what you want" -- what we call
'learned dependence' which happens in the absence of a true
market.
"our job now is to ‘Show Me the Value’.
And that is bloody hard work and fraught with all kinds of
risk."
That is the task and duty of every entrepreneur.
Jim Bursch
310-869-5340
">
@jimbursch
On 12/12/2013 9:09 AM, Peter Cranstone wrote:
"
type="cite">
I can get with that - so lets examine it a little further.
The consumer is now responsible for their own data - problem
right there as most consumers can barely update an app let
alone update their data. Then comes the issue with who has
access to that data and what part thereof - again more ‘house
keeping’ for the consumer.
So our dependence now shifts to the consumer always being up
to date, always setting the correct permissions etc. Versus -
do nothing and care less about your privacy as long as the
service is free and you get what you want.
Until we validate with real empirical data which clearly
shows that vendors can make ‘money’ the new way we’re destined
to remain in a holding pattern. We all talk about value - our
job now is to ‘Show Me the Value’.
And that is bloody hard work and fraught with all kinds of
risk.
From: Jim Bursch <
">
>
Date: Thursday,
December 12, 2013 at 9:10 AM
To: "Peter J.
Cranstone" <
">
>,
"
">
"
<
">
>
Subject: Re:
[projectvrm] Theory of peak advertising
I think "send some
data" is conceptually problematic, and gets at the
fundamental problem with big data and its ilk. The
minute data is sent, it starts to deteriorate, like
fruit that has fallen from a tree.
Let me run with this analogy. Lets say people are
fruit trees and their data is their fruit. The best
fruit stays alive on the tree.
Currently big data harvests the fruit, which eventually
rots, and the trees resent that their fruit is being taken
and for the most part wasted.
Advertisers are looking for specific kinds of tress that
are indicated by the fruit that they bear. This is
important -- advertisers are interested in the trees, not
the fruit.
What advertisers need is a tool that helps them find the
right trees. The fruit indicates the right trees.
MyMindshare is a tool that inventories the fruit trees and
allows advertisers to find the trees with the right fruit
profile, without picking the fruit, and delivering the
advertisers message to the right trees.
So why should the trees enter their fruit in the
inventory? Because advertisers are ready willing and able
to pay to get their message to the right trees.
Jim Bursch
310-869-5340
">
@jimbursch
On 12/12/2013 7:19 AM, Peter Cranstone wrote:
"
type="cite">
Totally agree - what becomes important is the
signaling method. Can consumers change behaviors (if
the tools are there) to signal (communicate) the right
message or will they simply keep doing what they’re
currently doing?
It’s almost like we need multiple intent signal
profiles…
- It’s ‘Me’ (need to send some data) - just surfing
but I like X, Y & Z
- It’s ‘Me’ (need to send some data) - Interested in
buying X, Y & Z
- It’s ‘Me’ (need to send some data) - I want to buy
X, or Y or Z if the price is right
Sending NO data is not really a viable option -
sending quality data and the right amount of it to
provide some value is going to be required.
From: Jim
Bursch <
">
>
Date: Wednesday,
December 11, 2013 at 5:06 PM
To: "
">
"
<
">
>
Subject: Re:
[projectvrm] Theory of peak advertising
I think
there is something that is being missed.
Advertising is communication -- the point of
advertising is to communicate a message to a
potential customer, and more specifically, to
communicate the right message to the right
person, which would be the person most likely
to buy or otherwise act on the information.
Advertisers don't give a squat about data --
they have no interest in purchasing data. What
they want is to communicate to the right
person at the right time.
The promise of "big data" is that they can
identify the right people at the right time, a
promise that they generally fail to deliver
on.
Advertisers will pay to get their message in
front of the right person. The premise of
MyMindshare.com is that advertisers should pay
consumers directly to get in front of the
right people. If advertisers are paying, that
creates an incentive for the right people to
raise their hand and say "I'm the person you
are looking for."
Twitter with an eBay business model.
Jim Bursch
310-869-5340
">
@jimbursch
On 12/11/2013 2:05 PM, Peter Cranstone wrote:
"
type="cite">
>> With that in mind, it seems
important to understand that tools are not
useful unless they come with incentives to
build mutually beneficial relationships.
Yep. Make it easy for the user to send
his/her private data and in turn make it easy
for the Vendor to read and do something with
that data in real time. Remove the friction
and drive up the value. Apple’s iTune store
and Amazon’s web site are prime examples of
removing friction.
From: Jake
Parent <
">
>
Date: Wednesday,
December 11, 2013 at 2:54 PM
To: Matt
Hogan <
">
>
Cc: Adrian
Gropper <
">
>,
Kevin Cox <
">
>,
"Peter J. Cranstone" <
">
>,
Don Marti <
">
>,
Marc Guldimann | Enliken <
">
>,
ProjectVRM list <
">
>
Subject: Re:
[projectvrm] Theory of peak advertising
People definitely understand
the language of value. But to me the
future of marketing is in reducing the
transactional (and often antagonistic)
nature of the buyer/seller relationship
and replacing it with a process of mutual
value creation. In other words, an
understanding between these two parties
that businesses providing customers with
something isn't a zero-sum game.
In fact, as a marketer, I strongly
believe that a more community approach
to business not only maximizes value for
the customer but also for the business -
it allows them to better harness
customers as researchers, innovators,
and sales-people.
With that in mind, it seems
important to understand that tools are
not useful unless they come with
incentives to build mutually
beneficial relationships.
Jake
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6911
- Release Date: 12/11/13
No
virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6912 -
Release Date: 12/11/13
No virus
found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6913 - Release Date:
12/12/13
|