This is in the category of “ferwatitsworth” I think that most retail businesses believe that people will spend more if they are provided with “opportunity,” “information,” or “deals.” That is, I think, the foundational basis for spending money on ads. I also think that it is true for some people, but not for everyone. Guy From: Doc Searls <
">
> Date: Friday, July 17, 2015 at 18:36 To: ProjectVRM list < "> > Subject: [projectvrm] Fwd: MediaPost's IoT: Shopping - Transforming the Shopping Experience - 8/6 NYC Sharing this. What do you think they mean by “always on shopping?” Can we (meaning everybody who cares about this, and thinks as objectively as possible) start by assuming that customers are going to spend $X, £X or €X, regardless of whether are herded by the kind of cattle-prods described below? If so, how much of the below is a waste for everybody, and how much is just stores adapting a bit to customers with mobile devices, making shopping a bit easier? I suspect that most of what’s imagined here isn’t going to help the customer navigate the store one bit, but rather annoy the crap out of her. (As will, I am sure, MiiP the monkey <http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/07/14/meet-miip-the-ad-monkey-in-your-app/>.) But rather than just mock or complain, what amongst the tech being developed will give customers more agency, and better ways of navigating retail spaces and engaging with the retailers and brands on display? Or, in other words, what will give VRM meaning there? Doc
|
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.