So we all know that Google “Chrome” has launched right?  Personally, “Chrome” makes me feel like a 10 year old trying to use the internet, I mean the whole UI just feels very childish, but that’s beside the point.  What nobody seems to be addressing is the information that Google will now have about it’s users.

Google made a brilliant move.  Advertising is gearing more towards extreme targeting, meaning the more you know about someone the more targeted of an ad you can show them.  If you’re the number one search engine in the world and you wanted to capture more information on your users, what would you do?  Create your own browser.

It was long rumored that the Google toolbar (the little add on that gives you the green bar, your supposed page rank) was a secret spy that collected information from your browsing pattens.  My SEO colleagues tested this and found out it was true.  Now imagine the information you are going to be giving to Google when you are using their browser?  Google is going to have information on all of your click patterns, your site history, etc.  Who knows, using the browser may even help fuel the google analytics tool that so many people are using on their sites.

I think in the next few years we are going to start to see Google develop a targeted ad placement platform like no other.  With around 70% market share in the U.S. Google is going to have more data on everyone’s browsing history than you can imagine.  I’m sure when it comes time for Google to go after the mobile advertising space that they will have a “mobile” version of Chrome that will allow them to also serve extreme targeted mobile ads as well.

Since Chrome is so new there haven’t been any tests yet to determine what information Google can actually get from us, but I can tell you that it does feel a little bit like Big Brother is watching you, don’t you think?

I’m not saying use or don’t use Google Chrome, I’m merely trying to give my take on the new move that Google has made and what it is going to mean for us as users and what is going to mean for advertisers.

What do you think about Google’s move to launch their own browser?

Did you enjoy the post?please subscribe to my RSS feed!

If you are an individual or a company looking to get involved in social media then you need to be prepared to receive positive feedback and negative feedback.  In my opinion the negative feedback is more important and in fact I would argue that all the feedback you receive is actually positive.  I call it negative feedback because it is portrayed in a critical light, meaning that instead of someone saying how great and amazing you are, someone will tell you that you suck, but the important thing is to find out why.

Positive feedback is easy to give.  Let’s say you release a new widget, next thing you know people are praising you saying your widget is the greatest thing since sliced bread…ya…so?  Sure positive feedback is great, it let’s you know that you are onto something, that you are doing something right.  The positive feedback you get is a good indication that your product or service is satisfying customer needs or wants.  However, you are never going to get 100% positive feedback.  Some of (if not a lot of) the feedback you receive is actually going to be negative, what matters is how you deal with the negative feedback.  Make your negative feedback actionable and turn it into something positive.

Negative feedback is actually positive feedback, stay with me on this one.  Let’s say you create a widget and release it, now instead of praise, people are making voodoo dolls out of you and telling you that your product sucks (ok if they are making voodoo dolls then you probably have a serious problem).  Instead of going into defensive mode, listen to what your users are telling you and make the changes they are requesting.  Look at negative feedback as constructive criticism because that is what it is (minus the voodoo doll).  If people tell you they don’t like something about your product then you know what you need to fix.  If someone tells you that your product or service is buggy, doesn’t work, looks bad, etc. then you know what you need to improve upon, this information is priceless as it shapes your product or service into what it is.    Collectively, your feedback is a giant focus group comprised of users who want to tell you what they think about your product (or you, your brand, your company).  No focus groups is always going to have 100% of the people say they liked the product.

The reason I wanted to address this is because a lot of people are scared to use social media because of the negative feedback they may receive.  I’ll share a little story with you about some negative feedback I received when I first started writing.  During the first month of my blogging I was chastised by a reader who called me out for not editing my posts for grammatical errors.  The criticisms were rather harsh and at first I felt a little upset and defensive, but then I realized that the reader just told me what I needed to fix.  I thanked the reader for his comments and have since tried to be more vigilant of my grammar.  This is just one of the many ways to take a seemingly negative piece of feedback and turn into positive feedback.  I receive comments and emails from readers all the time critiquing my posts or asking me to remove certain aesthetic things, and guess what, I listen and respond to all of them.  Every piece of feedback I receive I consider positive.  The fact that someone is taking the time to interact with me and share their opinion is humbling and I am grateful for every comment or e-mail I get.

How do you respond to the feedback you get?  How have you been able to take a seemingly negative piece of feedback and turn into something positive?

Thanks for reading

Did you enjoy the post?please subscribe to my RSS feed!

An article by the “Technology Evangelist” states:

“You don’t need to have a 2-way conversation to build a large following on Twitter. Publishing content people interesting, such a software updates, headlines, or humor are valuable whether or not you engage your followers.”

Oh Really?  You mean I’ve been wasting my time communicating with my twitter followers this whole time!?  DAMN!!

The examples that “Ed Kohler” (the writer of the article) uses are:

• wordpress (wordpress)
• Barack Obama (BarackObama)
• macrumors (macrumors)
• Stephen Colbert (StephenColbert)
• Henry Rollins (HenryRollins)

The biggest flaw with Ed’s assumption “that you don’t need a 2-way communication on twitter” is that the examples he uses are already big name brands, companies, or individuals.  I can say for a fact that one of the biggest factors that helped me get all of my followers, was interaction and communication.  I think there needs to be a separation between established and non-established names.  If you are running for president such as, oh…I don’t know, Barack Obama, then millions of people already know who you are and what you are trying to do, no kidding you’re going to have thousands of twitter followers.  But if your name is Jacob Morgan and you’re not running for president, how the heck do you think you are going to get 30,000 + twitter followers?  By spamming them and pushing out content to them?  Put down the crack pipe my friend.

The second flaw with Ed’s assumption is that the goal of twitter is to “build a large following on twitter,” seriously?  Do you actually think the goal that individuals and companies are going after is quantity of twitter followers? (I hope not).  Twitter is used as a communication platform between people, it’s not the quantity of the people you have following but the quality.  If you have 100,000 twitter followers and no 2 way interaction then what’s the point?  That’s like using SEO to get your page ranked number 1 on google while your conversion rate stays at 0, let’s wise up here shall we?

What do you think?  Do you need 2-way communication on twitter?

Thanks for reading

Did you enjoy the post?please subscribe to my RSS feed!

How many business models can you think of for a startup?

I won’t go into all the details and specifics of the various business models that startups can go after but a few them include selling adverting, charging a subscription fee, licensing software, etc.  There is one business model that appears to be somewhat popular yet I don’t hear anyone addressing it…acquisition.  As we begin to hear about startups such as socialthing get acquired by large companies such as AOL, one can only wonder if acquisition is indeed a viable business model that should be the end goal of a business.

Companies such as twitter and seesmic have not had a revenue generating business model since they have been created, yet they keep receiving funding…why?  Because if you are a VC it makes a bit more sense to invest in the companies.  A VC will invest in several companies, many will fail, but only one needs to succeed in order for the VC to make money.  So essentially a VC is hedging the risk by diversifying their portfolio.  But back to the company, is acquisition a business model or it a bit of luck?  When Socialthing started off did they sit around a table together and say, “we are going to build something that is going to get acquired and that is how we are going to make our money.”  Do you think seesmic and twitter are just stalling waiting for someone to come around and snag them up too?

In my opinion a successful business is able to generate revenue prior to acquisition and although I am not a big fan of advertising, it is still a business model (that every startup in the world seems to be going after).  The only other post I was able to find that directly addresses acquisition as a business model comes from the Disqus blog.  Now keep in mind that there is a difference between a company already generating revenue on its own and then getting acquired vs a company that is not generating any revenue (except for vs funding) and is waiting to get acquired.  If a company is not able to sustain itself by generating revenue then it has no business being a “business.”

We hear a lot about the successful startups that get acquired yet for every 1 that makes it, 10 fail.  Check out the web 2.0 directory and you will see that a handful of new companies are added every single day.

So I ask all of you, is acquisition a business model that startups should build their businesses off of?  Why or why not?

thanks for reading

Did you enjoy the post?please subscribe to my RSS feed!

I’m a music lover of all sorts and when I find a good example of truly unique and innovative music I feel compelled to share it.  Recently I discovered a one of a kind mix by DJ Shadow and Cut Chemist (love these guys), they mixed together the Gilligan’s Island them with Led Zeppelin’s Stairway to heaven; two unlikely songs that come together to make some extraordinary…this my friends, is innovation.

Would you have ever thought to put these two songs together?  What did you think of the mix?

thanks for reading

Did you enjoy the post?please subscribe to my RSS feed!