Windows 7 was released in October of 2009. 2009! It took nearly 3 years for Windows 7 to become the worlds most popular operating system.
Think about that the next time you try talk to anyone about anything “new”…..
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/03/tech/gaming-gadgets/microsoft-windows-7/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
If your company offends one of Twitter’s advertisers, even if your message is true, be prepared to be shut down….
=================
(CNN) — Twitter users are rightly aghast that the company on Sunday banned a user for openly criticizing NBC’s coverage of the Olympics. After Guy Adams, a British newspaper reporter for The Independent, posted negative comments about NBC’s tape-delayed Olympics coverage (including one executive’s work e-mail for viewers to make complaints), Twitter alerted its business partner — NBC — and showed the network how to file a complaint capable of shutting down the offending user.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/01/opinion/rushkoff-twitter-restricted/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7
=================
So, what do we have here? A British newspaper reporter (representing a media company) criticizes their competitor NBC (another media company), but since NBC is an advertiser on Twitter, Twitter shuts down the non advertising account.
“One Apple product, something that didn’t exist five years ago, has higher sales than everything Microsoft has to offer. More than Windows, Office, Xbox, Bing, Windows Phone, and every other product that Microsoft has created since 1975. In the quarter ended March 31, 2012, iPhone had sales of $22.7 billion; Microsoft Corporation, $17.4 billion.”
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2012/08/microsoft-lost-mojo-steve-ballmer
——————————————–
“When you do important work, work that changes things and work that matters, it’s inconceivable that the change you’re trying to make will be met with complete approval.
Trying to please everyone will water down your efforts, frustrate your forward motion and ultimately fail.
The balancing act is to work to please precisely the right people, and just enough of them, to get your best work out the door.
Shun the non-believers.”
…Seth Godin
Facebook announced in May that only 16% of a brands content in actually seen by that brands fans. That means if you think you have 10,000 “fans”, that only 1,600 actually saw your message.
http://mashable.com/2012/05/24/facebook-post-reach/
So…now that you have spent a lot of money driving YOUR customer away from your owend site to you Facebook site, what do you do if you want to reach more than 16% of your customers that you have driven to Facebook?
Facebook now provides the answer! You can simply pay Facebook, and you can buy your brand’s message onto your customers Facebook page.
http://mashable.com/2012/05/31/facebook-promoted-posts-tips/
It is the greatest campaign ever! You spend your money driving your customers away from your site to your Facebook site, and then you have to pay Facebook so that your customers actually see your message and then click back to your site.?!?!?!
Maybe there is an easier way? Maybe you should be driving traffic to your site and not pay the middle man?
by Chris Taylor – Mashable
Here’s one of the more painful parts of taking a company public: You have to make an honest assessment, in front of the whole world, of all the things that could kill your business. Facebook is no exception.
In its SEC filing, as required by law, the company outlined a whopping 35 “risk factors” that could “materially and adversely affect” Facebook. It’s a comprehensive list of every threat the social network currently faces. Some are head-slappingly obvious (they could lose users and advertisers), while others are more revealing (Facebook isn’t making any money from its mobile platform — so what if that grows and web users shrink?)
That may seem like a lot, but not in comparison to recent tech IPOs. Linkedin listed 42 risk factors in its filing, Zynga offered 44, and Groupon had 55.
Does that make Facebook a better bet for investors? You be the judge. What follows is a summary, in plain (or at least plainer) English, of the things Facebook says could kill it.
In other words, here is every single little worry that keeps Mark Zuckerberg up at night. We’ve bolded the ones that sound particularly troubling to us.
1. We could simply lose users, or fail to add new ones.
2. We could lose advertisers (like $10 million from GM yesterday) — and new technology may let users block ads.
3. Facebook’s mobile platform doesn’t show ads — so the more that grows, the worse for us.
4. The platform for Facebook apps might not be successful.
5. The competition from Google, Microsoft and Twitter could heat up — not to mention other social networks around the world.
6. More governments could restrict access to Facebook.
7. Users could turn their noses up at new products.
8. The Facebook culture is all about rapid innovation and getting users engaged — and that could come at the cost of profits.
9. Unspecified future events could tarnish our brand.
10. Bugs might give people access to users’ information that they’re not supposed to see.
11. The media could turn on us.
12. Our quarterly financial results could be difficult to predict.
13. Zynga accounts for 12% of our revenue. If we part ways, that could seriously hurt us.
14. Our revenue grew by 88% last year — and that’s simply not sustainable. Growth is bound to decline.
15. The U.S. laws and regulations we’re governed by could change or be reinterpreted.
16. If our patents and copyrights aren’t granted — or aren’t effective — it could seriously hurt us.
17. We have some patent lawsuits on our hands that could end badly.
18. We’re also involved in class-action lawsuits, and we could lose them too.
19. Mark Zuckerberg has a massive amount of shares, which concentrates power in the hands of one man.
20. There’s a complicated tax liability connected to a particular kind of stock unit we gave out — one that will be taxed at 45%.
21. If we need more rounds of investment, the terms might not be reasonable.
22. Costs might grow faster than revenue.
23. A lot of our servers are handled by third parties, and they might be disrupted.
24. We’ve started building a lot of our own data centers to handle traffic, and we’ve got limited experience doing this kind of thing.
25. Our software is incredibly complex and may have a lot of bugs.
26. We can’t say for sure that we’ll handle our growth effectively — we have more than 3,000 employees now, and that could spin out of control.
27. If we lose our leaders, like Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg, that would really harm us.
28. People might sue us over all sorts of stuff posted on Facebook — intellectual property, copyright, defamation, and so on.
29. Viruses, hacking, phishing and malware. Oh my.
30. Payment systems in Facebook apps could mean new government regulations.
31. We’re continually expanding abroad, and we may not understand all the risks in new countries.
32. We’re planning to acquire lots of other companies, which could disrupt everything at Facebook.
33. We might default on our leases or our debt.
34. Our tax liabilities, in general, are bigger than we thought.
35. U.S. tax code reform, if it happens, might hit us where it hurts.
.
.
.
It used to be that if you went on CNN, the 76th biggest website in the world according to Quantcast, that Facebook was the first thing you saw in the coveted right hand column. Now just a few months later, CNN has removed Facebook from its “above the fold” location and CNN no longer publishes what your Facebook friends are doing back and forth from CNN to Facebook.
Also of note, if you click the “login” button on the CNN homepage, it will log you into CNN, NOT Facebook.
Could it be that CNN is joining the ever growing list of publishers that have realized that Facebook is also in the business of publishing its audience and selling it at a profit? Fox News did it first. You have to look very hard to even find Facebook on their page.
It’s almost like CNN is trying to build its own audience.
Imagine that!
Want more “Likes”? Just call up the Likestore and buy some!
The Likestore is “The only reliable online store for buying
Facebook fans, YouTube viewers, Twitter followers and much more!”
Why try to own your customer and increase sales and profitability when all you have to do is buy fake likes?
Companies and agencies believe this stuff? (by the way, this is REAL. Click the link)
.
.
.
The common view that Facebook “likes” equate to brand engagement took a hit last month when the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute shared some interesting data with us. Researchers found that less than 1% of fans of the 200 biggest brands on Facebook actually engaged.
Their conclusion was based on a six-week study of Facebook’s People Talking About This metric, with researchers considering the number as a proportion of fan bases. Only 0.45% of fans engaged, if you subtract likes to isolate for more meaningful activity, including shares and comments. This confirmed something many readers already suspected: Facebook fan bases and actual engagement aren’t the same thing.
Not Many Fans Are Creating Content, But That Might Not Be a Bad Thing
One of the more interesting questions arising from the study is whether the findings apply to passion brands, like Nike or Harley-Davidson, as opposed to ubiquitous products that, loyal as their audiences might be, don’t get folks lathered up at the mere sight of the logo. Though the short answer is that passion brands might get slightly more engagement, it’s not enough to throw off the overall findings.
Looking at 10 passion brands — including Nike, Old Spice, Harley-Davidson, Porsche, Ford Mustang, Jack Daniels and Tiffany & Co. — the researchers found an average engagement of 0.66% The average engagement for the 10 brands with the largest fan bases was 0.36%.
I asked Senior Research Associate Karen Nelson-Field if that difference is statistically significant. In an email, she replied that it is — because of the large sample sizes — but that there’s something more important.
“Only one brand of the entire 200 in the analysis got an engagement level of 2%. A few over 1%. Most under 1%,” Ms. Nelson-Field wrote. “The significance here lies in the very tiny rate of engagement across all brands in a big sample. So, yes, we could say that Brand A (at 1%) gets twice as much engagement as Brand B (at 0.5%), but that’s like saying, ‘You have 50 cents, I have $1, so I am twice as rich as you.’ ”
The ultimate question is about the cost-effectiveness of engaging twice as many fans, Ms. Nelson-Field said. “Is the variation worth [the outlay], given the most you could expect is just over 1%?”
So there it is. Brands we think of as sexy have almost as tough a slog as a laundry soap in getting their large fan bases to do something.
One final data point from the study: Parsing by category, Ms. Nelson-Field found that the highest engagement was in alcohol, cars, cosmetics and electronics. The lowest was in confectionery, fast-moving consumer goods (such as laundry products), retailers, and software, social platforms and apps.
===============
Interpublic, Omnicom, Publicis. Together they own nearly every major advertising agency in the world. They create most of the media you see every day, from the internet to the Super Bowl ads. All three are huge internationally traded public companies, and their combined market cap is $25.81 BILLION dollars.
They all charge their clients to put links to Facebook in their ads.
Yet….if you go to any of their websites, none of them have a link to Facebook.
Think about it….
Marilyn Monroe is now officially verified on Twitter. That means that Twitter “verifies” that everything that Marilyn is posting today is real content posted today by the real Marilyn Monroe.
Doesn’t that kinda, maybe, sorta, make Twitter verification worthless?
