A Business Technology Place

Media subscriptions – Where do you spend your media dollars?

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal about Bloomberg charging for access to their content reminded me digital content providers are competing for my wallet-share. In 2015 I cut the cord with cable/satellite and haven’t regretted it. Now, the digital content I consume for video is based on month-to-month subscriptions. I choose the content valuable to me or that I consider worth paying for. No obligations. Easy. My current list:

Increasingly, news and media providers are also moving to subscription models for their digital content. As the number of subscribers for paper content decreases the media outlets need sources of revenue to sustain themselves. Currently, I don’t pay for online news, data analysis, and opinion articles. I still retrieve news on the internet from ad-only sites, teaser rates, or free allowances. To be fair, I listen to some news on the radio or through a XM satellite subscription. I do enjoy in-depth and good analysis on topics. I just haven’t settled on a favorite to lock-in.

What does that mean for all of us now and in the future? As more providers move toward subscription models, we’ll have to make choices on our media subscriptions to keep our overall spending in-check. How much will brand loyalty influence our decisions?  For me initially, I chose Sling TV as an online streaming provider. After a couple of years I switched to PS Vue based on different in programming packages for live sports. But with Netflix, I haven’t really actively shopped them for alternative providers like Hulu and Amazon.  Have I developed brand loyalty to Netflix? If I pay for a subscription to the New York Times (which I don’t) would I not pay for a subscription to additional online new providers like Bloomberg and the Washington Post?

Where do you spend your media dollar?

Right Sizing Advertisements

Advertisement cat-and-mouse.

For the record, I use an advertisement blocker extension in Google Chrome already. I don’t mind advertisements, because I realize they are necessary to promote products and services that drive the economy (the 4 Ps!). But let’s be honest. The placements of advertisements can be annoying when they disrupt the content of a broadcast, web page, place, or event. This is why I started using an Ad Blocker extension on my web browser several years ago. I wanted a smoother flow of content on the pages I was reading.

Creating guidelines.

In March 2017, the Coalition for Better Ads released some guidelines entitled Initial Better Ads Standards. The document is based on consumer research to identify the types of ads that promote poor experience ratings and create a greater propensity for consumers to adopt third party tools to block advertisements. This is the first step towards creating guidelines for internet ads similar to governing provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 for email.

Now, Google will start enforcing the “Better Ads Standards” by automatically blocking ads formats that fall outside the boundaries for acceptable-use. This is a big deal for several reasons:

  • Influence – Google Chrome is the most popular web browser in recent years according to multiple reports and studies from web traffic use.
  • Business Impact – The revenue model for some businesses will fall outside the boundaries of what is acceptable. Businesses will have to adjust to maintain revenue.
  • Industry Position- About $3 of every $10 on digital ads goes to Google according to this report in the Wall Street Journal. Is there a conflict of interest and will Google’s stance ultimately drive more revenue for Google?

A step forward, let’s take another one.

The Better Ads guidelines are not focused on what advertisers says, but how they say it. That’s a great start to bring some decency guidelines for how advertisers insert themselves onto my screen.

A few of the ads Google will block: Pop-up with Countdown, Sticky, and Auto-play Video with Sound (Source: Coalition for Better Ads)

The next thing I would like to see is a way for consumers to filter ad content based on their preferences. Perhaps the Better Ads group could designate ad content areas that could be objectionable such as alcohol, gambling, pornography, etc. Many publishers and ad servers are already making great strides in this space as they serve ads based on the content of the page or based on past searches. This is ad relevance and is a primary factor in driving clicks from consumers.  I have experimented with Google AdSense on my personal blog and Google allows me to exclude certain topic categories from displaying (Kudos Google).  My point is most of the decision power today is in the hands of the site owners and advertisers. I’d like to see the consumers have a bit more say in what type of content is displayed in the advertisements they see. Let’s keep right sizing this topic…..

Onward and Upward!

Give it a go

Disclaimer: I am a Google Adsense user on my blog, but I do not pay for Google ad placements on search results.

Several years ago I received an offer from Google for $100 worth of free ad placements. It was the start of a grand adventure at work. We ended up using the $100 credit to purchases ads for the eCommerce site at work and then multiplied the value of the credit. As you would imagine that led to more ad purchases (paid this time) and quite a bit of fun exploring different ad placement,.  bidding, and keyword techniques.

This last week, I received a very similar offer from Google. They are offering $100 if I spend $25. It’s for new customers only. I am classified as a new user because I’ve not used paid ad placements with my personal account or blog. It’s tempting to play with the credit for fun, but the purpose of my blog isn’t eCommerce sales.

I like the concept. I remember telling my manager that configuring the bidding and pricing of Google adwords felt like gambling. The great thing was it was easier to turn the odds in our favor and no one became suspicious if we left the day with more money than when we started.

So with all that said, I do experiment with adsense ad placements on my blog. Maybe I should give it a go.

Onward and upward!

B2B eCommerce – It’s different

Some thoughts about B2B eCommerce.

B2B eCommerce has been part of my life since 1999 when I worked for the John Harland Company. At that time, I was on a team creating and deploying an internet site for bank employees to order checks for their customers. In the last fifteen years I have worked with both B2B and B2C sites and I can say that B2B sites are different. Business approach B2B differently. B2B development efforts focus on different aspects of eCommerce.

Much of B2B eCommerce focus is on functionality and features. The development teams often focus on the business workflows within the customer’s business as a way to add value. As a result, there is less focus on customer experience created by UI designs than a B2C site. There is less focus on metrics like conversion and bounce rates. When I product managed a B2B site I liked to ask, “how can we create a flow that reduces speed bumps and just enables the customer to complete the transaction they signed-on to complete?” In other words, let’s not trip the customer and just let them create a transaction. B2C sites like to create diversions in hopes that customers will add more items to the cart before completing check-out.

Andy Hoar of Forrester recently blogged that US B2B eCommerce is forecasted to reach $1.1 trillion dollars by 2020.  This is not surprising, because technology continues advance to put capabilities in the hands of those that purchase for businesses.

Hoar cites a couple of contributing reasons:

  1. Today 70% of B2B purchases are researched online but only 30% are purchased online. Forrester predicts that gap will shrink.
  2. The economics of electronic order fulfillment are better than manual orders. Businesses know that electronic orders reduce costs in order entry labor, phone support, and supplies. Not to mention electronic orders typically create faster fulfillment times for the customer. When I worked for Harland we called this idea “Channel Shift”. There was a metric each year to incrementally reduce manual orders by increasing electronic orders. We even knew the dollar amount of cost take-out associated with shifting 1% of orders to our eCommerce channels.

But wait. Other factors are at play that influence the number of B2B eCommerce orders.

As I think through my experience and challenges my teams have encountered with “channel shift” a couple of things jump out:

1. Custom orders – eCommerce sites are easier when the product set for a customer is SKU driven from a catalog. The workflow changes when customers are allowed to customize a product. As the number of customizable features grows so does the level of complexity.

But more than the technology challenge with custom products is the education and knowledge challenge with the product set.  Buyers on B2B eCommerce sites are not necessarily experts on the products they are purchasing. They rely on the research and the company representatives for this expertise.

2. Relationships – Much of the B2B commerce marketplace is built on relationships. A successful salesperson will add value to a relationship by bringing product expertise to the discussion with the customer. The successful salesperson will show the customer how the product can be used within the customer’s business to drive value.

Believe me, I want to enable and influence channel shift. But this is more than a technology puzzle. There are businesses processes, product attributes, and people relationships that are part of the equation. I haven’t found a set magic formula or one-size-fits all approach. What is clear is that businesses and customers are looking for ways to use technology to make their processes more efficient. With both sides looking for a solution, success is there for the taking.

Onward and upward!

The speed of software releases

How fast do you want software released?

I was part of a discussion this week week about the velocity of production software deployments. I didn’t use velocity in the context of estimating software but rather the benefits of a regular cadence to releases and the focus it brings to the testing effort. The velocity of the team affects the frequency of production changes and thus in a sense affects the overall risk to the organization for disruption to existing services.  If we release software too quickly, I believe we increase the risk of service disruption and create inefficiencies in system-level testing. If we release software too slowly then we increase the risk of losing competitively in the marketplace as well as losing customers.

Boris from GoldenEye knew what he liked.

Boris from GoldenEye knew what he liked.

This wasn’t a discussion about agile software development principles.

For my part, I was curious about the relationship of production software releases,production defects created by those releases, and the testing effort required for approval. Maybe velocity was the wrong term to use based on its agile methodology definition.  My focus was on the frequency of change events to the production environment. In the most basic form, software releases can arranged by individual unit (feature/bug).  Each time there is a production release it requires at a minimum unit testing for the bug or feature that is new or has changed. But when we don’t do some level of full system testing we may miss items that are broken as result of the code change. All production releases by nature have some element of risk to disrupt current services.

What’s the right software release frequency?

Obviously the answer to this question depends on a variety of factors. Software and business teams make choices and decision about how they answer the question.  I look for a balance to provide support in the following areas:

  • Quality Assurance – The testing effort should have time  focus on feature and system-level testing.  Full system testing should reduce the risk of introducing new bugs into production as result of the new code.
  • Maintenance window – Excluding full system outages, the maintenance windows provide an agreed-to time for production updates. So if the maintenance windows are every other week then the software release schedule should not exceed every other week.
  • Priority – Not all production defects require immediate resolution.  The balance is to fix priority defects in a timely manner but not so frequently that it increases the risk and pressure associated with quality assurance thoroughness.

Remember what it is all about.

The point of velocity is not to tick a check-list that we have a process. The velocity does have benefits with estimating. But the real value is to provide a regular cadence of features with the highest quality to the customer. Most of all, the customer should understand the flow and be part of the process.

Onward and upward.