Every few weeks I see a story in the American media about dabbawallahs, a network of delivery men who carry freshly cooked lunches to office workers every day.
Dabbawallahs are very popular--I have used the service when I was working in Mumbai (Bombay). They are inexpensive, accurate and always on-time. Fortune and other magazines have done a story on them. Prince Charles visited them on his trip to Mumbai and even wedding one of the dabbawallahs to his wedding to Camilla. More from Wikipedia.
Now I see this piece from The New York Times.
It seems as if every writer who goes to Mumbai and sees the dabbawallahs wants to do a story on them, never mind the exact same thing has been written about many, many times before.
I wonder if they even check Factiva/Lexis Nexis before they pitch the story.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill
I saw this beautiful documentary on PBS last night and it was amazing. The documentary follows a homeless street musician, Mark Bittner, as he interacts with a flock of wild parrots on Telegraph Hill in San Francisco.
It was a wonderful documentary and brought tears to my eyes in many parts. But then I am a sucker for heart-warming animal stories!
Nearly 15-hours later I can still remember the names of the main characters (all parrots!) from the film and I think Bittner is a remarkable person. I would love to meet him someday and talk to him about his experience and his life now.
Here's the link from PBS about the documentary.
It was a wonderful documentary and brought tears to my eyes in many parts. But then I am a sucker for heart-warming animal stories!
Nearly 15-hours later I can still remember the names of the main characters (all parrots!) from the film and I think Bittner is a remarkable person. I would love to meet him someday and talk to him about his experience and his life now.
Here's the link from PBS about the documentary.
Foleo is Palm's Folly
It's been a very busy day.
After months of anticipation and secrecy Palm finally revealed its new device today. The gadget called Foleo looks like a small laptop and is intended as a companion to your smartphone. It will let users edit documents, email and surf the Net on the go.
Palm had been saving news of this announcement for the All Things D conference.
I did a first take that just talks about the device. When I saw the first pictures of it, my reaction was "Is this it?." My second thought: "What was Palm thinking?"
Most analysts I called felt the same.
From my second story on Foleo: Foleo is simply too limited in its use: It doesn't have a hard drive, runs the Linux operating system and falls into an in-between space, being larger than a phone and smaller than a laptop. The device basically just adds to the gadget clutter that users want to free themselves from, say analysts.
For the detailed story, click here.
I think Palm miscalculated badly with this device. I also think it is a company out of touch with reality and the only thing driving the stock now is the buyout speculation.
And the whole thing with Foleo will only make them an even more attractive buyout bait.
After months of anticipation and secrecy Palm finally revealed its new device today. The gadget called Foleo looks like a small laptop and is intended as a companion to your smartphone. It will let users edit documents, email and surf the Net on the go.
Palm had been saving news of this announcement for the All Things D conference.
I did a first take that just talks about the device. When I saw the first pictures of it, my reaction was "Is this it?." My second thought: "What was Palm thinking?"
Most analysts I called felt the same.
From my second story on Foleo: Foleo is simply too limited in its use: It doesn't have a hard drive, runs the Linux operating system and falls into an in-between space, being larger than a phone and smaller than a laptop. The device basically just adds to the gadget clutter that users want to free themselves from, say analysts.
For the detailed story, click here.
I think Palm miscalculated badly with this device. I also think it is a company out of touch with reality and the only thing driving the stock now is the buyout speculation.
And the whole thing with Foleo will only make them an even more attractive buyout bait.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Journalists and PR
Guy Kawasaki has a post today about the top ten reasons why PR doesn't work. I have heard this from my friends in PR and it's always an interesting conversation because I am coming at it from the other side of the fence.
In response to Guy's post, Glenn Kelman, CEO of Redfin, suggests entrepreneurs go the DIY route: do-it-yourself. Kelman has a point there. As a journalist, I love hearing from entrepreneurs directly. I am always open to pitches from founder/CEOs themselves. I want to hear their story and I want easy access to them.
But DIY PR is not always practical and doesn't always work well for everyone.
I have had some nightmares with inexperienced, young founder-CEOs. In one case, I had a very, very pushy and very aggressive CEO reach out to me personally all the time. He wouldn't take no for an answer. Those high-pressure tactics might work in sales but not in journalism. Eventually I had to start screening out his calls.
Among other problems I have faced is senior executives that blatantly lie-- something that totally destroys their credibility and turns me from a neutral observer into one that is in the future highly skeptical of their moves. Some executives will also not talk to me if I am not directly writing about them or their company, or will not understand how newsrooms and tight deadlines work.
Part of the problem is that not many CEOs are taught how journalism and the media works. MBA schools don't teach aspiring managers media strategies. For instance, one little secret of working with journalists that most PR people seem to understand well is: Talk to the journalist even if the story is not about you or your company. It's all about the relationship and building your brand.
If I think an executive has great insights/perspective and is willing to share those even if the story is not about him or his company, I respect that. But I am also equally happy to work with experienced, professional PR people. Some, I think, do a great job for their companies and I would say are worth whatever they are getting paid.
The DIY approach to PR also works best, I think, for small companies. As a company grows bigger, I think the CEO/senior management's time is better spent trying to manage and build a company than personally reach out to all journalists.
The ideal situation is do your own PR when your are small and use the money that you might pay a PR agency towards building the company.
As you get bigger, get a good PR agency. By that I mean a group that understands what the need of a particular media outlet is, has a great relationship with the company so it can connect a journalist quickly to the right executive at the firm, and offers other specialized services that a company may need.
That combination is not such a rare thing. I work with some very nice and professional PR people everyday and I respect them because they are good at their jobs. Sure, there are not too many of them but they are not as rare as many people would like to believe.
To round this up, here's a post from Brian Solis that says the conversation should be about how to fix the problem. I will keep my take on Brian's suggestions for another post, another day.
In response to Guy's post, Glenn Kelman, CEO of Redfin, suggests entrepreneurs go the DIY route: do-it-yourself. Kelman has a point there. As a journalist, I love hearing from entrepreneurs directly. I am always open to pitches from founder/CEOs themselves. I want to hear their story and I want easy access to them.
But DIY PR is not always practical and doesn't always work well for everyone.
I have had some nightmares with inexperienced, young founder-CEOs. In one case, I had a very, very pushy and very aggressive CEO reach out to me personally all the time. He wouldn't take no for an answer. Those high-pressure tactics might work in sales but not in journalism. Eventually I had to start screening out his calls.
Among other problems I have faced is senior executives that blatantly lie-- something that totally destroys their credibility and turns me from a neutral observer into one that is in the future highly skeptical of their moves. Some executives will also not talk to me if I am not directly writing about them or their company, or will not understand how newsrooms and tight deadlines work.
Part of the problem is that not many CEOs are taught how journalism and the media works. MBA schools don't teach aspiring managers media strategies. For instance, one little secret of working with journalists that most PR people seem to understand well is: Talk to the journalist even if the story is not about you or your company. It's all about the relationship and building your brand.
If I think an executive has great insights/perspective and is willing to share those even if the story is not about him or his company, I respect that. But I am also equally happy to work with experienced, professional PR people. Some, I think, do a great job for their companies and I would say are worth whatever they are getting paid.
The DIY approach to PR also works best, I think, for small companies. As a company grows bigger, I think the CEO/senior management's time is better spent trying to manage and build a company than personally reach out to all journalists.
The ideal situation is do your own PR when your are small and use the money that you might pay a PR agency towards building the company.
As you get bigger, get a good PR agency. By that I mean a group that understands what the need of a particular media outlet is, has a great relationship with the company so it can connect a journalist quickly to the right executive at the firm, and offers other specialized services that a company may need.
That combination is not such a rare thing. I work with some very nice and professional PR people everyday and I respect them because they are good at their jobs. Sure, there are not too many of them but they are not as rare as many people would like to believe.
To round this up, here's a post from Brian Solis that says the conversation should be about how to fix the problem. I will keep my take on Brian's suggestions for another post, another day.
Staying ahead of the pack
I am feeling good today. My feed reader showed two stories today that brought a smile to my face.
The first is from Troy Wolverton, one of my former colleagues from TheStreet.com. Troy and I never had a chance to work together but he has a story in the Mercury News today about EA stumbling because it misjudged the popularity of the Wii.
Here's my article on this topic published on May 16:
Game makers fail to cash in on console mania
Meanwhile, Businessweek has a story about one of the hottest stocks in the IT security sector, Vasco Data Security.
I noticed this in January and here's my first article about Vasco from then:
Vasco Shares Show Vigor
Here are some of my other stories on Vasco including their recent earnings and a small slip in their stock price.
It's always good to stay ahead of the pack.
The first is from Troy Wolverton, one of my former colleagues from TheStreet.com. Troy and I never had a chance to work together but he has a story in the Mercury News today about EA stumbling because it misjudged the popularity of the Wii.
Here's my article on this topic published on May 16:
Game makers fail to cash in on console mania
Meanwhile, Businessweek has a story about one of the hottest stocks in the IT security sector, Vasco Data Security.
I noticed this in January and here's my first article about Vasco from then:
Vasco Shares Show Vigor
Here are some of my other stories on Vasco including their recent earnings and a small slip in their stock price.
It's always good to stay ahead of the pack.
Cramer on Cramer
Since I started at TheStreet.com I have been surprised by the amount of negative attention that Jim Cramer, founder of the TheStreet.com and host of Mad Money show on CNBC gets.
Cramer has a huge fan following (his show is among the highest rated on CNBC) but he also has many, many people who spend time trying to prove he has no idea what he's talking about.
New York magazine (one of my favorite reads!) has an article written by Cramer himself that reads like part-manifesto to self, and part an attempt to answer some of the recent criticism about him.
Here's why Cramer says why his audience likes him:
Ultimately, it comes down to this: How many successful money managers would want to switch careers and take a huge pay cut in order to be on TV? I can think of only one who’s that out of his mind, and he’s writing this story. No one is trying to compete with me in this space, and that as much as anything has made Mad Money successful.
As to why he is such a polarizing figure:
I’m fearless. Or out of my mind. One way or the other, I think people appreciate the fact that every night I go out and put my head right back on the chopping block by firmly coming out for or against a stock. A lot of commentators shy away from making definitive pronouncements because it’s inherently risky. They’re afraid of picking a stock and then being really, demonstrably wrong. When you pick stocks in the public eye, especially when you do it five days a week like I do, getting some of them wrong is not a risk, it’s a certainty. Being wrong occasionally is simply the price of ever being right. You just have to be tough or foolish enough to tolerate the public humiliation. Another thing I do that no one else does is admit my mistakes. Every Thursday, I reserve a segment of Mad Money for owning up to the stocks I get wrong and trying to learn from my errors. When I blow a call, I joke that such bad stock-picking drives me to sipping cheap blended Scotch on my dirty linoleum floor at home; but that’s plain false. It’s a parquet floor, and it’s expensive single-malt Lagavulin.
I totally agree. It takes a lot of courage to put yourself out there everyday and take a position. Opinions draw reactions. They can be polarizing. But I think people want to hear from someone who isn't afraid to take a stand--one way or the other. It helps them make their decisions better.
If you are even the slightest bit curious about Jim Cramer, I would suggest you read this article. It's a long one but worth your time.
Cramer has a huge fan following (his show is among the highest rated on CNBC) but he also has many, many people who spend time trying to prove he has no idea what he's talking about.
New York magazine (one of my favorite reads!) has an article written by Cramer himself that reads like part-manifesto to self, and part an attempt to answer some of the recent criticism about him.
Here's why Cramer says why his audience likes him:
Ultimately, it comes down to this: How many successful money managers would want to switch careers and take a huge pay cut in order to be on TV? I can think of only one who’s that out of his mind, and he’s writing this story. No one is trying to compete with me in this space, and that as much as anything has made Mad Money successful.
As to why he is such a polarizing figure:
I’m fearless. Or out of my mind. One way or the other, I think people appreciate the fact that every night I go out and put my head right back on the chopping block by firmly coming out for or against a stock. A lot of commentators shy away from making definitive pronouncements because it’s inherently risky. They’re afraid of picking a stock and then being really, demonstrably wrong. When you pick stocks in the public eye, especially when you do it five days a week like I do, getting some of them wrong is not a risk, it’s a certainty. Being wrong occasionally is simply the price of ever being right. You just have to be tough or foolish enough to tolerate the public humiliation. Another thing I do that no one else does is admit my mistakes. Every Thursday, I reserve a segment of Mad Money for owning up to the stocks I get wrong and trying to learn from my errors. When I blow a call, I joke that such bad stock-picking drives me to sipping cheap blended Scotch on my dirty linoleum floor at home; but that’s plain false. It’s a parquet floor, and it’s expensive single-malt Lagavulin.
I totally agree. It takes a lot of courage to put yourself out there everyday and take a position. Opinions draw reactions. They can be polarizing. But I think people want to hear from someone who isn't afraid to take a stand--one way or the other. It helps them make their decisions better.
If you are even the slightest bit curious about Jim Cramer, I would suggest you read this article. It's a long one but worth your time.
Friday, May 25, 2007
THQ Bets Big on Wii
Many analysts and fund managers have been telling me recently they think THQ is the most undervalued of all the game publishers currently.
I did an interview with THQ's CEO Brian Farrell yesterday. Here's the story on TheStreet.com today.
THQ is betting against conventional wisdom in the video-game business. The company is eschewing a one-size-fits-all approach to creating games in favor of segmentation that will match the content to the demographics of the gamers who are most likely to use the device.
The company is also channeling development resources toward the Wii and plans to release 11 games for the console in fiscal 2008.
But that can be a risky plan. Unlike the earlier console cycle where Sony's PS2 ruled over rivals, analysts say that this time around, the three new systems could garner near-equal market share.
For game publishers this means the older plan of creating a title just for one system, known as third-party exclusives, is no longer viable. In an interview with TheStreet.com, Farrell says THQ's plan can still be cost-efficient, and the company's bet on the Wii could pay off in a year.
More at TheStreet.com
I did an interview with THQ's CEO Brian Farrell yesterday. Here's the story on TheStreet.com today.
THQ is betting against conventional wisdom in the video-game business. The company is eschewing a one-size-fits-all approach to creating games in favor of segmentation that will match the content to the demographics of the gamers who are most likely to use the device.
The company is also channeling development resources toward the Wii and plans to release 11 games for the console in fiscal 2008.
But that can be a risky plan. Unlike the earlier console cycle where Sony's PS2 ruled over rivals, analysts say that this time around, the three new systems could garner near-equal market share.
For game publishers this means the older plan of creating a title just for one system, known as third-party exclusives, is no longer viable. In an interview with TheStreet.com, Farrell says THQ's plan can still be cost-efficient, and the company's bet on the Wii could pay off in a year.
More at TheStreet.com
Rebuilding an Oakland Ramp in Record Time
Just 25 days after the I-580 connector on the MacArthur Maze collapsed because of a tanker crash, the ramp is open again.
Last night we were talking about the amazing speed with which a whole ramp was rebuilt.
The San Francisco Chronicle did a profile on the contractor, C.C. Myers whose company is handling the reconstruction.
From the article:
Last night we were talking about the amazing speed with which a whole ramp was rebuilt.
The San Francisco Chronicle did a profile on the contractor, C.C. Myers whose company is handling the reconstruction.
From the article:
Myers won the contract with a bargain-basement bid of $876,075, which is just one-third of what the job is likely to cost him. He's betting on raking in every cent Caltrans has promised if he beats the deadline -- $200,000 for each day the job is finished before June 27, with a maximum payout of $5 million.
It's a gamble, even for a man who once owned a casino, because much more than money is at stake.
What a great great local business story!
Upcoming changes to my blog
I will be making some changes to my blog in the next few days to add new features.
Here's some of the things I am looking to do:
1. Add a search box to make it easier to look for things inside this blog.
2. Create a blog roll and links section that will reflect my favorite blogs and media sites.
3. Play around with the template and see if I want a different look.
4. Categorize my posts better.
Here's some of the things I am looking to do:
1. Add a search box to make it easier to look for things inside this blog.
2. Create a blog roll and links section that will reflect my favorite blogs and media sites.
3. Play around with the template and see if I want a different look.
4. Categorize my posts better.
Out for the long weekend
We are heading to Crater Lake in Oregon for Memorial Day weekend. I will be back at work on Tuesday.
I love road trips and this should be fun!
I love road trips and this should be fun!
Thursday, May 24, 2007
From Google keywords to Newspaper Advertising
I found this very interesting comment in one of Robert Scoble's posts today. Mark, a small business owner, says after nearly seven years of buying Google keywords for advertising, he is thinking of moving back to traditional newspaper advertising because "its becoming more costly to convert adword enquiries."
"I did a test last week in a local paper and pound for pound I got a better return through the paper!!! Never thought I would say that," he says in his comment.
Mark has a more detailed post here about how his cost per click has doubled in the last 12 months. He says his rate of conversion of inquiries through adwords has also gone down during the same period.
This is interesting because it could signal a coming slowdown for Google if its Adwords program is not as effective as it used to be. I wonder what this means for newspapers and if they can be quick and smart enough to turn this situation, if it is true on a wider scale, to their advantage.
(Warning: The content in Mark's other posts is a little shady.)
"I did a test last week in a local paper and pound for pound I got a better return through the paper!!! Never thought I would say that," he says in his comment.
Mark has a more detailed post here about how his cost per click has doubled in the last 12 months. He says his rate of conversion of inquiries through adwords has also gone down during the same period.
This is interesting because it could signal a coming slowdown for Google if its Adwords program is not as effective as it used to be. I wonder what this means for newspapers and if they can be quick and smart enough to turn this situation, if it is true on a wider scale, to their advantage.
(Warning: The content in Mark's other posts is a little shady.)
Dell's Doing the Right Thing with Retail
Dell plans to sell its desktop PCs in Walmart stores soon.
It's a major shift for Dell, which historically eschewed retail sales in favor of the direct-to-consumer model.
I was watching CNBC's story on this earlier today and an analyst said the latest move could mean a dip in margins for Dell. Going to the retail channel could even be an act of desperation on part of the company, the segment suggested.
Sure, Dell's margins will come under pressure but the company needs to make this change.
The direct sales model worked very well for the company till recently but now with the increasing popularity of notebooks, Dell is facing new challenges.
In the last few weeks, I have been shopping for a laptop for and Dell is one of the brands I was looking at.
Yet I don't think I will eventually buy a Dell because I am not comfortable with the brand--for laptops.
I want to see the design, finish, and quality of a device I plan to spend a $1000 on.
I have yet to see any new Dell laptop in any store and I just don't feel a connection to it. With increasing competition and so many choices in the market, Dell's prices are also not low enough to draw me to them.
The idea of buying a notebook off the Dell website doesn't seem to work for me--though when I make my purchase eventually it is more likely to be on the Web.
Dell is starting with two low-end desktop models in stores but I hope it takes the plan to the next level. If I can see, touch and get more comfortable with the brand, I will buy it off their website.
Their retail strategy could then become the perfect complement to their direct-to-consumer model.
It's a major shift for Dell, which historically eschewed retail sales in favor of the direct-to-consumer model.
I was watching CNBC's story on this earlier today and an analyst said the latest move could mean a dip in margins for Dell. Going to the retail channel could even be an act of desperation on part of the company, the segment suggested.
Sure, Dell's margins will come under pressure but the company needs to make this change.
The direct sales model worked very well for the company till recently but now with the increasing popularity of notebooks, Dell is facing new challenges.
In the last few weeks, I have been shopping for a laptop for and Dell is one of the brands I was looking at.
Yet I don't think I will eventually buy a Dell because I am not comfortable with the brand--for laptops.
I want to see the design, finish, and quality of a device I plan to spend a $1000 on.
I have yet to see any new Dell laptop in any store and I just don't feel a connection to it. With increasing competition and so many choices in the market, Dell's prices are also not low enough to draw me to them.
The idea of buying a notebook off the Dell website doesn't seem to work for me--though when I make my purchase eventually it is more likely to be on the Web.
Dell is starting with two low-end desktop models in stores but I hope it takes the plan to the next level. If I can see, touch and get more comfortable with the brand, I will buy it off their website.
Their retail strategy could then become the perfect complement to their direct-to-consumer model.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
BlogHer in Chicago this year
Robert Scoble's post today about BlogHer, a blogging community for women, reminded me of my interview last year with Elisa Camahort, one of the three founders of the site.
BlogHer is having their conference this year from July 27-29 in Chicago.
Last year's conference in San Jose was a big hit and drew more than 700 attendees. And Elisa was really friendly and very accessible when I set out to do a story on the conference for Red Herring magazine.
What surprised me was not just the size of the community or how active it was but that many big name advertisers had realized the potential of that audience and were rushing to sponsor the event. You can see some of the fun schwag the attendees got last year in my story.
Good luck to BlogHer and all its attendees for this year's conference.
Here's the article I wrote last year after the BlogHer conference in San Jose. Since the link on the Red Herring website requires registration I am posting the whole story here.
She-Blogs
Hugs, kisses, and finely manicured feet were in abundance at Silicon Valley’s latest technology conference. But the 700-plus mostly female attendees of the second annual BlogHer conference weren’t there just to socialize.
Major advertisers like General Motors, Yahoo, and Johnson & Johnson were watching closely, eager to tap into a potentially big marketing opportunity. “This is probably the most important women’s media network,” says Elisa Camahort, president of events and marketing for BlogHer.
Indeed, 46 percent of bloggers in the United States are women, according to a survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project last month. “While women still aren’t writing and reading blogs as often as men, we’re catching up, especially when it comes to reading blogs at least weekly,” Charlene Li, an analyst with Forrester Research, wrote recently in her blog.
The number of attendees at this year’s BlogHer conference, held in San Jose, California on July 28-29, more than doubled over last year. BlogHer is hoping to leverage those numbers to transform itself into a powerful online presence.
The site’s 4,000 bloggers post on topics ranging from health, food and drink, religion and spirituality, to “mommy & family.” The Palo, Alto, California-based company, founded by Ms. Camahort and her partners, Lisa Stone and Jory Des Jardins, launched an ad network for the site on June 1. The “Mommy Bloggers,” as many of the community’s members are known, are becoming a huge draw for corporate America, says Ms. Stone.
“Women control 83 percent of household spending,” she says. “Online, many of these women are having conversations about what they want to buy, what they want to read, and what they like—conversations that are difficult to find elsewhere.”
If you want to know what women really want, the BlogHer swag bag could offer clues. Among the items: a bib, a 64-MB USB JumpDrive, a fast food book, a notebook, a pen, and an Elexa condom.
BlogHer is having their conference this year from July 27-29 in Chicago.
Last year's conference in San Jose was a big hit and drew more than 700 attendees. And Elisa was really friendly and very accessible when I set out to do a story on the conference for Red Herring magazine.
What surprised me was not just the size of the community or how active it was but that many big name advertisers had realized the potential of that audience and were rushing to sponsor the event. You can see some of the fun schwag the attendees got last year in my story.
Good luck to BlogHer and all its attendees for this year's conference.
Here's the article I wrote last year after the BlogHer conference in San Jose. Since the link on the Red Herring website requires registration I am posting the whole story here.
She-Blogs
Hugs, kisses, and finely manicured feet were in abundance at Silicon Valley’s latest technology conference. But the 700-plus mostly female attendees of the second annual BlogHer conference weren’t there just to socialize.
Major advertisers like General Motors, Yahoo, and Johnson & Johnson were watching closely, eager to tap into a potentially big marketing opportunity. “This is probably the most important women’s media network,” says Elisa Camahort, president of events and marketing for BlogHer.
Indeed, 46 percent of bloggers in the United States are women, according to a survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project last month. “While women still aren’t writing and reading blogs as often as men, we’re catching up, especially when it comes to reading blogs at least weekly,” Charlene Li, an analyst with Forrester Research, wrote recently in her blog.
The number of attendees at this year’s BlogHer conference, held in San Jose, California on July 28-29, more than doubled over last year. BlogHer is hoping to leverage those numbers to transform itself into a powerful online presence.
The site’s 4,000 bloggers post on topics ranging from health, food and drink, religion and spirituality, to “mommy & family.” The Palo, Alto, California-based company, founded by Ms. Camahort and her partners, Lisa Stone and Jory Des Jardins, launched an ad network for the site on June 1. The “Mommy Bloggers,” as many of the community’s members are known, are becoming a huge draw for corporate America, says Ms. Stone.
“Women control 83 percent of household spending,” she says. “Online, many of these women are having conversations about what they want to buy, what they want to read, and what they like—conversations that are difficult to find elsewhere.”
If you want to know what women really want, the BlogHer swag bag could offer clues. Among the items: a bib, a 64-MB USB JumpDrive, a fast food book, a notebook, a pen, and an Elexa condom.
Columbia Journalism Review
I recently subscribed to the Columbia Journalism Review, a magazine from my alma mater that aims to act as a "watchdog and friend of the press."
Two issues later, I can say, I am really happy with my decision to get it.
The current issue is wonderful and has some really interesting articles including one by my former rediff.com colleague Basharat Peer on the paucity of enterprise reporting stories in the Indian media.
This is the article from CJR that I was reading earlier today. How often does the press beat the SEC to accounting fraud stories? The quick answer: Not too often.
For more, check out the story, and, if you love journalism but don't have a subscription to CJR I totally recommend you get it asap!
Two issues later, I can say, I am really happy with my decision to get it.
The current issue is wonderful and has some really interesting articles including one by my former rediff.com colleague Basharat Peer on the paucity of enterprise reporting stories in the Indian media.
This is the article from CJR that I was reading earlier today. How often does the press beat the SEC to accounting fraud stories? The quick answer: Not too often.
For more, check out the story, and, if you love journalism but don't have a subscription to CJR I totally recommend you get it asap!
Media River and ClickSurge
I don't cover the web applications anymore but a pitch for a company called MediaRiver, formerly known as Intellext, got me curious.
I checked out their press release today and, wow!, there's more jargon in there than I could handle.
Here's what the company says their latest product called ClickSurge does:
ClickSurge, MediaRiver's new offering, enables Web publishers to guide
Internet users to the publishers' online content in a discovery-based
contextual model.
Good luck trying to understand that and how the technology works just from the press release!
I checked out the website and here's what, I think, is going on.
Intellext, as Media River was formerly called, created a product called Watson, a desktop program accessible from within Microsoft Office or Internet Explorer. As a user works on a topic, Watson running in background can look for relevant documents from the Web and bring it to the user without having to open a browser. Watson integrates with Google search and other search engines and the company positions it as a "search engine of search engines."
ClickSurge will customize the Watson idea for content publishers on the Web. Here's an example from a Chicago Sun-Times article on the company:
If a user at the People magazine Web site reads an article on Britney Spears, ClickSurge will match a dozen or more words, and offer "next clicks" to links to other articles relating to Spears. In contrast, many Web sites generate random links, which are less likely to hook readers and get them to stay at a Web site. Such sites, in this case, might offer links to more general entertainment news or even randomly selected links.
Not having seen a ClickSurge demo I am not sure how effective it will be. But the ClickSurge pitch reminds me of similar attempts being made by Claria.
Claria was once derided for having software that acted suspiciously like spyware. The company almost filed for IPO before all the negative publicity around spyware forced it to back out. In 2005, Claria decided to reinvent itself and offer publishers a personalization platform.
I need to look at Media River more closely to figure out the overlap between them and Claria.
I checked out their press release today and, wow!, there's more jargon in there than I could handle.
Here's what the company says their latest product called ClickSurge does:
ClickSurge, MediaRiver's new offering, enables Web publishers to guide
Internet users to the publishers' online content in a discovery-based
contextual model.
Good luck trying to understand that and how the technology works just from the press release!
I checked out the website and here's what, I think, is going on.
Intellext, as Media River was formerly called, created a product called Watson, a desktop program accessible from within Microsoft Office or Internet Explorer. As a user works on a topic, Watson running in background can look for relevant documents from the Web and bring it to the user without having to open a browser. Watson integrates with Google search and other search engines and the company positions it as a "search engine of search engines."
ClickSurge will customize the Watson idea for content publishers on the Web. Here's an example from a Chicago Sun-Times article on the company:
If a user at the People magazine Web site reads an article on Britney Spears, ClickSurge will match a dozen or more words, and offer "next clicks" to links to other articles relating to Spears. In contrast, many Web sites generate random links, which are less likely to hook readers and get them to stay at a Web site. Such sites, in this case, might offer links to more general entertainment news or even randomly selected links.
Not having seen a ClickSurge demo I am not sure how effective it will be. But the ClickSurge pitch reminds me of similar attempts being made by Claria.
Claria was once derided for having software that acted suspiciously like spyware. The company almost filed for IPO before all the negative publicity around spyware forced it to back out. In 2005, Claria decided to reinvent itself and offer publishers a personalization platform.
I need to look at Media River more closely to figure out the overlap between them and Claria.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Mark Cuban Takes a Swipe at Donald Trump
Mark Cuban has taken yet another potshot against Donald Trump.
Now that his show, The Apprentice, has been dropped by NBC, Trump chose to "quit" and Cuban makes some suggestions as to what Trump can do now:
You can travel the world over and give speeches on brand dilution. Explaining how a brand that was once synonymous with the finest real estate in the world is now synonymous with a canceled TV show, water, steaks, a doll, vodka, a perfume, a game and an online University that tries to sell questionable advice and products and is one of the biggest spammers on the Internet.
This is so entertaining! I love the Internet!
If you want to read the entire post, it is here.
Now that his show, The Apprentice, has been dropped by NBC, Trump chose to "quit" and Cuban makes some suggestions as to what Trump can do now:
You can travel the world over and give speeches on brand dilution. Explaining how a brand that was once synonymous with the finest real estate in the world is now synonymous with a canceled TV show, water, steaks, a doll, vodka, a perfume, a game and an online University that tries to sell questionable advice and products and is one of the biggest spammers on the Internet.
This is so entertaining! I love the Internet!
If you want to read the entire post, it is here.
Electronic Arts Accelerates into Asia
Electronic Arts has been struggling to get into the game in Asia, where revenue steadily declined last year and the company has had few hits.
Now the leading video-game publisher in North America has a plan: EA is buying its way into the continent, one company at a time.
On Monday, the company announced its latest deal, a 15% stake worth approximately $167 million, in one of China's largest online game operators, The9.
It's the second such investment that EA has made in the last three months. In March, the Redwood City, Calif.-based EA said it would take a 19% stake in Korean online game company Neowiz for about $105 million.
Now the leading video-game publisher in North America has a plan: EA is buying its way into the continent, one company at a time.
On Monday, the company announced its latest deal, a 15% stake worth approximately $167 million, in one of China's largest online game operators, The9.
It's the second such investment that EA has made in the last three months. In March, the Redwood City, Calif.-based EA said it would take a 19% stake in Korean online game company Neowiz for about $105 million.
More at TheStreet.com
Monday, May 21, 2007
Sourcefire's Mis-steps
Marty Roesch, co-founder and chief technology officer of Sourcefire, has done an interview with Network Computing and it's a very interesting read because it confirms some of my suspicions about the company's inability to understand how Wall Street thinks and works.
I have been following Sourcefire since my days at Red Herring and they used to be a favorite then. I wrote about them through their various ups and down, through the time when I thought they were one of the smartest private security players and most likely to go public (they did in March) to the botched acquisition of the company by Check Point.
The Network Computing interview itself is a very soft one. I wish the reporter had really pressed Marty for answers.
An excerpt from the interview:
Sourcefire announced its first quarterly earnings as a public company this May. The stock went from $18 to around $12, a drop of 30 percent. What happened?
The expectations were a little higher than the performance, and you can't do that in the public market, so we definitely got a good-sized correction. Q1 was something of an anomaly. There was some slowness in the federal procurement cycle and a few other factors came together--we had a bit of a perfect storm.
Here's how the series of events around their Q1 results really unfolded.
In its first quarterly earnings report after the company went public, Sourcefire realized that it was going to miss expectations.
That's really bad news... but well it happens. Investors and analysts understand that much.
But the way Sourcefire tried to convey the news was all wrong.
The company chose to put out a release about the likely earnings miss on Good Friday--a day when the stock markets are closed.
When investors saw the news on Monday morning, they were very upset. To make it worse, Sourcefire never made an attempt to explain the reasons for the miss--at least not till it was too late.
The company didn't make its CEO, CFO or anyone from the company available to the media or analysts to answer questions. I repeatedly tried to get the company and its PR agency to respond to my requests for a comment but they just couldn't be reached.
Sourcefire's stock fell nearly 30% on that day's trading alone. Finally around 3 p.m. --after market close on Monday--Sourcefire released a terse explanation. By then it was too late.
(My story about Sourcefire from that fateful Monday is here)
I find it difficult to believe that you need special acumen to understand this is totally the wrong way to handle something as important as earnings.
What Sourcefire should have done is release the news about the earnings miss on Monday before market opened and have had a brief explanation in the press release about what it thought was the reason for the shortfall.
Sourcefire should have also scheduled a conference call inviting all analysts, media, and investors and explained how the company is doing and what's going on with the numbers.
Something as simple as that could have saved them much grief.
Last when I checked a few days ago, a Wall Street analyst told me it could take nearly a year-and-a-half for Sourcefire to gain back investor & analyst confidence.
Companies can't and shouldn't go public if they are not willing to do what it takes to work with investors and Wall Street. Many times it is as simple as being transparent and upfront about both bad news and good news.
I can't understand how a company, as smart as Sourcefire, could have gone so wrong.
The rest of the interview is about how Marty thinks there's more to Sourcefire than just IPS/IDS. I am not convinced about that either. Sourcefire needs some serious help with telling their story. Any wonder that their stock has been down nearly 25% in the two-and-a-half months since their IPO?
via Mike Rothman's The Daily Incite.
I have been following Sourcefire since my days at Red Herring and they used to be a favorite then. I wrote about them through their various ups and down, through the time when I thought they were one of the smartest private security players and most likely to go public (they did in March) to the botched acquisition of the company by Check Point.
The Network Computing interview itself is a very soft one. I wish the reporter had really pressed Marty for answers.
An excerpt from the interview:
Sourcefire announced its first quarterly earnings as a public company this May. The stock went from $18 to around $12, a drop of 30 percent. What happened?
The expectations were a little higher than the performance, and you can't do that in the public market, so we definitely got a good-sized correction. Q1 was something of an anomaly. There was some slowness in the federal procurement cycle and a few other factors came together--we had a bit of a perfect storm.
"Expectations higher than the performance" is an understatement here.
The problem was Sourcefire didn't play it right by investors.
Here's how the series of events around their Q1 results really unfolded.
In its first quarterly earnings report after the company went public, Sourcefire realized that it was going to miss expectations.
That's really bad news... but well it happens. Investors and analysts understand that much.
But the way Sourcefire tried to convey the news was all wrong.
The company chose to put out a release about the likely earnings miss on Good Friday--a day when the stock markets are closed.
When investors saw the news on Monday morning, they were very upset. To make it worse, Sourcefire never made an attempt to explain the reasons for the miss--at least not till it was too late.
The company didn't make its CEO, CFO or anyone from the company available to the media or analysts to answer questions. I repeatedly tried to get the company and its PR agency to respond to my requests for a comment but they just couldn't be reached.
Sourcefire's stock fell nearly 30% on that day's trading alone. Finally around 3 p.m. --after market close on Monday--Sourcefire released a terse explanation. By then it was too late.
(My story about Sourcefire from that fateful Monday is here)
I find it difficult to believe that you need special acumen to understand this is totally the wrong way to handle something as important as earnings.
What Sourcefire should have done is release the news about the earnings miss on Monday before market opened and have had a brief explanation in the press release about what it thought was the reason for the shortfall.
Sourcefire should have also scheduled a conference call inviting all analysts, media, and investors and explained how the company is doing and what's going on with the numbers.
Something as simple as that could have saved them much grief.
Last when I checked a few days ago, a Wall Street analyst told me it could take nearly a year-and-a-half for Sourcefire to gain back investor & analyst confidence.
Companies can't and shouldn't go public if they are not willing to do what it takes to work with investors and Wall Street. Many times it is as simple as being transparent and upfront about both bad news and good news.
I can't understand how a company, as smart as Sourcefire, could have gone so wrong.
The rest of the interview is about how Marty thinks there's more to Sourcefire than just IPS/IDS. I am not convinced about that either. Sourcefire needs some serious help with telling their story. Any wonder that their stock has been down nearly 25% in the two-and-a-half months since their IPO?
via Mike Rothman's The Daily Incite.
A Fund of Funds
One of the most interesting conversations I had at Mike and Robb's party was with Jamien McCullum who heads the McCullum Group.
The group is creating a venture capital fund of funds that will allow investors an opportunity to invest in some of the biggest VC funds in the Silicon Valley.
Want in on the profits that Sequoia must have raked in after its investment in YouTube, or Kleiner Perkins, which counts companies like Amazon.com, Electronic Arts, and Google as its early investments? The McCullum Group fund could be a way to do it. (Clarification: I mention Sequoia and KP as just examples and don't know if they will allow the a fund of funds like the McCullum Group to invest in them.)
VC funds are traditionally restricted to institutional investors like pension funds and university endowments. But this could be one way for smaller investors to piggyback on the kind of returns that VCs can see with the right investment.
The McCullum group, says Jamien, will also have a social agenda and will look to set apart a percentage of its profits to help with charitable giving.
Here's a link to their website.
I would love to talk to Jamien more in a few weeks when he is ready for how the fund works and what kind of returns investors can expect and the risk factors here. Venture Capital is a tough business. One in ten startups will fail and I know of many VC firms whose funds haven't brought in good returns.
The conversation with Jamien, when it happens, should be interesting.
The group is creating a venture capital fund of funds that will allow investors an opportunity to invest in some of the biggest VC funds in the Silicon Valley.
Want in on the profits that Sequoia must have raked in after its investment in YouTube, or Kleiner Perkins, which counts companies like Amazon.com, Electronic Arts, and Google as its early investments? The McCullum Group fund could be a way to do it. (Clarification: I mention Sequoia and KP as just examples and don't know if they will allow the a fund of funds like the McCullum Group to invest in them.)
VC funds are traditionally restricted to institutional investors like pension funds and university endowments. But this could be one way for smaller investors to piggyback on the kind of returns that VCs can see with the right investment.
The McCullum group, says Jamien, will also have a social agenda and will look to set apart a percentage of its profits to help with charitable giving.
Here's a link to their website.
I would love to talk to Jamien more in a few weeks when he is ready for how the fund works and what kind of returns investors can expect and the risk factors here. Venture Capital is a tough business. One in ten startups will fail and I know of many VC firms whose funds haven't brought in good returns.
The conversation with Jamien, when it happens, should be interesting.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Mike & Robb's Party
Trend Micro's Mike Haro and Horn Group's Robb Henshaw threw a great party on Thursday in San Francisco for IT security folks.
This is the second time they are doing this event and they drew a very interesting crowd of journalists, Wall Street analysts, IT security startup CEOs, Trend Micro senior management, and PR people.
A few interesting conversations from the party:
It was good to catch up with Dean Drako, CEO of Barracuda Networks, a company that makes anti-spam appliances. If you have driven on the 101, there's just no way you could have missed their big billboard.
Founded in 2002, Barracuda, has grown into a fierce security player.
Anti-spam is a fairly commoditized market but Barracuda is one of the few private companies that is doing well. They are killing everyone on price and I have had other private security startups complain to me about how aggressive Barracuda is and how willing they are to undercut rivals.
Still Barracuda is a niche player. It doesn't cover the entire IT security needs of an enterprise, or even a sizable portion of that.
The company has grown too big to be acquired by anyone but the truly big boys of IT security. Or Drako will have to take it public. But it may be tough selling Wall Street this story. Barracuda isn't diversified enough in its security offerings and is playing in a commoditized market.
Wall Street isn't happy with public IT security companies now. Many portfolio managers that I have spoken with suggest that despite the potential, IT security stocks don't offer aggressive growth. One fund manager suggested investors would be better off putting their money in a one-year CD instead of an IT security stock as they could get better returns.
I chatted with some of the equity analysts who came to the party about this. The market needs to see one of the existing players do something to surprise them and make them change their opinion.
Anyway, thanks to Robb and Mike for having me there. It was a great location, some good food and wine, and very interesting people.
This is the second time they are doing this event and they drew a very interesting crowd of journalists, Wall Street analysts, IT security startup CEOs, Trend Micro senior management, and PR people.
A few interesting conversations from the party:
It was good to catch up with Dean Drako, CEO of Barracuda Networks, a company that makes anti-spam appliances. If you have driven on the 101, there's just no way you could have missed their big billboard.
Founded in 2002, Barracuda, has grown into a fierce security player.
Anti-spam is a fairly commoditized market but Barracuda is one of the few private companies that is doing well. They are killing everyone on price and I have had other private security startups complain to me about how aggressive Barracuda is and how willing they are to undercut rivals.
Still Barracuda is a niche player. It doesn't cover the entire IT security needs of an enterprise, or even a sizable portion of that.
The company has grown too big to be acquired by anyone but the truly big boys of IT security. Or Drako will have to take it public. But it may be tough selling Wall Street this story. Barracuda isn't diversified enough in its security offerings and is playing in a commoditized market.
Wall Street isn't happy with public IT security companies now. Many portfolio managers that I have spoken with suggest that despite the potential, IT security stocks don't offer aggressive growth. One fund manager suggested investors would be better off putting their money in a one-year CD instead of an IT security stock as they could get better returns.
I chatted with some of the equity analysts who came to the party about this. The market needs to see one of the existing players do something to surprise them and make them change their opinion.
Anyway, thanks to Robb and Mike for having me there. It was a great location, some good food and wine, and very interesting people.
Friday, May 18, 2007
PS3 vs. Wii (April)
Round one of the PS3 vs. Wii match went to Nintendo. Nintendo's Wii outsold Sony's PS3 by a huge margin in April according to The NPD Group.
The NPD Group tabulates monthly hardware and software sales in the video games industry and it is closely watched by everyone in the business.
My story on April's NPD data is here.
From the NPD story: Sony sold just 82,000 PS3s in April, compared with 360,000 Wiis, fewer even than the 84,000 devices of the Game Boy Advance, a fading console from Nintendo that was released in 2001. Both the Wii and PS3 were launched in November.
I also think Sony will be forced to cut price of the PS3 because it needs to spur sales. That story is here.
The NPD Group tabulates monthly hardware and software sales in the video games industry and it is closely watched by everyone in the business.
My story on April's NPD data is here.
From the NPD story: Sony sold just 82,000 PS3s in April, compared with 360,000 Wiis, fewer even than the 84,000 devices of the Game Boy Advance, a fading console from Nintendo that was released in 2001. Both the Wii and PS3 were launched in November.
I also think Sony will be forced to cut price of the PS3 because it needs to spur sales. That story is here.
Getting a newspaper subscription in San Francisco
We have been trying to get a newspaper subscription for nearly a year now. A few months ago, we signed up for The San Francisco Chronicle outside Costco where a little kiosk had been set up.
While R & I would prefer to get the San Jose Mercury News we thought it would be nice to get a paper with truly local news and events.
We waited the next few weeks for our newspaper to arrive. It never did.
Instead, we got a bill from The Chronicle folks for the paper we had never received. R called the circulation department and they reassured us that they would take care of the problem with the billing.
Then, a few weeks later, we got a notice from a collection agency for that bill.
R fought with the circulation department and the collection agency and now we have don't have any pending newspapers bills to pay but no subscription to a newspaper either.
I would still love to get The San Francisco Chronicle, The New York Times or The San Jose Mercury News. But I have questions on whether they can really deliver it to my doorstep, what time will it get delivered in the morning etc.
I can't find the answers to those questions on their website! How can a business be truly successful without answering questions their customers might have about their product?
And why is getting a newspaper subscription so hard? There's no local kiosk/distributor that I can walk up to and have a chat about my problems.
Our need is simple: we want a newspaper that comes to our doorstep--not to our gate so one of us has to wake up and trek out to fetch the paper--and is delivered early enough so we can read it before we head to work around 7.30 a.m.
Why is that so difficult? I subscribe to a bunch of magazines and they come right to my home without any problems every week/month.
Maybe this is one reason why newspapers in the U.S. are seeing their circulation fall. If they can't get it out to readers who really want it, and can't get their distribution right, how can they grow their subscriber base?
While R & I would prefer to get the San Jose Mercury News we thought it would be nice to get a paper with truly local news and events.
We waited the next few weeks for our newspaper to arrive. It never did.
Instead, we got a bill from The Chronicle folks for the paper we had never received. R called the circulation department and they reassured us that they would take care of the problem with the billing.
Then, a few weeks later, we got a notice from a collection agency for that bill.
R fought with the circulation department and the collection agency and now we have don't have any pending newspapers bills to pay but no subscription to a newspaper either.
I would still love to get The San Francisco Chronicle, The New York Times or The San Jose Mercury News. But I have questions on whether they can really deliver it to my doorstep, what time will it get delivered in the morning etc.
I can't find the answers to those questions on their website! How can a business be truly successful without answering questions their customers might have about their product?
And why is getting a newspaper subscription so hard? There's no local kiosk/distributor that I can walk up to and have a chat about my problems.
Our need is simple: we want a newspaper that comes to our doorstep--not to our gate so one of us has to wake up and trek out to fetch the paper--and is delivered early enough so we can read it before we head to work around 7.30 a.m.
Why is that so difficult? I subscribe to a bunch of magazines and they come right to my home without any problems every week/month.
Maybe this is one reason why newspapers in the U.S. are seeing their circulation fall. If they can't get it out to readers who really want it, and can't get their distribution right, how can they grow their subscriber base?
Flowers at my desk
R showed up at my office on Thursday with flowers after I was mad at him for something he did.
My cluttered desk looks much prettier now.
Newspapers are thriving in India
The Los Angeles Times has a story about how well newspapers are doing in India.
The article says: From 2005 to 2006, nearly 2,100 newspapers made their debut in India, joining 60,000 already circulating. Here in the capital, a bustling megalopolis with 15 million residents, two new dailies have hit the streets in the last four months, angling for their share of a market already divided among more than a dozen competitors.
Among the reasons responsible for the growth of newspapers are an expanding middle class, a booming economy, lower penetration of the Internet, and an upwardly mobile young population that seems to view newspaper reading as a sign of prestige, says the story.
I agree with all of that. But there's more.
Newspapers in India have their logistics around distribution right. Getting a newspaper is easy. Getting it to your door is even easier.
Growing up we subscribed to The Times of India, now the largest English-language newspaper in the country.
We lived on the second floor in an apartment complex yet the newspaper delivery boy would ensure we got our papers right outside our doorstep every morning between 6.15 p.m and 6.30 p.m.
And if the newspaper boy missed us on his rounds, it was so easy to get out and get another copy. There are newspaper vendors in every corner and sometimes you can strike up a nice deal with them to get the day's paper at the end of the day for a discounted price!
It worked like that for magazines too. If you bought a month old copy of the magazine you could get it for much cheaper.
And if you want to cancel your subscription just let your newspaper boy or the guy at the kiosk which is the distributor for your area know. Everything gets done easily, quickly and with little to no hassle.
That's completely different from my experience here in the Bay Area. Getting a newspaper to our door in San Francisco has been a nightmare. There not enough kiosks and you just can't get old copies for a discount anywhere!
Distribution seems to be a big problem in this country from what I can see.
Coming next: Our attempts to get a newspaper subscription in San Francisco.
The article says: From 2005 to 2006, nearly 2,100 newspapers made their debut in India, joining 60,000 already circulating. Here in the capital, a bustling megalopolis with 15 million residents, two new dailies have hit the streets in the last four months, angling for their share of a market already divided among more than a dozen competitors.
Among the reasons responsible for the growth of newspapers are an expanding middle class, a booming economy, lower penetration of the Internet, and an upwardly mobile young population that seems to view newspaper reading as a sign of prestige, says the story.
I agree with all of that. But there's more.
Newspapers in India have their logistics around distribution right. Getting a newspaper is easy. Getting it to your door is even easier.
Growing up we subscribed to The Times of India, now the largest English-language newspaper in the country.
We lived on the second floor in an apartment complex yet the newspaper delivery boy would ensure we got our papers right outside our doorstep every morning between 6.15 p.m and 6.30 p.m.
And if the newspaper boy missed us on his rounds, it was so easy to get out and get another copy. There are newspaper vendors in every corner and sometimes you can strike up a nice deal with them to get the day's paper at the end of the day for a discounted price!
It worked like that for magazines too. If you bought a month old copy of the magazine you could get it for much cheaper.
And if you want to cancel your subscription just let your newspaper boy or the guy at the kiosk which is the distributor for your area know. Everything gets done easily, quickly and with little to no hassle.
That's completely different from my experience here in the Bay Area. Getting a newspaper to our door in San Francisco has been a nightmare. There not enough kiosks and you just can't get old copies for a discount anywhere!
Distribution seems to be a big problem in this country from what I can see.
Coming next: Our attempts to get a newspaper subscription in San Francisco.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Charlie Gibson Leads The Ratings
Charlie Gibson now leads the network evening news pack.
As I mentioned in my earlier post, I think Gibson's newscast has the best mix of news and hard-hitting features.
Go Charlie Go!
As I mentioned in my earlier post, I think Gibson's newscast has the best mix of news and hard-hitting features.
Go Charlie Go!
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Sony vs. Apple
Sony reported its fourth quarter and fiscal year results and put out a 35-page (!!!) release.
It took me nearly 40-minutes just to wade through it to find basic information like revenue and profits by quarter and division.
Compare that to the clean second quarter results Apple put out a few weeks earlier. The lede in Apple's release pretty much sums up what any investor would be interested in knowing about the company's performance at the first glance.
I am not surprised Apple's user interface is so much better than that of Sony's :)
My Sony earnings story is here and Apple story is here.
It took me nearly 40-minutes just to wade through it to find basic information like revenue and profits by quarter and division.
Compare that to the clean second quarter results Apple put out a few weeks earlier. The lede in Apple's release pretty much sums up what any investor would be interested in knowing about the company's performance at the first glance.
I am not surprised Apple's user interface is so much better than that of Sony's :)
My Sony earnings story is here and Apple story is here.
Revolt of the Page-Slaves
The New York Observer has an interesting article about the high staff turnover at Forbes.com. The article says the site is now onto hiring young, straight-out-of school staff and pressuring them to produce stories that drive page views.
A number of senior reporters have left the publication recently. "Two sources estimated at least 50 previous editorial departures since early 2005," says the article.
I am surprised it took so long for this to be out in the open. I pretty much heard the same things, as this article says, from a Forbes.com reporter last year.
Forbes.com's chief executive blames the competition saying his employees are being poached away by rivals and, the site, as any online media should, is doing the right thing by keeping any an eye on its page views.
I always find it interesting that media organizations, who spend so much of their time, analyzing what businesses do wrong are quick to commit the very mistakes they would crucify their subjects for.
I think every manager will agree that you can't run a good business when your employees aren't happy. The goals of the organization need to be balanced with that of the employees. And in this case, if most reporters are complaining about the processes there and are leaving, the quality of site will at some point be affected.
The emphasis of page views to the exclusion of everything else is bound to backfire.
Sure, the online media has an easy way to track what its audience is reading compared to their print counterparts.
But does it make sense to run after eyeballs so hard that you have forgotten why you are running at all? If there's no quality content, no quality reporters what is the journalistic goal that the organization is serving?
A number of senior reporters have left the publication recently. "Two sources estimated at least 50 previous editorial departures since early 2005," says the article.
I am surprised it took so long for this to be out in the open. I pretty much heard the same things, as this article says, from a Forbes.com reporter last year.
Forbes.com's chief executive blames the competition saying his employees are being poached away by rivals and, the site, as any online media should, is doing the right thing by keeping any an eye on its page views.
I always find it interesting that media organizations, who spend so much of their time, analyzing what businesses do wrong are quick to commit the very mistakes they would crucify their subjects for.
I think every manager will agree that you can't run a good business when your employees aren't happy. The goals of the organization need to be balanced with that of the employees. And in this case, if most reporters are complaining about the processes there and are leaving, the quality of site will at some point be affected.
The emphasis of page views to the exclusion of everything else is bound to backfire.
Sure, the online media has an easy way to track what its audience is reading compared to their print counterparts.
But does it make sense to run after eyeballs so hard that you have forgotten why you are running at all? If there's no quality content, no quality reporters what is the journalistic goal that the organization is serving?
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
You are Fired! (Only I am too scared to say it)
NBC left Donald Trump's, The Apprentice, show out of its fall line up.
NBC isn't saying 'You are Fired' yet to Trump. Mediaweek quotes NBC Entertainment President Kevin Reilly saying: We want to stay in business with Donald. Donald still wants to do the show and Mark still wants to do it. We need to find the right time period for the show.
That sounds like diplomatic hogwash to me. Maybe NBC realizes that The Apprentice needs to end--now and forever. The show was pulling in about 7 million viewers in the last season, a fraction of what it did in its glory days.
I got hooked to The Apprentice towards the end of the first season and stayed with it through the next two. And then it got boring. Trump did some crazy things like firing his board room sidekick Carolyn Kepcher, and started bringing his cronies, daughter Ivanka Trump and son Donald Jr on. Needless to say, I thought both sucked. I didn't even tune into a single episode of season five.
By then, the format was too predictable. You knew exactly how it would play out and with Ivanka sitting in the boardroom pouting most of the time and offering little insight on why one of the contestants should be fired, I thought it was time for the show to end.
I am glad it is curtains down for now and I hope it stays that way. Donald needs to find another outlet for his ego.
NBC isn't saying 'You are Fired' yet to Trump. Mediaweek quotes NBC Entertainment President Kevin Reilly saying: We want to stay in business with Donald. Donald still wants to do the show and Mark still wants to do it. We need to find the right time period for the show.
That sounds like diplomatic hogwash to me. Maybe NBC realizes that The Apprentice needs to end--now and forever. The show was pulling in about 7 million viewers in the last season, a fraction of what it did in its glory days.
I got hooked to The Apprentice towards the end of the first season and stayed with it through the next two. And then it got boring. Trump did some crazy things like firing his board room sidekick Carolyn Kepcher, and started bringing his cronies, daughter Ivanka Trump and son Donald Jr on. Needless to say, I thought both sucked. I didn't even tune into a single episode of season five.
By then, the format was too predictable. You knew exactly how it would play out and with Ivanka sitting in the boardroom pouting most of the time and offering little insight on why one of the contestants should be fired, I thought it was time for the show to end.
I am glad it is curtains down for now and I hope it stays that way. Donald needs to find another outlet for his ego.
A New World Order in Media
Thomson Corp. has agreed to buy the Reuters Group for $17 billion. That's big news! The new combined entity will compete with Bloomberg and Dow Jones News Wires.
The deal makes sense. Thomson has a lot of financial data, that journalists like me use every day, and Reuters has a strong news operation. Together they can probably compete better against Bloomberg.
The Bloomberg terminals are quite expensive and not very user friendly. But the kind of access you can get to both financial data and news with them is awesome.
I have used both the Bloomberg terminals and Thomson Financial, and while I prefer the Bloomberg terminal for the depth and quality of data, I like Thomson Financial for its user friendly features.
So far, the biggest drawback that I saw, with the Thomson Financial site was its lack of access to news and Reuters can help fill that gap.
That said, taking on Bloomberg won't be easy. Bloomberg is very aggressive and, from what I know, almost fanatical in its determination to get be the first to get the news out.
The loser in this battle though could be Dow Jones. Dow Jones could get pushed to the number three position. But as long as the Wall Street Journal continues to carry Dow Jones it can stay relevant but it think it will be near-impossible for it to be the market leader.
The deal makes sense. Thomson has a lot of financial data, that journalists like me use every day, and Reuters has a strong news operation. Together they can probably compete better against Bloomberg.
The Bloomberg terminals are quite expensive and not very user friendly. But the kind of access you can get to both financial data and news with them is awesome.
I have used both the Bloomberg terminals and Thomson Financial, and while I prefer the Bloomberg terminal for the depth and quality of data, I like Thomson Financial for its user friendly features.
So far, the biggest drawback that I saw, with the Thomson Financial site was its lack of access to news and Reuters can help fill that gap.
That said, taking on Bloomberg won't be easy. Bloomberg is very aggressive and, from what I know, almost fanatical in its determination to get be the first to get the news out.
The loser in this battle though could be Dow Jones. Dow Jones could get pushed to the number three position. But as long as the Wall Street Journal continues to carry Dow Jones it can stay relevant but it think it will be near-impossible for it to be the market leader.
Monday, May 14, 2007
GigaOm & TheLadders.com Party
You know Silicon Valley is booming when the parties make a comeback.
Last week, GigaOm, the tech blog run by Om Malik, and online recruiting firm, TheLadders.com hosted a party at San Francisco's Pier 38.
The party was great with VCs, startup CEOs and more recruiters than I have ever seen in one place. The best part for me? A chance to meet many of my former Red Herring colleagues.
My most interesting conversation was with Wagner James Au, a writer for GigaOm whose coverage of the video game industry is very interesting. James is also writing a book on the virtual world of Second Life and hopes to have it out next year.
Here's a Wired blog report on the event and pictures from Brian Solis.
Next week, I have another party to go--an informal drinks hour hosted by Trend Micro's Mike Haro and Horn Group's Robb Henshaw.
Last week, GigaOm, the tech blog run by Om Malik, and online recruiting firm, TheLadders.com hosted a party at San Francisco's Pier 38.
The party was great with VCs, startup CEOs and more recruiters than I have ever seen in one place. The best part for me? A chance to meet many of my former Red Herring colleagues.
My most interesting conversation was with Wagner James Au, a writer for GigaOm whose coverage of the video game industry is very interesting. James is also writing a book on the virtual world of Second Life and hopes to have it out next year.
Here's a Wired blog report on the event and pictures from Brian Solis.
Next week, I have another party to go--an informal drinks hour hosted by Trend Micro's Mike Haro and Horn Group's Robb Henshaw.
THQ Makes The Right Moves with Saints Row
THQ scrapped its plans for a PS3 version of the Saints Row game, a move that messed up the company's guidance for the first quarter. Investors have sent the stock down 4%.
They may be wrong. THQ did the right thing.
With sales of the high-priced PS3 consoles yet to take off -- and without the kind of resources that its much larger rival Electronic Arts -- THQ is better off concentrating on consoles with a sufficiently large installed base to recover game development costs.
More at TheStreet.com
They may be wrong. THQ did the right thing.
With sales of the high-priced PS3 consoles yet to take off -- and without the kind of resources that its much larger rival Electronic Arts -- THQ is better off concentrating on consoles with a sufficiently large installed base to recover game development costs.
More at TheStreet.com
Blogonomics
I rediscovered this New York magazine article from 2006 about the blog economy and its a great read.
From the story: The A-list is teensy, the B-list is bigger, and the C-list is simply massive. In the blogosphere, the biggest audiences -- and the advertising revenue they bring -- go to a small, elite few. Most bloggers toil in total obscurity.
New York magazine is fast becoming one of my favorite mags. I have been reading its awesome profiles and features on the web (I once spent a whole day just going through its features archives!!!) and the magazine should be even better.
Note to self: Get that damn subscription soon!
From the story: The A-list is teensy, the B-list is bigger, and the C-list is simply massive. In the blogosphere, the biggest audiences -- and the advertising revenue they bring -- go to a small, elite few. Most bloggers toil in total obscurity.
New York magazine is fast becoming one of my favorite mags. I have been reading its awesome profiles and features on the web (I once spent a whole day just going through its features archives!!!) and the magazine should be even better.
Note to self: Get that damn subscription soon!
Friday, May 11, 2007
Electronic Arts Chases the Wii
Nintendo's Wii is a huge hit and Electronic Arts, the biggest video game publisher, has been left scrambling to get its act together on the Wii.
Electronic Arts has a little Wii problem.
The runaway success of Nintendo's latest console seems to have caught the leading video-game publisher by surprise and left it scrambling to create new games in a bid to ride the device's coattails.
With sales so far of 6 million Wiis worldwide, and another 14 million scheduled to ship in the next 12 months, EA needs to rule this console, like it has with Sony's PS2 or Microsoft's Xbox 360, if it wants to continue being the market leader in this next generation of devices.
Read more at TheStreet.com
Electronic Arts has a little Wii problem.
The runaway success of Nintendo's latest console seems to have caught the leading video-game publisher by surprise and left it scrambling to create new games in a bid to ride the device's coattails.
With sales so far of 6 million Wiis worldwide, and another 14 million scheduled to ship in the next 12 months, EA needs to rule this console, like it has with Sony's PS2 or Microsoft's Xbox 360, if it wants to continue being the market leader in this next generation of devices.
Read more at TheStreet.com
WTF???!!!!!!
James Macpherson, publisher of Pasadena Now, wants to have journalists in India cover local news, in this city. Pasadena is about 10 miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles.
Macpherson's reasoning? It helps reduce costs--a major consideration for local news organizations. The projected annual cost of hiring two journalists is $20,800. Talk about innovation in outsourcing!
Already, someone has commented the idea seems like it came from the good folks at The Onion.
What do I think? It's plain crazy! I have worked in India with some amazing journalists but local news is a whole different ball game.
The local system in the U.S., including city council, education, elections and courts, is quite different from that in India. More importantly, I think the plan won't work because journalists have to be really interested in what they write.
I find it difficult to believe that someone in an Indian city can get excited about local issues in Pasadena.
Some Pasadena facts culled from the city's website:
And would someone doing the job just for the paycheck be able to do it well? I think not.
I am beginning to suspect this is all just a publicity stunt to get more attention for the web site.
Macpherson's reasoning? It helps reduce costs--a major consideration for local news organizations. The projected annual cost of hiring two journalists is $20,800. Talk about innovation in outsourcing!
Already, someone has commented the idea seems like it came from the good folks at The Onion.
What do I think? It's plain crazy! I have worked in India with some amazing journalists but local news is a whole different ball game.
The local system in the U.S., including city council, education, elections and courts, is quite different from that in India. More importantly, I think the plan won't work because journalists have to be really interested in what they write.
I find it difficult to believe that someone in an Indian city can get excited about local issues in Pasadena.
Some Pasadena facts culled from the city's website:
- Pasadena has 23 parks, totaling more than one thousand acres of parkland. About 60,000 trees line the streets of Pasadena.
- There were 51,844 occupied housing units in Pasadena in 2000, consisting of 45.76% homeowners and 54.2% renters.
- The average rent for a 2 bedroom apartment in March, 2005, was $1,209 per month.
- In 2000, 14.9% of households were below poverty level.
- It has snowed twice in the City's history: January 13, 1932 and January 11, 1949.
And would someone doing the job just for the paycheck be able to do it well? I think not.
I am beginning to suspect this is all just a publicity stunt to get more attention for the web site.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
May the best man or woman win
I just read this interview with Linda Mason, senior vice president, standards and special projects at CBS News. Mason says people are not ready to accept the evening news from a woman anchor.
Here's what she says in the interview: I'm just surprised at how, almost 30 years after I worked on the "Evening News" as the first woman producer, that Katie is having such a tough time being accepted by the public, which seems to prefer the news from white guys, and now that Charlie's doing so well, from older white guys. I guess they want the reassurance of a Walter Cronkite.
I am a woman, I am not white, and I didn't grow up watching Walter Cronkite's newscasts. But I do love news and I tune into the evening newscast everytime I am at home. And because I don't have cable TV, I have to choose between Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams and Katie Couric.
My choice? Charlie Gibson followed by Brian Williams.
I did watch Katie Couric a few times and I thought the news was really bad. Couric seemed to have this faux earnestness in the way she looked into the camera. The soft lighting around her seemed to turn me off. And the worst, was the choice of news items.
There were some terrible features and too many 'women-oriented' issues that looked like what Couric cared about and not what appealed to me.
I think Linda Mason is wrong to make this an issue about Katie Couric being a woman on the job. It's about being the best on the job. And sometimes, if the best is a older white male, then let's not make it a gender issue.
Here's what she says in the interview: I'm just surprised at how, almost 30 years after I worked on the "Evening News" as the first woman producer, that Katie is having such a tough time being accepted by the public, which seems to prefer the news from white guys, and now that Charlie's doing so well, from older white guys. I guess they want the reassurance of a Walter Cronkite.
I am a woman, I am not white, and I didn't grow up watching Walter Cronkite's newscasts. But I do love news and I tune into the evening newscast everytime I am at home. And because I don't have cable TV, I have to choose between Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams and Katie Couric.
My choice? Charlie Gibson followed by Brian Williams.
I did watch Katie Couric a few times and I thought the news was really bad. Couric seemed to have this faux earnestness in the way she looked into the camera. The soft lighting around her seemed to turn me off. And the worst, was the choice of news items.
There were some terrible features and too many 'women-oriented' issues that looked like what Couric cared about and not what appealed to me.
I think Linda Mason is wrong to make this an issue about Katie Couric being a woman on the job. It's about being the best on the job. And sometimes, if the best is a older white male, then let's not make it a gender issue.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Media & Conflict of Interest
My dear friend, Cyrus, has an interesting discussion going on with Donna Dubinsky, a director at Palm and C.E.O of Numenta, over the seeming conflict of interest that New Yorker's profile of uber tech journalist, Walt Mossberg raises.
In his position as the consumer electronics reviewer for the Wall Street Journal, Mossberg is probably the best known technology journalist today and as the profile makes clear a "brand." But it also reveals more than that.
The profile talks about Mossberg's role as an informal "consultant" for companies on products ranging from cellphones to other gadgets. Dubinsky pitched both the Palm Pilot and the Treo to Mossberg to get his opinion on the device.
I think the revelation is troubling.
Mossberg is known for his integrity and I certainly don't think anyone for a moment believes otherwise. He has also built up a reputation of being fair, impartial, and an advocate for what he believes the average user is looking for from a gadget.
Till the New Yorker's profile on him, I don't think most of his readers knew about his "consulting" role with companies on the gadgets he reviews.
From the point of view of the companies, it makes sense to reach out to him. Mossberg is a very senior technology journalist, knows the industry very well, and has seen products evolve. It also helps that his reviews carry a lot of weight.
So not surprisingly, they want to his opinion on what possibly works for consumers and what doesn't.
But do his readers know that? Is there a disclosure at the end of his review on a product that says, Mossberg may have provided his input during the making of the product?
I think his readers have a right to know that. I have been reading his column for a long time and the New Yorker's revelation certainly came as a shock to me.
Clearly companies are putting a lot of weight behind his suggestions else they wouldn't be reaching out exclusively to him. And not being paid for his role doesn't negate Mossberg's contribution.
The profile also left me wondering whether a certain feature in, say, a cellphone that he praised in his review is because the company tailored the feature to his liking through their discussions during the product evolution stage.
Cyrus had an interesting analogy, and one that I think plays well here to describe the situation. He says: "Let’s say that Spielberg came to Roger Ebert while a film was still in production, and showed him a rough cut of the movie, or a storyboard, or a script, even. Ebert would give his opinion as a “non-official” review, and then Spielberg would go back and change the movie to meet the feedback that Ebert had given him. Then the movie would come out, very different then what Ebert had seen before, and he gave it a positive review. Don’t you think that would be a little strange? ."
I think what the New Yorker profile of Mossberg also shows is the cozy relationship between the big media and the companies they cover.
It's also one reason why, I think, there is increasing distrust of the media among the general public.
Another indication of how relationships between big media and companies work to mutual benefit? Mossberg's All Things D site has a conference coming up soon. Jeff Hawkins, the founder of Palm, is expected to reveal a new line of business at the conference. There's speculation that it could be related to a new set of devices that Palm may launch.
Hawkins and Palm don't want to reveal any details of that announcement before the conference. While it is certainly their prerogative to chose when they want to announce something, Mossberg's cozy relationship with Palm makes me think it could be a quid-pro-quo relationship, albeit in a very subtle way. What I would be even more interested in seeing is the review of any device that is announced at the conference.
Mossberg may be fair and impartial in his eventual review, if any, but this whole set-up makes me very uncomfortable.
Media companies rarely look at the flaws within themselves. And I am surprised the Mossberg conflicts issue hasn't been discussed more on sites like Romenesko.
In his position as the consumer electronics reviewer for the Wall Street Journal, Mossberg is probably the best known technology journalist today and as the profile makes clear a "brand." But it also reveals more than that.
The profile talks about Mossberg's role as an informal "consultant" for companies on products ranging from cellphones to other gadgets. Dubinsky pitched both the Palm Pilot and the Treo to Mossberg to get his opinion on the device.
I think the revelation is troubling.
Mossberg is known for his integrity and I certainly don't think anyone for a moment believes otherwise. He has also built up a reputation of being fair, impartial, and an advocate for what he believes the average user is looking for from a gadget.
Till the New Yorker's profile on him, I don't think most of his readers knew about his "consulting" role with companies on the gadgets he reviews.
From the point of view of the companies, it makes sense to reach out to him. Mossberg is a very senior technology journalist, knows the industry very well, and has seen products evolve. It also helps that his reviews carry a lot of weight.
So not surprisingly, they want to his opinion on what possibly works for consumers and what doesn't.
But do his readers know that? Is there a disclosure at the end of his review on a product that says, Mossberg may have provided his input during the making of the product?
I think his readers have a right to know that. I have been reading his column for a long time and the New Yorker's revelation certainly came as a shock to me.
Clearly companies are putting a lot of weight behind his suggestions else they wouldn't be reaching out exclusively to him. And not being paid for his role doesn't negate Mossberg's contribution.
The profile also left me wondering whether a certain feature in, say, a cellphone that he praised in his review is because the company tailored the feature to his liking through their discussions during the product evolution stage.
Cyrus had an interesting analogy, and one that I think plays well here to describe the situation. He says: "Let’s say that Spielberg came to Roger Ebert while a film was still in production, and showed him a rough cut of the movie, or a storyboard, or a script, even. Ebert would give his opinion as a “non-official” review, and then Spielberg would go back and change the movie to meet the feedback that Ebert had given him. Then the movie would come out, very different then what Ebert had seen before, and he gave it a positive review. Don’t you think that would be a little strange? ."
I think what the New Yorker profile of Mossberg also shows is the cozy relationship between the big media and the companies they cover.
It's also one reason why, I think, there is increasing distrust of the media among the general public.
Another indication of how relationships between big media and companies work to mutual benefit? Mossberg's All Things D site has a conference coming up soon. Jeff Hawkins, the founder of Palm, is expected to reveal a new line of business at the conference. There's speculation that it could be related to a new set of devices that Palm may launch.
Hawkins and Palm don't want to reveal any details of that announcement before the conference. While it is certainly their prerogative to chose when they want to announce something, Mossberg's cozy relationship with Palm makes me think it could be a quid-pro-quo relationship, albeit in a very subtle way. What I would be even more interested in seeing is the review of any device that is announced at the conference.
Mossberg may be fair and impartial in his eventual review, if any, but this whole set-up makes me very uncomfortable.
Media companies rarely look at the flaws within themselves. And I am surprised the Mossberg conflicts issue hasn't been discussed more on sites like Romenesko.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
