Archive for the 'Business' Category

Snow job in Greenland

Whitewash

“A West Coast man has lost his feet and a hand to frostbite after surviving three days in an Arctic whiteout.”

Let’s look at the facts here. He had

  1. No EPIRB to locate him if all failed
  2. No Food
  3. No GPS
  4. Not enough fuel
  5. No tent
  6. No other survivial gear

Karamea’s Joseph Gibbons is a lucky man to survive three days near the highest point in Greenland during a storm. He lost some bits of his limbs in the process, but is eager to get back to work in the extreme cold.

Only luck prevented this from becoming a fatal accident. The real question is how the heck did he get into this situation, and more importantly, how the hell did his employer let him get into his situation?

“I went out for what I thought would be a 20 to 30-minute excursion, so I didn’t have any survival gear per se.”

One of the first lessons in extreme conditions is surely never to go out without the right gear. So why wasn’t the gear on the snowmobiles at all times? Why was Joe allowed off base without the minimum equipment? How can you be a contractor to do this sort of work if these basics are not part of the way you operate? Who are these shonky people? Who employed them?

Turns out his employer was an unnamed contractor working for the US Government, and the work was, amazingly,  “researching how camps could be put together to better survive the harsh conditions.”

That mission just makes it even worse. What the hell were the US Government thinking? I sincerely hope that this contractor has been stood down until the reasons behind this debacle are cleared up.

Joseph may be able to claim some compensation from his contractor employer, and by extension, the US Government. He can probably do this regardless of whether he broke the rules or not.

However if he did break the rules for his excursion, then he should never be employed in a safety environment again – and certainly not by that employer (unless he reforms and teaches HSE.)

So whether this was something only he did (his fault) or was systemic (contractor’s fault) or wasn’t against the rules at all (Government fault) it should never happen again. All parties need to do some soul searching here – Joe for going out without the right kit, the contractor for providing a working environment that allowed him to do so and the US Government for employing contractors that allow this sort of thing to happen.

Shame on all of them, and you are a lucky man Joseph Gibbons.

Radio NZ interview – How to survive and prosper this recession

I’m just back from an entertaining interview with Kathryn Ryan on the Nine to Noon program.

You can listen to it at Radio NZ: How Businesses Can Survive The Recession (and more)

Links to some things we talked about:

Social Innovation Camp NZ

Electricity microgeneration

  • Refit educating New Zealanders about Feed-in Tariffs (FITs)
  • Micro Generation – Wikipedia entry on what it is all about
  • Powershop – buy your power online now

Gardening
Great opinion piece from influential NYTimes columnist Nicholas Kristoff

5 Recent posts that I like – and a new page

I’ll be on Kathryn Ryan’s Nine to Noon program on Radio NZ at about 9:20am Monday 22nd.

There are a few potential topics to cover – including why NZ is a good place to be right now, what businesses can do to manage through the recession and the Social Innovation camp next steps. We’ll see what happens on the day.

For new and newer readers I’ve just put up a page of posts that I like from the last couple of years.

Posts I like.

Here are some good recent ones

Blame directors for failure, CEOs for success

2 shots were fired Self restraint is good

Let’s stop MPs drinking and lawmaking Seriously

Two McKinsey pieces on education – do read them

Well done Green cabs – now how about that website Great comments

Brass Monkey 2009 – a photolog The annual winter bike rally

Bribes, jobs and wine – not a good mix

There are two  jobs sites in NZ with critical mass – Seek and Trade Me Jobs. It’s a tough road to get to the top, and when Seek and Trade Me themselves have lost thousands of listings it’s even tougher to make things pay.

During these recession days  employers are realising that they don’t need to try hard to attract quality candidates, which means an advertisement on Seek and Trade Me is all they need to do.

New entrant MyJobSpace is doing the tough yards, and is tiny compared to everyone else. Here’s the market share of visitors – as measured by Netratings and charted in Trade Me’s newsletter to job advertisers.

So they need to go hard to get anywhere, but I feel that their latest attempt to woo customers is sailing a bit close to the wind.

I’ve copied below the text from a remarkable email that myjobspace is sending to contacts. The deal is that by committing your employer to a $365 annual fee you’ll receive a case of 12 bottles of wine. The first choice retails for $11 per bottle, so let’s call it $130 of wine.

Now most employers have rules against this sort of thing, and it creates a disconnect between what is best for your employeer in these cost cutting times, and what is best for the employee.

Imagine if we upped the ante – and added two zeros to each side. I’ll give you $12,000 worth of stuff if you sign a contract worth $36,500. New Zealanders, as inhabitants of the least corrupt country in the world,  would react pretty negatively to that offer. Companies and individuals should also do so to the wine offer.

I would be looking pretty hard at any money paid to this crowd if I were in a corporation. Sole traders are a different story – it’s their own money and wine to play with, but then I’m not a tax lawyer either.

So while myJobSpace needs to be aggressive, I feel they have gone too far with this. Shame.

an unashamable bribe!

A little while ago we spoke to you about your recruitment needs, you decided it wasn’t the best time for you to be using our site.

However in these times, more than ever, it’s critical to have the best people. There’s an old saying – “It’s easier to change people than to change people.” Anyone who’s not being positive, innovative, committed, or is under-performing must go.

Talking about being innovative and committed….. we came up with this unbelievable offer (well bribe really) that is an absolute first for NZ

If you decide to make the right choice and start advertising for the right person here’s what we’ll do;

We’ll send you a case of 12 bottles of wine when you join, you can chose from the following:

1. Wyndham Estate Bin 555 Shiraz 2006

2. Redwood Pass Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc 2008 – rated by Cuisine Magazine

3. Twin Islands Marlborough Chardonnay 2007 – rated by Cuisine Magazine

Tell us where to send it, and we’ll courier it as soon as we receive your one off payment of $365.00+gst for 12 months unlimited advertising.

Here’s the best part: the best guarantee you’ll hear all year! At the end of the 12 months of unlimited advertising, if you’re not completely satisfied with our service and jobsite, we’ll refund you in full, and of course the wine will be a distant hangover, which is all yours. If you hear of a better guarantee anywhere please let me know.

So if you’re looking for real value and ways to cut costs, our site is said to be the most cost effective recruitment tool available in NZ. We were also voted one the best sites in NZ at the NetGuide Awards.

This offer is strictly available until the end of June, with payment of $365+gst not required until 20 July. This can even be split over 3 payments of $135+gst. (July, Aug and Sept)

If you have any queries please call or if you’d like to go ahead please email: contactus@myjobspace.co.nz with JUNE WINE OFFER in the title, tell us the wine you’d like, the address for delivery of the wine, and a daytime contact phone number. We’ll do the rest.

Yours faithfully

Gary Collins
Managing Director
www.myjobspace.co.nz

PS. The first 15 to reply will also get a free priority listing which keeps your ad at the top of the page. Did you know that 82% of people don’t look at the second page of results. Valued at $95+gst †

Idiot taxes mean business opportunity

A while back I wrote about Dick Smith being a stupid place to buy stuff.

The cheapest HDMI cable you can buy on sale at Dick Smith, with the 15% discount, is a staggering $55.23.

Despite a Dick Smith staff member’s comment on the post

“I work there and I will admit you can get pretty much anything we sell cheaper on the internet”

…Amnon, amongst others, commented that there are in fact some things that are cheaper to get from DSE, but it still leaves the mystery of the $55 HDMI cable.

Now from an interesting source comes an answer – and it makes sense. DC based political blogger Matt Yglesias picked up on the notion that the HDMI cables are an idiot tax (or information tax). Actually Matt got that from Alex Tabarrok:

My best guess is that this is an unusually strong version of the hidden fee model of Laibson and Gabaix. In that model, firms overprice one aspect of service–such as a hotel charging exorbitant rates for telephone service–as an idiot tax. Crucially, the idiot tax is matched by an IQ-subsidy; the price of the hotel room is lower than it would be without the idiot tax–so the idiots don’t know to shop elsewhere and the high-IQ types are, in fact, drawn to stores with an idiot tax. Thus, buy your blu-ray player at places such as Best Buy which sell a lot of expensive cable as well as massively overpriced extended warranties.

I’d extend that, and see there are three reasons that people pay these prices:

  1. Convenience: Buyers know the price is unfair, but chose to pay as the difference in price is made up by the convenience of buying the item in store.
  2. Information: Buyers don’t know that the prices are unfair – as they are unaware of the either because they do not now the prices elsewhere.
  3. Coercion: Buyers know the price is unfair, but pay the price as they feel that they have no other option.

Let’s examine these in turn, but first let me state that any business that treats their customers as uninformed or coerces them into buying things should understand that the idiot is not the customer, but themselves.

1. Convenience

This is actually fair – if the extra price a store charges for an accessory is more than compensated by the convenience of obtaining that item immediately, then buyers can make a rational choice. This is a form of price discrimination – a time rich and money poor student may choose to shop around, while a harassed business person in a suit may choose to pay the premium.

It’s critical, however, that the difference in price is not excessive, as then the situation can easily move into the third category of coercion.

2. Information

This is screwing the customer. The store has deliberately chosen to take advantage of the naivety of their shoppers and is taking excess margin.

While this win-lose transaction works at the cashier, stores should realise that in the long run the information will emerge. This manifests itself in a gradual erosion in the public perception of the store. In marketing speak – this is brand erosion, in business speak this is falling sales and eventual bankruptcy.

3. Coercion

This is clearly screwing the customer, with the full knowledge of the customer. Assuming the customer has not walked away this coercive approach results in much faster brand erosion through word of mouth and publicity. The customer experience is negative and they do business with the seller under duress. This is clearly unsustainable.

Where industries contrive to collectively screw customers they open themselves up to a new competitor that breaks the rules and offers customers a straight deal. Indeed all of these approaches carry that risk. Let’s look at some example industries, and how a new player could take advantage.

Convenience Stores and service stations charge more for basic items as you will pay more to get it 24/7 and in an easy location. There are plenty more examples of the 1: convenience category.

Existing store chains can be out competed by mid-small sized supermarkets – much like the metro markets in London or downtown Wellington. There is also room for a service station chain to lower prices of key products and promote that as a competitive advantage. Finally the 24 hour supermarket with service station attached completely changed the industry – reducing the need to c-stores and taking big chunks out of petrol station margins.

Electronic retailers like Dick Smith place low margins on the flagship products, such as TVs and DVD players, and then makes up margin by selling HDMI cables with 80% markup, pointless warranties and so forth. The warranties and HDMI cables are un-buyable as it is clear that there is to much excess profit involved. This falls into the 2: or 3: categories above – as the price difference is just too high to be otherwise.

These old players are being out-competed by e-commerce players with low overheads, knowledge driven selling (i.e. great descriptions) and competitive pricing, cross checked by price search sites. There is little excuse for using something else these days.
There is space, perhaps, for a fairer high street seller, but it’s a tough game with tiny margins – and those rents and staff costs are not cheap.

Hotels advertise expensive rack rates, but offer cheaper ones on websites and through package operators. They charge extortionate rates for telephone calls, internet access, meals, drinks and for mini-bar purchases.

The result is that the smart hotel consumer avoids all of these extras, meaning that they actually have negative utility – the mini bar tempts you but you dare not indulge. These fall into the 3rd, coercive, category – but most chose not to pay.
There is room, and some are addressing it, for a fairer hotel approach. Charge reasonable fees for the phone, minibar and suchlike and people will start actually using them. In NZ we have always had motels, which (unlike the South American definition) are cheap, cheerful and generally fair with the extras.

Rental car agencies add airport fees, taxes and most importantly, insurance costs to their initial quotes. In NZ we have it a bit better, but the sales pressure to lower the insurance excess remains – avoid this as it is a ripoff. Don’t start me on the “free fuel – return it empty” scam either. Many (too many) people fall for this – make no mistake it’s in the 3rd category, and you should not pay.

A new play in Spain (and sadly I can’t find them) completely transformed the expat rentals a few years back by offering a one price, full insurance included, sign and drive away service that acquired customers for the agencies. Other approaches include the rent a car for an hour places like ziphop.co.nz or zipcar.com, or (please) a new rental player that charges one price, full insurance and provides instant service without 10 minutes of typing into an archaic green text screen.

Mobile Telephone providers ‘fight’ on their headline calling plans, but charge high prices for international calls, international roaming, excessive texts, minutes and in particular international data. With very few exceptions these rates are not reducible – and so international data roaming in particular is simply unusable.

The mobile telephone companies have a grip on the market – but resellers and new players like NZ’s 2degrees have the ability to be somewhat transformational by offering one price for all you can eat deals. 2degrees is stuffed on international roaming though, as these prices are dictated by the counter-party. However Vodafone has the ultimate opportunity to simply make international roaming data, voice and text fees disappear for their customers – and they’d have a lot more customers if they did so.
Customers have voted with their feet on telecos – and have moved across to Skype, especially for international calls. When the marginal cost of a call, text or data is so trivial, and the alternative of Skype is ever present it makes it obvious that the Telcos strategy should be to make the prices low enough for us not to care.

Apple charges good prices for their computers, but outrageously high prices for their RAM. The savvy buyer gets the minimum RAM and upgrades on their own.

Apple has locked in loyal customers, such as me, by providing great products. Competitors have much greater hurdles to crack than the price of memory, so for now just keep buying your memory from somewhere else. Memory (and Hard Disk) retailers should be targeting Apple buyers, particularly for the newer models, and making it easy to find and buy cheaper alternatives.

Many of these businesses are mired in the past, and a new player has the real ability to capture a large share before the incumbents react – and by which time it is often too late.

So what other idiot taxes are there – and more importantly what opportunities present themselves as a result? A recession is a great time to attack.

BNZ’s Netguard costs $5, but is the least bad option

I’ve blogged before about BNZ’s stupid Netguard Card – which has codes on it to allow you to login to your bank account. Perish the thought that you are travelling when the new one is issued, or that you lose it without first taking a photograph and placing it on your blog or Flickr.

BNZ updates the card every year – and that’s where we can start figuring out how much it costs.

They use cards from Entrust, a company that entertainingly does not even own entrust.co.nz. (pretty trustworthy huh) There is, however, a pricelist on their site, and they are quoting US$8.26 per user for a yearly process for 10,000 cards.

They are quick to point out the savings of the card versus the alternative of a Token:

entrust That’s based on 10,000 users, but we can change the number of users – so let’s choose 800,000 – my guess to the number of active BNZ customers.
entrust

That’s not so bad – at all. Indeed even with recent exchange rates and a healthy “Where the heck is New Zealand?” margin, these things are probably coming in at NZ$4-5 dollars each. That’s still $4-5 that I’d rather have in my account however.

The comparison for 80,000 users looks pretty bad for those tokens though – banks that use them would pay an extra US$23m.

So as I understand it BNZ is now obliged to use some sort of additional security check, and so choosing the Netguard Card is the least bad alternative. It’s cheap, fits in my wallet, and can be photographed and stored digitally.

I’d still prefer the option of nothing though.

The Fail of Bing. And google.

Like everyone else I have been trying out Bing.com – Microsofts “new” search engine.

It’s useless.

Here is the result page for “buy car” – with “pages from New Zealand selected”.

Bing
Firstly it is difficult to see where the advertisements stop and the results start. On my giant screen the yellow is white, while the format of the ads looks the same as the results. I feel that Bing is trying to trick me into clicking on the ads.

Secondly all of the advertisements are Australian – except for hapless Yellow.co.nz that is still buying traffic for some bizarre reason.

Thirdly they manage to miss that Trade Me is (by a considerable margin) the biggest car market in New Zealand. Zillion and Autotrader are markets, but what the heck is Manheim Fowles doing in 7th place, and why does BuyRight get such play?

Trade Me actually does pop up further down  on the list, coming in at 16th place with the car seats category, and in 21st place with ride on toys category. Meanwhile Turners home page scrapes into 31st spot – both results are far too low to be useful.

Similarly searching for “Buy iPod” gets a bunch of useless Australian ads, but it does get Trade Me and Apple NZ in the top three – a win. Those two stores are almost certainly the biggest online sellers of iPods in New Zealand. However theboysdownunder.com are certainly not, and the page shown is a deep link special offer – so what are they doing in the #2 slot?

Bing

Finally I ran the “buy car” search on Google.co.nz – and was astonished to find that they too fail to pick that Trade Me is the marketplace for cars here. They also didn’t pick up Turners auctions, though Turners managed to buy the prime advertising position.

Google, of course, gets the delineation between advertising and results right – with a darker background, slight indentation and different format for that top Turners advertisement. The rest of the results are reasonable as well.
Trade Me

So – what have we learned?
Firstly yet again the lesson is to never brag about a new search site until it actually works. Cuil is probably still out there – but nobody cares.
Next – Microsoft still doesn’t get it. But we knew that. At least I don’t have the visceral negative reaction to Bing that I do to the Windows Live brand.

Finally even Google gets it wrong sometimes. Sure Trade Me can do a better job on SEO, but they simply don’t need to any more as everyone knows that’s where you go.

Back to the nineties sites like metacrawler were the way to go – passing your search phrase to several engines at once, as they all sucked to one extent or the other. The along came Google, which actually worked, and everything else faded away.

It’s still clear that Google is still vastly better than anything else out there, so I simply don’t understand why you’d use anything else at the moment.

When to resign from a board

Over at the SEC is an excellent letter from Richard E Middlekauff – who just resigned from the board of Heelys, Inc – a shoe company.

Here’s why:

1: The shareholders are not maximising their return after the company was in play.

The Board, in my opinion, should seriously engage potential buyers of the Company, unlike it did with Skechers USA, Inc. last year, in order to maximize the Company’s value for its stockholders.  I do not see the Company achieving this as a stand alone company.  Unfortunately, it appears that the majority of the Board charted a different course, giving scant attention to the offers from Skechers and other third party prospective buyers, and instead pursued an untimely and expensive restructuring of the Company by installing management having no actual experience in the shoe industry.

..My feeling is that CSW is not considering offers for the acquisition of the Company in a manner consistent with Delaware law.  I understand that CSW has its own internal issues with its stockholders; however, that should not cloud its fiduciary duties to the Company.  Any intentions regarding the Company in connection with any stock buy-back or plans to take the Company private should be disclosed to the Company’s stockholders as required by federal securities laws.

2: The board was not being consulted for important decisions

As a Board member, I have often not been consulted in advance of significant management decisions.

3: The board was given insufficient information and time to make decisions

I often did not receive sufficient information to properly prepare for meaningful participation in Board meetings to properly evaluate the information in connection with addressing critical matters affecting the Company.

Similarly, the recent Board meeting held on May 12th upset me greatly, but provides a good example of the short shrift treatment of the Board members when each director was given only two (2) minutes to speak on the significant issue of the strategic direction of the Company.  This was most unfair to me personally, as well as any other director who shared a very different point of view from the majority of the Board.

I’ve written about this before – and I’ll reiterate that if you find yourself in any of these situations then get out.

A few fun GM Chapter 11 facts

A quick read of the General Motors Chapter 11 Bankruptcy petition gives some fun facts about the collosal disaster that is GM.

Total Assets: $82.3 Billion

Total Debts: $172.8 Billion. That’s 217% of assets, $90.52 billion in net debt and bigger than the GDP of New Zealand.

  • How did it get this far?

The biggest trade debt ($121.5m) is to advertising agency Starcom. (They are the 6th biggest unsecured creditor, after big bond holders and employees). Meanwhile Publicis Groupe went for $25.3m, Interpublic for $16m and McCann Erickson for $4.6m. That’s $167.4m in total advertising agency debt.

  • If your biggest supplier is an advertising agency, wouldn’t you begin to suspect that there is a disconnect between your advertised messages and your products?
  • How did you measure the impact of your advertising spend?

Meanwhile metal suppliers US Steel, Arcelor Mittal and AK Steel Holding Group all managed to keep their debt under $10m.

  • How come they were so smart and Starcom et. al so dumb to be left holding the bag? Starcom in particular is looking pretty stupid.

GM owed Enterprise Rent a Car $33m, Avis $12m, Hertz $8.7m – for a total of $53.7m.

  • Was GM really paying rental car companies to take their cars?
  • Why did rental car companies give their customers crappy GM cars that have higher maintenance costs and lower lives (versus say Toyota’s)? Was that doing the right thing or taking the money and damn the customer?

Bottom of the list of top 50 unsecured creditors are consultants Cap Gemini – with $4.4m in trade debt.

  • How much did they save GM for that $4.4m consideration?
  • If they are such good consultants, then how come they didn’t get their money up front?
  • What other consultants were used in the last, say, 10 years? How much did that cost, and what did they make/save for GM?

I’m glad GM is in Chapter 11 (refinance and trade out) – it’s the right thing to do, though I do feel that a full blown Chapter 7 (close it down and divide the pieces) is the better option. GM has become to bloated, is crippled with legacy staff and pension issues and makes vehicles which are amusingly ugly, woefully inefficient and mired in the past.

Well done Trade Me, but the threat remains

There’s an interesting article over at eBay strategies, which talks about how eBay lost the market for classifieds and mentions that Amazon is taking out the top end. (If you work at Trade Me then you should have eBay Strategies in your RSS reader)

I’ve mentioned it here before, and it bears repeating: Trade Me is different.

Trade Me has captured the Motors market, is well ahead of the incumbent in Property traffic and just behind the incumbent in Jobs. They are also in flats ( and have been for years) and rental property.

Meanwhile Trade Me’s free listings and simple localization meant that they have always been in the local classifieds game – things like sofas and so forth that require a face to face transaction.

The overall effect was a business that left no space for the well executed Zillion and Finda to get traction.

So well done Trade Me, but the threat will always be there – screw up and someone will take big chunks of the business. This will happen, for example, if Trade Me attempts to increase fees too much or if usability is lost in a host of features. If so then Craigslist, Gumtree or say Zillion will be right there to pick up the volume.

Sadly for the competitive threat Trade Me is still following the path to usability, and while I’d like to see lower fees in tough times they are probably at the right level for now.

It’s the same at the top end for eBay with higher quality product sellers moving across to Amazon.

Indeed while a substantial percentage (say 40%) of Trade Me’s listings are new, there does remain a bit of a gap in the market for direct selling of quality new products. It’s the one Ferrit was so hapless at finding, and I’ve mentioned how you can take advantage before. The gap is pretty tiny, but between New Zealand and Australia (where eBay is also screwing up) there is plenty of scope.

I’m saddened at just how eBay have managed to lose the plot, but respect Trade Me and how they are still showing the way after 10 years.

I’ve joined Equip – a Better by Design consultancy

Better By Design is a NZ Government sponsored program that seeks to help high growth companies become design-led – and thus turn into great companies.

The end goal of Better by Design is for New Zealand companies to generate more export sales by selling better-designed products and services.

It all came out of a 2003 paper and kicked off at a 2005 conference, and it’s part of NZTE.

There’s an impressive advisory board, led by Jeremy Moon (Icebreaker) and assisted by Rick Wells (Formway). Those are two great design led companies – and another one is Apple. It’s no coincidence that I’m typing on an Apple computer, sitting on a Formway Life Chair and wearing 3 separate pieces of Icebreaker clothing. These are companies that understand what I need before I need it and make beautiful products that fit those needs – products that are more addictive than caffeine.

Better by Design’s primary vehicle is the Design Integration Program – a six stage process that identifies high growth export led companies that would benefit from the program, audits them to assess their gaps to being design-led, writes a plan and then helps the company get the plan done.

BBD uses three external consultancies to perform the audits and write, with the client company, the plan to become design led. BBD’s own internal consultants, who each boast an impressive private sector CV, identify and bring companies aboard, guide them through the process and then help companies get the plans done.

Oh – and the audit and plan are free to the participating companies.

It is, however, really rather difficult to get into the program.

Well over 100 companies have been or are going through the process, and there have been some notable successes. Check out the case studies for OBO and Bendon, each of whom has transformed their business in recent years. There are other case studies as well.

The primary measure is dollars earned from exports, and I am told that the results are well above expectations.

I recently joined the team at Equip Design, one of the three external firms that companies can choose to perform the Design Audit and Plan (called a Design360). I’m joining Equip founders Ray Labone and Peter Haythornwaite along with Andrew Jones.

Ray has been in this program from the very beginning, and is a (or the) leading branding consultant. He co-founded Designworks and he chaired the Design Taskforce that created the work that ended up as Better By Design.

Peter has a similarly stellar career in the Industrial Design field – running his own design company for many years and, well if you are in the field you know who he is.

Interestingly one of my cousins (Mikkel Johannessen) worked for Ray years ago, and another (Nils Johannessen) for a design company that Peter founded. They both went through what was then the Wellington Polytechnic School of Design, and I remember Nils’ class designed MP3 players – in about 1990.

Andrew is an engineer and has far too much production process consulting experience.

So I’ve joined a very strong team – and I’m there not because I love caressing gorgeous  Apple products, agonizing over website design, or because I derive a perverse pleasure from helping production processes get better. Instead I am there to provide a business perspective to the team, as the audits and plans tend to go to the very core of what a company does and how it does it.

I bring with me a pretty ruthless approach to the process of growing and improving businesses, one that has always stayed clear of chasing government money just because it is there. I believe in the BBD program as the participating companies are very well screened, it’s free, the BBD team and external consultants have great CVs, and the track record is peerless.

I’m really looking forward to this work – it’s only a handful of days a month, but it means I get to see and help some great companies all over New Zealand. The BBD team has not focussed on web-based businesses, and so I will extend my reach and hope to be able to do some cross-pollination between the two worlds.

I will also learn a lot – from Ray, Peter and Andrew and from the companies that I get to see, and get to apply that to other things that I am involved with.

There is a chance that things will change a bit after the forthcoming budget, but I sense a confident mood given the track record of the program.

Hopefully you will read here about the great companies in the program, but only  if all parties (BBD, Equip and hte company itself) are comfortable.

Red Bull is a tobacco company

A scary article in the NZHerald on how a Brooke Robertson lost 55 Kg of weight by abandoning foods and solely drinking Red Bull.

“I managed to wean myself off it by being in hospital for that long but I had severe withdrawals – sweating, nausea, shaking. It was an addiction. The doctors stated that.”

We get the occasional odd story here in New Zealand, but I want to concentrate on the quote from a Red Bull spokesperson who

denied the drink was addictive and said there was “scientific evidence that caffeine is not addictive”.

That’s exactly the sort of disingenuous statement that the tobacco companies made for years about nicotine. There may be scientific evidence for one side and the other of an issue, but the overwhelming preponderance of evidence is that caffeine is addictive.

I don’t know whether this was a misguided spokesperson, an external lawyer or whether the Red Bull organization truly believes there is a chance that caffeine is not addictive. The fact is they are selling stuff which contains an addictive ingredient, and they should have acknowledged that, say that they recommend one can a day as part of a balanced diet and move on.

They didn’t – instead they tried to infer imply  that caffeine is not addictive – according to ’scientists’.

But even without the scientific evidence we all know that Caffeine is addictive – it’s not even a debate in society. The world consumes about 120,000 tonnes each year of caffeine, and it’s consumed in the full knowledge that it is a stimulant and it is addictive. It’s like alcohol and tobacco – a legal way to send a mind altering substance to your brain.

So I’ve purchased my last drink of Red Bull, will not support their crazy sports events (which are brilliant way to do marketing) and will sneer at the Red Bull and Toro Rosso Formula 1 teams.

I also recommend that Red Bull spokespeople read Wikipedia – the Caffeine article is excellent – well written and with plenty of footnotes for those in denial to follow.

Withdrawal symptoms—possibly including headache, irritability, an inability to concentrate, drowsiness, insomnia and pain in the stomach, upper body, and joints[71]—may appear within 12 to 24 hours after discontinuation of caffeine intake, peak at roughly 48 hours, and usually last from one to five days, representing the time required for the number of adenosine receptors in the brain to revert to “normal” levels, uninfluenced by caffeine consumption.

And now I’ll go make myself a coffee. I forgot to this morning and I can sense a headache coming on.

Let’s deliver mail once a week

From this great illustration of the average US Postal Service residential customer’s mailbox we can glean some interesting facts. Amongst them is numerical evidence as to why I don’t check my mail very often.

delivermagazine

There are almost 200 billion pieces of mail delivered to the (and Wolfram Alpha couldn’t deal with any of this) 111 million USA households each year. That’s an average of almost 1,800 each, or 5.7 items a day* or 34 a week (with 6 day delivery). I recall it was around 24 in 1999, so times have been strangely kind to the USPS.

Here’s the problem – 5.3 of those 5.7 letters each day are “unwanted”, and the only 0.5 are not. I’m including bills in the unwanted, as nobody really likes getting them. Moreover in the USA in particular, bills are used as just another way to deliver you junk mail.

Meanwhile the average household is getting about 1 personal letter a month, and  1 card or invite a week – though many of those cards will also be junk.

<update – the legend is wrong – red is not wanted etc.>

It’s really hard to define the size of the junk market in the USA, or anywhere, as companies for some reason get really defensive about their mail being classified as ‘junk’ or ‘unsolicited’. Also in the USA the junk mailers get around ‘no junk’ signs by personally addressing much all of their materials – those are the catalogs, direct letters and so forth in the graphic above. Moreover it is often difficult to distinguish junk (’get a pre-approved credit card’) from bills (’Here’s your credit card bill – with a pre approved offer!’) – and sometimes that is deliberate, so you will open the junk.

Sadly, no matter what you call it, it is all just so much wasted paper (the occasional beautifully crafted wedding invitation aside.) What is particularly strange are the 15 Billion catalogs sent out each year. That’s a whole lot of paper in the internet age.

We all belong to the internet age – paying bills online (usually automatically), sending and reading thousands of emails, twitters, blog posts and so forth each year and reading our news online. We only use snail mail (the name says it all) when we deliberately want a slower and more classy process, such as for those elegant wedding invites.

I last sent a personal letter when I was in Pakistan. In 1998. Or was it Europe in 1996? Either way – it’s long past the time when the mail was something I cared about.

Yet we still have the Pavlovian instinct, much like when a phone rings, of checking the mail when it arrives. I often do as well, but what could be in my mail box of any importance?

Well – the only things that matter to me at the moment in that box are The Independent and The Economist, which as newspapers have a time element to them. (I should also get the NBR but they make it a bit hard.)

Everything else can wait. I’d prefer to do bills in batches (I usually wait until the 3rd letter then overpay for a few months) as it is more efficient, and junk gets binned. (Powershop wins awards here – no paper is involved in the purchase of electricity)

So why do we as a society insist on a service to deliver our mail every day? Can’t we reduce it to once every 2 or 3 days, or even once a week?

Businesses can perhaps have more frequent deliveries, but they can pay for it, and besides – this will prod them into going fully online.

How about we offer a dual service – one service that will get me The Economist yeserday (e.g. by print on demand and hand delivery) instead of Monday/Tuesday and that will  deliver the Independent to me before I wake up on Thursday and another service that delivers letters once a week?

We can take the savings, and use them to contribute somehow to the roll out and maintenance of decent broadband infrastucture. We could even give the ownership of that broadband infrastructure to the NZ Post, just like it used to be.

Why are Harcourts not yet on Trade Me?

There’s a fun discussion happening over on the Unconditional Blog – which if you have not found it yet is well worth following. I commend Alister Helm for not only his writing, but also for balancing the real estate industry (and their archaic ways) and the dot com approach to things.

However Alistair write a post on Harcourts that was just a wee bit too fluffy for my sensibilities – so I asked the question “.. are these change leaders <Harcourts> even on Trade Me yet?” (I knew that they are not – and they are missing out on 600,000 browsers each month)

If you go to that post now then stop reading – I’ve just copied and pasted. Indeed join the conversation over on Alistairs blog raher than starting s new one here.

To his credit Alistair gave a comprehensive reply, but it does not fly with me.

1. Realestate.co.nz – the most comprehensive single property portal in NZ – 95% of all listings by real estate agents are featured, the site receives 370,000 unique browsers per month with over 120,000 of these from overseas. This single portal provides the most comprehensive source of real estate – test it on Google which is were the majority of real estate searches start – type in “property in …” on Google NZ.

2. Harcourts.co.nz – the number one company website with over 160,000 unique browsers per month, close to double the web traffic of any other company website.

3. Google adwords – the opportunity to promote property online with pinpoint accuracy and cost effective visitor traffic.

Harcourts have never used Trade me property for all of their listings, they are not alone. At this time realestate.co.nz would have over 20,000 more listings than trade me property. As well there are over 200,000 unique browsers a month who go to realestate.co.nz who do not visit trade me property. (these are all Nielsen Stats)

Harcourts judge that their clients properties would not be presented in the best manner on a website that focuses on second hand goods auctions after all do real estate agents in Australia or US use eBay? – certainly not. Harcourts have adopted this strategy and it has not effected their market share – their share is growing.

I would judge that Trade me is not the sole answer to advertising anything in NZ – just look at jobs, Seek is still the number 1 jobs website – some high value items like jobs and houses may not long term fit the image and profile of trade me – cars, beds, shoes, CD’s and mobile phone – certainly core for Trade me.

My reply was as follows:

Realestate.co.nz had 354,357 UB’s in April, of which 145,000 odd also went to Trade Me. Another 621,080 went to Trade Me and not to Realestate.co.nz.

Harcourts.co.nz had 161,891 UB’s in April, of which 83,500 also went to Trade Me. Another 679,945 went to Trade Me and not to Harcourts.

These are total traffic figures- I should have used domestic, but actually from memory the total numbers make realestate.co.nz look better. I would say though that the impact of those overseas browsers is pretty minimal – after all how many houses are sold each month to overseas buyers?

While UB’s are over-counted (e.g. I have multiple browsers and computers so count many times) this is still a pretty compelling market that Harcourts misses out on. There must be more to it.

And there is – Realestate.co.nz is partially owned by Harcourts, and the Harcourts CEO is the chairman of Realestate.co.nz. Isn’t this a more likely reason for them not to list on Trade Me?

Almost every other real estate agency on Realestate.co.nz is on Trade Me. The last hold outs were/are the shareholders in Realestate.co.nz.

I have no problem with Harcourts holding out, but the reasons are clear, and they are not based on statistics but on ownership.

There are 365 Harcourts listings on Trade Me right now – placed, I understand, by individual agents. If I were a Harcourts agent I’d be pretty annoyed that 600,000 Kiwis were not able to view my listings, and I can understand why they would do an end-run behind the corporate policy.

Meanwhile Barfoot’s have over 2000 listings on Trade Me. Do we think that Harcourts are looking at Barfoot’s recent success in Auckland and wondering just how much of that relates to their presence on Trade Me? Remember that Trade Me attracts sellers, not just buyers.

Actually I’d love to see a chart of sales by agency versus number of listings that month on each of the sites. It would make interesting reading for the entire industry. I suspect you’d better be on both main sites to maximise your chances of a sale.

I do believe there is a place for both Trade Me and realestate.co.nz, but if Harcourts are really scathingly positioning Trade Me as a 2nd hand goods market then they show a very poor awareness of what exactly Trade Me is to Kiwis.

eBay is a poor cousin to Trade Me – they never figured out how to do Motors or Property, and certainly not Jobs. In Australia the market for cars is pretty fragmented, but is mainly on independent listing sites. Similarly the market for property is all over the place, without one dominant player (it varies by region and realestate.com.au is pretty good).

Not only are 40% odd of Trade Me’s items on sale new, but Trade Me is the marketplace for cars and bikes (due to poor online competition back in the day), getting close to the same for property (where realestate.co.nz is good competition), and still in progress for Jobs (where Seek was a very strong incumbent).

As an aside (and red herring) – what happens to the other 5% of real estate agent listings that are not on realestate.co.nz? Are they listed anywhere?

Disclosures: none – I have not worked for Trade Me for quite a while, and I know both Alistair from Realestate and Brendon from Trade Me Property, and they are both good guys.

Let there be light

A simple idea – cover a 55,000 sports stadium with solar panels, and use them to power (75% of) the lights. This is in Taiwan, ready for the World Games, and, more importantly, Rugby sevens.

When there is no match then the power is fed into the grid – to the tune of 1.14 Gigiwatt hours per year. New Zealand uses about 42,000 GWh per year, so it isn’t a huge amount of electricity – but it is wonderfully sustainable. (I guess in wellington we could use windmills instead)

They built this with no recordable accidents – which is also a stunning achievement.

Plenty more photo goodness, and even a video, at deputy-dog and at the Worldgames09 site.

Next Page »


Kiwis - Get $20 of free Electricity! from FlowerPower at Powershop. Sign up

Tweets

History

 Subscribe in another RSS reader

Disclaimer These opinions are my own, and not that of any of my current or former clients.