When I first read this news headline, I thought I was having a stroke: “Yelp and Bing Team Up in Attempt to Thwart Zagat and Google.”
Tweet via @Swoontang
iOS vs. Android Installed Base fragmentation.
Totally forgot to share this, but I was interviewed by Fortune / CNN two weeks ago on Twitter’s foray into the small business advertising arena. I basically say that I think Twitter is playing SMBs for fools and taking their money without showing ROI. It worked for Google with AdWords for years, so I don’t blame them. But SMBs really should stay away from stuff they don’t understand. If you understand analytics and CPC, CPA, CAC then go for it. If you don’t, focus on making a better cupcake.
Absolutely.
Same can be said about Facebook, too.
Experimented with a small ad budget for a client on Facebook recently.
My quick takes:
It’s for folks in the middle where I think it’s largely ineffective:
And you can insert Google/Twitter above and the conclusion is the same.
As far as Twitter goes, there are already tools available that can provide for localized search/keyword targeting. And they’re free. And rather than just spit out a sponsored tweet or auto-follow, viewing keywords “intratweet” and in context can provide you a valuable opportunity to engage with a potential new lead/customer/fan and actually start a fruitful conversation versus just badgering them with a boilerplate response.
Check out GeoChirp, for one.
In short, “GeoChirp helps you search for people Twittering for specific things in a specific area.”
You just:
You can follow results by subscribing to an RSS feed. (Read more on GeoChirp here).

Pretty powerful stuff. Talk about targeting…
And on Twitter, there’s only 140 characters to work with. There’s not much room for nuance! Using Dave’s cupcake shop example, if someone around you tweets:
“I just had the most incredible banana cream cupcake at my niece’s b-day party! My favorite! [Insert obligatory Instagram food porn pic here]”
…then that’s about 99% of the targeting you need, no? Next to word-of-mouth or a warm referral from a friend or existing customer of yours, you can’t do much better than that. Why pay Twitter/Facebook/Google a dime when you can connect with someone on a one-to-one basis and tailor your response based on a known, stated, common interest? It’s far more authentic and you can use your own voice.
“Hey @suchandsuch, I’d put our banana cream frosting up against any in the world!!! Come on down and I’ll give you a sample on the house!”
The fact that Twitter is a giant “open” conversation means a) unlike with the walled gardens of Facebook, or the anonymous algorithms of Google, you can engage anyone, personally, and b) you can be hyper-granular in targeting your likely audience. Seems to me to be far more valuable than the “throw a bunch of crap against the wall and see what sticks” model of mass advertising with it’s .01% click through rates.
And as a user, aren’t you happier to receive word about something you love vs. that for another Brazilian wax treatment all because you’re a “Female, aged 18-34?”
Get real.
Does curating an audience this way take work? Sure. Easy? Nothing worthwhile ever is. There’s no silver bullet in building an audience for your business online, but one truth about social is that you get out of it what you put into it. Signing up for an ad budget doesn’t take a lot of time and effort. Consequently, I’ll wager that the “leads” you get out of those efforts will pale in quality next to the ones that you originated organically on your own using your own voice, and your own thumbs, one tweet at a time.
Feel free to reblog, comment, or ping me on Twitter @mbrosen to discuss in more detail.
Please lower your bitrates.
Now that the largest U.S. mobile carriers have ended or announced an end to unlimited cellular data plans, this is a practical way to help customers manage their usage. (Sprint, get the iPhone and you can re-join the conversation with the big boys when people start caring about you again and your earnings release is no longer prefaced by the word “Hemorrhaging”).
Some suggested guidelines for mobile streams:
Again, particularly for mobile streaming/downloads, though these guidelines would be sufficient for the desktop, as well. Also acceptable would be to provide concurrent “low-quality” and “high-quality” streams for the different use cases, i.e. while on wired/wireless internet vs. cellular.
Here’s why:

You like streaming music or listening to the radio while you commute on the bus/train? Maybe listening to a 3-hour baseball game? Maybe one that’s out-of-market, so the radio in your car won’t do. Does your local radio station not carry your favorite radio talk show, or not carry it live when you can listen, or only carry an hour segment of a 3-hour show? (BTW, I love ooTunes by Oogli for listening to the radio on the iPhone [iTunes link]. It effectively provides streams to every station that broadcasts on the web in every city in a single app. Much better than having separate AOL Radio, IHeartRadio, or several apps for individual stations).
Well, let’s say you have AT&T’s 2 GB monthly data plan.
At 128 kbps, an hour of audio is 57.6 MB.
That’s 35 hours per month.
Not to mention all the other data you use each month, from e-mail, to web surfing, Twitter, YouTube, GPS, etc. And who knows what new apps will come around that will use heavy data? TV viewing? Live sports? Do you use tethering with your laptop? Yep, that’s included in the monthly 2 GB, too.
How long is your daily commute? 30 minutes each way? So, an hour a day? More? Times 22 days or more.
Do you like to listen to your own music/radio at the gym? How much time do you spend there each month? Spend time outside? Ride a bike? Go to the beach?
That 35 hours can disappear rather fast.
Now:
At 32 kbps, an hour of audio is 14.4 MB.
That’s 142 hours per month.
Big difference. Much better. More efficient. Still better quality than AM or FM radio. Don’t have to think about it as much.
For users, it will obviously help keep data usage down. Podcasts or audiobooks will take up less storage. Also, for iPhone users, it will keep you from bumping up against Apple’s arbitrary 20 MB file size limit when downloading over-the-air from the iTunes app. (To get around that, you can actually just click on the name of a podcast vs. the download button and the file will start streaming. Of course, this doesn’t help with data usage and you must have a signal, so if you go underground or through a tunnel, no dice. Instead, I recommend the great Podcaster app by Alex Sokirynsky [iTunes link]. It enables you to bookmark your favorite podcasts, subscribe to premium ones that require a subscription/login, and download files above 20 MB over cellular). Yes, you can just download while on Wi-fi or when at your PC, but 50% of iPhone owners never plug them into iTunes after the initial activation and sync. (Yay, iCloud). What if you forget? Don’t have the time before leaving the house or office? There’s no Wi-fi at the train/bus station? Your iPhone is synced with your home computer, not your work one, and thus you can’t manipulate the files on it?
For publishers, it will result in lower bandwidth/hosting costs. You can store a larger archive of data in your xml/rss feed history so users can retrieve more past content. And your listeners can download/stream when they want to, and more importantly, when they have the time. Better to give your listeners access wherever they are, lest they stop listening. What if that hour on the train/bus is the only free time you have? Rather play with your kids when you get home than listen to Adam Carolla complaining about something?

And perhaps just as important, for most non-music content, there will be no appreciable difference in sound quality.
Here:
Listen to the 3 samples below. Spoken word. It’s Martin Short singing “Happy Birthday” to Dennis Miller on his radio show a while back. Same clips, varying bit rates. The original 128, 64, and 32 kbps.
I won’t tell you which is which.*
Hear a difference? Think you’ll notice with those stock white ear buds?
Worth getting dinged for overages on your bill each month?
Nah…
It’s a simple switch that helps all parties involved. Even the carriers, who might like the idea of charging for overages, probably like more the idea of giving their already over-tasked networks a break wherever they can and gaining the goodwill that comes with better performance.
Please do it. Everyone get on board.
Feel free to forward this to your favorite publishers.
Thanks in advance.
*1 - 32 kbps, 2 - 128 kbps, 3 - 64 kbps
MPEG LA announced today that its AVC Patent Portfolio License will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as “Internet Broadcast AVC Video”) during the entire life of this License.
Read the entire release here.
Funny old post from Fake Steve stand-in Fake Nikolai, a faux Google mole who tells it like it is:
Deadline? You must be joking.
Just tell me when you need to have something by, and then 2 weeks later, tell me when you really really need it by and we’ll aim for a few days after that. Is OK? Whatever – deadlines don’t matter here anyway. The product will languish in beta for a few years no matter what I do.