Enex have just presented the results of their analysis of the ISP-filtering trials; the Government’s test on Internet censorship. Here is my selective summary of the Executive Summary:

There were two parts to the test; ‘protecting’ people against the sites the Government blacklists and filtering out sites that are not on the blacklist (if you don’t do that, you may as well not bother, as new sites are cropping up every miinute, I mean second).

As you’d expect, the systems all blocked the blacklist sites. If you know a URL, it’s easily blocked. As you’d also expect, trying to dynamically block sites is just not going to work. Enex claim that 80% of undesirable sites were blocked with the dynamic filtering. Leaving 20% of sites getting through the net. Not exactly a success. Improving the accuracy of this filtering, say Enex, will degrade Internet performance. This we knew.

Only 2/3 of customers said they would ‘probably or definitely’ continue to use such filtering. Given that these people volunteered to use the technology and are obviously in favour of filtering, it’s a very poor result.

Telstra did not even test the filtering option, saying it can be circumvented and it is not effective in blocking IM conversations/file transfers or Peer-to-Peer programs. This we already knew and Enex confirmed these conclusions.

It was always a ‘look at me’ government initiative designed to win votes from the family sector. It was also never going to work, as every informed tech-commentator said when it was floated. Incredibly, instead of the government acknowledging the idiocy of this initiative and pulling the pin on it, they are imposing mandatory filtering on ISPs. Incredible.

I’m declaring December 7th the first Sales Respect Day.

Talk to any real estate salesperson. Their job involves providing valuable information to people who need to make a decision. Yet they are treated like second-class citizens. Often they are spoken down to, their correspondence is ignored and they are very seldom thanked by the prospective purchaser. They endure jibes and constant insinuations that they have lower ethics than other people.

The fact is, every profession has a mix of people who are scrupulous and people who are not. Professions like Real Estate are probably more conscious of ethical requirements than most, because they are more regulated than other professions.

I think many business people treat the sales person with disdain because they ascribe malicious intent to people who are trying to make money out of them. As if, somehow, a profit motive offsets the right to be treated with respect. It’s the same thought pattern that instilled a hatred of money-lenders when they started charging interest. People who provide you with a service should be treated with respect. Here is the quid pro quo: I’ll give you information and act ethically. You tell me honestly where I stand and treat me with respect.

One of the greatest sins against sales people is the disingenuous mining of information by a client. They intend giving the business to a particular supplier but will seek information from a range of companies to exert price pressure on the preferred supplier. A potential supplier might spend huge amounts of time and resources answering questions, educating the client or pitching ideas. But they were never going to get the business because they were too small a company. Or in the wrong location.

So here’s how you celebrate Sales Respect Day.

1. Send a thank-you note to a sales person who has given you useful information.
2. Send a thank-you note and a small gift to a sales person who has given you useful information and didn’t get the business.
3. Send a sales person honest, constructive feedback about why they missed out on the job.

And give some thought to how you treat sales people – consider the following questions:

* Are you completely up-front with sales people about how the sales decision will be made and the chances of a sale eventuating? If you have no intention of purchasing, perhaps you should pay for the information.
* Do you reply promptly to sales people or wait for them to call you six times? Do you treat others poorly because it makes you feel more important?
* Do you have ethical guidelines as to how sales people are treated in your purchasing process?
* Do you thank sales people for comprehensive proposals that have clearly taken lots of time and effort?
* Do you waste people’s time because you have no intention of buying something off them? If you intend buying something off the Net, it’s just mean to bleed some retail sales person of information.

Most of us are sales people some of the time and purchasers some of the time. Show some respect.

Here’s a (real) complaint letter written in 2001 to Nissan.

ATTENTION: MR NEVILLE GREEN, GENERAL MANAGER – NATIONAL PARTS

DEAR SIR,

I would like to bring to your attention some serious faults in Nissan Motor Co. in regard to parts availability, lead times and pricing. Currently at this mine we have a Nissan W40 civilian bus that we cannot use to transport staff to and from the mine. The reason this bus is not operational is not labour or condition related, it is because of a denial on the part of yourself and Nissan Motor Co. to adequately supply your clientele with parts. I give you the example of the following items;

Of these I tried to purchase, only 3 are available in W.A.. It stretches the bounds of credulity that items such as wheel nuts (a consumable in most of the known world) are available with a lead time of 4 days-ex east. What resoundingly snaps the bounds of credulity clean in half is that items such as brake shoes are ex Japan (6 weeks). I cannot deny the effectiveness of these components, they not only slow the bus down, they have the ability to stop it stone fucking dead for 6 weeks! I didn’t even bother enquiring availability on such complicated parts such as washers etc – the only washers in stock would be – washer? Wind fuck out of this customer and tell him it’s ex east.

On the rare occasion we have been delivered parts within an acceptable time period, they have been entirely wrong. It is not that the wrong parts are ordered, it is that some of your parts interpreters are so green I couldn’t set them on fire with petrol.

These are not isolated incidents, they occur every time we try to purchase parts, from $10.00 hoses, at $104.94 each, through to internal gearbox components that are second only to thermonuclear warheads in their capacity to annihilate all that surrounds them.

It is astounding that in this day of interstate air and road transport at least 6 times per day, you peanuts take 4 days to get a part across the country. May I suggest you stop freighting the parts with Nissan transport vehicles as the 3 week delay in Nissan’s 24 hour roadside assist is becoming too much for us to bear.

I could elaborate further on the complete frustration I feel from trying to keep this bus on the road safely; suffice to say the bus driver now has a firm belief in the afterlife and we haven’t ruled out danger money for the position.

Please don’t get me wrong; I could handle the first 35 instances of being fucked around, (the apologetic kiss from customer support was always welcome). Now that you’ve turned it into a
bizarre form of sado-masochism complete with scratching and biting, I feel I have to complain.
I look forward to discussing every single frustrating event of the past 8 months with you.

I SINCERELY HOPE YOU CUNTS NEVER BUILD PLANES

YOURS IN UTTER AMAZEMENT,

JARROD BYRNE
UNDERGROUND MAINTENANCE PLANNER
BOUNTY GOLD MINE, MT HOLLAND FORRESTANIA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TEL (090) 394 527 FACSIMILE (090) 394 528
NISSAN MOTOR CO (AUSTRALIA) PTY. LTD.
C/O 244 WELSHPOOL RD, WELSHPOOL W.A.6106

AND EVERY PERSON I TALK TO BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN I GET SOME SATISFACTION

(Hate to ruin a good beat-up but the expletives were apparently added by someone after the letter was sent). In the search I did there were only 19 copies of this letter on the net including the page on Snopes verifying it. This is because the letter was written in 2001 and posted on the net in 2004.

Had the letter been written this year, it would have been Tweeted, Dugg and updated on countless Facebook sites. There would have been a public response by the company.

Consumer complaints; historically a private conversation between purchaser and corporation are going public. Companies who are not tracking conversations in social media and handling them swiftly are going to wear a lot of publicity that they don’t want. Bigger companies are more alert to this change. Small and medium-sized companies will be caught in the headlights.

I was talking to the owner of a repair business recently who said customers on the phone are sometimes very aggressive when things don’t go their own way. However, when the manufacturer is also involved in the dispute, the customer becomes surprisingly submissive. The “big company” advantage is a legacy of television advertising and financial hegemony, but that advantage is being undermined.

The recent damage to corporate credibility notably in the financial and vehicle sectors, together with the increased accountability that social media invites; we’re watching a power shift in the politics of customer relations.

I walked down to the Re Store to get some free range eggs. When I got back, I met an elderly lady in the lift with whom I have a nodding acquaintance. She told me she had just taken delivery of a new piece of jarrah furniture. Did I want to have a look? I thought I would; I knew a little about her and she’s had an interesting life. So I went to her flat and had a glass of water with her and she showed me some of her personal memorabilia.

Walking around the kitchen she went to put the eggs in the fridge; I said, ‘oh, don’t worry about that, they’ll be fine out of the fridge’. She said ‘that’s very kind of you. What a thoughtful thing to do’. So the eggs became a gift. Thoughtful of me, huh?

I think I’ll file this post under ‘Uncategorized’. Not in a basket.

From the Department of I Told You So, Google’s Lively has got the boot and Second Life continues to lose corporate traction. Reuters and Avastar have abandoned the platform. Quarter three in Second Life saw negative growth.

Business was interested in Second Life because it was a new interface and it was growing quickly. There will be interest again when there is a jump in the user experience or user numbers. Platform stability would also be a bonus. User numbers will grow only when there is a less demanding interface. Any bonehead can use Facebook.

Second Life’s legacy is significant; the compelling experience of virtual sex, the astonishing creativity of user-generated content in architecture and fashion, the rapid bonding powers of anonymous friendship…

It will continue to be interesting for at least two reasons; the education sector’s on-going search for a more engaging remote education experience and the governance issues surrounding virtual world environments as open as this. The most recent uproar in Second Life was over the pricing of certain types of islands, OpenSpace Sims but it is part of a long history of governance failures.

Linden Lab, who run Second Life, have complete authority but the passion of users who invest time in personal creativity and run virtual businesses makes law-making a very tough management task. I’ll never forget my first interaction with a Second Life entrepreneur; FURIOUS that someone had accidentally built over a virtual boundary, costing him (I calculated) around 20 cents an hour in revenue for a small number of hours. He was ready to rip someone’s head off.

The ego and significance that accrues in the virtual environment makes this a fascinating sandbox for modelling real-world decision-making. If LL work out how to make popular decisions in this environment, they will have learned something very valuable.

Photo by Miabella Foxley.

FREE. More than any other word, this word gives marketing a bad name. The most recent example to cross my virtual desk was a ‘Sponsor Update’ from WebProNews, a source of huge volumes of Search Engine Optimisation information; small portions of it useful. A ‘free’ offer for Brad Callen’s book, SEO Mindset: The Real Secrets To Getting #1 Google Rankings For Whatever Keywords You Want, Whenever You Want. Also cures cancer.

If you have to pay postage and handling, it’s not free Brad. If the book is free for those who pick it up in Podunk, Idaho, great. Say that it is a FREE PICK-UP in Podunk. If it’s free with an Amway Toilet Bowl Cleaner it’s a FREE WITH offer.

By the way, you say that the book has a value of $97. Have you sold it to people you don’t know for $97? Because otherwise you are scamming me. You say you are offering almost $470 worth of other products also ‘totally free’. They may be fantastic value but they are not ‘totally free’.

The marketing profession (American Marketing Association, Australian Marketing Institute – I’d link to them but their website doesn’t work) should delineate FREE, FREE PICK UP and FREE WITH. They should set parameters for establishing the value of a product that is not retailed. The practice of calling things free when they’re not and the practice of inventing ridiculously high values for your products should be the subject of industry attention and scorn.

You make us all look bad, Brad. Check your mindset.

I’m working at the moment on Second Life projects for Lithuanian and Singaporean clients. The Lithuanian project is with a commercial entity. Not the first in a Baltic state though. Estonia has just established a virtual embassy in Second Life, following the Swedish lead. Part of the attraction of developing in Second Life is dealing with parts of the world not normally seeking Australian marketing consultants.

Pictured is a part of the Lithuanian build that Tue Torok and Arnout Sequent have put together; it’s an ecologically orientated competition based around the Lithuanian love of trees and nature. The company concerned is a technology company. Interesting that they have adopted a cultural meme instead of a sales-orientated approach.

The Singapore project is large scale governmental one and the contrast between their government’s attitude to technology and the attitude of the Australian Government is unavoidable.

As part of my web research I stumbled upon the following quote from a Singapore bureaucracy. It was so far from Australian attitudes it jumped out at me:

“Singapore is a society in a hurry”. How would an Australian bureaucrat characterise Australia? “Australia is very laid-back society with a great lifestyle”.

Anyway, the Singapore quote continues:

“Our lack of natural resources and our small domestic market means that we have no buffer against changes in the outside world. We have only our skills and our adaptability”.

The Australian quote would continue:

“We are blessed with substantial natural resources. We can rely on demand from China for years to come, thank goodness”.

Yesterday I stopped in at the Northbridge Festival and was listening to a pretty good brass outfit when Milton Quackenbush’s mother tapped me on the shoulder. She had seen me taking notes (I was working, so sue me) and asked me if I had written down the name of the band. I think she may have mistaken me for a music critic. I have the word “critic” written all over me.

She went on to explain that her son was a jazz musician who played at the nearby New Orleans restaurant. Oh, I must have heard him last night I said; I ate there for the first time (it’s good). “No”, she corrected me, “he plays there Fridays and does solo piano there on Sunday. Here’s his business card”.

Now I’ve got a reason to go back to the New Orleans. Milton has a MySpace account but it doesn’t press a business card into your hand. Remember that the web remains a passive medium. Mother marketing is active.

And the name of the brass ensemble? I can’t tell you. They didn’t make it on to the program and like almost every other live band I’ve seen lately, they didn’t put a sign out front with their name on it. Falls short of even passive advertising.

Here’s a suggestion for the Australian Market and Social Research Society, the industry association that looks after market research professionals.

As a way of improving consumer confidence in market research what about an accreditation system for publicly released research?

The media use surveys as a way of generating headlines. Sometimes this is done quickly and with poor methodology which is an unfortunate irony, – it has the most exposure and is the most likely to be quick and sloppy. It is very much in the interests of the market research industry to establish some accreditation in this area. Convincing the media will be something else.

I’m suggesting a compact visual accreditation system that can be used on TV or at the tail of a newspaper article. The media’s help would be needed to explain the meaning of the symbols to the population.

Accreditation would only be available if research was conducted by a member of the association and supervised by a qualified practitioner. I’m suggesting three different accreditation symbols. The more symbols you’ve got, the more credible the research.

i – denoting that the questionnaire (at least) is available for public view on the internet. The link would need to be given at the end of the article/story or published on a separate market research page on their web site.

Sigma – denoting that the sample size conforms to guidelines set by the AMSRS.

Tick – denoting that an independent member of the AMSRS has affirmed the survey design as suitable.

Any symbol reproduced would be preceded by a lower case “mr.” It’s not a bullet-proof system but it’s a start. I’m sure the AMSRS can do better since hey, I’m not a market research professional.

Over time an accreditation system supported by the media would increase people’s understanding that there is good market research and poor market research. That dichotomy is not currently out there.

The WA Football Commission are currently in negotiation with LG over naming rights to the oval, having determined that under their lease they DO have the right to name the oval. Interesting how any change brings out the traditionalists – those who believe that “Subiaco Oval” is a sacred place somehow responsible for precious memories which would be devalued by a name change. The truth is that it’s a banal name. It’s named after a suburb.

I doubt the benefit of these deals for well established brands. Optus and LG are already national advertisers with all the credibility that attaches to that. It’s an expensive way to buy awareness. You couldn’t describe it as advertising; it’s just associating your brand name with football. There is normally no way to push a particular message.

Having said that, what would make most sense for LG is to try and negotiate for the oval to carry a positive connotation for the brand. They are the proud owners of a very powerful proposition; “Life’s Good”. If they were able to make that the name of the oval they would be advertising, not just paying to publicise a name that everyone already knows. The name would be better received by fans than LG Oval as it says something positive about the experience of going to the football.

Football executives could float this as the proposed name. They should say in their publicity that they are proud to have a public association with LG and that linkages with business are essential for the future well-being of the game. I wouldn’t call it “Oval” I’d just call it “Life’s Good”.