Ged Carroll

Category: business | 商業 | 상업 | ビジネス

My interest in business or commercial activity first started when a work friend of my Mum visited our family. She brought a book on commerce which is what business studies would have been called decades earlier. I read the book and that piqued my interest.

At the end of your third year in secondary school you are allowed to pick optional classes that you will take exams in. this is supposed to be something that you’re free to chose.

I was interested in business studies (partly because my friend Joe was doing it). But the school decided that they wanted me to do physics and chemistry instead and they did the same for my advanced level exams because I had done well in the normal level ones. School had a lot to answer for, but fortunately I managed to get back on track with college.

Eventually I finally managed to do pass a foundational course at night school whilst working in industry. I used that to then help me go and study for a degree in marketing.

I work in advertising now. And had previously worked in petrochemicals, plastics and optical fibre manfacture. All of which revolve around business. That’s why you find a business section here on my blog.

Business tends to cover a wide range of sectors that catch my eye over time. Business usually covers sectors that I don’t write about that much, but that have an outside impact on wider economics. So real estate would have been on my radar during the 2008 recession.

  • News Of The World

    I was getting ready to give my presentation at the CIPR the other evening when the news broke on Twitter about the News of The World. There was a sense (which I personally believe to be wrong) that this was going to result in a revolution that would:

    • Take down News Corporation
    • Radically change the standards of journalism

    I want to hear a revolution out there

    When Karl Marx wrote his book The Communist Manifesto, he would have anticipated that the class struggle would have gone into revolution in the United Kingdom. At that time, the country was pioneering the industrial revolution and many members of society had every reason to be dissatisfied with their lot in life. Instead his writings inspired revolutions in the mainly agrarian societies of Russia and China. Whilst, the UK provides foreigners like Marx and Engel with the freedom to express their views in a manner that wouldn’t have been tolerated in their native Germany, the country also had an effective state security mechanism in the Special Branch of the police. But writers and thinkers have speculated that there is also something ‘counter revolutionary’ in the UK psyche.

    Probably the closest we came to seeing it was the economic induced Jarrow march and the industrial disputes of the 1970s; which were as much a kick back against useless management teams in companies and a lack of investment, as they were a rising up of the proletariat.

    Social rather than political movements didn’t get much further; the summer of love brought the modern fractured nuclear family. The backlash of punk ushered in the yuppie and the ravers of 1988 that were a reaction to the grim social and cultural reality of Thatcherite Britain with a bit of weekend hedonism turned into the controlling Big Society of today. All of these events felt as if the world was going to be changed; but it didn’t in any meaningful way. The UK hasn’t had a media industry equivalent of the Arab spring.

    Most of the noise around this is happening on Twitter and in the media of the middle classes rather than the heartland of the News of The World. They don’t speak for the minicab driver, the hairdresser, the plumber or the joiner; who are more likely to be worried about the latest antics of Cheryl Cole and where are they going to find the same quality of sports reporting in another Sunday paper?

    News Corporation resilience

    Rupert Murdoch has experienced many ups and downs as he built News Corporation and whilst the current News Of The World scandal is no doubt upsetting it isn’t the closest his business has come to going under. In terms of the organisation as a whole, the boiler plate on News Corporation press releases says everything that needs to be said:

    News Corporation (NASDAQ: NWS, NWSA; ASX: NWS, NWSLV) had total assets as of March 31, 2011 of approximately US$60 billion and total annual revenues of approximately US$33 billion. News Corporation is a diversified global media company with operations in six industry segments: cable network programming; filmed entertainment; television; direct broadcast satellite television; publishing; and other. The activities of News Corporation are conducted principally in the United States, Continental Europe, the United Kingdom, Australia, Asia and Latin America.

    As a business it exists pretty much as they present it, it is not a paper tiger like the investment banks or Enron and the current event is considered in the wider world to be a UK issue, so there is little likelihood of contagion to his other properties worldwide in terms of lasting reputational damage.

    Regroup, rebrand

    As the News Of The World shut down, rumours swirled around about The Sun going to a seven-day production. There is a strong business case for them to do this and the current phone hacking scandal debate just provided a great catalyst. Moving to a seven-day newspaper provides a number of opportunities for News International:

    • The Sun’s brand has been stronger and it simplifies the company’s brand portfolio; money is only required to support one brand
    • It allows News International to remove duplication, particularly at senior levels within the papers, so reducing the wage bill whilst increasing profitability

    Unlike the Wapping strikes of the 1980s News Of The World journalists being laid off would have little sympathy from the public at large; I doubt even the NUJ would be likely to back them in the face of the current scandal. This provides News International with a unique opportunity to rebrand and regroup around it’s flagship Sun brand. I think that it’s no coincidence that Rebekah Brooks said that News International would seek to ensure that as many of the journalists as possible were re-employed as soon as possible.

    Confluence of interest

    The proposed media revolution exposes too many interests to chaos and the system like a knitted jumper is too intertwined: pull one thread and the entire sweater would unravel leaving something useless behind. It is in no one’s long term interest to tug on that thread.

    In 1992, with the re-election of a Conservative government backed by News International’s media The Sun ran a headline ‘It’s The Sun Wot Won It’. Tony Blair worked hard to build a relationship with Rupert Murdoch and one of the factors that was seen to help him win power was the tacit approval of the News International papers. Like the political power masters of old, News International can move a bigger block of voters than the Guardian Media Trust papers or the Trinity Mirror Group.

    Secondly, for every story that gets run, there are ten papers that don’t see the light of day. What would happen if the media was threatened?

    Ethics: the thin end of the wedge

    There is speculation that the phone hacking tactics that News of The World employees and contractors have been accused of has also been practiced at other media publications and that evidence will come to light of contagion of dishonesty. A measure of how true that is, was the desire for British journalists to work on the US equivalent of the UK red tops because of their unique no-holds barred approach.

    • What about payments for stories? Do these induce whistle-blowing for profit, or computer hacking?
    • What about dumpster-diving?
    • Or getting people drunk to then interrogate them?
    • What about the use of blackmail to persuade sources to cooperate which was one of the allegations made in the Max Moseley case?
    • How ethical is if for the government or organisations to leak stories?
    • Will journalists now need to be completely transparent about ‘sources close to the matter’? This would mean that journalists couldn’t pad their articles out with speculation, but it also means that PR teams would have to restrict access to spokespeople as briefings couldn’t be done to provide context or background without attribution

    The interface between society and the media would fall apart with the media left out in the cold about hard news stories. The social norming around these issues would be shut down and the sausage factory would be put back under wraps before lasting damage is done or the ramifications in business, politics and even the arts would ripple through every aspect of society. It is an imperfect system as it is, but one that works for most of the people most of the time.

    The media marketplace

    The Romans used to talk about ‘bread and circuses’ to keep a population happy and there is still an element of truth in that phrase today. The News of The World and their peers fill that gap. A media that falls to deliver to that need, fails to sell to a large proportion of the UK population. Whilst lip service may be paid to high standards, journalists will have to deliver what ever is required to keep the printing presses running and the website online. Despite the moral stance of O2 amongst others in pulling advertising from The News of The World; advertisers generally follow the audience in terms of their media spend. More media related commentary can be found here.

    More reading

    Did Twitter kill a newspaper? Of course not – GigaOM

    Phone Hacking Scandal live updates – The Guardian

    Why did Murdoch close the News Of The World? Daily View – BBC News blog

    Message from Rebekah Brooks to all News International staff

    Statement from Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and CEO, News Corporation regarding the phone hacking allegations

  • MySpace

    This has taken longer to write than I would have liked since TalkTalk Business still has me living the analogue lifestyle at home. I wanted to put finger to keyboard because much of the coverage around MySpace acquistion focused on:

    • The difference between what News Corporation paid for the social network and what it then sold the assets for
    • The decline in MySpace as a social network, the sale was another milestone for the MySpace story to be repeated

    There was less attention paid to the Specific Media side of the story and what would they be likely to do? It’s probably easier filter this out by what they won’t do.

    • Revitalise MySpace as a social network. That dog won’t hunt: like a restaurant that is no longer fashionable or a nightclub that has lost its buzz – lightning won’t strike twice. You would be better off starting again, simply because you could get rid of a lot negative brand perceptions, rather than trying to get people to come back. This is pretty much the same fate for ideas around going back to being a music-marketing brand
    • Change the game. This is the path that Friendster is taking with its new Malaysian owners, who are keeping customers network login in details and their social graph, but positioning the site towards social gaming. Existing social network members had the opportunity to download photographs and other details from their soon to disappear profiles. MySpace could try that but it would need some social gaming content like Farmville…

    Do nothing but monetise it. I personally think that this is the most attractive option. At the time of writing this post, Demand Media has a market value of about 1.1 billion US dollars. But it has that valuation based on the growth potential in its content factory model, one which according to Business Insider isn’t making sufficient money. What MySpace allows Specific Media to do is flip the Demand Media model on its head.

    It is primarily a sale of people’s content to which advertising can be put against. Consumers generally leave MySpace profiles dormant. Drop them an email, talk about new features and at the bottom of it an opt-out option to make their blog posts public and ‘Hey presto’ instant content farm.

    What people didn’t realise about MySpace was that it wasn’t only music marketing and Tila Tequila pictures, but professional content from the likes of the CIPD and soccer mom’s photo albums. So there is a diverse range of material to be monetised. Well worth the 35 million US dollars that Specific Media has paid out for the moribund social network.

    Sure it’s cheap advertising, but it could be put against relevant content and it wouldn’t even have to split the profits with the content providers in the way Google has to. More related content can be found here.

  • Walmart

    Today some of the most successful companies out there are ones that have a key technology platform and Walmart looks like it will be joining them:

    • Retail: Amazon, eBay, Alibaba
    • Office productivity: Google, Microsoft, Zoho
    • Telecommunications: Microsoft (Live Meeting and Skype), Cisco (WebEx)
    • Consumer services: Baidu, Google, Netease
    • Entertainment: Netflix, Amazon, Apple, PPLive

    I think we’ll soon see Walmart added to this list. At the present time the average consumer view of Walmart is likely to be that of a large, malevolent, low-class retailer in the US; the weird Yanks that bought ASDA in the UK and a trusted supermarket in China.

    What these perceptions don’t tell you is that Walmart has innovation in its corporate DNA. In 1987, they set up a satellite network connecting stores with headquarters over voice and data. When I was in college Walmart was associated with the ‘beer and diapers’ urban legend precisely because the company had a reputation for pioneering and pushing supply chain management and data-mining to the edge in order to maximise returns from its stores.

    Walmart like Amazon already has a large logistics footprint; some of the moves it has been making over the past 18 months make me think that the company is going for a big platform play – building a big box retailer online. Bear with me, while I run you through a few selected highlights:

    • Vudu – purchased in February 2010 by Walmart. The company provides stream on demand content that home audiences can pay for. The technology can be integrated into a variety of consumer electronics. It’s a digital content supermarket by another name
    • Kosmix – move forward to April 2011 and Walmart buys a social media platform that organises content by topic. Lots of smarts for social commerce, product reviews, marketing insights, customer services
    • Yihaodian – Walmart buys a minority stake in an e-commerce company with logistics in the high growth coastal areas of China. Due to the nature of the Chinese marketplace, that minority stake is the same level of commitment as acquiring a US business outright. The sale of physical goods in China maybe more attractive than the digital media market because the media industry is disrupted and alternative monetisation models are already well in place
    • Walmart is also starting recruit rock-star web tech talent with a particular focus on improving the mobile experience of their online properties

    More retail sector related content can be found here.

  • iCloud thoughts

    On June 6, Apple announced a number of products at a keynote speech to kick off its worldwide developer conference. Mac OS X Lion and iOS 5 were widely anticipated; but the one that got the most attention was a service called iCloud.

    This service has received a fair bit of coverage and its worthwhile reflecting upon, some of this reflection has to do with all the things that we don’t currently know. I am not  going to focus on the iTunes Connect product that gives you a selection of your music across devices as other people have done that much better than I could.

    First of all a bit of a history lesson

    Apple has actually selling online services since about 1985, so Apple’s history with online services is almost as old as The WELL. AppleLink was an online service set up originally to connect Apple employees and dealers, it had a client software application for both Mac and the later models of the Apple II. It provided assess to remote server folders (kind of like FTP, iDisk, Box.net or Dropbox), bulletin boards for discussion and system-wide email (though interoperability with other email systems came in later).

    This system was a way that Apple distributed systems updates and drivers to dealers (you have to remember that at that time operating systems and the associated software that went along with them took up much less memory than they do today). This was all hosted on time-shared mainframes and connected by a global data network by GE Information Services. GE charged too much for the service and didn’t reflect the technological changes coming down the pipe that made these services cheaper to operate. So Apple eventually worked with Quantum Computer Services (now known as Aol) to develop a version of AppleLink suitable for consumers.

    The first email from space was sent on an Apple Portable via an AppleLink account from the Atlantis space shuttle to the Johnson Space Center in 1991. Back in 1988, AppleLink was also the host for a multi-channel story that played out with weekly episodes and included user identities woven into its plot. The storytelling used chat rooms and email was well as a more traditional narrative format echoing Matt Beaumont’s novel e by about 12 years.

    After a while, Apple, had a falling out with GE Information Services and consolidated their own service renamed eWorld and had it run by AOL.
    eWorld main screen
    Eventually eWorld was closed down as Apple realised that it couldn’t compete with AOL and they had bigger things to worry about as Apple was on the downward trajectory that would result in the return of Steve Jobs. By 1997 both AppleLink and eWorld had been closed down. The content eventually ended up on the Apple website under sub-domains like developer.apple.com and support.apple.com.

    In 2000, Apple came back with iTools which included the .mac email accounts, simple web publishing and iDisk. The email account allowed you to have IMAP4 which was rare at the time and iDisk was based on WebDAV standard to syncing. There were other services including web publishing and iCards: an electronic greeting cards service (prior to Facebook were a low impact way to exchange greetings, with a HTML card sent via email. One of the most prominent providers bluemountain.com was bought in a deal apparently worth 780 million dollars by then internet giant Excite@Home).  By 2002, Apple started charging for these services and briefly threw in a subscription to Virex.

    The service got a rebrand as MobileMe to take account of Apple’s expanded computing portfolio to take in the iOS-powered series of devices. Newcomers got a .me.com email address rather than the .mac.com email address. I myself have been signed up to these services through their evolutions for the past ten years or so, so still have a .mac.com ID.

    iCloud is a development repackaging of these offerings; an evolution rather than an innovation, it also means that Apple’s claim in the sub header of its press release that the service: Free Cloud Services Beyond Anything Offered to Date – are economical with the truth. There is also a question in my mind, for reasons I’ll outline below, about whether this next evolution is positive for end users.

    Device philosophy

    One of the things that stuck out to me when I was listening to Steve Jobs introduce iCloud, he described the Mac as ‘just another device’. On one level it makes sense; as the Mac is one of three sets of computing devices that Apple now sells: the Mac, the iPad and the iPod Touch / iPhone.

    • The second thing that marks it out, is a trust that as Sun Microsystems used to say ‘the network is the computer’.
    • Finally there is the question of primacy. Which device is the ultimate arbiter of the correct data?

    The flawed ‘net

    iCloud is based on the assumption that good quality data connectivity is ubiquitous, this is complete fiction for many people. I live in central London, apparently a world city, a hive of connectivity. Wi-fi that I can access safely is only available in certain coffee shops, and the mobile networks are full of holes like Swiss cheese. I am with Vodafone that seems to be better than most, but the only way to have a near-continuous reception is to roam on a foreign SIM; which is outrageously expensive. This situation isn’t . In the UK, the broadband infrastructure simply isn’t available to support existing streaming video services. I live in Central London within the proverbial stones throw from Silicon Roundabout and get barely 3MBs download and 400KBs upload from my ADSL connection. I live 500 metres from my local exchange.

    Data integrity

    One area I am not convinced that Apple will get right with the iCloud is keeping the integrity of address and calendar data intact. If one device doesn’t have primacy there is no control mechanism. It is easy to accidentally alter a record on an iPhone and that could then ripple through the iCloud to all associated devices based on it being the most recent edit. There is no information on how it will handle duplicate entries and failed syncs. Lots of unanswered yet critical questions.

    Household enterprise systems

    My set-up on MobileMe is relatively simple, I have one iTunes account, one address book, one calendar, one set of bookmarks and system preferences. These are synced across two devices (the MacBook Pro that I am writing this post on, and my iPhone). But increasingly, Apple’s eco-system is found at the centre of family’s IT systems. The analogy of the household CEO is often used to describe the housewife as homemaker.

    The family’s IT system needs to look more like the kind of enterprise technology that a CEO would expect. With massive data storage and policy-based systems designed to keep the right data with the right owners. I haven’t seen any evidence that iCloud would do this which is likely to result in lots of poisoned address books and music collections.

    It just works?

    One of Apple’s key selling points since Steve Jobs returned to Apple was that the company’s products just work. This is why the synergy between hardware and software is so important. When you took one of the original iMacs out of the box, you plugged in the keyboard, the modem cable into the telephone socket, the power socket and turned it one; you were ready to start computing.
    Museum of Information
    It promised elegant simple technological choices to early adopters and the late majority alike and is why products like the iPod, the iPad and the iPhone have become commonplace in many developed marketplaces disrupting incumbent players like Creative and Nokia. The complexity and challenges that the iCloud system needs to overcome could undue this unique selling proposition and tear Apple’s market-making leadership position apart.

    Open standards to Apple standards

    One of the things that has helped Apple to do well has been its adherence to open standards: the iMac benefited from being a USB pioneer. Mac laptops became popular with photographers because of FireWire. The Safari web browser and WebKit build upon W3C standards compliance and it is hard to remember now, but the first iPhone used HTML5 web applications for external developers – something that many people lost sight of.

    Apple’s online services were similar. The email service was based on IMAP4 allowing for easy synchronisation and iDisk works on WebDAV. However in the Apple press release announcing iCloud there is no information on what it supports any standards, but it does talk about iCloud storage APIs. And Apple did promise to make thse APIs available to developers. I am concerned that my social graph may be locked into a storage equivalent of the Hotel California; which is especially dangerous when you think at the amount of iterations and service closures that Apple has exhibited in the online space.

    More online related content can be found here.

    More reading

    Apple Introduces iCloud – Free Cloud Services Beyond Anything Offered to Date

    What the iCloud will cause to happen next | FT.com

    Apple details iCloud’s digital storage and syncing, free 5GB of storage

    Fourth time’s a charm? Why Apple has trouble with cloud computing

    Cloud Poll: Does iCloud Actually Have Anything to Do with Cloud Computing? | ReadWriteWeb

  • The wisdom of mobs

    Old media historically took a pride in its ability to spur the public into action, a classic example would be The Sun’s headline from April 11, 1992 which trumpeted ‘It’s The Sun Wot Won It’. In this case claiming that The Sun’s readers had turned the tide of an election. There is also a darker side to this: the wisdom of mobs. 

    I have been interested in how mob behaviour or the shifting of public opinion has been changed by social media and affected consumer behaviour with ‘the wisdom of mobs’.  The recent super injunction debate has again brought it to the fore, as has Anonymous and Wikileaks.

    This has all had another subtle effect, as evidenced by this quote from Jamie East, founder of HolyMoly:

    “There are fewer gobshites who aren’t media-trained and surrounded by PRs, so it’s more difficult to find things to write about. And the ‘pap’ agencies aren’t getting the pictures they used to.”

    East is describing in his own colourful way an awareness and responsibility about their own reputation, or as Singaporean blogger Pat Law put it:

    As long as the information is online, even if you’ve placed it on private mode, your privacy is automatically placed on a pedestal for potential abuse. So never publish anything you don’t want people to know online.

    This is one side to a multi-stranded solution to the wisdom of mobs problem:

    • Behavioural – individuals need to take responsibility for their actions and what they say, reputation isn’t managed: reputation is, as reputation does
    • Social – we have yet to develop an appropriate civic society online. Towns on the American frontier appointed sheriffs and town councils to try and bring a modicum of justice and decorum during the pioneering days. These appointments were symptoms of a wider awaking towards thinking less about the individual and more about the kind of society that they were creating on the frontier. We need a similar awakening for online. Secondly a better civic society, should be able to organise lobbying that is as effective as that currently done by vested interests on behalf of disrupted interests like the ABPI and Warner Music; otherwise these groups will continue to enjoy undue succor – what politicians fail to see is that these groups are the British Leyland or the Northern Rock of the digital age
    • Legislative – this is the one that I am most concerned about for a number of reasons. Politicians of all sides are not good at giving up surplus powers and striking down legislation, instead keeping it to one side for a rainy day. The Labour administration of Tony Blair kept the Criminal Justice and Public Order act of 1994 including its controversial part V dealing with criminalising rave culture. The current conservative government has kept the Digital Economy Act in place, despite the fact that it adversely affects their ability to spur digital innovation and inclusion. The threat of legislation allows politicians to adjust behaviour in industries, for instance: self-censorship by UK ISPs by Ed Vaizey. It is virtually impossible to find a legislative body with the suitably sustained light touch required
    • Governance – effective and transparent governance mechanisms for governance in commercial issues would mean that there would be less of a public interest in gossip. Allegations surrounding Fred Goodwin would have been more appropriately investigated as part of his management of the Royal Bank of Scotland
    • Professionalism – the media has a responsibility to lift its own content out of the gutter of sensationalism. They need to man up and take responsibility for the wisdom of mobs, but they won’t. There simply isn’t a desire to do decent investigative journalism or thought-provoking analysis. It is probably not considered commercially viable to do it (though the audience of documentaries at the cinema seems to suggest otherwise), there aren’t the journalists with the right set of skills and mindset: where are the next Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein or Seymour Hersh?

    More ethics related content can be found here.