The pulse of Alexander Interactive

A recruiter in New Jersey got ahold of my contact information last year. He called and managed to learn from me that I do some of Ai’s hiring. I did not choose to use him for any of our staffing.

Since then, he has called me reliably, every two weeks, to see if I need him yet. Last fall I got tired of his calls and told him, flat out, to please stop calling. We have no relationship and his repeated attempts to wear me down were not working.

He ignored this request and keeps calling. Today was his most recent ping. I now recognize his phone number on caller ID; I don’t pick up when he rings me and I delete his voice mail without listening. And still he calls. (It’s been so long that I feel like I blogged about him once before.)

What percentage of a user base gets worn down by this tactic? Is it worth alienating a high percentage of a potential consumer segment in the hope of finding a sale?

I’m sure my recruiter/stalker has found that repeated calls work on some people sooner or later, but in the meantime, I’ve memorized his name and sworn never to work with or recommend him. Is that good business?

This is a good thing for an online marketer to consider before buying email lists and defaulting signups to opt-in.

Ai is pushing live the latest version of the Continental Airlines International Restaurant Week website today. Its rollout (the third annual campaign we’ve done for them) is a reminder of the impact an integrated marketing plan can have on an online project.
For Continental, the website is the home base of an annual promotional campaign. International Restaurant Week leverages the cuisines of twelve of New York’s finest restaurants as the airline “takes you to even more places.” This year, the website showcases a signature dish contest, judged by Tom Colicchio, as well as user-generated ratings and reviews.
But what will make this campaign successful is the steady flow of traffic generated by Continental’s marketing efforts. This year’s promotion included prominent, handsome advertising in magazines and newspapers in New York, where the promotion is taking place. Targeted emails were sent to Continental OnePass list members, and a promo tile is in place on the Continental Airlines home page.
All this is creating strong traffic to the site. Continental’s Restaurant Week is a short-term promotion; it can’t wait for natural search results or rely on the press release to pull people in. So Continental worked proactively, and the result is a steady flow of users that will stay engaged for the duration of the promotion.
With targeted emails, print ads and online messaging, Continental is reaching a defined market effectively. It’s a powerful combination that should be considered for any marketing initiative with well defined goals.

I just stumbled upon the fact that Chocolate Skittles allegedly exist. While researching the validity of this, as well as the availability of said Chocolate Skittles, I checked out skittles.com.
After you enter your birthday on the home page, you are brought to an external site – the official Skittles YouTube landing, which displays Skittles television commercials. In the top left corner of the page, there is a modal navigation bubble (built with Flash) that stays with you as you browse.
When you click on any of their product titles from the “Products” link, you are brought to a page in Wikipedia that displays tabular data of all Skittles products (including international). When you click “Friends” you are brought to the Skittles Facebook Fan Page. Click “Chatter” and it directs to the Skittles Twitter page, while “Videos” takes you to the YouTube page, and “Photos” leads to the Skittles Flickr page.
Skittles are also allowing their customers to interact with the company, and with each other. The Skittles Flickr page aggregates any photo titled with or tagged with “Skittle” or “Skittles.” The same rule is applied to their Twitter page.
The “Contact” page is a bare-bones, static page with a simple form. Any legal information, such as a Privacy Policy, is located under the “Other Gobbledygook” button on the navigation bubble, which expands to display the information.
It amazes me that such a well-known brand has used this method to present themselves on the web. They have used the most popular social websites to their advantage, and likely spent a minimal amount of money to build their site. They are advertising for themselves on all of these sites without even paying for the advertisement.
This is one of the most unique and interesting concepts of a branded website that I have seen. As the popularity of social websites progress, more examples like this will pop up. Just look at how many musical artists have deleted their personal websites and simply use MySpace as an outlet. It’s all about how to reach the largest audience, and social websites are the best tool for that right now.

I used Netflix for the first time this week and it wowed me. I know, this would have been news 3 years ago but Netflix is now: ubiquitous with getting movies, has forced Blockbuster to rebuild its business plan, and has a second generation that features a library of streaming content. I have known that people swore by it but I thought of it as not for me.
Like me with Netflix, people are still reticent to use the internet to its fullest. They have heard the benefits of net based products–and probably know that the new way is a vast improvement–but still do it the old way.
Online retailers and online arms of brick-and-mortar retailers have to keep in mind that some people are arbitrary. There will be people that will take their sweet time, but one time will try your service.
It was a free trial that got me started and I saw for myself the benefits of Netflix. Though I have no statistics handy, it’s not a stretch to think that some people are still hesitant to try a new service without an enticement. E-tailers gave steep discounts many years ago to make it easier for people to try their first online shopping experience.
There are many reasons to avoid these steep discounts, but an introductory rate, week, free shipping, or coupon still have a way to bring people to buy online.

According to research firm NPD, Apple’s iPhone was the best-selling cell phone in the U.S. in Q3 2008.

Which, frankly, is remarkable: a company that didn’t make mobile phones until 2007, and which introduced its phone at a staggering $599 price point, has in less than 18 months come to dominate the market.

Perhaps Apple isn’t the biggest cell-phone maker overall; that’s left to mobile-phone companies that produce multiple models. But in having the best-selling, and arguably best, product in the industry has completely altered the landscape.

The one-two punch of the iPhone and iPod underscores Apple’s incredible product strategy. The company creates a product, optimizes the user experience, markets it like mad, and basically comes to own the product segment.

A decade on, iPods still represent more than 75% of the portable music device market. The millions of iPhones suggest that Apple is succeeding in its goal of becoming the default option for consumer-grade smartphones. No other product–from video game systems to household electronics to automobiles–has such dominance from a single player with narrowly focused product segments.

This is now a company that plays to win. It’s a far cry from the Macintosh era, when Apple was content to make products that were simply better than the competition. Now they are the best, and the marketplace is responding in kind. No wonder so many companies look to Apple as their aspirational benchmark.

A great follow-up to my whitepaper on holiday shipping promotions: this new weekly index of free shipping across 100 ecommerce sites. Great research.

Coca-Cola is test marketing new aluminum bottles. I was handed one on Fifth Avenue today by a promo squad.

To Coke, this must be genius: better branding of their iconic bottle, with lower shipping and breakage costs versus glass, and a handsome visual appeal. The majority of the market is already drinking its soda from aluminum cans, anyway.

But to me, it’s the inverse of the ideal: I’m drinking soda with the usual tin-can aftertaste, in a lesser form factor. The aluminum bottle has neither the lightweight flexibility of plastic nor the squat sturdiness of a can.

Curious: am I in the minority on this? Certainly Coke could have a big success on its hands, since people are used to aluminum and the design is a novelty. But I don’t see the long-term advantage.

OK, so I fully understand the copyright implications behind the bald-faced ripoff that is Scrabulous, and owner Hasbro’s insistence that its violators cease and desist, which led to the Scrabulous Facebook app going offline. What I don’t understand is the way Hasbro is going about its business.

Why, if Scrabulous is so popular, has it been unable to forge an agreement with its creators that leverages the traffic?

Why did a lawsuit get Facebook to shut down the app, while the standalone Scrabulous site continues to chug along unabated?

Why, after many months of legal wrangling, did Hasbro choose yesterday to get tough with Facebook directly?

Why wouldn’t Hasbro get its own Facebook Scrabble app out of beta, and check its scalability, before the Scrabulous C&D overwhelmed the Scrabble beta, knocking half a million Scrabble players offline?

In other words, why is Hasbro alienating its users?

Scrabble has a fanatically devoted consumer base. People play competitively, casually, asynchronously–however they can play, they will. Alex used to play via text renderer before the graphic apps launched; I play EA’s stupid Scrabble iPhone app that doesn’t have a good competitive setting, even though I lose by 150 points every game. A friend of mine taps (tapped) into Scrabulous continually throughout the work day.

Point being, people love their Scrabble. They played Scrabulous simply because it was the best option on the market. With their platform knocked offline without a viable alternative, 500,000 devoted Scrabble fans are flat-out livid, and their devotion is being tested. The same people that love their game have pushed the official Facebook app to a 1.3/5 rating, and the discussion board is full of anger.

Hasbro could have been a hero: test its app’s scalability, make streamlined play, and invite Scrabble fans to play on the authentic platform when it was ready for broad release. Only then should they have shut down Scrabulous, forcing people to make a comfortable transition. Instead, their users have lost faith. It will be interesting to see how long their disillusionment lasts.

Update: Apparently the official Scrabble app was hacked yesterday. Which is appropriate. Also in this article: “Analysts say the blow-back from Scrabulous fans, although painful now, will probably be temporary.” Which is probably true, and somehow disappointing.

Everyone is all abuzz, as they always are, about Apple’s latest product news, in this case the $199 3G iPhone. As expected, the focus is on the price: $199 for an iPhone! What a deal!

Yet it’s not that great a deal. The entry price has been lowered but not the true cost. Of course, Apple and AT&T know this; it’s the foundation of the cellular industry, and AT&T Wireless is happy to exploit it here.

Full disclosure: I am a wildly satisfied iPhone owner. I’m not buying the new one, though, in part due to the economics. Here’s why.

The current (now previous) iPhone cost $399 for the device and $20 per month for a required AT&T Wireless data plan. Over the life of a two-year (24-month) contract, the total cost of ownership amounts to

399 + (24 x 20) = $879

This number excludes taxes, regulatory fees and marginal inflationary adjustments, but it’s an accurate gauge of what Apple and AT&T get from the consumer across two years.

For the new phone, the price drops to $199, but the monthly data fee has risen to $30. Sounds small, but over the course of two years, guess what?

199 + (24 x 30) = $919

By the end of two years, total cost of ownership for the new phone is actually higher for the half-price iPhone. Apple managed to get monstrous press coverage of its $199 price point with little mention of the data charge, which substantially affects the equation.

Now, I’m obviously simplifying a conversation with many other variables. (For example, over two years, “real cost” including inflation and float may benefit the monthly plan; people who renew contracts in less than two years have altered ownership costs; etc.) But my point is simply put: list price and true cost are not the same, and the 3G iPhone is no cheaper than its predecessor.

I have been surprised in recent months by the number of ecommerce sites that have defaulted to opt-in upon completion of a purchase.

Opt-in is, of course, supposed to be a voluntary and user-defined action. But it hasn’t been that way for me as much as it used to.

As consumer spending slows, retailers, anxious to retain traffic and minimize customer acquisition costs, are taking steps to reach out to shoppers that fit their profiles. And what better way to do that than by hitting up previously converted users?

Interestingly, the sites that have opted me in recently are not uninformed small businesses; they’re major corporations with major legal departments, all of whom should presumably know better. Among the offenders:

• Barnes & Noble, where I haven’t shopped since 2007
• Citi, for a credit card that gets less than $1000/year in charges
• Home Decorators Collection, after a recent purchase (a Home Depot subsidiary)

Have you been spammed–I mean, opted in–recently? By whom?