Illusions of Reality

Clive Thompson recently wrote an interesting article (at http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/122/is-the-tipping-point-toast.html) based on Duncan Watts theory that, in a way opposes Malcolm Gladwell’s Tipping Point theory. However, for me, more interestingly, I noticed a difference in opinion on this between what Seth Godin had to say and what Guy Kawasaki thought!

Seth notes on his blog post (at http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/01/the-hyping-poin.html) that Watts is effectively not conflicting Gladwell and what Gladwell says holds good. On the other hand, Guy, on his blogpost (at http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2008/01/forget-the-a-li.html) noted the statement "It [achieving marketing success through influentials] just doesn’t work. A rare bunch of cool people just don’t have that power. And when you test the way marketers say the world works, it falls apart. There’s no there there.” from the original Thompson article. Guy also says "My money is on Watts."

I beleive that Seth’s point that Watts is not conflicting Gladwell doesnt appear to be correct. The original statement noted by Guy also suggest Watts saying to be in conflict to Gladwell (and also what some of Seth stuff says). However, I would still stick and very strongly support Gladwell and Seth theory that key people matter more than herd followers.

However, quoting one of Seth’s statements in his post:

"Unleashing the Ideavirus didn’t spread because ‘important’ people endorsed and promoted it. It spread because passionate people did."

I beleive an important point to note is that many a times passionate people would be the important ones. Take, for example, Drucker for management, Steve Jobs for the interface or art in the look of the product or infact Seth himself for the marketing and startup stuff!

I came across a very interesting company today and then ended up reading a lot of stuff on this company. Jones Soda - it is. The company sells soda in United States - something that most companies would not even think of doing in presence of the giants Coke and Pepsi.

Jones Soda tries a very interesting contrast approach to sell its soda in American market:

1. It provides a personalization experience by labeling its bottles with pictures that are selected from those submitted by people on its website.
2. It also sells a kind of souvenir-personalized version where it makes bottles with pictures that you submit and order them to be on bottles sent back to you - again, part of the personalization feel.
3. It doesn’t use typical advertising approaches, probably since it realizes that it would never be able to win customers this way since both Coke and Pepsi put ample of money to obsess people through this approach.
4. It does funny things like April fool’s news of the company being acquired by a tractor company - free publicity.
5. It comes out with novel flavors that taste so bad that no one can actually drink. They know and agree to this - but they say its part of publicity or being talked about factor.

I also read an interesting interview of Jones Soda’s founder at http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/92/open_jones-extra.html. The interview is dated March 2005 and these folks appear to have started somewhere in 90’s. Considering the approach for marketing that they took right from the beginning (over a decade ago), the approach appears more relevant today. Their approach agrees to Seth Godin’s theory that no one likes being forced to see the adverts - one needs to be novel or "Purple Cow" to grow in modern market. And for them, it certainly appears as so far, so good.

A quick glance at their income statement (http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=bi&q=JSDA) certainly shows that they are growing and growing well.

While I am certainly impressed by their approach, especially considering the fact that they started attempting this in late 90’s, I wonder - why soda? Can’t all the above "coolness factors" be associated with other products that may have a larger differentiation aspect on the product itself as well? In that case, wouldn’t it be easier to gain market share quicker? That’s because Coke and Pepsi have dominated this arena so much that a thought of soda probably reminds most of us taste of one of our favorite Coke or Pepsi product (for me - Coke Classic). At the same time, I remember what GM was once for the car markets or what Hotmail was for user emails - perhaps that’s why I am not the founder of Toyota or Yahoo Mail!

Okay. Now I know that its been ages since Kindle is out but I’ve been lazy over putting this one down. But frankly speaking, first time I saw that Kindle thing on Amazon’s pages, I was like - why is Amazon doing that? I thought so because I have always been over-whelmingly impressed about Amazon does on its website. But as time passed by and as I looked through deeper, I felt so much Ipodish about Kindle. And now it really feels that this is Amazon’s iPod for readers.

So, what’s the best about Kindle:

Direct download of books via mobile network with no additional cost and hecks for the reader, I beleive, is the real killer here. This single feature will truly rock kindle version of book sales on Amazon - just because of the ease of getting stuff on your reader. That, integrated with Amazon website’s large collection (currently approx 90,000 titles on Kindle version) appears to be a perfect win-win. Infact, this one feature appears so interesting to me that I would say iPod folks can look into it for sure. Currently, I dont buy a lot of stuff from iTunes stores even at $ 0.99 but if they’d offer me to get any song anywhere, I am sure I’d end up buying so many just to avoid the trouble of connecting iPod to my PC and then all those hecks! I know mobile networks in past have tried delivering content through their networks, but I think - a content provider doing this is way better an idea since users are acquainted with their content. Users know iTunes stores, users know amazon store - users dont know Nokia music library downloads!

And whats not so great about Kindle?

Well, ofcourse the look, which everyone agrees sucks. But, apart from this aspect, I beleive no support for PDF eBooks reading is a major drawback. Now, I agree that Amazon would love to keep its books sales up by not allowing those geeky folks to read pirated eBook copies on their latest fantastic reader. But, the point is, Amazon is no one to act as DRM-nanny out here. Perhaps, this is where it needs to learn from iPod. And also from all those sinking companies who have tried to sell DRM music or tried their own ways to sell music in different ways. iTunes sells stuff for sure even when pirated MP3’s are a click away. That’s because there is perhaps a large population who are ready to buy rather than going through that pain. And ofcourse, there is other segment of population who are ready to get pirated stuff working howsoever painful it may be! So, even if Amazon tries to fight it, those geeky mongers are going to hack the features out and get it to work the way they want. So, then, why not have that hot feature in? Having observed Jeff Bezos, I beleive Kindle would have this feature soon.

So, with whom is this magic device competing?

Sony reader, perhaps, has been there even before Kindle. But, I beleive Amazon’s reach due to its website is going to be a single strength that will easily lead its victory over the reader. Ofcourse, Sony does not provide the download via mobile network feature. But, Amazon’s deep reach in the book reader’s community is going to nail it. Amazon is also selling the Kindle version of its books way cheaper and is constantly increasing the size of Kindle version selection.

I recently read a very interesting post on how marketing folks can use a theory of exclusion to attract people. The post (by Seth Godin on his blog) is at http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/12/exclusion.html

Incidentally, just a few days ago when I was thinking about different perspectives of business, I started to realize that a lot of nearly every direction or aspect of business can be directed to human psychology. Seth’s post is an example of applying this to marketing, but same goes in stock markets, economics, finance management, leading teams and so on. Infact, wherever you have human interaction, you have the psychology in play. Infact, on this realization, I have been keen to study some material on applied psychology - not the typical dry-bone psychology theories (I dont dis-respect those but just that they are not my cup of tea!) - but the pieces like above are very interesting and are of great importance in getting insights to how situations can be dealt with in business.