Can't say for certain (without looking it up) what day Twitter started, but I do know that for 18 months I ignored it on purpose. I really could not see the point in being able to send 140chr messages, this I suppose more than likely as I'm not a great fan of texting in the first place (rather talk than text).
The younger generation are however addicted to texting (and Social Networks) and it seems, if my partner is anything to go by, so are many of the older generation too. So with both old and young alike using Social Media, it is not surprising that business is interested in it for advertising etc.
This interest is most plainly evident in the way that "Understanding Twitter Courses" are sold out in my local area at least, in a matter of days. However when it comes to doing the deed, or paying someone else to Tweet for them, the number of businesses really interested seems to be quite low.
Sure many are playing with Twitter, but some (and this includes some businesses that are selling Twitter services) are hardly tweeting at all, and most, according to the pundits are not Tweeting in the right way either.
For many businesses then the question really is 'To Tweet or Not To Tweet' and from my experience todate, most are totally unsure of what to do.
We plunged into Twitter a few months ago, not for the reason of trying to make an impact on people, but to make sure that our customer's domain and company names were seen to have been mentioned in the 'TwitterStream' just in case, as rumour had it, that Google were taking this into account when deciding rankings (still not sure on that one). This is still one of the main reasons that we Tweet, as it is a basic concept of our SEO practices that we try to cover all the bases, this so that whatever factors Google decides to use to rate sites, our client's sites are covered.
As for actually gaining business directly from Tweeting, that I think is not happening as much as people might hope (this being born out by polls), but like any form of advertising, it does raise the profile of a business, and, if targeted at the right people, MUST to some degree at least be beneficial.
With this in mind, my advice to businesses is that Social Media and Twitter are an opportunity that should not be missed especially considering that an impact can be made for a very small investment in time / money.
Time will tell as to just how powerful this medium becomes, but from what I have seen so far, all interested in B to C marketing, will have to get 'involved' with Social Media in the very near future.
More soon
Thursday, 25 March 2010
Friday, 19 March 2010
When to Step Into the Buying Cycle?
When you are selling something, anything, it pays to know a little about the 'Buying Cycle' for that particular product. The buying cycle is best defined as the what happens between when someone decides that they want something to the time that they go and buy it.
As you can imagine, this cycle can be very short; 'I'm thirsty, I think I'll buy a Coke' to long ones like 'I need a new TV, but I just don't know what type to get'. These cycles can thus last for seconds or months, some requiring detailed research, others none at all.
The producers of drinks or TV's could (and do) of course get involved with the customer even before they are actually looking, and that of course is the reason for many adverts on the TV. They want to put their brand in front of you for the time you are thirsty or looking for that TV. Branding is another reason why people write blogs or Tweet, it is all to do with raising one's profile.
When to get Involved?
However on the web, when it comes to a particular site selling a TV, the question is 'When should they get involved in that buying cycle?' Let us take TV's as the example. We can assume that the manufacturers will have been blasting out the reasons why people should pick a Sony or a Panasonic, all this being aimed at those who are either not in or have just started the process of getting a new TV, so that area is covered by the 'big boys'.
But what about you, the TV retailer, when do you start trying to catch the attention of that TV buyer? You also have to decide the means you are going to use, will you provide reviews and comparisons, will you set up a forum where people can get advice, or will you set up a Blog so that people can ask your advice directly and where you post this and that all about TV's. Or will you just wait until that last minute, when the buyer has decided on the model they want and then bounce and try to win the deal with the best price?
Some sites use both, and some don't sell on price at all, instead relying on the goodwill they have generated by providing the reviews and advice to the consumer.
As you can imagine, the process of capturing the eye of the customer early on is a time consuming and costly one. All those reviews and articles and the time taken to give advice are not going to be cheap to provide. When it comes to Adwords, the difference is vast too, as in one instance you are buying the word 'hd televisions' and in the other 'Sony XV4000'. As you can imagine the cost per click for one is a hell of a lot higher than the other...
As mentioned above, those sites wanting to wait until the end of the cycle, will, more than likely be using Adwords as the capturing mechanism. The reason for this is simple as it is very easy to 'buy' the keywords covering all the model numbers needed (rather than have your site tuned so finely that they appear in the Organic listings), and of course you are virtually guaranteed to be spotted (if you bid enough) by anyone looking.
Thus, if you have a good advert (and in many case a good price) you can more than likely get a sale from someone you have had no dealings with in the past at all. In a way you are 'stealing' that sale from those who (may) have helped that buyer come to the decision to by 'x' but that is, many would say 'business'.
Cheap is Not Always Cheerful
All you, as a site owner can do to counter this threat is to be as helpful as possible during the buying cycle and hope that this and the solid reputation you will have built up in the process will steer the buyer to purchase from you, even if you are that little bit more expensive. After all, cheap is not always cheerful at the end of that proverbial day.
More next week
As you can imagine, this cycle can be very short; 'I'm thirsty, I think I'll buy a Coke' to long ones like 'I need a new TV, but I just don't know what type to get'. These cycles can thus last for seconds or months, some requiring detailed research, others none at all.
The producers of drinks or TV's could (and do) of course get involved with the customer even before they are actually looking, and that of course is the reason for many adverts on the TV. They want to put their brand in front of you for the time you are thirsty or looking for that TV. Branding is another reason why people write blogs or Tweet, it is all to do with raising one's profile.
When to get Involved?
However on the web, when it comes to a particular site selling a TV, the question is 'When should they get involved in that buying cycle?' Let us take TV's as the example. We can assume that the manufacturers will have been blasting out the reasons why people should pick a Sony or a Panasonic, all this being aimed at those who are either not in or have just started the process of getting a new TV, so that area is covered by the 'big boys'.
But what about you, the TV retailer, when do you start trying to catch the attention of that TV buyer? You also have to decide the means you are going to use, will you provide reviews and comparisons, will you set up a forum where people can get advice, or will you set up a Blog so that people can ask your advice directly and where you post this and that all about TV's. Or will you just wait until that last minute, when the buyer has decided on the model they want and then bounce and try to win the deal with the best price?
Some sites use both, and some don't sell on price at all, instead relying on the goodwill they have generated by providing the reviews and advice to the consumer.
As you can imagine, the process of capturing the eye of the customer early on is a time consuming and costly one. All those reviews and articles and the time taken to give advice are not going to be cheap to provide. When it comes to Adwords, the difference is vast too, as in one instance you are buying the word 'hd televisions' and in the other 'Sony XV4000'. As you can imagine the cost per click for one is a hell of a lot higher than the other...
As mentioned above, those sites wanting to wait until the end of the cycle, will, more than likely be using Adwords as the capturing mechanism. The reason for this is simple as it is very easy to 'buy' the keywords covering all the model numbers needed (rather than have your site tuned so finely that they appear in the Organic listings), and of course you are virtually guaranteed to be spotted (if you bid enough) by anyone looking.
Thus, if you have a good advert (and in many case a good price) you can more than likely get a sale from someone you have had no dealings with in the past at all. In a way you are 'stealing' that sale from those who (may) have helped that buyer come to the decision to by 'x' but that is, many would say 'business'.
Cheap is Not Always Cheerful
All you, as a site owner can do to counter this threat is to be as helpful as possible during the buying cycle and hope that this and the solid reputation you will have built up in the process will steer the buyer to purchase from you, even if you are that little bit more expensive. After all, cheap is not always cheerful at the end of that proverbial day.
More next week
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Using Twitter to Interact with your Customers
It is not often in the UK that one has heard the words 'hats off to' and 'BT' in the same phrase, but that is what I must say today, at least for one thing.
Why do I acclaim BT in this way? Well quite simply for the way they are monitoring Twitter. It was yesterday morning when I tweeted about my broadband being slow and that I was waiting for BT to fix it. Then not an hour later came a @reply from BT customer care saying that they were sorry that I was having problems and sending me a link with some ways that might helpfix the issue.
This is a good use of Twitters Search facility (or perhaps Topsy - see www.topsy.com) as it allows anyone to 'engage' (the secret they say of using Twitter properly and getting the most out of it) with other Tweeters.
Obviously, this engagement could lead to other things, in the end perhaps a sale? If not then at least the person trying to engage will have been seen in the others 'timeline' (if they respond, which all should do - 'manners you know') and that can only raise their awareness level, which after all is what it is all about.
So hats off to BT for the monitoring Twitter so carefully (they have yet to fix my line though!).
If you want to monitor Twitter, then just keep using the Search facility, or better still use Topsy, pay the little bit extra and get 15 min alerts. This means that within just 15 mins of someone using a keyword (or your name) you can know about it and @reply to them with help, news, views or a request for more info so that you can help. You never know where it might lead...
This of course can also help with Brand protection (see yesterdays Blog post) as a quick response would show that you care and could also turn that customer's bad feelings around. They could end up a great supporter and start telling everyone about how great you are....
Of course there are some companies that cannot do much to rescue their brand and thus any efforts would certainly be much like flogging that dead horse (yes you guessed it I'm referrring to my old friends at Crazycameras) but for many others, monitoring Twitter carefully could well be a very very good idea.
More tomorrow
Why do I acclaim BT in this way? Well quite simply for the way they are monitoring Twitter. It was yesterday morning when I tweeted about my broadband being slow and that I was waiting for BT to fix it. Then not an hour later came a @reply from BT customer care saying that they were sorry that I was having problems and sending me a link with some ways that might helpfix the issue.
This is a good use of Twitters Search facility (or perhaps Topsy - see www.topsy.com) as it allows anyone to 'engage' (the secret they say of using Twitter properly and getting the most out of it) with other Tweeters.
Obviously, this engagement could lead to other things, in the end perhaps a sale? If not then at least the person trying to engage will have been seen in the others 'timeline' (if they respond, which all should do - 'manners you know') and that can only raise their awareness level, which after all is what it is all about.
So hats off to BT for the monitoring Twitter so carefully (they have yet to fix my line though!).
If you want to monitor Twitter, then just keep using the Search facility, or better still use Topsy, pay the little bit extra and get 15 min alerts. This means that within just 15 mins of someone using a keyword (or your name) you can know about it and @reply to them with help, news, views or a request for more info so that you can help. You never know where it might lead...
This of course can also help with Brand protection (see yesterdays Blog post) as a quick response would show that you care and could also turn that customer's bad feelings around. They could end up a great supporter and start telling everyone about how great you are....
Of course there are some companies that cannot do much to rescue their brand and thus any efforts would certainly be much like flogging that dead horse (yes you guessed it I'm referrring to my old friends at Crazycameras) but for many others, monitoring Twitter carefully could well be a very very good idea.
More tomorrow
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Brand Protection and the Internet
When Twitter started making a real impact, and especially when Tweets were first integrated into Google's search results, there was a 'flurry of worry' in the marketing world (or so it seemed to me). There were numerous posts, articles and comments all about how these Tweets could damage a brand and reduce sales.
Starbucks
The one I remember the best was from the marketing dept of Starbucks. They were worried that if someone used the net to find their local outlet (when visiting a new town) that they would see, just below the results a Tweet from a disgruntled customer and therefore decide to go elsewhere. Their 'brand protection' protocols were put on full alert it seems.
The idea of protecting your brand on the internet is of course nothing new, and just like in the old days (with press cuttings) some companies have a small army checking the 'web waves' for comments mentioning their brand in any way. Google alerts and the new Topsy (Twitter alert system) both help here of course.
Once detected, any 'bad' comment can be answered and combated in some way, be it to solve the issue or to simply draw people's attention away from it. Either way, this brand protection does at least limit any damage and, in the case of solving a problem, can actually boost a brand's image as it shows that they care.
To make matters even harder for the brand protectors, there are numerous 'Review' sites where anyone can tell of their experiences with a product or company. Just type in 'reviews + company name / product' into Google and you will more than likely be shown a whole list of sites.
Of course the answer to the problem is to have good products backed up with good supply and support, as that way you just won't get that many complaints and if you do they will be swamped by the good ones. Remember everyone knows that 'you can't please all the people all the time', so if you can please most of them you will be doing as well as can be expected...
As to why brand protection (both on and off line) is so important, well for the big companies of the world, like BT, Coca Cola, Ford etc the answer is obvious, but for the smaller businesses it must in the end come down to sales. After all if the world and his wife are continually slating you on the web, you are not likely to get much business via the web are you?
Crazycameras - and exception to the rule?
Well, it seems that however logical the above statement is, that our friends crazycameras, who have it seems been slated on the web for months, if not years, are still there selling online today.
True, they do not, I am told use any of price comparison sites (the many bad reviews), but they are still operating.
The complaints have also been for more than just poor service, or undelivered products, as they have included electrical safety issues, the equipment they supplied to one UK customer being unsuitable (and downright dangerous according to an electrical engineer) for use in the UK.
From this one can deduce that brand protection, whilst being a sacred subject for some, does it seem not matter to others (I have seen no efforts by Crazycameras to answer any of these criticisms).
I suppose the fact is that, if you, like a spider, spread your sticky web wide enough, that you will always catch enough unfortunates, even though if they had looked, they would have seen many many signs saying 'I'd turn back now if I was you'.
More tomorrow
Starbucks
The one I remember the best was from the marketing dept of Starbucks. They were worried that if someone used the net to find their local outlet (when visiting a new town) that they would see, just below the results a Tweet from a disgruntled customer and therefore decide to go elsewhere. Their 'brand protection' protocols were put on full alert it seems.
The idea of protecting your brand on the internet is of course nothing new, and just like in the old days (with press cuttings) some companies have a small army checking the 'web waves' for comments mentioning their brand in any way. Google alerts and the new Topsy (Twitter alert system) both help here of course.
Once detected, any 'bad' comment can be answered and combated in some way, be it to solve the issue or to simply draw people's attention away from it. Either way, this brand protection does at least limit any damage and, in the case of solving a problem, can actually boost a brand's image as it shows that they care.
To make matters even harder for the brand protectors, there are numerous 'Review' sites where anyone can tell of their experiences with a product or company. Just type in 'reviews + company name / product' into Google and you will more than likely be shown a whole list of sites.
Of course the answer to the problem is to have good products backed up with good supply and support, as that way you just won't get that many complaints and if you do they will be swamped by the good ones. Remember everyone knows that 'you can't please all the people all the time', so if you can please most of them you will be doing as well as can be expected...
As to why brand protection (both on and off line) is so important, well for the big companies of the world, like BT, Coca Cola, Ford etc the answer is obvious, but for the smaller businesses it must in the end come down to sales. After all if the world and his wife are continually slating you on the web, you are not likely to get much business via the web are you?
Crazycameras - and exception to the rule?
Well, it seems that however logical the above statement is, that our friends crazycameras, who have it seems been slated on the web for months, if not years, are still there selling online today.
True, they do not, I am told use any of price comparison sites (the many bad reviews), but they are still operating.
The complaints have also been for more than just poor service, or undelivered products, as they have included electrical safety issues, the equipment they supplied to one UK customer being unsuitable (and downright dangerous according to an electrical engineer) for use in the UK.
From this one can deduce that brand protection, whilst being a sacred subject for some, does it seem not matter to others (I have seen no efforts by Crazycameras to answer any of these criticisms).
I suppose the fact is that, if you, like a spider, spread your sticky web wide enough, that you will always catch enough unfortunates, even though if they had looked, they would have seen many many signs saying 'I'd turn back now if I was you'.
More tomorrow
Monday, 15 March 2010
The Power of Social Media & The Web Part 3
For anyone that has been following some of my recent posts will have noticed that I've not been too pleased with a company called crazycameras. This was for the simple reason that they did not tell the truth about their products, could not manage that famous p***up in that famous brewery and all in all are 'bad sorts', the sort of company that does the internet no favours at all.
Now let me make it clear, I, like many others did, in the end get my camera. Sure it was the wrong model (as USA one and not a UK one), does not have a valid UK warranty (thanks to Panasonic's own rules), but I did get my camera (even though I had cancelled it a number of times).
I am saying this to point out that my 'Twitter crusade' has not been a personal one, but rather one that was intended to rid the Internet of a particularly useless company, rather as a doctor would want to rid the world of a nasty virus.
Now it may be that Crazycameras have at last had enough of all the bad publicity and reviews (mine were just a drop in the ocean, there were plenty of others outside of Twitter) and / or that Google have seen the light and have stopped their ads, but they do seem to have gone (at least from my viewpoint) and that is all to the good. For without their pay per click ads, they are not likely to snare as many unfortunates into buying from them. Still this could be a short term thing and is one that I am keeping my eye on.
During my little crusade I am pleased to report that my Tweets must have raised Crazycameras ignoble profile to many hundreds if not thousands of Twitterers, as well as to Google, Panasonic and Canon. I must admit to not being sure if any of these big hitters were / are bothered about it all, their view seeming to be 'nothing to do with us'. This by the way is something which I simply do not agree with at all. They are the ones supplying the cameras and they are the ones allowing this company to mislead people by the use of a .co.uk domain name in their adverts, still they are also the ones who are having their names associated with the whole sad affair and that can't help them either in the long run...
Still if they (crazycameras) do decide to start placing their ads on Google again, I will be ready to act and having seen the power of the net for myself here, even if only in a small way, will be ready to bring into play another weapon, that of the dedicated website.
One of the best examples of this was the 'rebellion' against Simon Cowell's Xfactor by a certain Jon Morter. Jon decided to stop Simon's apparent command of the Christmas No. 1 and thus chose the appropriately named group 'Rage Against the Machine' as his weapon of choice. He then succeeded, by using the power of the net's Facebook (and of course Twitter), in beating perhaps, the most powerful force in music in the world today.
When the Guardian broke the news to Morter that he had won, he was initially lost for words. "Oh bloody hell," he said, as the consequences of what he had done became clear. Composing himself, he said: "I think it just shows that in this day and age, if you want to say something, then you can – with the help of the internet and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. If enough people are with you, you can beat the status quo."
Enough said, the proof was in the pudding and if Crazycameras try to make a come back on Google, we will see what a proper Twitter campaign, coupled with a dedicated 'Say No to Crazycameras' can achieve. It would after all be a very interesting experiment indeed.
More on the power of Social Media tomorrow...
Now let me make it clear, I, like many others did, in the end get my camera. Sure it was the wrong model (as USA one and not a UK one), does not have a valid UK warranty (thanks to Panasonic's own rules), but I did get my camera (even though I had cancelled it a number of times).
I am saying this to point out that my 'Twitter crusade' has not been a personal one, but rather one that was intended to rid the Internet of a particularly useless company, rather as a doctor would want to rid the world of a nasty virus.
Now it may be that Crazycameras have at last had enough of all the bad publicity and reviews (mine were just a drop in the ocean, there were plenty of others outside of Twitter) and / or that Google have seen the light and have stopped their ads, but they do seem to have gone (at least from my viewpoint) and that is all to the good. For without their pay per click ads, they are not likely to snare as many unfortunates into buying from them. Still this could be a short term thing and is one that I am keeping my eye on.
During my little crusade I am pleased to report that my Tweets must have raised Crazycameras ignoble profile to many hundreds if not thousands of Twitterers, as well as to Google, Panasonic and Canon. I must admit to not being sure if any of these big hitters were / are bothered about it all, their view seeming to be 'nothing to do with us'. This by the way is something which I simply do not agree with at all. They are the ones supplying the cameras and they are the ones allowing this company to mislead people by the use of a .co.uk domain name in their adverts, still they are also the ones who are having their names associated with the whole sad affair and that can't help them either in the long run...
Still if they (crazycameras) do decide to start placing their ads on Google again, I will be ready to act and having seen the power of the net for myself here, even if only in a small way, will be ready to bring into play another weapon, that of the dedicated website.
One of the best examples of this was the 'rebellion' against Simon Cowell's Xfactor by a certain Jon Morter. Jon decided to stop Simon's apparent command of the Christmas No. 1 and thus chose the appropriately named group 'Rage Against the Machine' as his weapon of choice. He then succeeded, by using the power of the net's Facebook (and of course Twitter), in beating perhaps, the most powerful force in music in the world today.
When the Guardian broke the news to Morter that he had won, he was initially lost for words. "Oh bloody hell," he said, as the consequences of what he had done became clear. Composing himself, he said: "I think it just shows that in this day and age, if you want to say something, then you can – with the help of the internet and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. If enough people are with you, you can beat the status quo."
Enough said, the proof was in the pudding and if Crazycameras try to make a come back on Google, we will see what a proper Twitter campaign, coupled with a dedicated 'Say No to Crazycameras' can achieve. It would after all be a very interesting experiment indeed.
More on the power of Social Media tomorrow...
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
So How Powerful is Social Media - Part 2
The second day of my 'Social Media' experiment was very interesting and is showing that Twitter can indeed be used to 'reach out' to people. It is however a slow process, and should be likened to an Ant pushing an Elephant, i.e. don't expect instant results, but when the beast is moving well, watch out..
The above analogy is perhaps truer than it first appears, as in some cases at least, the Elephant will not be moved by strength of numbers, but by the fact that it is annoyed enough by the constant harassment to move on.
It will be interesting to see if my campaign to get Crazycameras to stop using a .co.uk domain name in their adverts works through either getting Google to stop them, them deciding to stop, or another party like the Advertising Standards Authority or Trading Standards to stop them. Or then again, could it be Twitter power that will cause them to think again?
I am not sure of the success of this campaign by any means, but Twitter and the Net in general do allow the humble peasant the ability to draw attention to things, and if enough people agree, then I am sure that things will happen, be it to stop companies misleading customers, or to get customers to buy things...
To give more details on the second day, well the first action was to create a Twitter Poll, an interesting service that allows people to get Twitterers opinions by a vote or survey. Attention was drawn to this (or should I say attempted to) via many Tweets both in the form of normal Tweets and by Replies. I can't say the response was overwhelming, (just 5 so far), but all were against allowing Crazycameras to use the .co.uk domain (which proves that they at least have not voted).
There will be more attempts at getting votes today, along with other Tweets about how the matter has been drawn to the attention of Google and the Advertising Standards Authority.
Look out for more posts on this Social Media Experiment !
To vote on the matter by the way, please visit - http://twtpoll.com/xp2496
The above analogy is perhaps truer than it first appears, as in some cases at least, the Elephant will not be moved by strength of numbers, but by the fact that it is annoyed enough by the constant harassment to move on.
It will be interesting to see if my campaign to get Crazycameras to stop using a .co.uk domain name in their adverts works through either getting Google to stop them, them deciding to stop, or another party like the Advertising Standards Authority or Trading Standards to stop them. Or then again, could it be Twitter power that will cause them to think again?
I am not sure of the success of this campaign by any means, but Twitter and the Net in general do allow the humble peasant the ability to draw attention to things, and if enough people agree, then I am sure that things will happen, be it to stop companies misleading customers, or to get customers to buy things...
To give more details on the second day, well the first action was to create a Twitter Poll, an interesting service that allows people to get Twitterers opinions by a vote or survey. Attention was drawn to this (or should I say attempted to) via many Tweets both in the form of normal Tweets and by Replies. I can't say the response was overwhelming, (just 5 so far), but all were against allowing Crazycameras to use the .co.uk domain (which proves that they at least have not voted).
There will be more attempts at getting votes today, along with other Tweets about how the matter has been drawn to the attention of Google and the Advertising Standards Authority.
Look out for more posts on this Social Media Experiment !
To vote on the matter by the way, please visit - http://twtpoll.com/xp2496
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
Just How Powerful Is Social Media? Part 1
I've not been doing my Blog for a few days now, partly this was down to lack of time (we got a whole new bunch of clients coming aboard) and partly because I have been 'bogged down' in dealing with an Internet retailer, one that simply, in my view should not be allowed to trade.
You may have seen comments on this blog (and others) about this company, www.crazycameras.co.uk, as they do have a fair few (bad) comments about them spread across the web, be it on Twitter or any of the many review sites that exist (more fool me for not checking up before I ordered!)
You would think that with all this 'bad press' that they would not get any visitors (let alone sales) but they do. It is really surprising to me, I really would have thought that 'public opinion' would have put an end to them, but I suppose that as long as Google allow them to use a .co.uk domain name, even when they are in the USA that they will get along just fine.
I have taken the matter up with Google but they say that crazycameras are not breaking any of their rules, which in my view is being irresponsible, but hey that is only my opinion.
It is my view that as they are in the USA, and supply USA version cameras that they should not be allowed to use a .co.uk domain name UNLESS they make it very very clear on their site that the cameras they are selling are non UK versions and that the warranty is only valid if you send the camera all the way back to the USA....
I'm sure if all the facts were known that the number of orders from the UK would plummet, but making that happen will take some doing.
It is however a fact that if the Twitter community (and others online) really got their act together that they could force Google (and Crazycameras) to change their ways.
The question is 'Will enough people be bothered?" for if not then the power of Social Media will not be all that it could be?
I will keep you posted...
You may have seen comments on this blog (and others) about this company, www.crazycameras.co.uk, as they do have a fair few (bad) comments about them spread across the web, be it on Twitter or any of the many review sites that exist (more fool me for not checking up before I ordered!)
You would think that with all this 'bad press' that they would not get any visitors (let alone sales) but they do. It is really surprising to me, I really would have thought that 'public opinion' would have put an end to them, but I suppose that as long as Google allow them to use a .co.uk domain name, even when they are in the USA that they will get along just fine.
I have taken the matter up with Google but they say that crazycameras are not breaking any of their rules, which in my view is being irresponsible, but hey that is only my opinion.
It is my view that as they are in the USA, and supply USA version cameras that they should not be allowed to use a .co.uk domain name UNLESS they make it very very clear on their site that the cameras they are selling are non UK versions and that the warranty is only valid if you send the camera all the way back to the USA....
I'm sure if all the facts were known that the number of orders from the UK would plummet, but making that happen will take some doing.
It is however a fact that if the Twitter community (and others online) really got their act together that they could force Google (and Crazycameras) to change their ways.
The question is 'Will enough people be bothered?" for if not then the power of Social Media will not be all that it could be?
I will keep you posted...
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
The Virus Will Always Get Through
It was Stanley Baldwin who is first said to have quoted the phrase 'the bomber will always get through', this being used in 1932, in the speech "A Fear For The Future" to the British Parliament.
His words were proven to be fact in the later years and are today, just as true it seems, whether the bomb be delivered by plane or another means.
The sad fact of it all is that the same is true for computer viruses, no matter what defences you erect against them, they will eventually get through and make a right mess of your computer world.
Be sure on one thing here, I am talking from experience and from 'rubbing shoulders' with some of the top Computer Security guys over my years at the CCTA (Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency). Here their most telling comment about computer security was that "the only 100% defence was 6 inches of air" (i.e the system was not connected to anything - ever).
The other factor to remember is that the Virus protection software on your machine is always in 'catch up mode', it cannot ever protect you from a really brand new virus as it has not seen it before and hence cannot recognise it as a 'bad guy'. This is much the same in the world of medicine and we all have seen what a mess we make of fighting virus's there (even when they have been around for years).
So, what can you do about it?? The simplest and most complete solution is to make an 'Image' of your PC, BEFORE it gets any nasty's and make sure that you also make regular back ups of your data too.
That way, if your PC gets infected you can 'roll back' to an earlier version of your PC, pre the nasty virus, it being simply WIPED away when the PC's disc(s) has that old trusted version of you PC placed back on it. Sure you will lose some cookies etc that you had on the old machine, but overall much will be as it was, and all in a far faster time frame that getting rid of a determined virus (and less costly too, an IT man may well charge a few hundred pounds to remove a virus).
My advice, from one who has been infected (nasty it was) and has seen the pain of removal and the ease of the 'roll back' is to have a chat to your IT man and get an image of your PC straight away, the level of infections on the Net are rising all the time now, so don't waste time here.
By the way, in case you are wondering why I have taken the time from my normal Blogging about Marketing to speak on this, well, this is for three reasons.
Firstly, I have just been infected (for the first time in 9 years - and through a PDF at that !) and Secondly, having seen the ease of the roll back, as versus another machine in the business that took a day (and £400) to fix when it got zapped, I wanted all to hear what they could do.
The third reason is that by implementing the strategy outlined above, you are in effect, 'Giving Two Fingers' to the Virus producers (by taking all their 'fun' away) and that can't be a bad use of two fingers in my book.
More on Marketing soon...
His words were proven to be fact in the later years and are today, just as true it seems, whether the bomb be delivered by plane or another means.
The sad fact of it all is that the same is true for computer viruses, no matter what defences you erect against them, they will eventually get through and make a right mess of your computer world.
Be sure on one thing here, I am talking from experience and from 'rubbing shoulders' with some of the top Computer Security guys over my years at the CCTA (Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency). Here their most telling comment about computer security was that "the only 100% defence was 6 inches of air" (i.e the system was not connected to anything - ever).
The other factor to remember is that the Virus protection software on your machine is always in 'catch up mode', it cannot ever protect you from a really brand new virus as it has not seen it before and hence cannot recognise it as a 'bad guy'. This is much the same in the world of medicine and we all have seen what a mess we make of fighting virus's there (even when they have been around for years).
So, what can you do about it?? The simplest and most complete solution is to make an 'Image' of your PC, BEFORE it gets any nasty's and make sure that you also make regular back ups of your data too.
That way, if your PC gets infected you can 'roll back' to an earlier version of your PC, pre the nasty virus, it being simply WIPED away when the PC's disc(s) has that old trusted version of you PC placed back on it. Sure you will lose some cookies etc that you had on the old machine, but overall much will be as it was, and all in a far faster time frame that getting rid of a determined virus (and less costly too, an IT man may well charge a few hundred pounds to remove a virus).
My advice, from one who has been infected (nasty it was) and has seen the pain of removal and the ease of the 'roll back' is to have a chat to your IT man and get an image of your PC straight away, the level of infections on the Net are rising all the time now, so don't waste time here.
By the way, in case you are wondering why I have taken the time from my normal Blogging about Marketing to speak on this, well, this is for three reasons.
Firstly, I have just been infected (for the first time in 9 years - and through a PDF at that !) and Secondly, having seen the ease of the roll back, as versus another machine in the business that took a day (and £400) to fix when it got zapped, I wanted all to hear what they could do.
The third reason is that by implementing the strategy outlined above, you are in effect, 'Giving Two Fingers' to the Virus producers (by taking all their 'fun' away) and that can't be a bad use of two fingers in my book.
More on Marketing soon...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)