Tag Archives: Marketing

October 3, 2025 · 02:02

See Tea or else

Yes, I promised you a story full of intrigue, filled with bad Jedi and happy Sith only 20 hours ago. And here it comes (I’m watching Star Wars episode 2 at the moment). You see, there is a setting where we can watch the unfolding of what some laughingly call ‘Artificial Intelligence’ (it would be if it was designed by the CIA, but the American Administration is now in shutdown). To get there there are three parts. 

In part 1 we look at the ‘disinformation’ and here we see the parts that do not match. You see, Dab Mashed potatoes with unions were discontinued in both Coles and Woolworths. The IGA still has it as I was able to verify in person (I had to travel to Summer Hill for that). So this is part 1.

Now we get to the slightly better stuff. You see, some might think that combining DML with Predictive Analytics (some think it is AI) is a solution. You merely set this in a massive database and voila (a theatrical of ‘here it is’) and that was that. This is merely my version of what I think it is happening. 

You merely set the model on all the articles you have and you take settings of ‘minimum order size’ ‘estimated margin per item’ and a few other things and there you have a matrix showing the items that just don’t make the cut for your ‘predicted margin of profit’ model and they are ‘discontinued’. And it goes on for nearly all retail models, and it might be a consideration that this is a speculated idea of why PM Albanese invited Lulu into the mix against Coles, Woolworths, IGA and Aldi. I have no data on this, but I reckon it might be a reason that it stops the DML/Predictive Analytics madness. You see, there is a setting that it is folly to get any customer 100% happy (it really is), so these giants are heading for a mere 90% and they throw out the least margin articles out of their consideration, but there is a flaw, thrown out 10 articles is a start, but that leaves one less at 90% and 9 less at 1%, as such you have a base of 81%, so now we are off to the races. And as there is no substitute for added pressures, Lulu gets invited to Australia (in case the others went the way of the dodo, I meant Coles and Woolworths). There is no supporting evidence, so this is (highly) speculative. But there is another setting. You see, this solution requires programming skills and that is where ‘Accenture plans to boot staff it can’t train to use AI, 12,000 already culled’ comes in. This solution will require hundreds, if not thousands of people being reskilled and places like Accenture cannot do that, unless they trim the staff they have in several places. And 12,000 were ‘culled’ because it hinders their bottom line. To support this I give the following thoughts ‘What time was taken to assess a person whether he/she could be re-skilled?’ Who had the knowledge to assess this and what time frame was developed here? If this goes through it will mean a lot of engineers will be required in a short term setting.

And I merely used the Deb potato mash as an example, but what happens when it this pattern is released on pharmacy or other items? So whilst we might think that Accenture is dabbling in greed, the plain setting is that this is the direction that commerce is driving itself into. 

And this setting is about to be set on unverified data. Consider that Gemini AI had it wrong on Coles and Woolworths (see image), so what else did they get wrong and when that data is unverified how will the Predictive Analytics work with any level of accuracy? Mere simple questions at the top of my mind. And that was the setting of that ‘so called’ AI. 

Now, the setting is that parts of this are speculation, but does this make it wrong? It might be unverified, but the setting of the 12,000 culled into joblessness is recorded all over the media, and it is for the reason of ‘reskilling’ but what makes it impossible to reskill a person? As I see it, it is merely time and that is as I see it, time Accenture seemingly doesn’t have. And the setting of DML and Predictive Analytics? I see that as a limit towards viable data and that is the setting that plenty are ignoring. Some will ‘embrace’ the customer telling them that their data is awesome, but that is the second folly in this. Most of them are merely at the tally stage and their systems tend to come from legacy data, implying it is filled with holes and holes of non-data.

So think of this what you want, but the larger setting is about limiting YOUR ability to choose because it affects THEIR profit margins. Come to think of it, when was the last time you saw Sarsaparilla on the shelves of your supermarket? I remember a few years back there was Black knight licorice, where did that go? So think of all the things you liked and it is no longer there, why is that? Some are unviable as they cater to hundred of thousands of customers and they need to ‘adjust’ their stock accordingly. But what was denied to you? And the setting of adding predictive analytics to their profit mix is only making that worse for you. So what about part 3? Well that is where you the consumer comes in, it is what defines you, not what ‘their’ unverified data says you are. 

So have a think about what you are about to lose and have a great day and enjoy your next coffee, if only to force you to their brand of Nescafe.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 24, 2025 · 05:01

The overlook factor

That is all on me. Or basically better stated, there were other factors in place. First there was the Amazon Luna, the setting was open to them, but like Google, Amazon left billions on the floor. So I moved on, hoping that Kingdom Holding would buy the Google Stadia to further their own capital and throughput to their community. But that didn’t happen either. To see this setting we need to take a step back and look why the Google Stadia ‘failed’. The published ‘works’ give us:

Google Stadia failed due to a combination of a flawed business model, insufficient exclusive games, and poor marketing. Gamers were hesitant to purchase games on a new platform with an uncertain future, especially when compared to established alternatives like Xbox Game Pass. The inconsistent technical performance and the closure of Google’s own game development studios further eroded user confidence, leading to the platform’s shutdown in January 2023. 

In addition we are given:

1. Business Model & Pricing:
Confusing Model: Stadia was both a subscription service and a game store, which confused potential users about what they were getting and how to pay. This could be easily fixed. In my ‘oversimplified model’ I set the idea to an annual setting of $90 dollars, or $9.99 a month, first two months free to counter the purchase of the Stadia. In this setting I am foreseeing an initial annual revenue of $2-$3 billion, after that (during phase 1) the revenue would top up to about $6 billion.
High Purchase Prices: Unlike competitors, Stadia required users to purchase games outright, which was a hard sell for a platform that didn’t have a console.  This item falls away at present.

2. Lack of Exclusive Content: 
Few “Killer” Games: Stadia failed to attract users with a strong lineup of exclusive, must-have games that would justify switching from competing platforms. The stadia will not be competing, it goes in another direction. It still have games, but is part of a tripod of services, as such it has another direction.

3. Marketing & User Adoption:
Poor Marketing: Many people, even within Google, were unaware of Stadia. The marketing efforts were misdirected and did not resonate with potential users. This is easily fixed, the setup allows for a population of 50,000,000 users and there is a business part that will show to be transparent.
Unclear Target Audience: The platform’s target audience was not well-defined, leading to confusion about its purpose and value proposition. I solved that from basically day one.

4. Technical Issues: 
Connection & Latency Problems: While cloud gaming is dependent on internet speeds, some users experienced technical issues, including frustrating delays and sudden crashes, even with good connections. This might be a problem, But if Amazon could fix it, so could Google, were the right settings set in motion? Also, the premise of the Stadia changes, as such some games will not have latencies, only games like Epic Games depend on this.

5. Google’s Priorities & Image:
Lack of Long-Term Commitment: Google’s history of abandoning projects further damaged trust in Stadia, especially after its closure was announced. Optionally no longer a problem.

Unrealistic Expectations: Google reportedly had very high expectations for Stadia from the outset, expecting a scale similar to the Play Store, which may have been unrealistic for the nascent cloud gaming market. This is on Google, the setting changes and as such so does the expectation of things. I expected up to $6,000,000,000 in annual revenue in phase one, after that it could go up to $15,000,000,000 annually, that is a lot better that Microsoft EVER achieved.

Some call me stupid, some call me a dreamer (I might be the latter) but as I see all the tech firms rely on their AI, all whilst Huawei is about to make a move with cheaper options. They are likely to get billions of consumers (1.4 billion in China alone) and as Huawei is pushing through several ides that make Apple and others nervous, they could end up with a massive chunk of it. In the meantime I looked elsewhere and I see the stadia hiding for its own population and there is a chance that China might become one of them, although partnership with Tencent is much more likely. And my idea opens up the Ubisoft schooling setting (I wrote about it a few times) on the stadia as well. 

A setting of $6,000,000,000 is there for Google to activate, they already have the hardware and one of the tripod elements in place. One required Unreal Engine 5 (I don’t know if the stadia can cater to that app need) but that is the setting several left on the floor (and I am not in favor of Microsoft picking up this idea).

So am I a dreamer or are the Tech giants running like Greyhounds after the AI bunny in a spinning retrace? I leave it up to you to decide. But as I see it Google overlooked a massive optional population and now as the game is about to change, Tencent might actually become the winner of that tally. Have a great day and enjoy the coffee this morning.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 3, 2025 · 16:39

About the fish

Yes, it is a little weird, but that is the setting I faced today. In the dream I saw several metal masks of Sam Fisher. At first they looked like cheap pewter toys. But when I tried one, it didn’t fit, it was a mask for a child no more. I was a mask in two parts. The face and the mask and when you place it in an aquarium, the face and mask combination makes it partially float. It was the setting you do not see that makes it eerie. You see, you place the blood worms in the face and when the head gets submerged the bloodwork’s are gradually released into the aquarium. The fish start attacking the face of Sam fire, but after a minute you see what is going on and that is the setting of the mask. This made me think. What if that is the next marketing setting? Not about Sam Fisher, but the setting that marketing needs to embrace that marketing toys need to have a larger release setting. One that is kept in the house. Like the deadman chest in Pirates of the Caribbean? In Japan fish are big (not just on the diner table). You see According to Vastu principles, an aquarium is considered to be a powerful tool for enhancing positive energy and promoting harmony and prosperity in the home. The Vastu principles are about blanching the elements (air, water, fire and earth) as such the aquarium is in principle an item that gets the focal point in a home. And some marketeers are seeing that as a place to market their goods. It doesn’t get into the house, but if it get there it is almost guarantee to hold that focal point for some time and that reverberates in gaming too. Consider that this place will get a nice ticket and then is placed in the homestead for months at a time. That is what marketing should be embracing, not the idea to get to EVERY homestead, but where you get to go, hold that attention point for a lot longer than anyone else.

That same principle could be applied to the aforementioned head as a feeding point for fish.

Now, that does not make this the best idea, but considering that more people have something a lot smaller, the idea puts a smelling on the face of any marketeer that wants to see long term visibility. It could be anything, from a simple marble looking Oracle logo, to a submerged GTAVI car, completely broken. Marketing has plenty of options, what I wonder was that so many ignore the millions of aquariums in the homestead. A place where you place something one and then just accept the view it gives. Seems like a lost opportunity for the right marketeer. 

I want to write more about what Google got handed to them, but I wanted to explore a few more avenues on that setting. It is not as cost and dry as it is and for Justice to play this hand is a little about what comes next and I am curious as to how Justice will thwart the equations of Google data by Tencent and Huawei, because there is a story there. Especially as China is flogging of excess data centre computing power. I reckon that this will have some correlations over time. Jut like the aquarium space that was ignored by most. I am certain that China never overlooked that part of the equation. Did the Justice department make a boo-boo?

Have a great day

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

July 30, 2025 · 14:39

The erratic vision

That is where I found myself this morning. It was a confusing dream but things made sense whilst the dream was going on. I was in some kind of hobby store and I was buying Star Trek figurines. They were small (really small) and this set had the USS Enterprise (the first one), Deep Space Station K7, a Klingon D7-class battlecruiser and a Romulan T’Liss Class. The ships came with an envelope with codes. You see, the ships are a mere setting. The ships connected to a program and that program (courtesy of Adobe) had a new stage in marketing (it will make sense). This setting was a collaboration between Apple and Adobe. The ships are ‘decoration’ prototype and there are settings that are free and professional. This setting is what the fans will use or in other terms fanfare of systems. The larger setting was the pen, there were two types of pens, one was simplistic (for starters and low level marketeers). The pen was different It was not used against a tablet or pc, it was use anywhere, your desk if need be. The pen draws and the lines appear on the mobile, tablet or desktop. There are two kinds of lines. Lines that are drawn with the pen and I the guidance lines are also drawn but looked a little different. As I saw it, I clicked on the table and  clicked on the Deep Space Station K7, the station appeared in my viewfinder on the display. I drew a line around the station and clicked on the Enterprise. Now the Enterprise moved around the station and I could set the screen as a static point of a dynamic point and from there the animation started. The animated started as I gave the signal and all the elements were hi-resolution as the codes transferred the Hi-res images to my desktop. It was all around the pen, the apple pen that had surpassed whatever we had in mind. The ballpoint was some kind of rubberized mica and as it rolled it did the same a mouse did, but now with the freedom of the hand. The pen also had a few buttons and two sliders. To make the interaction more smooth and a lot more intuitive. The professional pen was a lot more expensive and was connected to a wrist pad. A pad on your underarm which had a screen with buttons and could be customized. 

This is the future of what Meta calls AI marketing. 3D settings of an object which could be linked to the high res setting of any object a person wants to have and that is how marketeers set the stage for a lot of new advertisements. The display guru’s design the settings and whilst a lot is done on the pc, prototyping is done at your own desk, dozens of people guiding a new setting of any brand and that is ‘encouraged’ with the fanfare objects as is seen here. But it goes beyond a mere series. Most series are represented Star Trek, Babylon 5, the Expanse, but it goes beyond these settings, the generic objects like pawns, cubic forms and others for people, animals, buildings and so on. All linked to an objects and they could be reused in seconds and could alternate over themes and personal touches. As such the designers could set up themes and create the overall, whilst any marketeer can turn prototypes into fine tuned advertisement. A new setting that is giving brands a lot more control at a fraction off the cost. And as each element id completed the Meta AI will turn it all in dozens of advertisements pretty much a new advertisement each minute. 

That is where graphic design is going to (as I personally see it) and the pen is turning what was a simple 3 trillion into a new setting of at least 9 trillion. There is nothing like waves that push people forward and when the world needed innovation Apple and Adobe pushed it all to the surface. And Adobe used a new setting to grow a loot larger. The themes gave fans an outlet and it was all pushed by the figurines that allow people to prototype settings on their own desk. I saw that this set costed $69 now consider that 50% of their fans (in excess of 40 million) that makes this 20 million times $69 giving the Adobe system a quick $1,380,000,000 and that is merely one fan system, now consider the stage of dozens of fanbases, it allows for the stage of online mediation of fanfare. And it goes beyond that, when the brands will take another setting Now take this setting in the professional stage with over 500,000 and they need this and a lot of people are setting the stage to advertising. Adobe is sitting on the forefront of what everyone needs and now there are almost no competitors out there. A stage of devices that do what is normally reserved for directors, now at the fingertip of almost every market driven person. And when the people are up to what Meta saw initially, and that is now used to new heights by Adobe and Apple, the stage of repetitive advertisements end and that will push new viewers to a visibility of brands. 

I reckon that there will be cloud solutions by Adobe in new directions and to new heights of bandwidth.

A setting that my mind saw but it was still early. As I see it the world belongs to innovators and Adobe is about to come around the corner with all kinds of innovations as I personally see it. 

Have a great day and don’t stare at this too closely because I haven’t revealed all here. Ad as some thoughts from the past are set to new branches of what was revealed earlier, we can see where the data ends up bring and that is part of the solution some cannot see yet.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

April 18, 2025 · 17:18

A viewpoint is not a point of view

Yes, nice and confusing. But that is the meaning of this exercise. You see, I don’t agree on the point of view the law makes in this case. They have altered their point of view on the law in motion. In a setting that ran for over a decade. I don’t think they are to blame, there is no real guilt here (apparently), but the setting stands. In this I call to attention the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3674nl7g74o) stating ‘Google has illegal advertising monopoly, judge rules’ I do not agree and for this I call to attention two ‘pieces’ of evidence. The first is the actor Ryan Reynolds, a person I have called more than once the craziest marketeer on the planet. The second piece of evidence is a firm named CAASIE.co, an advertisement services firm apparently in Brisbane (I thought they were in New York). These two stand out, in a pool of millions. Set in a presence of “The US alone spent almost $481 billion on marketing in 2022, with digital marketing seeing significant growth. Australia’s marketing industry is also substantial, valued at over $20 billion.” With the added “While a precise count isn’t available, the scale of the industry suggests a large number of professionals are involved in marketing roles worldwide. The demand for marketing expertise is strong, and the industry is continuously evolving, particularly with the rise of digital marketing”. Don’t get me wrong, there are good marketing teams. The bigger brands have decent teams and at times places like Coca Cola and Heineken stand out. Yet in that setting of millions of people these two stand out. Why? Perhaps marketing is seen by some as the path you take when you can’t do anything else? Perhaps these men (women too) can talk their way into the panties of the youthful ladies and they thought, perhaps I can make money out of this venturous situation. And they went into marketing, mainly because ‘sex sells’. The truth couldn’t be farther (or is that further) removed from the truth. 

And there the problem starts. You see, Google isn’t monopolising things, they merely had the proper handle on things. The marketing bulk doesn’t know what it its doing and as ‘they’ see it Google is in the way. In the early days Google (read: Larry Page and Sergei Brin) figured out a few things. As Microsoft was talking dirty to the CFO’s in the land (in the late 80’s and beyond) these two youthful young sprouts figured out that the work was done by the m inions of these CFO’s, so as they catered to the bulk of the worker ants, Microsoft was wasting its time on expensive dinners and drink parties and they got all the CFO’s and CTO’s of the Fortune 500. But these people needed their worker ants and Google had created a search system that catered to THEIR needs. So whilst these youthful young sprouts were at Stanford University, their buddies all went for the knickers of the ladies. They created a page rank system, because they saw ahead that the web was going to be a mess, millions of voices create cacophony and they cut through the mess.

So ahead we go 20 years (take or leave a year) and Google figured out that their system is gold. So they venture forward and they create Google Ads (formerly Google Adwords) and that was in 2000. Again they hit gold, although it was a natural continuation from page rank and again Microsoft wants ink on the game, but wannabe’s and spin creators can merely make shallow creation and it is seen in their product. At present known as Microsoft Advertising, holds a market share of around 3-4% of the global search engine market. This is bad news for the marketing wannabe’s as they bought the shite that Microsoft is seemingly selling. Even I saw the bing hijacking of people seeking and as Microsoft is all playing innocent, they did (as I personally see it) enable the system to be abused. It matter not, Google created a firm product and now the marketing bitches (both male and female) decided to cry fowl (intended typo) So that I the setting.

Marketing today is people who talk a lot present a lot, but as I see it, they do not know what they are doing. Merely hoping that their revenue cup runneth over and it is based on decade old settings (which is what schools rely on). At UTS (University of Technology Sydney) we had one lecture on page rank and that opened my eyes (unlikely as much as it hit Sergei and Larry), but the setting was clear. Google created the largest setting by thinking of what to do, not to wine and dine the people with money and they followed Microsoft as they didn’t realise what they were up against. The internet of things is a massive beast with plenty of horns and these are the horns of plenty.

So now we get to the ‘court case’ that the BBC gives us. So as we are given “The US Department of Justice, along with 17 US states, sued Google, arguing the tech giant was illegally dominating the technology which determines which adverts should be placed online and where” and as I personally see it, they are catering to millions of people who do not know what they are doing and they think it is unfair that these people should miss out on a business they are unlikely to understand. You see, I name these two at the start as they have figured out a few things. Ryan Reynolds created billions from understanding the world and its business (Mint Mobile, Aviation Gin, and Wrexham AFC. He also co-founded Maximum Effort, a marketing agency and production company) he figured out a few things and that sprout is a mere 48 springs old. He saw the options and turned several products in a multi billion dollar empire by engaging with an audience and telling a story in a way they remembered. The other (the wannabe’s) can scoop up a mere $100,000 dollars at a time as I see it. Let’s not forget that this man started as an extra on the X-Files, now he surpassed the main cast of that series (including the director) in several ways.

Second we get CAASIE.co, they come with “buy outdoor ads globally – from your browser”, with the byline “Self-service. No contracts. No commitments” and consider this quote “In 2007, São Paulo, Brazil instituted a billboard ban because there were no viable regulations of the billboard industry.” For decades these billboards were out there and in 2020 (a mere 5 years ago) they decided to change the premise. So as we get “They are an advertising company specializing in Digital Out of Home (dOOH) advertising, programmatic advertising, and digital signage. Their headquarters are in Brisbane, Australia”, a setting that was clear for decades but no one considered what there was and these people did, so as they gain favor and altitude by being innovative the wannabe marketeers can (for all I care) go duck themselves. 

These two examples are a clear sign that the crying marketeers need to grow up, or as the Americans say “Go big or go home” and that is noticeable on the future of marketing as I see it. Now they are all about AI and creating hypes, but that doesn’t pay for the yacht (or for diner as I see it). 

So as I see “US district judge Leonie Brinkema said in the ruling Google had “willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts” which enabled it to “acquire and maintain monopoly power” in the market.” Is wrong by at least half a continent (a mile seems so shallow), so as I see it, when did the law start catering to village idiots? The fact that there are thousands of voices doesn’t make this clever. Reynolds and CAASIE were clever, they were very clever and that is a setting that CAASIE can enjoy, you see when they get access to the stage where the Google Ads people use CAASIE as the global interface to get global visibility, CAASIE will grow a lot more and what will the marketeers do to get their slices of pie? Cry a little more? Since when did we cater to the stupid to give value to this world?

The is the setting I see and as I see it the larger folly of US district judge Leonie Brinkema, so their goes her “willfully engaged”, Google walked a path for decades and that thought paid off and as I see it, Google was not catering to CAASIE, CAASIE found its own niche of global needed marketing. These two settings (Reynolds and CAASIE) show that there was space and these are raking in the billions (CAASIE not yet) but they can get a lot more by expanding into the UAE and Saudi Arabia, optionally Bangladesh and Indonesia as well. A setting that will iterate in new areas and that was something that a player like Microsoft never understood. My evidence in that statement is the fact that they lost marketshare 6 times over.

So the viewpoints of Google, Ryan Reynolds and CAASIE are not points of view, they are intentional strides in the Internet of Things and their views of how to make money. A lesson a lot of marketeers never learned in the first place. Although they got their collection of panties n their trophy cabinet, something I never ever had, but I decided to remain innovatively engaged. So as I had the ball several times from DARPA, Ubisoft and Microsoft (optionally Amazon and Apple as well) I can relax to see these departments of Justice (globally) fumble their balls and as things go from bad to worse I can giggle (not Google) from the sidelines. How the stage is the play of things, something Shakespeare figured out in 1623.

Have a great day whilst you ponder the wisdoms I left here with two hidden snags, the clever people out there can work out what I left for others to find. Have a great one.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 26, 2025 · 22:06

The tradeoff

That is at times the question and the BBC is introducing us to a hell of a tradeoff. The story (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kglle0p3vo) is giving us ‘Meta considers charging for ad-free Facebook and Instagram in the UK’, the setting is not really a surprise. On April 10th 2018 we were clearly given “Senator, we run ads” and we all laughed. Congress is trying to be smart over and over again and Mark Zuckerberg was showing them the ropes. Every single time. There was little or no question on this on how they were making money. Yet now the game changes. You see, in the past Facebook (say META) was the captain of their data vessel. A system where they had the power and the collective security of our data in hands. There was no question on any setting and even I was in the assumption that they had firm hands on a data repository a lot larger than the vault if the Bank of England. That was until Cambridge Analytica and in March 2018 their business practices were shown the limelight and it also meant that Facebook no longer had control of their ship of data, which meant that their ‘treasure’ was fading. 

So now we get “Facebook and Instagram owner Meta is considering a paid subscription in the UK which would remove adverts from its platforms. Under the plans, people using the social media sites could be asked to pay for an ad-free experience if they do not want their data to be tracked.” It makes perfect sense that under the guise of no advertising, the mention of paid services make perfect sense. This is given to us via the setting of “It comes as the company agreed to stop targeting ads at a British woman last week following a protracted legal battle.” I don’t get it, the protracted legal battle seems odd as this was the tradeoff for a free service. Is this a woke thing? You get a free service and the advertising is the process for this. As such I do not get the issue of “Guidance issued by the regulator in January states that users must be presented with a genuine free choice.” This makes some kind of sense, so it is either pay for the service or suffer the consequences of advertising. And lets be clear the value of META relies on targeted advertising. What is the use of targeting everyone for a car ad when it includes the 26% of the people who do not have a drivers license. There is the addition that these people need to have an income of over $45,000 to afford the 2025 Lexus RX $90,350 which is about 30%. We can (presumptively) assume that this get us a population of about 20%-25%, so does it make any sense for Lexus to address the 100% whilst only one in four or one in five is optionally in the market? Makes no sense does it? As such META needs to rely on as much targeted advertising as it can. And as you can see, The advertising model, known as “consent or pay”, has become increasingly popular. And at some point they were giving the people “But it reduced its prices and said it would provide a way for users not willing to pay to opt to see adverts which are “less personalised”, in response to regulatory concerns.” That is partially acceptable, but I have a different issue. You see, I foresee issues with “less personalised”, apart from gambling sites, there is a larger concern that even as Facebook (or META) isn’t capturing some data. There is the larger fear that some will offer some services and now care about capturing collected data. For example sites outside the EU (or UK). Sites in China and Russia like their social sites that collect this data and optionally sell it to META. You see, there is as I currently see it no defense on this. Like in the 90’s when American providers made some agreement, but some of them did not qualify the stage of what happened to the data backups and those were not considered, when they were addressed it was years later and the data had left the barn (almost everywhere). 

There is a fear (a personal fear) that the so called captains of industry have not considered (I reckon intentionally) the need of replacing and protecting aggregated data and aggregated results. Which allows for a whole battery of additional statistics. Another personal fear is the approach to data and what they laughingly call AI. It is hard to set a stage, but I will try. 

To get this I will refer to a program called SPSS (now IBM Statistics) so called {In SPSS, cluster analysis groups similar data points into clusters, while discriminant analysis classifies data points into pre-defined groups based on predictor variables.}

So to get data points into a grouping like income to household types, this is a cluster analyses.

And to get household types onto data points like income to household types, is called a discriminant analyses. Now as I personally see it (I am definitely not a statistician) If one direction is determined, the other one should always fail. It is a one direction solution. So a cluster analyses is proven, a discriminant analyses to income ill always fail and vice versa. Now with NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing, which is what these AI firms do) They will try to set a stage to make this work. And that is how the wheels come of the wagon and we get a whole range of weird results. But now as people set the stage for contributing to third party parsing and resource aggregation, I feel that a dangerous setting could evolve and there is no defense against that. As I see it, the ‘data boys’ need to isolate the chance of us being aggregated through third parties and as I see it META needs to be isolated from that level of data ‘intrusion’. A dangerous level of data to say the least.

There is always a downside to a tradeoff and too many aren’t aware of the downside of that tradeoff. So have a great day and try to have a half cup of good coffee (data boys get that old premise)

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 15, 2024 · 17:39

What is it?

You know the setting that came (if I remember correctly) from the original TV-series ‘The Untouchables. The start was always “the names have been changed to protect the innocent”, what if it becomes “The names have been changed for the progression of greed”? As such we get:

It was a dark and gloomy night (a lousy start to be sure). There was a table. At that table were 5 man. His name was M Rerolls, he was heading a meeting with the others. The setting was the progression of advertising. As he saw it, every person should be able to be advertised to. But one organisation was impeding this progress. The makers of this console solution had bounced Microsoft and others and now that the Amazon Crescent was gaining more than 200 million gamers, the essential revenue from that medium was expected to be massive, more so then any other console. As such mr. Rerolls had another stage, the stage of pressure and social media pressures through fake accounts and hyping. Within 2 months the console went overboard and advertisings were introduced. Mr. Rerolls was pleased. Millions more in the bank thins month alone. Life was good.

On the other setting, the people in charge of the console decided that this pressure was more then undesirable and they made plans. But there was no easy way to do this. As such they went back to the maker of the solution and decided to leave it with him. 

The man brooded and brooded for a week to see how this setting could be disabled and then on the 8th day, when eating a sandwich on his balcony a thought emerged. The man considered a few items and decided to get to work. 

He started simple, he looked into the cookie system. It was the building block of advertising and as such it would be their undoing. And as he set it out, it would be near impossible to track, the better setting was that consoles were near impervious and he dud everything to give Nintendo and Sony a pass on that system. Crescent would be the infectors of others and when the system was shutdown it would all be purged from the machine. A near perfect solution.

It was inefficient to transport the worm, virus or hotkeys. But building them with advertising would be simple and the larger goal would be served. As such he took a page from the books of the series of Bones and set it all in motion. 

As he saw it the ‘simplicity’ of the data-cbid was that it was a counter (a Cookiebot Domain Group ID), but it could be more, much more and it would take the people a long time to figure out what was going on. He had a similar old fashioned idea in the 80’s. It was a different idea, but the same principle. 

He started the design of several data viruses and cut them into small pieces he needed 56 bytes to set the story in motion and another 128 bytes to give it direction. The 128 bytes could be embedded into the system cash, the 56 bytes in 3 data-cbid’s and that set the advertisement system into a new creator of malware victims. 

The idea was set into another approach towards direction and segments. The cbid parts were the location, the the direction was part of the algorithm and the third part was the conundrum, as he was contemplating this, he thought of a advertisement demo. It was clear that the advertisement was intelligent, measuring and responding to the advertised party. It gave him the parts he needed. As such the three parts were independent and they did not connect to each other and the advertisement used it all, but there were no connections and no connections were made. 

As he saw it, it would take a setting that is larger then the simple code. He created three parts, the first part will attach the codes if a certain advertisement was shown. He had a few friends and to add an advertisement was easy, the setting was to add a dozen campaigns all working kinda the same, but all handing different cbid’s there were three code parts, in the id number, the second sequence had the part number. 0000 became sequence with an added 01, 02 or 03. As such there were 150 cbid’s spread over difference advertisers and in part the idea was that until the three sequences align, nothing happens. When they align because the three are shown in one sitting and the code is completed. The randomness of it all will not allow it to be found easily and it will set the difficulty of finding the problem to almost impossible. The advertisements will connect the work, virus or malbot to anyone that computer, tablet or mobile cold connect to and when the device reboots, the stage resets and it all starts over again. As defined, the right to be advertised to will result in the world of Mr. Rerolls to be deleted, how nice. Killed by his own advertisement system and the solution will be outstanding for the longest of time. 

This was a simple story, I am all about the stories and about the settings of an RPG. In that setting you cannot have a one track mind and as I see it the people forcing us into advertisements for the need of greed, need to be stopped. I am not against advertisements, I am against forcing it down our throats, which is why some of the IP I created will not allow advertisements and that is how I see it. Some will be fine with it, others are not (the greedy people). And I created this setting to fight the overwhelming setting of greed.

And I needed a hobby for this Sunday. What is more lovely than to create an offset to ‘Microsoft’s ad revenues surge 19% in latest quarter’ with this? So do I mind that they recorded Revenues were $64.7 billion, Net income was $22 billion. No, I do not. It is wrong to okay Google and say it is wrong for Microsoft to make that penny. I believe that it is wrong to force it down out throats. That where marketeers come into play. And they must be stopped, their hinger for advertising is insatiable and my idea stops it to some extent. When the world does something to stop insatiable greed we will have a chance, but I won’t hold my breath. So my creative mind selected an idea to stop them. Creativity yay. 

Have a lovely day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science, Stories

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 25, 2024 · 18:22

Marketing sidestep

The day before yesterday I was given a mini-can of a Walovi tea as a trinket as well as a can of Walovi tea. The tea was slightly too sweet, but the taste was otherwise good. I liked it. I put the little knick knack on my keyring and that was it. Today I amended to the idea to make it a little more of a real device that people will like and put on their desk. A functioning thing that could be bought and people will pay for something that is good. Even if it costs a few dollars. 

Now consider it not merely a simple toy, but something functioning. Consider the following. The mini can is set with the following.

A battery so that wireless connections are possible it has a charge point at the bottom through USB-C and at the top

A switch looking like a soda can lid so you can switch the device off. When rotated on, there will be two connections. A SD card and a Micro SD card. Now you think that it is out there, but you would be wrong. I have looked and I cannot find anything like this and even as I set this as a Coca Cola can. It could just as easily be a Pepsi can. Bottle shaped like a soda brand or a beer can, the can could be a beer too and this would see a massive level of visibility. So why didn’t anyone grasp that option? There is enough out there to see the the futility of some marketing attempts. So why am I the one looking at this and are others not even close to this? Then there are the options. The battery and WiFi connector could be optional making it a simple SD card reader and none of those seem to be around either. So what are the marketing boffins doing? Why are they not ahead of me? I can think of Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, Heineken, Vita Coco Company, Asahi Group Holdings, Anheuser-Busch InBev and no one with these billions of dollars thought of this? Perhaps they did and they rejected the idea. Yet nowadays, we have mobiles, laptops, netbooks, consoles and tablets. All relying on WiFi for connectivity. So what was keeping them?

Just a question to put out in the open. So have a wonderful day and don’t let creativity stop you from making a wild idea out in the open. Look at what is out there and see what could be in every living room and office for all to see. So what kept them in the first place?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 20, 2024 · 18:43

Puzzlement

That happens and it does not matter how bright you are. At times you get the message and it makes no sense (at that moment). I had that yesterday with an article by Fortune (at https://fortune.com/2024/11/17/luxury-goods-lvmh-kering-bain-broken-promises/) we get ‘50 million people have stopped buying luxury brands like Dior and Burberry after ‘broken promises’ to customers’. The first question that pops into my head was ‘How do they get to these numbers?’, lets be clear I am not accusing anyone of anything. Yet that gives us the 100% of Tokyo and Sao Paulo together. To collect that amount of data requires a mind boggling amount of data. I lost track to the article as Fortune hides behind a paywall and I am not that stupid to fall for the ‘disaster’ sales technique. The article gives us brands like Burberry and Dior. As such Simple questions become apparent. 

What form of verification was used?
Data in itself is the biggest liar of all. A simple mistake of cleaning and verifying the data is essential. Example is the question ‘Are you pregnant?’ Is a nice one, when the men are not cleaned out of this setting we get an astounding 50% offset (if we are lucky). The man (always trying to be funny) will answer no, because it is the truth. 

Then we get the broken promises. 

What evidence is there?
I get that Fortune gives us “On some level, brands have broken their promises to consumers” the voice (read: writing) of Marie Driscoll an equity partner. So what evidence are we given. The to some degree aggregated setting gives us LVMH, Burberry and Kering. There is a mention that they missed revenue targets. And suddenly we see that they are surpassed by Ozempic (a Pharma solution). We see not mention of any broken promises. We see all kinds of excuses and no actual mention of broken promises. At best we get the term brand fatigue. Actually I made mention of this in an article in January 2024 called ‘That one sided conversation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/01/27/that-one-sided-conversation/) my issue is that malls (and brands) need to set their focus to engagement. I even created the setting to do just that And I had the Toronto Eaton Centre as an example as well as the Dubai Mall (and a few other places in Dubai). I never considered broken promises, and as I see it Fortune has no real setting for that either. If you have 50,000,000 consumers. You have data. Whether the consumer told a porky pie (read: lie) or there is another reason like they ran out of cash. The simple setting is data and the article does not give us any. The article is (as I personally see it) a sham. We are given “an equity Analyst told Fortune” the name appears later. Yet, if I had this to say you mention that name EVERYWHERE. And the article goes one step further “Now 50 million luxury consumers have either ditched buying designer bag, scarves, watches and more — or have been priced out, Bain & company’s new annual luxury report warns”

I personally believe that LVMH, Burberry, Gucci (et all) need to demand that data from Fortune. I wonder how long I need to shift through that data to see an astounding amount of gaps that could get Fortune into hot waters? 

I got to see the article in my mobile, but not my laptop (another fine mess I got myself into). 

In these troubled times I have no issue with missed revenue targets and I feel certain that their investors do not have that issue either. The very rich know how they are doing and for the most they also know that of their peers. So if only 2 get their numbers that quarter, they are certain that about 80% will not go shopping everywhere. Optionally they will push back their Burberry suit or dress. There is no shame as I personally see it (and for the record I have never had enough money for a Burberry suit). 

As such my puzzlement. Fortune was always seen by me as a straight error in ‘reporting’ and this article basically threw their credibility in the trashcan.

The Second sight
That comes from the reference to Bain and Company and the stage that was referred to. The headline there was ‘Global luxury spending to land near €1.5 trillion in 2024, remaining relatively flat as consumers prioritise experiences over products amid uncertainty’ an article by Claudia D’Arpizio and Federica Levato. There we see “And yet, 50 million luxury consumers have either opted out of the luxury goods market or been forced out of it in the last two years. This is a signal for brands that it’s time to readjust their value propositions. To win back customers, particularly the younger ones, brands will need to lead with creativity and expand conversation topics. Simultaneously, they must keep their top customers front and center, surprising and delighting them while rediscovering one-to-one human interactions. For all customers, it will be critical to double down on personalisation, leveraging technology to achieve it at scale.” That is a view I can get behind and there is no mention at all of ‘Broken Promises’ (anywhere in the article). These two youthful young sprouts basically confirms my believes that it is about engagement. It does not matter how (I personally chose a generic setting) to engage the consumers in a much larger setting of a place and not a specific brand. I do not disagree with “rediscovering one-to-one human interactions” but as a technologist I prefer my Chicken Shawarma in a one to many configuration. And I do get that to address the very wealthy (aka filthy rich), a one on one setting is likely preferable. But that was never the reason for the IP I created in that setting.

And I for one personally believe that you can ditch the Fortune story and go straight for Bain & Company (at https://www.bain.com/about/media-center/press-releases/2024/global-luxury-spending-to-land-near-1.5-trillion-in-2024-remaining-relatively-flat-as-consumers-prioritize-experiences-over-products-amid-uncertainty/) the article is quite remarkable. And it was a pleasure to read too. I get that the numbers game can be nerdy and dry, but this story is uplifting and a good thought to address, for anyone in retail that is.

In the end what did Fortune do? Very little, all praise to Bain & Company here.

Have a great day all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 27, 2024 · 22:48

That one sided conversation

We all have them, we tend to have them with ourselves. We see things, at time we extrapolate and we come to singular conclusions. I did too. You see, ever since we have been treated to Pretty Woman (1990) we al wanted to see Rodeo drive, we wanted to see the shops and during the first covid we all took that option and had a look. However, most of us felt slightly betrayed. The view was not what we expected and today I looked at three other YouTube videos. The bulk is concentrated on the block surrounded the via Rodeo. The shops seem empty, some shops show nothing outside (or very little) and Rodeo drive is diminished to a crowd of tourists and vloggers with here and there a person quickly walking to or from their jobs. The other side is that Dubai has the mall of the emirates, the Nakheel mall that are on par with Rodeo drive and the Dubai Mall outshines Rodeo drive by a lot. And you might wonder why Dubai is such a sought after destination? The Americans let things slip all over the place and the turning point is just about here. I reckon it is already here for Las Vegas and as we see what tranquility, cleanliness and amazing views we get from these malls, as well as malls in Riyadh and you wonder why. London might have Harrods and it is amazing, but London is showing additional issues making Harrods and the streets surrounding it unsafe for tourists and shoppers. The downfall will be harsh and it is getting worse. The malls in the UAE and KSA have options towards driving engagement, making these places even more appealing. Places like Rodeo Drive and London have waited too long and there is a clear indication that their revenues cannot be maintained and the solution was online (my blog) well over two years ago. It was creating engagement. Engagement is only working if you have a population that you can serve and that is missing outside the middle east. Where was the Rodeo drive diner, preferably filled with people? Where were the real shoppers? They might show revenue for now, but when did we see a real stage of physical versus online revenue? In the Dubai mall I see shops and well over 75% show shopping and buying people during the YouTube pass. People eating, people drinking, people walking (not vlogging) dozens of eateries and many of them filled with people. The vlogging and posing women on via rodeo aren’t showing too much shopping, are they? Now, lets be clear. I could be wrong, but I feel certain I am not. I warned about creating engagement, they did nothing. I warned about creating awareness and too little was done. Now we see things changing. Even the Eaton Centre Mall in Toronto shows more live and living shoppers than Rodeo drive does, so how’s that for leaving it in the middle east? I get the distinct feeling that should Riyadh and Dubai embrace engagement, the impact on London, Paris, Amsterdam, New York and Los Angeles will be felt to a much larger degree. The equation was not a mystery, it was simple and it has been simple for over a decade. The customers expect more and too many places aren’t showing any. Engagement was key in this and it was ignored. The moment some of the jewellers in Dubai show the engagement solutions I had thought up the change will be close to immediate a race in time will happen. Oh, I almost forgot about Monaco. They are good for now, but they too need to embrace an engaging nature. They recorded 218,400 tourists and they are not doing bad, but the idea is to address this before it turns bad and so far they (seemingly) haven’t done enough. The dozen of hot women and fast cars videos seem nice, but one video tells it nearly all. Monaco has a lot more to offer and videos clearly show this, but when the  numbers dwindle the act of engagement is shoddy and optionally too late. These solutions tend to work when there is too much to see, too much to do and too many places left that alone for too long. Optionally they relied on the wrong numbers and the wrong stories, but this is pure speculation from my side.

Consider that the Dubai Mall has all the best brands of the world, all the sought after brands and articles for purchase and they are a zero tax nation. You still think that my feel is wrong? Some people travel to Dubai just to get the new iPhone at 0% taxation. If you are willing to do that, the rest seems easy to place and engaging your customers becomes a dream ride to keep revenues up. Oh, and here (unlike in London) you can buy a watch and walk safely home. So this might be one sided, but I am leaving you with enough pointers that you can verify for yourself.

In a one sided conversation, the best you can hope for is for someone else to listen (or read), I leave it up to you to decide.

75 minutes to Sunday for me. Have fun.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Tourism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,