Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Sony viral marketing ploy - 'all i want for xmas is a psp'

Selling to Your Best Prospects
Distance Education Helps You Get Ahead.

This is a video response chronicling all the obvious evidence against alliwantforxmasisapsp.com. Since I didn't have a real video program, I made this with Sony (lolz) Vegas Movie Editor's free trial, which I've never used before, so be forgiving if my editing sucks.
Author: babylonian
78 comments on YouTube.com
Tags: viral marketing all want for xmas is psp sony zipatoni
Useful Diet's Tips
Marketing Your Business on Craigslist

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Naples woman’s invention tells good eggs from the bad

Claude Hopkins Prophetic Insights
Are You Stressed Out?
It’s hard to tell a bad egg by its shell, especially if you already dyed it bright pink for Easter.

But, if you want to test the egg for freshness before you dye it, a local inventor hopes to help you out.

After testing her own eggs at home for decades, Trish Horst, a product developer with five patents under her belt, created Good Egg-Bad Egg! to offer a more exact definition of freshness. The product isn’t on the market yet, but Walgreens and other retailers have shown interest and Horst expects it to be out well before you start dying next year’s Easter eggs.

Good Egg-Bad Egg!, which has patents pending and is now being manufactured, is a 16-ounce, liquid measuring cup with four lines on the side to indicate the freshness, depending on its buoyancy, ranging from “Bad Egg! Do Not Use!” at the top to “Real Fresh Egg! Enjoy!” at the bottom.

To test an egg, fill the cup with water, drop it in and see where it settles.

On an afternoon this week, Horst sat at a table in her Naples condo with a six-egg carton and a glass Good Egg-Bad Egg! prototype for a demonstration. She only buys half-dozen egg cartons, because she likes her eggs super fresh.

Horst lifted the first egg for inspection — it was smooth and white, without cracks — and dropped it into the tester. The egg sunk to the bottom and laid on its side.

“That’s a really fresh egg,” she said. “See how it’s laying sideways on the bottom.”

The second egg, which sat on the bottom tipping upward, was a “good egg;” the third, which floated completely upright with its tip out of the water, was rotten.

So why create a tester, when an egg that floats is bad and an egg that sinks is good?

“We wanted to know more, so our tester is calibrated,” Horst said. “We didn’t want to know if it was just good or bad, but how old.”

Horst and her husband Bruce, a mechanical engineer who owns a medical screw manufacturing company, tested dozens of eggs fresh from the farm and from the supermarket to calibrate their egg tester.

Good eggs, which sit on the bottom but tip upward, are between 7 and 10 days old, according to the tester. OK eggs, which settle a little higher, are between 21 and 35 days old and are good for baking.

Family egg-testing habits from her mother and grandmother inspired Good Egg-Bad Egg!, Horst said. The product will be available in plastic and glass, which will probably retail for $2.99 and $4.99, respectively.

Horst, who lives six months of the year in Naples and six months in Rockland, Ill., started as a small business owner in Rockland in the 1950s. She turned to inventing in the early 1970s.

The key to inventing is to be observant, calm and thoughtful, Horst said. Wannabe inventors should take clues from young children, she said, because they look at the world without preconceived ideas about how things should or shouldn’t be done.

Years ago, Horst came up with an idea for simple plastic salad tongs without long handles. Extra Hands, which have a little knob on the back so they rest easily on the side of the salad bowl, have been one of her most successful inventions.

In 2002, Horst sold Extra Hands for about $200,000 and today the product is available online and in stores around the country.

The Good Life, a kitchen and home accessory store in The Plaza on Third Street South in Naples, has been selling “tons of them, in all different colors” for almost a decade, said Scott Schwarz, the owner’s son. A set costs $7.95.

Horst’s other patented inventions include Corner Guard, a piece of disposable cotton to protect the corners of your mouth from chapping while you’re at the dentist; and Rug Bugs, an anchor to keep area rugs and runners from moving on carpet floors.

The Corner Guard idea came from her experience working at a dentist’s office and her own chapped mouth corners after dental visits. The Rug Bug was inspired by her troubles with an area rug that “walked by itself” from its spot on her dressing room floor.

“There are so many opportunities for invention, people just have to take the time not to smell the roses, but to think,” Horst said. “. . . Just think of the things you do from the time you get up in the morning and how you could make those actions simpler or safer.”

Safety is the motivation behind Good Egg-Bad Egg!, and although her calibrated tester won’t be on the market for a while, Horst urged Easter egg makers to make sure their candidates don’t float, just to be safe.


Good Diet Foods
The Question You Should Ask Yourself Every Day

Labels: , ,

Immigrants big in tech startups

Bow company finds niche in car market
Finances improvements

SAN FRANCISCO — Foreign-born entrepreneurs were behind one in four U.S. technology startups over the past decade, according to a study being published today.

Duke University researchers estimated that 25 percent of technology and engineering companies started from 1995 to 2005 had at least one senior executive — a founder, chief executive, president or chief technology officer — born outside the United States.

Immigrant entrepreneurs' companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in sales in 2005, according to the survey.

Their contributions to corporate coffers, employment and U.S. competitiveness in the global technology sector offer a counterpoint to the political debate over immigration and the economy, which largely centers on unskilled, illegal workers in low-wage jobs.

"It's one thing if your gardener gets deported," said the project's Delhi-born lead researcher, Vivek Wadhwa. "But if these entrepreneurs leave, we're really denting our intellectual-property creation."

Wadhwa, Duke's executive in residence and the founder of two tech startups in North Carolina's Research Triangle, said the country should make the most of its ability to "get the best and brightest from around the world."

The study comes nearly eight years after an influential report from the University of California, Berkeley, on the impact of foreign-born entrepreneurs.

AnnaLee Saxenian, now dean of the School of Information there, estimated immigrants founded about 25 percent of Silicon Valley tech companies in 1999. The Duke study found the percentage had more than doubled, to 52 percent in 2005.

California led the U.S., with immigrant entrepreneurs founding 39 percent of startups, though they make up only 25 percent of the state population.

In New Jersey, 38 percent of tech startups were founded by immigrants, followed by Michigan (33 percent), Georgia (30 percent), Virginia (29 percent) and Massachusetts (29 percent).

Washington had a relatively low rate of immigrant-founded startups (11 percent), the study found.

Saxenian, also co-author of the new study, said the research debunks the notion that immigrants who come to the U.S. take jobs from Americans.

"The advantage of entrepreneurs is that they're generally creating new opportunities and new wealth that didn't even exist before them," Saxenian said.

Researchers started with 28,766 companies classified as technology and engineering companies in Dun and Bradstreet's Million Dollar Database, which lists companies with more than $1 million in revenue and at least 20 employees.

They were able to reach senior executives to determine the backgrounds of key founders for 2,054 of the tech startups.

Immigrants were most likely to start companies in the semiconductor, communications and software niches, least likely in the defense sector.

One of the study's biggest surprises was the extent to which Indians led the entrepreneurial pack. Of an estimated 7,300 U.S. tech startups founded by immigrants, 26 percent have Indian founders, CEOs, presidents or head researchers, the study found.

Indian immigrants founded more tech startups from 1995 to 2005 than people from the four next biggest sources — United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan — combined.

"People who come from India are laser-focused on technology," said Rosen Sharma, who immigrated from India in 1993 and is CEO of software company SolidCore Systems.

"They come here and they learn to tell a story and paint a vision. Once you have those two things, you're off to the races."

The Duke researchers also found that foreign-born inventors living in the U.S. without citizenship accounted for 24 percent of patent filings last year, compared with 7.3 percent in 1998.

Without permanent citizenship, inventors are more likely to take valuable intellectual property elsewhere — and U.S. companies would have to compete with them, Wadhwa said.

"The bottom line is: Why aren't these people citizens?" Wadhwa said.

"We're giving away the keys to the kingdom. This is a big, big deal once you figure out what this means for [our] competitiveness."

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company


To Do To Lose Weight
Ad firm with a first -- but will it whiff by mixing cookies, Muni?

Labels: , , , ,

Why Michael Jordan Made 300 Times More Money Than His Teammate Joe Klein

Ten Things NOT to Name Your Business
We are launched!

In 1996 the Chicago Bulls reigned supreme and Michael Jordan was raking in $80 million per year. Joe Kleine was last on the bench, making the NBA minimum of $272,250.

Same winning team. Why the 300:1 difference in pay?

Because Michael Jordan was just slightly better than everyone else.

And because Michael Jordan drives sales of basketballs, tennis shoes, T-shirts, soft drinks and toothpaste in Paris, Barcelona, Taipei, Tokyo, Melbourne, and Davenport Iowa.

Joe Kleine doesn't.

Thomas Friedman put it like this: "The gap between first place and second place grows larger, and the gap between first place and last place becomes staggering. In many fields there is rarely one winner, but those near the top get a disproportionate share.

"The potential market for any good or service, for any singer or songwriter, for any author or actor, for any doctor or lawyer, for any athlete or academic, now extends from one end of the world to the other.

"Either you dominate the worldwide market or somebody else will."

When you emerge as the winner, as "THE Accounting Firm", "THE Doctor", "THE Salesman", "THE Basketball Player", "THE Man" or "THE Woman" in any particular field, you can potentially win not only the United States or Europe, not only Japan or China. You reap enormous profits and royalties from everywhere.

Don't miss this:

For almost everyone reading this, the name of the game is not being "The Doctor."

It's about being The Internal Medicine Specialist for Patients who are 60 years old and older.

It's not about being The Lawyer. It's about being The Attorney for Industrial and Environmental Tort Law.

You hyper-specialize, so that even on the mighty Internet, you are a big fish in a little pond. Even in hyper-narrow niches, if you're #1 on the Internet, you win, Big-Time.

I can think of no place where this is more clearly seen than in my own Renaissance Club Roundtable group.

Joe DiSorbo is rapidly becoming the #1 in online product fulfillment. Julie Brumlik, #1 in skin care. Glenn Livingston is #1 in online market research. Jeff Hughes, #1 in high-end, high-touch call centers.

If you're gunning for the #1 spot in your niche - and if you qualify - you can be admitted to this group, a forum where #1 marketers in many realms gather three times a year and sharpen their games.

[Via Perry Marshall]


Easy Healthy Tips
Broken iPods Riches - Don't Tell Anyone!

Labels: , ,

Madison Avenue Calling

How A Lady Stumpled Upon A $100000 A Year Business Working On Sundays.
Manifesting Your Dreams And Desires
People often say they do not like advertisements, but that may change if the ads start lowering their cellphone bills.

Cellular phone carriers like Verizon, Sprint and Cingular, now the new AT&T, are beginning to test and roll out advertising on mobile phone screens, and by next year, cellphone advertising is likely to be more common.

In exchange, the companies say, their subscribers will enjoy improved mobile Internet services and content provided free or at reduced prices. Other companies like Virgin Mobile USA and Amp’d Mobile are taking the idea a step further, rewarding customers for viewing ads by lowering their cellphone bills.

Amp’d, a cellphone company that aims its marketing at 18- to 24-year-olds in the United States, will begin offering an opt-in advertising plan this year. Customers who sign up will gain access to free shows and other content — if they are willing to put up with some ads.

“When people are consuming this stuff on their phones, it adds up to a lot of money,” said Brian Mullen, director for content business development for Amp’d.

Another company, Xero Mobile, plans to distribute one million free cellphones on college campuses across the United States this year and give customers 40 percent off on their calling plans, if they watch up to four commercials a day, said Rich Clayton, a spokesman for Xero. In Britain, a company called Blyk plans to provide a completely free plan on phones that are paid for by ads.

It was inevitable that advertising would hit the small screen sooner or later, industry analysts said. Cellphones are the most pervasive media device, beating out computers and televisions, as consumers keep their mobile phones at their side nearly every moment of the day.

A small but growing number of consumers, in particular, younger ones, are using their mobile phones for text messaging, surfing the mobile Internet, watching short shows, taking photos or videos and checking e-mail messages. Only time will tell if cellphones are destined to become like all other forms of media — supported by both subscription costs and by advertising.

Still, these new phone services will become mainstream only if their prices are lowered, possibly through advertising, analysts said. On average, consumers in the United States spend $50 to $60 a month for cellphone service, including data features. The average total bill has been flat for the last few years, even as voice call charges have decreased, because of the increase in fees for text messages and mobile e-mail messages.

“Advertising absolutely makes sense to extend expensive multimedia services and mobile TV to the mass market,” said Linda Barrabee, an analyst with the Yankee Group, a technology research and consulting firm based in Boston. “I think we will see consumers say, ‘You know what, I’m only going to spend this much money on my mobile phone.’ ”

In Asia, by contrast, multimedia mobile applications are more commonly used, and those services became more affordable there without advertising because of quick adaptation by consumers, analysts said.

The new uses of cellphones present vast opportunities for consumer brand companies, which are finding it difficult to reach customers through traditional media like magazines and television. Mobile phones can handle ads in many forms, including video, text messages, search and banner displays. And cellphone ads can be fine-tuned based on customer data.

But there is a chicken-and-egg factor when it comes to advertising. Big advertisers generally want to see further adoption of services before they pour significant money into mobile ads. Advertisers like Procter & Gamble, Burger King and Pepsi have been experimenting with mobile phone ads, but, in total, cellphone advertising generated only about $421 million in the United States last year, according to eMarketer, a digital advertising research firm. EMarketer predicted this month that mobile advertising would reach $4.8 billion across the country by 2011.

Despite the hopeful thinking, there is no guarantee mobile ads will catch on. “I would not want them on the phone even if that would help cut costs,” said Conor Kelly, 20, a student at Savannah College of Art and Design in Georgia. Mr. Kelly said he did not mind subtle sponsorships of content on his phone, but he would not want it go beyond that.

“It gets to a point where you’re almost encroaching on someone’s privacy,” Mr. Kelly said.

In the early days of the commercial Internet, some service providers tried giving away online access in exchange for showing ads to users, but those efforts did not pan out.

For the subsidized approach to work this time around, cellphone companies must prove that consumers pay attention to ads. “We have to ensure that the models that we pursue are those that actually get seen and acted on by consumers,” said Marc Lefar, chief marketing officer for AT&T’s wireless unit, which used to be called Cingular Wireless. AT&T is testing various forms of cellphone advertising, with introduction of ads planned this year.

As of now, text messaging is the most common venue for mobile phone ads. Signs, food packaging and even TV spots feature a code that phone users can text to be entered in promotions. 1-800-Flowers, for example, is running a sweepstakes in the New York area for a flower arrangement that comes in a small margarita glass. Next week, Nike will allow consumers to alter one of its TV commercials online and send their creations to their friends’ phones.

Some consumers may not realize that opt-in text message ads generate a charge for those who pay for each incoming text message. Such costs have deterred some marketers from creating mobile ads, said Sarah Kim Baehr, vice president for media at Avenue A Razorfish, an interactive ad agency that is part of aQuantive.

As mobile phones are used for more tasks, ads will pop up increasingly in more varied forms, ad executives said. Preroll video ads have already started to appear. Advertisers like Toyota have created 10-second commercials to run before miniepisodes of Fox shows, and the network promotes the strategy as a great way to reach a young audience.

“Look around,” said Mitch Feinman, senior vice president of Fox Mobile Entertainment. “All the young males and kids, they’re on their mobiles.”

Advertisers are generally paying a high price to try cellphone ads, about $40 for a thousand viewings of their ads, or twice as much as many TV spots, analysts said. The performance of these ads over the next year or so will determine whether they are likely to provide enough income to justify giving customers a price break on service fees.

Some companies are not waiting to find out. Virgin Mobile USA introduced a program last summer it calls Sugar Mama that compensates its phone users with free calling minutes for watching commercials, reading advertiser text messages and taking surveys from brands. Since last July, about 250,000 phone users have participated, earning a total of about three million minutes, said Howard Handler, chief marketing officer of Virgin Mobile USA.

Advertisers like the United States Navy and Levi Strauss Signature are showing ads through Virgin Mobile USA’s program, in part, because they liked the idea of compensating consumers for the time they spend watching their ads. “It gives us the assurance that our message is being heard,” said Stacy Doren, director for media and online at Levis Strauss Signature.

The carriers have so far been wary of exposing their customers to ads because the wireless marketplace is so competitive, said Scott A. Ellison, vice president for mobile at IDC, a technology and communications research firm.

“Advertisers are always hungry for new ways to reach people, however that’s a little scary for the carriers because they’re concerned over how the end user experience will be impacted,” Mr. Ellison said.

Google and Yahoo are also investing in mobile advertising, moving their search capacities to phones and selling sponsored search ads. Google executives have said publicly that they think phone service will one day be free and supported by advertising.

If advertising on mobile phones generates enough income to offer significant phone subsidies, many companies will probably allow phone users to choose whether they want ads, analysts said.

There are some consumers who would not want much advertising, no matter the price break. Younger consumers, whose parents do not want to upgrade their phones, and lower-income shoppers who cannot afford the upgrades may be the most receptive to ads.

Future ad packages might include free text messaging for people who agree to receive text message ads, said Roger Wood, senior vice president and general manager of the Americas region for Amobee Media Services, a company that is working with cellphone companies to test advertising-financed services in the United States and abroad. Underwriting mobile phone services would be a good opportunity for brands to provide value to customers rather than just blasting them with messages, said Mark Kingdon, the chief executive of Organic, a digital ad agency and part of the Omnicom Group.

Danny Herb, an avid text messager, said he would welcome advertising if it helped him cover his phone’s mobile video and Internet capacities. Mr. Herb, 25, said he did not use other features on his phone because they were expensive. But he said he would use them if they were free with ads.

“I wouldn’t pay for mobile Internet or video,” Mr. Herb said. “My text messaging costs me too much.”

NYTimes.com
My Choose Of Nutrition
Why Your Sales Staff Shouldn't Market

Labels: , , , ,