New Buy Back Program Could Reshape Selling Landscape
The following link is to a story on a new trend in buying throw away gadgetry. The idea is to get you, rather than purchase an extended warranty, to pay a small fee of something like 10 dollars to get a guarantee that the retailer will buy it back when you upgrade or go to the next generation of the device.
Instead of being hit up for an extended warranty next time you buy a gadget, you may find yourself hearing a pitch from TechForward Inc., a Los Angeles-based company selling a "guaranteed" buyback plan for electronics.
The idea came from Jade Van Doren, Chief Executive Officer of TechForward, while traveling in Japan where the passion for Tech is an advanced art form. "I just started thinking about ways that you could build a company around ... encouraging people to live that lifestyle of temporary ownership," he said.
The idea of encouraging a turnover is not so advanced either. All companies plan strategies that include the shelf life of their product. In Japan, states Van Doren, people change out their phone every few months. It seems a matter of re framing the American consumers mind to that of such values.
It makes sense that for an agreed on fee at the time of the original purchase that a year down the road the company would take the approach. Consider that the next generation from beta's frequently release the next generation withing the same season as Betas. People wonder, why bother buying an extended warranty when a few months latter they are in the same store looking at the latest model. So rather than pay, $50.00 dollars at a Best Buy on an extended warranty, you would shell out ten to sell back your camera phone or other device.
Sounds great, right? Well there is one small catch. As time passes by you get less investment on junk when you take it back. After one year it is $40.00, after two, it is twenty. Van Doren says it helps keep the consumer update and the retailer gets the customer to come back into their store and spend more money. Their are limits, points out the article, and not all gadgets will qualify for such constructional offers.
There are already many companies who will take your tech trash, but they don't offer money back normally. Programs like this, maintains Van Doran, will stimulate the industry and make it more tempting for someone just on the verge of buying that new toy.
It may be good too, to consider that this echo friendly solution, despite its origins of profit driving sales will appeal to recyclers and Earth friendly minded users. It sounds good to me.
Any thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/01/17/gadget.buybacks.ap/index.html
Monday, January 21, 2008
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Dear Mr. Internet: Some Random Curses From the Print World
Low B Average and Beer for Everyone!
It seems everyone likes to bitch about Mr. Gates. This goes along with lamenting natural disasters and questioning if there is a God or not. The only trouble is we all know that Mr. Gates exists. His ubiquitous influence over all things PC in the world is troublesome for a lot of geeks and savvy users.
In an article (see link below) on year end caps gurus state their share of bitches about Microsoft Windows Vista and in another story I find that Microsoft has a large portion of a Mexican brewery, a recent acquisition. I wonder if this is a move into other markets, where one day Mr. Gates, Rupert Murdoch, and Oprah, along with a handful of moguls will carve up the earth into some Orwellian jigsaw puzzle.
What it means to live in a corporate world? About the same as living in the Christian world when the Vatican was the final word on power, money and of course (but not least) God. Complaints are issued. Users lose what is left of there partitioned mind of 1's and 0's but Mr Gates stays at the top like Oprah stays on the cover of her monthly, modestly named "O".
Is it all shouting in the wind? Perhaps. But like a blog it feels so right to let out a little steam when the error messages stack up and you feel as if it is a personal attack.
I was advised to steer clear of Vista for a couple of years. Its a beta release and there are going to be bugs, I was warned. Yet I kind of still want it. As crazy as it sounds I am a year behind on my Windows XP (awaiting service pack 3, due in a couple of months) and feel as if I am not legitimate. Some part of me feels as if I am writing this blog out on clay tablets in cuneiform.
What is about technology that is so spirit killing? Is it the helplessness? Is it just a matter of keeping up with the Jones? I can't say. There is something neurotic about technology. Living in the beta world can leave a librarian feeling exposed and useless. I want to shout. "Wait, I got all of these books and at least they don't respond with "illegal nonvirtual" or the humbuggery of "the server is down. Try again later." Print is print. It stays that way. Digital is like smoke. I thought I just read that. No, wait a minute.
Never mind...
Any thoughts?
http://gizmodo.com/336829/microsoft-year+end-report-card-b+
It seems everyone likes to bitch about Mr. Gates. This goes along with lamenting natural disasters and questioning if there is a God or not. The only trouble is we all know that Mr. Gates exists. His ubiquitous influence over all things PC in the world is troublesome for a lot of geeks and savvy users.
In an article (see link below) on year end caps gurus state their share of bitches about Microsoft Windows Vista and in another story I find that Microsoft has a large portion of a Mexican brewery, a recent acquisition. I wonder if this is a move into other markets, where one day Mr. Gates, Rupert Murdoch, and Oprah, along with a handful of moguls will carve up the earth into some Orwellian jigsaw puzzle.
What it means to live in a corporate world? About the same as living in the Christian world when the Vatican was the final word on power, money and of course (but not least) God. Complaints are issued. Users lose what is left of there partitioned mind of 1's and 0's but Mr Gates stays at the top like Oprah stays on the cover of her monthly, modestly named "O".
Is it all shouting in the wind? Perhaps. But like a blog it feels so right to let out a little steam when the error messages stack up and you feel as if it is a personal attack.
I was advised to steer clear of Vista for a couple of years. Its a beta release and there are going to be bugs, I was warned. Yet I kind of still want it. As crazy as it sounds I am a year behind on my Windows XP (awaiting service pack 3, due in a couple of months) and feel as if I am not legitimate. Some part of me feels as if I am writing this blog out on clay tablets in cuneiform.
What is about technology that is so spirit killing? Is it the helplessness? Is it just a matter of keeping up with the Jones? I can't say. There is something neurotic about technology. Living in the beta world can leave a librarian feeling exposed and useless. I want to shout. "Wait, I got all of these books and at least they don't respond with "illegal nonvirtual" or the humbuggery of "the server is down. Try again later." Print is print. It stays that way. Digital is like smoke. I thought I just read that. No, wait a minute.
Never mind...
Any thoughts?
http://gizmodo.com/336829/microsoft-year+end-report-card-b+
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Googling Good Deeds?
Virtual Purse Strings and Naysayers
January 17, 2008 Google.org Spreads a Wider Philanthropic Net
SAN FRANCISCO - Google.org, the philanthropic arm of Google Inc, said on Thursday it is expanding beyond funding for alternative energy to focus on projects in health and combating poverty and climate change.
Google.org is working with partners in five fields who will get $25 million in new grants and investments and help from Google employees.
Three of the projects are new, including one that will use of information technology to "predict and prevent" ecological, health or social crises in vulnerable regions. Its initial focus will be on Southeast Asia and tropical Africa.
"We want to take the advantages of Silicon Valley to the Rift Valley," said Dr. Larry Brilliant, executive director of Google.org, referring to support for projects in East Africa, in a conference call to discuss his group's plans.
Google.org mixes the star-power of the world's biggest Internet company with a change-the-world idealism that aims to inject new energy and activism into the world of philanthropy.
But critics question whether the tiny percentage of its $200 billion market capitalization Google has committed to good works is more than just a publicity stunt.
The norm may be cynicism and questioning the motivations behind this move to enter into such philanthropic ventures. But what use will come from such derision's. There aim may be being the big fish, but that is capitalism. I consider myself a liberal, and deeply concerned about issues of poverty, and ecological matters such as global warming. I support capitalism. It is good for a nation to produce a market where competition will benefit society. Technology, goods and services generally improve and are fostered when anyone can get in the game. This article also points out that Google funds projects that back small and medium-sized business in developing countries as a way to alleviate poverty and overcome the limits of both microlending -- grants usually under $500 to groups of villagers -- and conventional aid, involving grants of several-million dollars. That sounds like more than a stunt to me. If businesses in economically poor countries can get a foothold, then that is a good thing. Right?
We all seem to cross paths on a daily bases (or at least once a week at the least) with Google. For me it takes away some of the sting of my complaints knowing that some good is coming out of this behemoth's ubiquitous hold on my researching life.
Any thoughts?
Here is the full story (Italics are passages from this link):
http://www.internetnews.com/breakingnews/article.php/3722536
January 17, 2008 Google.org Spreads a Wider Philanthropic Net
SAN FRANCISCO - Google.org, the philanthropic arm of Google Inc, said on Thursday it is expanding beyond funding for alternative energy to focus on projects in health and combating poverty and climate change.
Google.org is working with partners in five fields who will get $25 million in new grants and investments and help from Google employees.
Three of the projects are new, including one that will use of information technology to "predict and prevent" ecological, health or social crises in vulnerable regions. Its initial focus will be on Southeast Asia and tropical Africa.
"We want to take the advantages of Silicon Valley to the Rift Valley," said Dr. Larry Brilliant, executive director of Google.org, referring to support for projects in East Africa, in a conference call to discuss his group's plans.
Google.org mixes the star-power of the world's biggest Internet company with a change-the-world idealism that aims to inject new energy and activism into the world of philanthropy.
But critics question whether the tiny percentage of its $200 billion market capitalization Google has committed to good works is more than just a publicity stunt.
The norm may be cynicism and questioning the motivations behind this move to enter into such philanthropic ventures. But what use will come from such derision's. There aim may be being the big fish, but that is capitalism. I consider myself a liberal, and deeply concerned about issues of poverty, and ecological matters such as global warming. I support capitalism. It is good for a nation to produce a market where competition will benefit society. Technology, goods and services generally improve and are fostered when anyone can get in the game. This article also points out that Google funds projects that back small and medium-sized business in developing countries as a way to alleviate poverty and overcome the limits of both microlending -- grants usually under $500 to groups of villagers -- and conventional aid, involving grants of several-million dollars. That sounds like more than a stunt to me. If businesses in economically poor countries can get a foothold, then that is a good thing. Right?
We all seem to cross paths on a daily bases (or at least once a week at the least) with Google. For me it takes away some of the sting of my complaints knowing that some good is coming out of this behemoth's ubiquitous hold on my researching life.
Any thoughts?
Here is the full story (Italics are passages from this link):
http://www.internetnews.com/breakingnews/article.php/3722536
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Start them Very Very Young
Get Them Hooked!
It should be no surprise to parents and educators who are around this target audience day in and out. For librarians in the children's section it may be one more way to activate a passion for the public library. Called Web Playgrounds of the Very Young, major industry players such as Disney and Nickelodeon are getting there share of the pie. Its a booming market. “Get ready for total inundation,” said Debra Aho Williamson, an analyst at the research firm eMarketer, who estimates that 20 million children will be members of a virtual world by 2011, up from 8.2 million today. Even companies like Mattel and Lego are entering the market as well.
My question, and forgive me for asking, how much learning is a kid really doing at these sites?And is it just another marketing opportunity for these giants to profit off parents who wish to find appealing zones of safety that their children may play in without fear of inappropriate content or even worse, predators.
Disney’s goal is to develop a network of worlds that appeal to various age groups, much like the company’s model. Preschool children might start with Pixie Hollow or Toon Town, another of Disney’s worlds, grow into Club Penguin and the one for “Cars” and graduate to “Pirates of the Caribbean” and beyond, perhaps to fantasy football at ESPN.com.
Most of these are more cursory skill sets and web navigation. So it could be useful in getting a child interested in using computer (not a difficult task) and in a safe and friendly way.
A good friend of mine, a neighbor, who has two nephews and three nieces says that, Vivian just turning five will sit quietly for long periods when ever her mama will turn on "Ipies" (Vivian's pronunciation of Pixie Hollow). And this is a young lady who likes to play I can say "No" louder than you, according to my neighbor.
I have checked out the links below and to be honest, they seem oriented to selling, to me. But perhaps I am cynical. If children are learning anything remotely useful, are safe, healthy, and happy, that is all that matters. Right?
Any thoughts?
Here is the link to the New York Times article (italics are quoted passages):
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/business/31virtual.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Here are some of the playgrounds mentioned in the New York Times Article:
http://www.webkinz.com/index.html
http://www.clubpenguin.com/
http://www.moshimonsters.com/
http://www.stardoll.com/en/
http://play.toontown.com/webHome.php?r=431716&r=431024&r=674800&r=213428
http://disney.go.com/fairies/games/pixiehollow.html
It should be no surprise to parents and educators who are around this target audience day in and out. For librarians in the children's section it may be one more way to activate a passion for the public library. Called Web Playgrounds of the Very Young, major industry players such as Disney and Nickelodeon are getting there share of the pie. Its a booming market. “Get ready for total inundation,” said Debra Aho Williamson, an analyst at the research firm eMarketer, who estimates that 20 million children will be members of a virtual world by 2011, up from 8.2 million today. Even companies like Mattel and Lego are entering the market as well.
My question, and forgive me for asking, how much learning is a kid really doing at these sites?And is it just another marketing opportunity for these giants to profit off parents who wish to find appealing zones of safety that their children may play in without fear of inappropriate content or even worse, predators.
Disney’s goal is to develop a network of worlds that appeal to various age groups, much like the company’s model. Preschool children might start with Pixie Hollow or Toon Town, another of Disney’s worlds, grow into Club Penguin and the one for “Cars” and graduate to “Pirates of the Caribbean” and beyond, perhaps to fantasy football at ESPN.com.
Most of these are more cursory skill sets and web navigation. So it could be useful in getting a child interested in using computer (not a difficult task) and in a safe and friendly way.
A good friend of mine, a neighbor, who has two nephews and three nieces says that, Vivian just turning five will sit quietly for long periods when ever her mama will turn on "Ipies" (Vivian's pronunciation of Pixie Hollow). And this is a young lady who likes to play I can say "No" louder than you, according to my neighbor.
I have checked out the links below and to be honest, they seem oriented to selling, to me. But perhaps I am cynical. If children are learning anything remotely useful, are safe, healthy, and happy, that is all that matters. Right?
Any thoughts?
Here is the link to the New York Times article (italics are quoted passages):
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/business/31virtual.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Here are some of the playgrounds mentioned in the New York Times Article:
http://www.webkinz.com/index.html
http://www.clubpenguin.com/
http://www.moshimonsters.com/
http://www.stardoll.com/en/
http://play.toontown.com/webHome.php?r=431716&r=431024&r=674800&r=213428
http://disney.go.com/fairies/games/pixiehollow.html
New Database Alternative
Another Option for Hungry Researchers
ProQuest Announces Aggregated Full-Text Database for Libraries
ProQuest (www.proquest.com), part of Cambridge Information Group (www.cambridgeinformationgroup.com), has launched a new aggregated full-text database for libraries called ProQuest Central. The company says it is designed to serve as the foundational research collection for academic libraries. ProQuest Central offers more than 11,000 titles (8,000 in full text) and more than 160 subject areas covering core academic disciplines.
ProQuest Central’s coverage includes core disciplines such as business and economics, medical and health, news and world affairs, science, education, technology, humanities, social sciences, psychology, literature, law, and nursing. ProQuest Central, available now, combines content from top publishers such as Cambridge University Press, Emerald Group Publishing, MIT Sloan Management Review , Palgrave, Oxford University Press, Dow Jones, and more. Multiple content types are available, including scholarly and general reference journals, newspapers, full-text dissertations, company annual reports, industry reports, country reports, working papers, and more.
What looks promising about this database is that it may be striving to be more flexible and interface with users. It also appears to have a stated goal of covering a wide variety of subjects and services.
I was unable to access the service but the press release above provides a link to the home page where you can read about it.
I would love to hear first responses from anyone who has wet there feet with it.
Any thoughts?
Here is a link to the press release:
http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/wndReader.asp?ArticleId=40608
ProQuest Announces Aggregated Full-Text Database for Libraries
ProQuest (www.proquest.com), part of Cambridge Information Group (www.cambridgeinformationgroup.com), has launched a new aggregated full-text database for libraries called ProQuest Central. The company says it is designed to serve as the foundational research collection for academic libraries. ProQuest Central offers more than 11,000 titles (8,000 in full text) and more than 160 subject areas covering core academic disciplines.
ProQuest Central’s coverage includes core disciplines such as business and economics, medical and health, news and world affairs, science, education, technology, humanities, social sciences, psychology, literature, law, and nursing. ProQuest Central, available now, combines content from top publishers such as Cambridge University Press, Emerald Group Publishing, MIT Sloan Management Review , Palgrave, Oxford University Press, Dow Jones, and more. Multiple content types are available, including scholarly and general reference journals, newspapers, full-text dissertations, company annual reports, industry reports, country reports, working papers, and more.
What looks promising about this database is that it may be striving to be more flexible and interface with users. It also appears to have a stated goal of covering a wide variety of subjects and services.
I was unable to access the service but the press release above provides a link to the home page where you can read about it.
I would love to hear first responses from anyone who has wet there feet with it.
Any thoughts?
Here is a link to the press release:
http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/wndReader.asp?ArticleId=40608
Monday, January 14, 2008
New Wiki Search Engine Hardly a Splash
With Fewer Results and Proprietary Questions, Wales Still Defends His Newest Search Engine as Being Full of Potential. So? Prove It.
You almost have to have a good dose of P. T. Barnum mixed with the marketing skill of William Randolph Hearst these days on the Internet. Jimmy Wales, the democratic guru of information and sharing the wealth (information that is, not money) has made a lot of promises about his new Wikia. "I’m a big believer in ‘release early, release often,’ so things are going to change a lot." says Wales. Actually when you think of it, Wiki world is at heart the ideal user based social center of the Web. It can be edited and enriched by the same people for whom it is intended. Wikia too, is an example of this same user participation. Wikia is branded as a "social" search engine, significantly different from the big names in search, such as Google and Ask.com. Wikia is hoping that the open and participatory model will make Search Wikia the place to go for search results of higher quality.
Still, the results now are turning people away, according to TechCrunch (Michael Arrington), who cites the low numbers of search results when used. Granted, it is a young pup on the market. But it shall have to grow a lot in the coming months to be able to run with the pack. Are people really even going to think Wikia when the search. Already Google is in the lexicon of slang. When someone wants an answer they "Google it."
The advantage may come in its flexibility. Google is a fixed structure, but by its very nature wiki applications can be altered in ways that others cannot. It is, (Wikia) that is billed as being far more user friendly. Wales has a big promise to keep on this one. If he fails, however, the worst that can be said is that Google will have to work a little harder for its user dollar.
Any thoughts?
Italicized portions of this post were borrowed from an article by Woody Evans titled: "We Find It All: Wikia’s New Social Search Engine"
Here is the link to the story:
http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/nbReader.asp?ArticleId=40606
Try Wikia out:
http://www.wikia.com/
You almost have to have a good dose of P. T. Barnum mixed with the marketing skill of William Randolph Hearst these days on the Internet. Jimmy Wales, the democratic guru of information and sharing the wealth (information that is, not money) has made a lot of promises about his new Wikia. "I’m a big believer in ‘release early, release often,’ so things are going to change a lot." says Wales. Actually when you think of it, Wiki world is at heart the ideal user based social center of the Web. It can be edited and enriched by the same people for whom it is intended. Wikia too, is an example of this same user participation. Wikia is branded as a "social" search engine, significantly different from the big names in search, such as Google and Ask.com. Wikia is hoping that the open and participatory model will make Search Wikia the place to go for search results of higher quality.
Still, the results now are turning people away, according to TechCrunch (Michael Arrington), who cites the low numbers of search results when used. Granted, it is a young pup on the market. But it shall have to grow a lot in the coming months to be able to run with the pack. Are people really even going to think Wikia when the search. Already Google is in the lexicon of slang. When someone wants an answer they "Google it."
The advantage may come in its flexibility. Google is a fixed structure, but by its very nature wiki applications can be altered in ways that others cannot. It is, (Wikia) that is billed as being far more user friendly. Wales has a big promise to keep on this one. If he fails, however, the worst that can be said is that Google will have to work a little harder for its user dollar.
Any thoughts?
Italicized portions of this post were borrowed from an article by Woody Evans titled: "We Find It All: Wikia’s New Social Search Engine"
Here is the link to the story:
http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/nbReader.asp?ArticleId=40606
Try Wikia out:
http://www.wikia.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
