Life in a day: When the Internet is changing the time dimension

By John Giannatos

I admit that the Internet has never ceased to amaze me. When I say the “internet: I don’t mean internet cables or communications protocols, but uses that people have come up with to help them create new things, new ideas and innovations.

Take for example the new brainchild of Ridley Scott, the cinematic experiment “ life in a day”.

Life in a Day is a documentary film project by YouTube. Users sent in videos of themselves filmed on a particular day, July 24th, 2010, and then Ridley Scott produced and edited the videos into a film.

Trailer below:



The impressive thing is not only that scenes were collected from 4,500 hours of footage in 80,000 submissions from 140 nations, but the fact that the film serves as a time capsule, to show future generations what it was like to be alive on the 24th of July, 2010.

…

That’s magical in itself!!

It's amazing what people can do through the internet.

To each one of us, time is both relative and absolute.
The relative value of each second can be totally different for everyone, even though in absolute terms, it is still one second. I mean, waiting for time to go by during a bad moment is not the same as how quickly time goes by during a very wonderful moment, even though the time value may be the same.

The amazing thing with this documentary is that it lets us view time in another dimension, not linear but three-dimensional.
For example, in the future we can gather material for any given minute (e.g. September 27, 2014 at 14:10), and we will then be watching hundreds of discrete moments making up many hours in total, but all representing exactly that second in time.

To experience feelings and situations that happened at a very second...

This is a journey through time stopped.

A journey of life, where a second can last thousands of hours ....

As Bill Hicks said: “We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively."

We are not accustomed to such interpretations. As we were not accustomed to communicating through skype, sending email, staying connected forever with friends from the past through facebook (this is a freeze in time as well ...), or have colleagues that we have never met in person, and all these new habits have been learned through the internet.

The internet has changed our lives and technology can actually drive history.

The life in a day, is the proof that the internet has made us citizens of a large village. Humans like a forest; a whole made up of individuals, a conglomerate.

I am fortunate to live these moments of historical development of the Internet, and this is something that will be assessed maybe 200 years from now, by those who read the story. And all that happened today will be for them, historical events that revolutionized 20th and 21st century existence.

Why do consumers follow a brand?

By John Giannatos
I will try to interpret the latest research on consumer behavior in relation to brands.

There are no random events or interactivity on the behavior of users in social networks, especially when viewed en masse.

People naturally relate to other people, not to a brand; unless, that brand has something to give to that friend. The connection of people with brands is linked to a previous post I wrote that discusses how a consumer gives value to himself through the "good” brand.

The latest research from Forrester Research shows the reasons why an individual follows a brand or company on social networks.

Ι divide consumers into 3 basic categories:

1. Conscious Consumers and Utilitarian: Those who replied, “I wanted to get deals/discounts.”
2. Consumers who want to give value to themselves through the brand: Those who replied, “I love the brand and wanted to follow it” and those who said, “I wanted to keep up with news about them.”
3. Mimetic Beings. Those who replied, “I noticed someone following the brand/company profile.”

If your business has built a strong brand, then the people of the three above categories will have a reason to follow you. But, if your business is small or medium and the brand has not yet been established, then there is little to no hope for the consumers in category 2 to have any reason to follow you.

Your business should target the consumers in category 1, those who are looking for deals and promotions.

44,3% of consumers say that they are tied to a brand because they expect to receive a benefit from the relationship. (A connection is always a relation, which soon or later should exchange a mutual benefit.)

Chadwick Martin Bailey’s 2010 research explores why social media users become brand fans.

The research clearly tells us that a brand in a Social Network should periodically offer something to their “friends” to keep the relationship alive.

This is the main point of my article, which comes in response to many companies making Facebook pages without a strategic plan, reason, or goal; they make it just to make it.

A Facebook page, or a similar profile on any other social network, must offer more than just news and updates. The company needs to do something to satisfy the clients/consumers to show that the relationship is two-sided.

After you understand that aspect of social networking you can concentrate on group 3, the copy cats. When your business offers a special or a deal, your consumers will be able to share the deal with their friends, and get these copy cats involved. Your group three will be the biggest supporters of spreading the word, because they will want to show off their relationship with your business. Thus, the user will not only have personal interest in the relationship with the brand, but will also acquire social value of sharing with his friends.

When your company gives more than one “reason” for the consumer to like the brand, and then begins the cycle of building your brand’s awareness. “I love Tommy Hilfiger because…” “I like Adidas because…”

When your consumers are part of a social network, they are ready to play the game of interactivity.
It’s beneficial for sure for the brand to participate in this game and create a relationship with its consumers.

E-standby Upgrade an e-commerce innovation from Silicon Valley.

By John Giannatos

Studying e-commerce in the global Internet, using a philosophical approach of trade through online sales, I noticed that few services have improved the concept of commercial quality.

The Internet alone has improved sales and given the consumer the ability to look for better prices and specs. It has also given the Vendor the opportunity to leave the narrow local context, but there are few innovative ideas that can provide an all round win-win situation.

I want to explain what consumption in modern times means to me:
Right or wrong, a man builds the thought of “I am” through what he has and what he wants. Subconsciously, a consumer tries to improve his social status and recognition through the acquisition of goods and other things. That is why you see someone paying 300% more to buy a better car, yet it offers no relative, qualitative improvement for the price, etc.

When we buy a product or a service, deep in our mind there is a hope.

Hope to improve our life, our aesthetics, our experience, our social status, our expectations for a better life etc.

Can we upgrade our life through goods or materials?

I have observed the online commerce for years, trying to find when and where the Internet can give a framework for innovation, where trade wouldn’t have the same structure that was there 500 years ago. I'm looking for an innovation that will upgrade significantly, the lives of consumers and the market.

The answer came to me during a recent trip to Silicon Valley where I met an entrepreneur with an innovative idea that upgrades the lives of the buyer without just selling “hope.”
The service is called e-standby upgrade, and the company behind it is nor1.

The service works as follows: A guest reserves a room at a hotel and then is offered the opportunity of a discounted room upgrade, which is not confirmed until check-in. The guest commits to pay a discounted price for the room upgrade, if it is offered at check-in.

Founder of this idea/project is Art Norins, who is also the CEO and Chairman of Nor1.
I found the idea brilliant, not only for the customers, (the market proves this itself, since it produces a 20% conversion rate), but also in the field of business, since Goldman Sachs and Accel Partners, as well as other venture capital firms, have funded tens of millions of dollars in this project.

This is one of the most brilliant ideas I have seen in e-commerce, because it is one of the few occasions where a product or service gives profit to 3 parties, the Hotel, the Service provider, the consumer (Win,win,win!)

For the first time in history, the surplus of a “product” is offered to consumers at a lower price, while providing a profit for the “merchant” and at the same time a third “player,” gets to win in this game too.

If you study the game theory that is likely behind the idea of Mr. Norins, it is clear that it benefits the guest to always opt for the upgrade since any transaction always benefits all.

This service creates a better market and for this reason it is innovative.

Why only this service and not any other? Maybe I am exaggerating?
Not at all!

Let’s study any other form of service that offers multiple win situations; Ebay? Only under certain conditions (time, etc.). Groupon? It only has advertising benefits for the vendor, since the product or service is low-priced on the offered day.

In general, a discount may benefit the consumer, but works against the merchant, which depreciates this loss through marketing budget, thus you will not easily find a relevant service which offers the same innovations as “e-standby upgrade.”

All that remains is to see what other services and products can use this business model to create a better market and upgrade our life.

European E-commerce, the Cross Border barrier.

By John Giannatos

I started researching European sources of official data and information in September 2010, for an e-commerce project which had to be presented to venture capitalists in Silicon Valley.

At the end of my research I realized that Europe, despite its great "e-conomic" potential, will never reach the level of business of the USA e-commerce sector. The reason is the special characteristics, which do not allow Europe to act as a single nation, either in the political or business perspective.

The EU is not able to deliver the economic and social outcomes expected by consumers/citizens, to track the progress in the integration of the European e-commerce.

What are the broblems?

The main problems in e-commerce, for Cross Border transactions in the EU are:

• Fragmentation of consumer protection rules
• Language barriers
• No or limited cross-border delivery
• Taxation overhead for the vendor
• High shipping costs between countries
• Payment Methods

Putting the problems in some kind of order, I would say that the main problem for consumers (and the main reason a retailer would exit a website), is language. The language problem is also a headache for the vendor, who has to translate his online store and product details into multiple languages, increasing operational costs.



Another regulatory barrier for retailers, to EU cross-border e-commerce, originates in the fragmentation of consumer protection rules and taxations issues (VAT, fees, levies etc).

Regarding shipping costs, I would simply mention that a product which within the US (West coast to East coast) costs $9 USD in Europe has an average cost of 16 Euros (US$22). This problem is further exacerbated for both parties, vendor and customer, when the customer needs to return faulty or damaged goods.

On average, 11% of individuals who ordered goods or services over the Internet within the EU in 2010 experienced problems. These include technical, failures, language, non-deliverability etc. In some countries, including Romania and Bulgaria, this percentage was as high as 76% and 75% respectively.

The problems above explain why European cross-border e-commerce is tiresome, structured on a not so well functioning market, and thus there is no competition and no innovation.

My feeling is that the EU faces e-commerce the "chicken or the egg" dilemma, because of the existence of big American firms. There are no big European players. We are not pushed to solve the problem and if the problem is not solved, how can big European players rise?

European e-commerce has the highest potential of all, with a market prediction of 311 billion Euros in 2011 (including tickets and non-physical products). There are countries such as Cyprus, Malta, Luxembourg and Lithuania, where for over 75% of all product searches, there only exists cross-border offers.

Empowering the EU e-commerce market means making markets work for people. EU citizens cannot easily step out of their country for ordering products or services.

The EU should take political measures to make cross-border e-commerce work better, starting with addressing the fragmentation of consumer protection to tackle unfair commercial practices from international post delivery firms. The main action from the commission is to simplify the regulatory environment for both retailers and vendors (especially linked to VAT), and of course standardizing the rules for distance sellers to contribute to reducing barriers to online sales.


Related links:

Gap between domestic and cross-border e-commerce
EU seeks to bolster cross-border e-commerce
'Sluggish' Growth in cross-border e-commerce across the EU