|
|
 |
|
|
|
register |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about
|
|
|
meet up |
add to del.icio.us |
digg it
|
|
|
|
Internet Marketing Digest 0424
Internet Marketing discussion mailing list
Digest #0424
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AOL users alert: due to some changes in the AOL mail system, it's
possible you missed a few digests (or they came in the form of MIME
enclosures). To get old digests, please use AOL's FTP facility
(keyword: FTP) and connect to ftp.popco.com, and navigate to the pub
then the internet-marketing directory, then the 1995-08.digests folder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is moderated by Glenn Fleishman <[email protected]>
For info about the list, send INFO INTERNET-MARKETING to [email protected]
Send posts to [email protected]
To UNSUBSCRIBE send any text to [email protected]
To switch to single mail message mode (rather than digest) send
SET INET-MARKETING MAIL NOACK to the address [email protected]
To switch back to digest mode, send: SET INET-MARKETING MAIL DIGEST
Complete list archives: <http://www.popco.com/hyper/internet-marketing/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In this digest:
Becoming Popular on the Web (Bob Novick <[email protected]>)
Re: Internic Registrations pass to 100,00 mark ([email protected]
([email protected]))
AOL MAIL PROBLEMS ([email protected])
Re: Internic Registrations pass to 100,00 mark ("Danny Sullivan"
<sullivan@maxonline.com>)
Re: Unsolicited email ([email protected] (Jeroen Doucet))
Re: Internic Registrations pass to 100,000 mark
Re: Unsolicited email (Matthew James Marnell <[email protected]>)
Re: Bulk Mail ([email protected] (Steve O'Keefe))
Re: Corporate Resistance ([email protected] (Duncan Carmichael))
Bulk e-mail to associations? ([email protected] (Charles Rubin))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 1995 08:01:28 -0700
From: Bob Novick <[email protected]>
Subject: Becoming Popular on the Web
Becoming Popular on the Web
Bob Novick
August 21, 1995
The Worldwide Web (WWW) is exploding with new home pages, both personal
and commercial. And the software that allows people to view and even
listen to the content in these pages is here now and better versions are
soon to follow. (We have a friend whose home page features the sound of
Beethoven's bathroom, and another whose home page shows the current
satellite weather map for the U.S.)
So, what is missing, what is the next major hurdle on the WWW and how
will it be managed?
In my view, the biggest problem on the Net is finding anything. Or, from
the point-of-view of a commercial enterprise on the Net, being found by
anyone. There are literally hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of
web sites. How can one of them to stand out, even if its is willing to
spend significant amounts of money on advertising? Especially
considering that the main way that web sites become popular today is
via word-of-mouth on newsgroups and e-mail discussion lists. How, then
is a commercial web site to become well known and attract large numbers
of appropriate visitors.
Case in point: today's "Interactive Age" profiles Gatorade's move to
advertise on ESPNET, the innovative sports magazine located on Paul
Allen's Starwave web server. Gatorade will now be a major advertiser on
this web site, to the tune of $300,000 for a year. Why are they willing to
spend this kind of money? Because in a test they were able to get 4,000
visits per day.
Is 4,000 a lot or a little? Let's say the total audience, worldwide, on
the WWW on any given day is five to ten million. Gatorade got 4,000
visits which is .08% of five million and .04% of ten million. That's eight
hundreths of one percent. For which they'll be paying $300,000. That
translates into $3.8 million for one percent of the Net audience, or, if it
would be possible, $380 million for 100% of the 5 to 10 million Net audience.
If the problem is getting people to visit your site, how is it done? There
are currently several solutions for building traffic on commercial web
sites, none of them fully satisfactory. Here's a brief review:
1) Being listed by search "engines" and directories like Lycos, Webcrawler
and Yahoo, recently joined by services that do or will charge a fee like
Infoseek and the Mckinley Index from the Maxwell sisters (daughters of
Robert Maxwell) now available through IBMs Infosearch. These are like a
disorganized TV guide with millions of entries. Even if an advertiser
can pay to be featured, when 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 pay, who can stand out?
2) Magazines (print) and e-zines (electronic) that give you the latest or
hottest web sites. They either already sell advertising space or soon
will. This approach encourages the "site of the minute" mentality among
Netizens: run to visit the hot site before it cools off and then on to
the next site. Not a very good way to build a stable audience for a
commercial web site, but a way of building traffic nonetheless.
3) Make a sponsorship deal with an existing online service such as
America Online (AOL) or Microsoft Network (MSN). That gets you prominently
featured for that segment of the online audience which has access to that
service. Perhaps 10% of all those online are on AOL. Maybe MSN will
eventually match or exceed this percentage. But the vast majority are and
will continue to be outside these services, which charge a membership fee,
and thus are denied access to their content.
AOL and MSN plan to make *some* of their content available to those who
don't subscribe to their system, but we'll see if they can deliver
anything significant to those outside their systems and still demand
premium fees from their own subscribers.
4) Set up your own branded online service. That's the route that
Microsoft, AT&T, MCI, The Washington Post and many others are choosing.
This approach may provide a significant captive audience for a few
advertisers and commercial entities, but how many can afford to develop
an entire online system and how many such online systems can attract a
signficant number of users? More importantly, will people remain for
long in a service which limits access to most of the content on the WWW?
5) Provide your own broswer that connects user to your site and not much
else. That's the current rage, according to Ad Age Interactive. They
report that Hilton Hotels will be providing 200,000 visitors with
free diskettes that, when loaded on your computer, give you free online
access to the Hilton WWW site and not much else. Other advertisers are
trying similar approaches, including Time Inc. which will provide a
browser from Compuserve that will connect users directly to the Time
Pathfinder site. (http://www.pathfinder.com/)
My opinion is that we haven't even seen all the possible solutions to the
commercial company's problem of being found by their target audience on
the Net, much less had an opportunity to evaluate their success. The
Internet, much more so than any other communication medium, is driven by
the users rather than by the sponsors. It may well be that none of these
solutions proves fully satisfactory in the long run.
This analysis suggests that while content is of great importance,
providing it doesn't fully answer the question of how to
become popular in a medium where anyone can set up a web page with
popular content and where word-of-mouth is the dominant method of
communication.
Comments on this essay are welcomed.
Bob Novick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bob Novick [email protected]
CyberPulse(sm) Research & Consulting Phone: 310-559-6892
CyberGroups - CyberSurveys - CyberResearch Fax: 310-839-9770
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 1995 11:18:32 -0700
From: [email protected] ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Internic Registrations pass to 100,00 mark
>From: "Chris Harrower" <silver@postoffice.ptd.net>
>
>Is there a "secret" to getting multiple domains?
I, too, am interested in this issue. Our publishing company puts out seven
publications, but when we registered we were told only one domain name per
corporation. But is it possible to get domain names for each of our
publications?
Joan
Joan Kite [email protected]
Home of Football News, and the Dolphin, Steelers, Eagles & Saints Digests
Curtis Publishing (800) 334-4005
PO Box 526600, Miami, FL 33152-6600 (305) 594-0518
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Aug 1995 14:32:07 -0700
From: [email protected]
Subject: AOL MAIL PROBLEMS
>From Sanford Wallace - Promo Enterprises:
I have read all of the messages in regards to the bulk email discussion. I
am in the process of preparing a reply.
I am writing this note to inform the mail list that AOL has been encountering
mail delivery problems from the internet. Since Thursday, no undeliverable
mailer daemon messages have been returned to internet senders. In addition,
any mail list moderators should be aware of the fact that listserve mailings
that include any invalid aol members, will only be received by half of the
intended aol recipients. I have been in contact with Brad Knowles, the
internet mail systems administrator. He is trying to find out the solution.
His email address is [email protected] and his phone # is 1-703-918-2256.
*****Please use good judgement if you contact him. He did not exactly give
me permission to publicize his numbers.*****
Please forward this note to any appropriate recipients.
- --Sanford Wallace
[email protected]
Promo Enterprises
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 07:20:47 -0700
From: "Danny Sullivan" <sullivan@maxonline.com>
Subject: Re: Internic Registrations pass to 100,00 mark
I agree with those that find it disturbing that Kraft can register
133 names--including non-trademark names like butter.com--while
others can't seem to register more than one. Our company managed to
get a second domain for our index service after resubmitting the
request, and that seems to be the way to go. However, I doubt Kraft
resubmitted 133 requests. It seem more like they spammed away and got
all they wanted. I fully recognize the need for companies to have
multiple domains from a marketing standpoint. However, if Kraft can
get all it wants, it seems ridiculous for the InterNIC to deny the
requests of smaller companies.
- ----------------------------------------------
Danny Sullivan | mailto:sullivan@maxonline.com
Maximized Online | http://maxonline.com
(714) 955-5300
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 07:25:19 -0700
From: [email protected] (Jeroen Doucet)
Subject: Re: Unsolicited email
Although I feel this discussion is deeply rooted in American politics, I
think there are some points I would like to make:
[email protected] (Bob Gaskins)wrote:
>
>Why would
>anyone want to reopen an avenue for government to legislate (read:
>"censor") the content of what has (so far) remained a free and open forum?
First of all is legislation not the same as censoring. Legislation can even
mean liberalisation. So don't confuse two (three?). Secondly I don't think
that Glenn meant legislating content but legislating actions. Legislation
should not be about what is said, but about the way it is sent to me. Your
freedom in sending me stuff ends when it limits my freedom to allocate MY
resources. That is the bottom line.
>I'll be one of the first to admit that unsolicited email is annoying and an
>infringement of my right to allocate my resources (money and time for
>starters) as I see fit. But I'd much prefer to deal with the violators of
>that right in a free and open forum.
The problem is that some violators don't want to to deal with you in a free
and open forum. They just found this great way of making money (vacuuming
personal information from newsgroups), and are not in the least bit
interested in admitting that what they are doing might be
counter-effective/against netiquette/bad mannered/plainly stupid. I mean, I
haven't seen mr Promo participating here since his first few posts.
>The Internet is not just a network. It's a culture. And that culture has
>developed (and continues to develop) its own definitions of appropriate
>behavior. Those who operate within those definitions are accepted. Those
>who don't are ostracized.
- --snip--
>Okay, I'll admit some of those examples may seem absurd. In fact,
>attempting to legislate what can be said on the internet is absurd, too,
>firstly because such legislation would be unenforceable.
- --snip--
>But the main point is this: As a society, the Internet has demonstrated it
>is perfectly capable of forcing the opinion of the majority on any minority
>that "gets out of line".
- --snip--
>The Internet Community has been called an anarchy, but that does not mean
>there are no rules. More accurately the Internet Community is an absolute
>democracy, that is, a democracy ruled *directly* by its members (rather
>than through a set of elected representatives).
I think your general idea of the Net is a bit too optimistic. Although an
angry Internet mob can try to lynch someone who steps out of line (eg
Cantor&Cantor), it is very easy to avoid this lynching through filtering.
This filtering can be easily done by companies who are a lot more net-savvy
then the regular AOL subscriber.
The Internet is not an absolute democracy. I you would like to compare it to
a political system, it comes closest to a aristocracy, that is ruled by
people who are (a little) technical, higher educated and mostly male. But
eventually if there is an issue at hand, only people who happen to be around
or who are very well connected get to air their opinion about it. But only
IF you have acces to the necessary information or your contribution is not
filtered out by a moderator or a gatekeeper(AOL, Prodigy etc.)
Furthermore I don't think that forcing the opinion of the majority upon a
minority is desirable. This is called repression and is very bad for a
political climate.
Back to the subject. I DO think that legislation is necessary to protect the
(not so knowledgeable) individual user against spam and bulk email. I think
this should be done by legislation because the Net is to fragmented to
involve all accesproviders in an multilateral agreement. The enforcement of
this law could also include bouncing mail from known international violators
by IP adress. Thus legislation should not ever be about content but should
be about the ability of other people to force me to spend money and time.
So far the fragmented political stuff, but there was a lot in your mail I
wanted to respond to. Next time I'll stick to the subject, promise.
Take care
Jeroen
Jeroen Doucet
[email protected]
Office: (+31) (0)3406-65800 Facsimile: (+31) (0)3406-62893
X-400:I=JDO;G=Jeroen;S=Doucet;O=DDV;PRMD=GNS-X400;ADMD=400NET;C=NL
Member of Instant - http://huizen.dds.nl/~instant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 10:34:03 -0700
From: Matthew James Marnell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Unsolicited email
} From: [email protected] (Jeroen Doucet)
}
} Back to the subject. I DO think that legislation is necessary to protect the
} (not so knowledgeable) individual user against spam and bulk email. I think
} this should be done by legislation because the Net is to fragmented to
} involve all accesproviders in an multilateral agreement. The enforcement of
} this law could also include bouncing mail from known international violators
} by IP adress. Thus legislation should not ever be about content but should
} be about the ability of other people to force me to spend money and time.
While your post is well thought out, and you make really good points,
we run into the same problem with bulk-email that the US legislature did
with "porn" which is, they may make a law here, but it would be very hard
to enforce it locally without putting providers out of business.
The Internet has a way of applying pressure to those that have no regard
for netiquette. It has in the past, and it most likely will for some time
to come. Everybody should have the ability to block these people at the
lowest level. Right down to the TCP/IP stack with routers and Unix
utilities. The more people that do that, the less profitable it is for
companies to use spam. People that know what they're doing as far as ISP's
go know this so they right in clauses to their contracts that say, you
spam, you walk. It worked with Cantor & Siegel and will most likely to
continue to work for quite some time.
Take my most recent incident with the spammer using CIS. If I hadn't gotten
the response from CIS that I did, I would have configured my machines to
refuse to talk to CIS's machines. Real simple. Enough providers of content
do this and CIS fields a lot of phone calls for tech support, and possibly
lose customers for someone who hasn't lost "connectivity" to the net.
But, I knew that CIS would work with me, because I know the guys over there
know that too. We work together that way, the whole net.
Unless there is a world court to take our grievances to, legislation, in
whatever country, of the net will never work.
Matt
- --
Matt Marnell Portia Communication & Internet Services
CEO/CIO Inet Consulting, Training, Info Services
[email protected] Web Authoring and Unix Consulting and Admin
http://www.portia.com v: (513)435-6534 f: (513)435-6643
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:44:18 -0700
From: [email protected] (Steve O'Keefe)
Subject: Re: Bulk Mail
On 20 Aug 1995, Glenn Fleishman said:
>* Unsolicited email and other spams should be made illegal in as many
>countries as possible, just as unsolicited faxes are illegal in the U.S.
Hold on a minute, Glenn. I regularly get unsolicited e-mail from you via
the "Seattle Writers" list. I didn't subscribe. I enjoy getting the mail. I
don't want to unsubscribe.
I get unsolicited e-mail every day from potential clients, friends,
authors, relatives, spam artists. Because I've written a few magazine
articles about the net, I get all kinds of news releases and commercial
spam.
Here's what I do with stuff I don't want to read: DELETE. It's really not
that hard folks. It takes me less time to delete dozens of unwanted
messages than to flame even one spammer.
When I get unwanted phone calls, I politely hang up. When I get unwanted
mail, I throw it away. When I get unwanted e-mail, I delete it. If I
suspect I'm on a list where I'll continue to get unwanted e-mail, I send a
form letter politely asking to be removed.
My solution to this problem would be the ability to have "unlisted" e-mail
addresses, and the ability to register with some central organization to be
taken off junk e-mail lists.
STEVE O'KEEFE <[email protected]>
Internet Publicity Services for Book Publishers & Authors
Web: http://www.bookport.com/welcome/okeefe/IPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:46:36 -0700
From: [email protected] (Duncan Carmichael)
Subject: Re: Corporate Resistance
Peter Lemiex writes about (at least) several types of corporate resistance
to installing an Internet connection and that the "heart of the matter" is
countering a negative media image. The areas of resistance I remember (since
I'm now in digest mode I can't easily quote) are employees wasting time and
security. He refers to an article in Info Week on the former. I think that
InfoWorld had a recent article, or editorial, which reached exactly the
opposite point of view as the one he refers to did. Sorry I can't remember
the issue or reference, but it was quite recent.
As for security, I believe this is a legitimate issue and any good manager
would want to address this before having a connection installed. There's a
great deal written (and for a start I'd recommend "Firewalls and Internet
Security: Repelling the Wily Hacker" by Cheswick and Bellovin from Bells
Labs) addressing security. From a marketing point of view, I would think
that addressing this issue proactively is the best bet. If you show the
prospect that you have thought it through beforehand and that your solution
is safe I think this is the strongest marketing position. After all, there
are risks of an Internet connection, particularly one done without a
thorough consideration of security. (BTW, my use of security, as is normal,
includes all security risks, not merely "computer" security.)
** Duncan Carmichael Potomac Intersystems, McLean, VA **
** [email protected] (703)-790-0980 & FAX (703)760-8992 **
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1995 16:47:11 -0700
From: [email protected] (Charles Rubin)
Subject: Bulk e-mail to associations?
I strongly advise people against bulk e-mailings, but I had a seminar
attendee who reported very positive results from a mailing to an e-mail
list he'd obtained from an industry association to which his company
belonged. He was a manufacturer of music instrument cases. He e-mailed a
simple announcement to a list of other association members (a couple of
hundred of them) and got a very positive response (i.e., new business) with
no flames.
As far as I could tell, recipients had not *asked* to have information sent
to them; their addresses were simply taken from association records, much
as an association might sell its paper mailing list. Because people haven't
asked for the info, this practice still makes me a little queasy, but the
uniformly positive response to it and the client's enthusiasm for doing
more of the same gave me second thoughts. Has anyone else has had
experience with this type of mailing?
Charles Rubin, co-author, "Guerrilla Marketing Online"
[email protected] - http://www.sedona.net/crubin
800-357-1057 (dial code 33) - fax 520-204-1190
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
If you have any questions about this, please check out our Copyright Policy.
totse.com certificate signatures
|
|
|
About | Advertise | Bad Ideas | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Drugs | Ego | Erotica
FAQ | Fringe | Link to totse.com | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
