Breaking Bad. It's officially the greatest rated TV show of all time. This week's episode was the "best TV episode ever made". Why?

The greatest rated TV show of all time. Officially.

If one more person tells me 'Breaking Bad' is the best thing on television - ever! - I'll scream. And note the word Television.

Everyone in Streamabout, who have a good eye for this sort of thing, are crazy about it, especially cameramen. Obsessive even.

I watched 4 episodes, Series 1 and it lost me but unquestionably, I'm in a tiny, tiny minority.

The show was created by Vince Gilligan for Sony Pictures, having previously written The X Files. 

This week's episode "Ozymandias" (episode 14, series 5... in case you're asked because fans talk like that) got a huge, perfect '10' from 12,000 reviewers on Amazon's IMDb. Which makes it into Television history. Nothing else has come close to that online reaction.

Critics went ecstatic and fans were left breathless. An OMG! reaction. The name, Ozymandias, is from a famous sonnet by Shelley about a crumbling empire.

It has been talked about as being one of the best TV episodes "ever made". I kid you not.

Set in New Mexico, the show premiered in January 2008 about a chemistry teacher who turns bad (or good some say?). This final ever series completes (a total of 62 episodes) on September 29th and Netflix has really helped to grow the audience and is the greatest rated TV show of all time in The Guinness Book of Records. 

I won't list the awards it has won, because it's just too long.

But what Breaking Bad does show is that good drama, good content still works on Television and Online. It also shows that Social Media engagement in content, is more and more critical.

When 12,000 online reviewers give it a '10', it makes you think that you have to watch it and so spreads the word, virally. Good shows get noticed quicker and get audiences faster, rather than the 'hit and miss' of old because of online recommendation.

After all, it's the oldest cornerstone of advertising - word of mouth - and Social Media gives you that in droves. So Breaking Bad shows what can be done with traditional TV content, broadcasting online and Social Media engagement.

So I for one am going back to it, to see what the fuss is all about.
Or Chemistry. 
Yeah, I hear there's money in that?

Amazon Instant Video gets Airplay Support on Apple TV. This changes things. Again.

Amazon instant video has now got fully updated with Airplay support on Apple TV.

What does that mean?

It means you can use their App to watch Prime Instant Video and The Amazon Instant Video store on your Apple TV. Like Netflix, it's a big upgrade for their competitor as Apple (who may control connected TV's) have reached a deal with Amazon.

It also allows full integration with Amazon's IMDb which you might be familiar with and which also gives information on movie casts, soundtrack, history etc. In turn that allows them to offer you a Movie by the same Director? or including the same cast? So a lot more integration.

You can also have other features which traditional TV doesn't give you; like customer reviews or ratings; like "if you like this, watch this"; like concurrent downloads; like so much stuff enhancing your viewing.

The App is free and fully compatible too. Amazon, having tried to buy 'Roku' and not completing it, were rumoured to be producing their own set-top box. This may indicate that they've decided not to. 

As I see it, it's a clear example of a "deal" being done between a content provider (Amazon) and a device supplier (Apple). In other words, if you want your content on a device such as Apple TV, you'll need to do a deal too.

Which will worry many because "free to air" on standard TV's, might not be a distribution route in the future simply because, standard TV's will phase out as they're replaced with Connected TV's. I suggest it's unlikely that your next TV will be a standard TV and more likely a connected one.

And if you want to "do a deal" say as a traditional content supplier, Apple will need to be convinced that they want your content firstly. And even if they do (they may not want 'home produced' features or local content for example), you can be outbid by cash rich dotcoms to keep you off.

How would Irish news for example, fit into this platform? Streamed online means moving around whilst a free App might do it? Don't know, but it will disrupt.

So this will change the world. 
Because it changes distribution.

A little bit about Twitter and Jack Dorsey. And the IPO.

Jack Dorsey's first ever tweet.

It was July 15th 2006, when Jack Dorsey launched Twitter (although his first tweet was in March) with the now infamous 140 characters, designed by the way, so that mobile users could easily text, tweets. 

He was working in San Fran at that time when he approached a podcasting Software company Odeo and whilst he was obsessed with..... Trains...and Taxis. In fact he wrote software to co-ordinate Taxi locations.

The name was inspired by Flickr and it was first used as an internal service within Odeo.

7 years later, 200 million active users (over 500m registered users though), tweet 400 million times a day. 60% of tweets are from mobiles.

Now, in advance of the impending IPO, it has a value of between 10 and 15 billion us dollars. It had revenues last year of 250 million usd although that's likely to double this year.

Over time, Dorsey was moved out of the company in 2008 and following equity calls, had his stake diluted to just over 3% and he started to develop payments company, Square. That's worth over 3 billion us dollars today.

Twitter is now one of the 10 most visited websites and Justin Bieber the most popular on Twitter with over 44m followers. Obama is the highest politician and FC Barcelona, the highest followed sports club. 

Dorsey was born in 1976 in St. Louis, raised a Catholic and Forbes put his net worth at over a billion usd. With a forearm length tattoo and a drop out of New York University, he originally thought he wanted to be an artist.

Very interested in politics, there's been talk about him running as Mayor of New York. Real talk. 

But all in all, it's a fairly admirable story. Unlikely that Jack Dorsey will make a complete fortune from the Twitter IPO given his stake, he will always be seen as the founder of Twitter. 

And if you're not on it, get there.
It's absolutely an obsession.

Oh, it's @stuartfogarty btw.

Newspapers are embracing digital. And The Independent Group are making a fine job of it too.

In the digital age, one of the media that's often quoted as being in the firing line is newspapers. And they have been, but that doesn't mean that they're sitting on their hands and rolling over because they're not. They're actually embracing it and making a damn good job of it too with The Independent Group really making inroads.

What online and video brings to publishers, is the ability to sell TV commercials and the ability to use their established brands with loyal readers, to develop interactive magazines (IMags). Streamabout have been playing a role in delivering these quality videos for online publishers.

Clearly, firstly, the use of video news, allows for pre-roll and mid-roll advertising which allows newspapers to broadcast TV Commercials - something they've never been able to do before. In fact it's an opportunity for newspapers to attract in large TV advertisers whom they've never had as clients before. Who'd ever have thought you'd seen a 30 second TV commercial in a newspaper?

Newspapers can now scale up into the lucrative TV airtime space and that's a whole lot of opportunity for new revenue. Because TV Advertising as a sector, generally dominates media revenues.

Pre-rolls are now developed, available and growing with great long term potential.

The second offering of interactive magazines is a further development of that space. Here the online edition of a magazine - what is normally a printed product in tandem, although one wonders if IMags will become standalone opportunities - gives further, better interactive content.

The Irish/Sunday Independent have been at the forefront of this. Their online imagazine 'Juno' published yesterday, is a clear example of that.

A succession of interactive magazines aimed at niches such as Rugby ('Lineout'), Childcare ('Mothers&Babies'), Fitness ('Fit'), Exams, GAA, Christmas ('Mistletoe'), Soccer ('Soccer Legends') and so on, has been more than a foot in the water. In fact, when you look at the list, you'll see the pro-activity.

You'll find them all linked on www.independent.ie homepage, under 'Services' as you may not be able to click the links in this blog. (If you can't, just cut+paste the links here into your browser). But I've included two videos here at the end which are well worth the watch - honestly!

Yesterday, they published a lifestyle magazine, 'Juno' edited by Constance Harris, with The Sunday Independent but also online. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=1

For example, whilst the printed version featured a fashion shoot with legendary photographer Mike Bunn, the interactive magazine had 3 'behind the scenes' videos about the shoots. So readers were able to delve into it more and understand what it's like to shoot fashion. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=30

A piece with model Roz Purcell on a lingerie shoot, also came with a video (calm down) where interviews with the photographer, stylist and scenes from the shoot were very watchable. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=46

A story about Irish female authors self-publishing their work, allowed for online interviews with the actual authors. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=26

Another fashion shoot meant online, you saw it in the making plus more detail on the garments. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=62

Another video was able to give you tips on how the make up was applied by a top make up artist from the shoot. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=76

A story on wellbeing with Karen Ward, gave your more insight on her interactive video interview. 

http://supplements.independent.ie/?xml=Juno_iMag&iid=80896#folio=82

All supported by brands like Chanel, L'Oreal, Clarins, BT's, Newbridge and so on, who introduced their own TV Commercials, links directly to their websites facilitating purchase and links to their Social Media pages.

With all the content available to freely share on Social Media.

So digital now brings publishing and magazines to life and gives the readers further content to view for free. With the expertise of editorial that's available to a topline publisher like the Irish Independent and Sunday Independent, they're assured of being quality and will be hard to beat.

A clear example of embracing digital. 
And INM are doing it very, very well.

Have a look at this one from yesterdays 'Juno'. The story of a first. A Fashion Shoot in deepest Ireland, on a 'rock' called Skellig with legendary photographer, Mike Bunn.

Oh okay then, here's the Roz Purcell one from 'Juno' too.

TV Audiences versus Online viewing. You know which one is winning and growing, don't you.

You do get tired of a constant barrage of PR and in essence propaganda, from vested interest groups in the TV market, telling us that TV viewing is growing. In fact, it's getting better they say. TV viewing?

They've not learnt the lessons of the music industry, nor the book publishing industry, that instead of knocking digital, they can embrace it and make from it. Digital can be the saviour of TV as CBS are finding out. 

Tired and weary.

Sure, I have a vested interest in online video but I don't hide behind it, and I have a daily vested interest in Advertising. Traditional TV broadcasters do hide, producing Press Releases and Research under acronyms as "facts". And the reason I'm interested in online, as a former dyed in the wool Adman, is that I know it's where the eyeballs are heading. I still do traditional Advertising but I tell clients the truth.

TV stations are of course, afraid of online and video online viewership, so they have to keep telling a yarn that the online explosion isn't really happening, when it is. Understandable perhaps, but it's helping, as intended, to dampen advertising support online. Which is slowing online growth - but not for long.

However, advertisers are cleverer than that because they know the switch in audience away from traditional TV - simply from their own experience. Anyone with a child under 18, sees it everyday.

It might surprise some, but Clients are people too.

It's a simple fact that as Social Networks have grown, people are spending more time (notably in the traditional peak time evening viewing) on those networks. And if they're doing that, they're consuming less TV OR, watching it differently by second screens. Second screens clearly reduce the impact of advertising. It's just commonsense.

Online video is soaring. 

- 58% of the US stream (EMarketer) up from 20% in three years. 
- 75% of internet users are watching digital video (EMarketer). 
- 87% of people complete a video ad (that's from Nielsen) 
- "internet video ads have a higher impact than TV Ads" (that's Nielsen too). 
- "TV viewing is flat, steamers are watching more online video for longer" (IAB) 
- And digital is growing in that light 18-34 hard to reach TV audience (Nielsen). 
- Light TV viewers are shifting online quicker (Nielsen). 
- 145 million people in the US watch video online compared to 290 million who watch TV. And that was in 2012 (Mashable)
- YouTube has over 1 billion viewers a month (Daily Mail) and "more 18-34's watch YouTube than any cable TV channel". 
- Online video advertising is expected to grow +40% this year (Business Insider) 
- Americans aged 12-34 are spending less time in front of their TV's (New York Times) 
- Netflix now has 33 million subscribers (that's paid for viewers who are more valuable to advertisers). 
- "Households abandon cable and Satellite TV for streaming" (Forbes).

Will I go on?

The point too, is that all the opposing arguments are based on data - nobody is lying - but it's how you interpret that data for your own PR purposes is the issue. As someone said, if 40% of car accidents are by drunk drivers, then sober drivers are more dangerous.

It's not the data - it's how you use it.

So a word to media planners and buyers. A word to marketing managers and brand managers. A word to Admen. Use your commonsense.

TV isn't dead....but it's dying. 
You know it and so do I. 

Do you think you'll ever buy a TV again? You won't, you'll buy a connected TV for online content which in a lot of cases, simply won't show traditional TV programmes. If you own the device (like Apple will own Apple TV), you'll own the content and that's broadcasters biggest fear - distribution. It could close them.

You pay to get on the App Store. You'll pay for access to connected TV as a content provider IF they want your content. And they probably won't.

Look at data and ask yourself why it has been given to you.
Question it.

Time for a change.

12 years today.

Twelve years ago today, 2,606 lost their lives in the buildings. Hard to believe still. And nothing more to say. Except this. 

The new Freedom Tower at The WTC (above), will be completed this year. 

Bigger, Better and Stronger. 

The Steve Jobs firing from Apple by his best friend, John Sculley, in 1985. John Sculley video talks about it this week for the first time.....and Jobs about Sculley "he destroyed everything, starting with me"

Steve Jobs recruited John Sculley from President at Pepsi (which he had joined in 1963) on the infamous quote that did Sculley want to sell sugar water all his life, or join Jobs and change the world? Sculley had been famous for developing 'The Pepsi Challenge' 1975 taste-test campaign.

That was 1983 and they became best friends describing it as an "amazing partnership". In 1984, there was the famous Superbowl commercial, "1984" (ironically).

Eventually Jobs believed Sculley was "bad for Apple" and a power struggle culminated in a Board showdown in May 1985. Having been best friends, they were now best enemies.

The Board sided with Sculley and 5 months later, Jobs resigned from Apple. Of course in 1986 he started Pixar and in 1995 produced their first feature, 'Toy Story'. Jobs was the Executive Producer.

In 1996 Jobs rejoined Apple and the rest, as they say, is history. Sculley had left/fired in 1993. 

It's pretty clear that the clash was between an innovator and a business head. Sculley was focused on structure, cashflow and traditional business whilst Jobs was just an unruly doer. Jobs, it has to be said, was no angel either.

And Sculley has never talked about it...until this week aged 74. Worth a look.

And then at the very,very end of this piece - hear Jobs talking about Sculley - "I hired the wrong guy.....he destroyed everything I'd spent 10 years working for...starting with me"

Instagram shows unreal growth for Facebook. 150 million active monthly users. Their video offering is driving it.

When Facebook bought Instagram (an App) for a billion usd in April of last year, most of us were scratching our heads. Whilst Instagram had 9 employees (it was started in October 2010), it was the first time Facebook had acquired a business like this. 

9 employees, 1 billion?? Here's my blog from then;
http://streamabout.blogspot.ie/2012/04/instagram-sells-to-facebook-today-1.html

This week, Instagram has just announced that it has 150 million active monthly users - that's 50 million more than it had 7 months ago and that is, unbelievable growth. 60% of these users are outside of the US which makes it even more appealing. 

With this growth comes Ads and Instagram have said that they'll start selling ads next year and that will now go some way to repaying Facebook. With this amount of users, it won't take too long to generate a billion dollars in revenue.

One of the things that's driving this growth is Instagram online video which started a few months back. So you can not just view pretty pictures but pretty video too. 

Fairly extraordinary stuff and one where I think we can safely admit....it looks like we were wrong....online video driving growth, again. I should have known.

Never a fan but this Guinness Commercial is really worth the look. Really.

Not a fan of Guinness Advertising at all, at all although I do drink the stuff (as often as I can). But this really caught me off guard.

Story of a basketball game but the story of friendship, togetherness, told in a very effective way. Which you'll see at the end. Might even shed a tear or two, if you're a girl......lads don't do that sort of thing.

Music is 'To Build a Home' by The Cinematic Orchestra.
After that, I've no idea who is behind this. 
Just presume it's AMV BBDO? 

Lovely job really.

Samsung launch the first 'wearable computing', their Smartwatch. Pity about the name.

Samsung have finally launched their long awaited 'Galaxy Gear' smartwatch.
The first real attempt at wearable computing and this is the first generation watch - so it will improve in time.

Bigger than most watches, it's seen as a bit 'chunky' with a flat, rather than curved, screen. Doesn't look too bad though, although it's not a replacement for your phone but an addition to it. You won't have to use your phone so much, but you will need it.

Connected via bluetooth, it has a camera on the wristband and touchscreen. There's a Pedometer which allows you to track your running and it costs 300 us dollars. And it comes with nice colour choices (6) making it 'fashion technology'. Or so they say.

So we'll see. Apple are due to launch theirs, next week.

Samsung have gained first-mover advantage here and it shows they can deliver innovation, quickly and affordably. It will be 'in the shops' at the end of September.

What they can't deliver however, is a name. 
Galaxy Gear? Catchy.

Microsoft pays 7 Billion for Nokia. It feels like 1997.

In one of his last great acts, 'Crazy' Steve Ballmer, the Microsoft CEO has agreed to buy Nokia, for about 4.6 billion stg/7 billion us dollars. 

Nokia, the one time Finnish world leader in mobile phones, has worked with Microsoft since 2011 on the Lumia phone. More importantly perhaps, former Microsoft executive, Stephen Elop and current Nokia CEO, was tipped to replace Ballmer.

So is this case of getting a new Microsoft CEO with the company? Buy one, get one free?

It's yet another Microsoft deal that seems on the surface, "bizarre". They all do at first and then when you reflect....well, they all still do.

Firstly Microsoft already has working relationships with other hardware manufacturers, notably Samsung, who'll see this as competitive. A huge conflict of interest anyway.

Secondly a price tag of nearly 7 billion usd seems high for a company that had its stock recently at 'junk status' and frankly, that has little brand status remaining in the smartphone market. All to be paid in cash.

Thirdly, 32,000 employees come with it. That's a big, huge ongoing cost and basically increases the Microsoft workforce by a third.

As one blogger put it, "This would be the deal of the year....if it was 1997" Another suggesting they should buy AOL and Betamax next. In other words, it's all a bit late and a surprising concept for Microsoft to tackle Apple/Samsung mobile dominance, now. That game, one would have thought, is well and truly over.

And you know what? Microsoft just do things and leave them there. Perhaps like the Skype acquisition, there just isn't, a plan.

Here's Ballmer note to staff about the Nokia buy;

From: Steve Ballmer
To: MS FTEs
Date: Sep. 2, 8:00 PM PDT (Sep. 3, 6:00 AM EET)
Subject: Accelerating Growth

We announced some exciting news today: We have entered into an agreement to purchase Nokia’s Devices & Services business, which includes their smartphone and mobile phone businesses, their award-winning design team, manufacturing and assembly facilities around the world, and teams devoted to operations, sales, marketing and support.

For Microsoft, this is a bold step into the future and the next big phase of the transformation we announced on July 11.

We are very excited about the proposal to bring the best mobile device efforts of Microsoft and Nokia together. Our Windows Phone partnership over the past two and half years has yielded incredible work - the stunning Lumia 1020 is a great example. Our partnership has also yielded incredible growth. In fact, Nokia Windows Phones are the fastest-growing phones in the smartphone market.

Now is the time to build on this momentum and accelerate our share and profits in phones. Clearly, greater success with phones will strengthen the overall opportunity for us and our partners to deliver on our strategy to create a family of devices and services for individuals and businesses that empower people around the globe at home, at work and on the go, for the activities they value most. 

We have laid out Microsoft’s strategic rationale for this transaction in a presentation that I encourage you to read.

This is a smart acquisition for Microsoft, and a good deal for both companies. We are receiving incredible talent, technology and IP. We’ve all seen the amazing work that Nokia and Microsoft have done together. 

Given our long partnership with Nokia and the many key Nokia leaders that are joining Microsoft, we expect a smooth transition and great execution. 

As is always the case with an acquisition, the first priority is to keep driving through close, which we expect in the first quarter of 2014, following approval by Nokia’s shareholders, regulatory approvals, and other closing conditions. 

But I also know people will have some questions about what happens post-close. While details aren’t final, here is what we know, and how we’re generally approaching integration:

1. Stephen Elop will be coming back to Microsoft, and he will lead an expanded Devices team, which includes all of our current Devices and Studios work and most of the teams coming over from Nokia, reporting to me.
2. Julie Larson-Green will continue to run the Devices and Studios team, and will be focused on the big launches this fall including Xbox One and our Surface enhancements. Julie will be joining Stephen’s team once the acquisition closes, and will work with him to shape the new organization.
3. As part of the acquisition, a number of key engineering leaders will be joining Microsoft from Nokia, reporting to Stephen in his new capacity:
	· Jo Harlow, who will continue to lead the Smart Devices team
	· Timo Toikkanen, who will continue to lead the Mobile Phones team
	· Stefan Pannenbecker, who will lead Design
	· Juha Putkiranta, who will lead the integration effort on Nokia’s behalf
4. Regarding the sales team, we plan to keep the Nokia field team, led by Chris Weber, intact and as the nexus of the devices sales effort, so that we can continue to build sales momentum. After the deal closes, Chris and his team will be placed under Kevin Turner. We will develop a single integrated team that is selling to operators, and there may be other integration opportunities that we can pursue. Kevin will work with Chris Weber and Chris Capossela to make those plans.
5. Our operating system team under Terry Myerson will continue unchanged, with a mission of supporting both first-party and third-party hardware innovation. We are committed to working with partners, helping them build great products and great businesses on our platform, and we believe this deal will increase our partner value proposition over time. The established rhythms and ways of working between Terry and his team and the incoming Nokia team will serve us well to ensure that we do not disrupt our building momentum.
6. We are planning to integrate all global marketing under Tami Reller and Mark Penn. It is very important that we pursue a unified brand and advertising strategy as soon as possible.
7. Finance, Legal, HR, Communications, DX / Evangelism, Customer Care and Business Development will integrate functionally at Microsoft. Sourcing, customer logistics and supply chain will be part of Stephen’s Devices organization. ICM / IT will also integrate functionally for traditional IT roles. We will need to work through the implications for factory systems given the differing manufacturing processes and systems at both Nokia and Microsoft.
8. We plan to pursue a single set of supporting services for our devices, and we will figure out how to combine the great Nokia efforts into our Microsoft services as we go through the integration process.
9. There are no significant plans to shift where work is done in the world as we integrate, so we expect the Nokia teams to stay largely in place, geographically.
10. Tom Gibbons will lead the integration work for Microsoft.

While today’s announcement is big news, we have to stay heavily focused on running the current business. We have a huge fall and holiday season ahead of us, so we need to execute flawlessly and continue to drive our business forward. I have no doubt we will.

Steve

Phone Boxes. What to do with them? Great idea from New York. Make them "way-finding" digital touch screens.

So when was the last time you used a payphone to make a call? Couple of years? And yet the city is still littered with these icons of a bygone day. I remember as a kid, visiting London and coming home with a metal die-cast model of the red phone box being such an icon of London.

Indeed, local Irish newspapers reporting recently, that they've become ideal places for drug users to shoot up. But the saturation of mobile phones, has meant that they have no real use anymore and in fact, are becoming an eyesore.

Until now.

Great idea from New York then, which links to a concept being used in London. The idea is to turn the payphones into 'wayfinding' touch screens. Cosy booths, out of the weather to find your way.

So in the payphone booth, are touch screens that give local directions. After all, how many of us have been asked on the street for directions?

An interactive map, with local retail store listings and bus/train stops with timetables, would be a great help to tourism. And a great help to citizens. Once you think about that too, using WiFi, it will allow a lot of other applications.

Clearly Ads on screen being one, but perhaps offering free WiFi hotspots? Or Information hubs on general local heritage stuff? Or opening hours of local attractions showing perhaps, their video? Or local restaurant reviews/info? Car Park information? Traffic updates? Scrolling news? A dispenser of online tickets? Emergency services? And so on. All at the touch of a screen. Perhaps free Skype to allow tourists say hello to the folks literally on the street. 

Commercially it's a sound idea too - as indeed it is to bring real benefits to the streets of a city. The phone box is still iconic and in some ways, treasured. Importantly, it's already there so the conversion is relatively easy.

By giving it a digital makeover could be one of the great landmark ideas. And leave a great mark on the city.

Wearable computing begins. The Samsung Smartwatch launches September 4th.

The new generation of wearable computing kicks off on September 4th with Samsung's launch of its smartwatch believed to be called 'Galaxy Gear'.

It will make calls, receive calls, email, text, access the web and wait for it, tell the time. It's believed to have a camera integrated into the strap.

Google, Apple and Microsoft are working on versions of their own but the Korean company is first to market - a big first mover advantage and sure to steal the PR inches. It beats Google Glasses to a full launch, another long awaited wearable concept, although out there amongst a select few. The Sony Smartwatch is already out there but hey, who knows about it.

It will run on Android with a small key pad but brings mobile into a new space and will further the growth in mobile applications. It's much easier to wear a watch than carry a phone. Rumoured cost about 250 usd and it'll come in 5 colours.

Interesting times as we move into the wearable generation.

New Iphone in September will come with a trade-in offer. Great marketing.

We've come a long way since 1983.

The new Iphone release is rumoured to be on September 10th according To Mashable and the 20th from The Huff Post - but we know it's coming sometime in September. They'll want it in the stores by November for the lucrative Christmas rush.

There's talk of new colours (a graphite grey, gold?), super HD screen, 2 handset sizes, better camera/flash, better battery, a possible fingerprint scanner, faster processor, a cheaper alternative, the name (5S instead of 6?) and so on, doesn't seem to be real exciting. But we'll see. Apple always surprises.

However, there is strong talk of a trade-in programme launch which is a great marketing idea. Although some carriers (O2, Vodafone) already offer trade-ins on all phones as you try to get your "free" upgrade, an Iphone trade-in notably in Apple stores, will get the cash coming in.

Given the saturation of Iphones (which is actually the biggest market problem and notably for Samsung growth) and given the high cost of new models, a formal trade-in is a good marketing trick. Once everyone has a smartphone, it's difficult in these straightened times, to sell them a new one. So a trade-in upgrade is one good idea.

Basically it's one way of giving a "discount" on new phones without damaging the brand values and the old phones have a resale value. So it encourages constant upgrading and keeps stock turning.

Expect this to be announced at the launch and I've no doubt it's a great trick that will boost sales of the new Iphone. 

Will they trade in Blackberrys and Samsungs against a new Iphone I wonder? I would.

Microsoft's 'Crazy Steve' to retire. Here's the video that explains why he's called crazy.

Want to know why he's called Crazy Steve Ballmer? Have a look at the video above. If it's not playing, you'll find it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc

So there you have it, the CEO who gave me more blog space than any other, is about to retire at 57 and "within 12 months" or, "when a successor is found". Whichever is quicker. 

Microsoft's "transition" (according to them) to "a device and service company", meant if he didn't go now, they wouldn't have a CEO longer term to oversee this "new direction" (their words).

"Crazy" Steve Ballmer.

I wrote about the awful practices at Microsoft on his watch exposed by Vanity Fair here http://streamabout.blogspot.ie/2012/07/vanity-fairs-expose-of-microsoft-and.html and again here http://streamabout.blogspot.ie/2012/07/vanity-fair-august-article-to-add-to.html

The poor performances and launches here http://streamabout.blogspot.ie/2012/07/microsoft-launches-office-2013-and.html

And at the time that he slammed the Iphone never mind, as you'll see in my blog, his dismissing of the Android. If it's not playing it's here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U

Still, as you'll see from the top video on this blog, he'll be missed in his own way. Seemingly though, perhaps not by the markets.

Following the announcement today, shares have jumped. 
Up 9%.

And then along comes Nike and just does this.

Sorry, Advertising is dead and over. Then along comes Nike and produces a spot like this. If it doesn't play, go here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPkyPdubqDs

25 years of 'Just Do it' and one terrific piece of work. Wieden+Kennedy AGAIN (see my Honda blog later) and look at Serena Williams or better still, the genius that is, LeBron James.

But this video would make you just do it. With Nike.

Extraordinary. Short Blog. Speechless.

Online video produces good original content. And Netflix have 14 Emmy nominations to prove it.

Online video isn't just YouTube or streaming old editions of old shows, but an opportunity to create top-end content. Online video is creating programmes and the 65th Emmy Awards, the bastion of traditional TV, proves it.

Netflix is actually spending its money generating productions for exclusive content so that's no bad thing. They're getting a unique proposition in doing this by providing viewers with something no one else has - really good content they've made themselves.

Netflix has received 14 Emmy nominations for three series which they created, they produced and were broadcast exclusively on Netflix. It's the first time ever, online has been nominated.

The very excellent 'House of Cards' got 9 nominations, 'Arrested Development' got 3 and 'Hemlock Grove' got 2. 

The Awards are on September 22nd and no doubt a win, will further bring audiences to Netflix in order to view the award-winning series. 

Which of course you can only see on....Netflix.

Publishers, Music Companies, Mobile Companies and more are being rescued by internet companies they tried to stop.

All the talk of the Internet wreaking havoc on traditional media companies is changing. In fact, it's helping them!!

I've stolen this from a great Article in the current August 17th edition of  The Economist (cover above) which is well worth the read, called "digital pennies pile up at last".

The reputable PWC reckons revenue for online media and entertainment will rise by 13% each year for the next 5. So the web is growing the entertainment business.

Music, which record companies legally, stupidly, fought internet pioneers for years, is actually showing +.2% growth - the first time it's growing in a decade. Which means the internet increases royalty payments to....the very same record companies! 

And that's their IFPI trade group numbers. So the web is coming to their rescue as their CD and DVD sales collapse.

Online radio and music streaming (Spotify etc) brought in a billion dollars in 2012. 

Mobile phone companies are benefitting too, by selling data to access these services whilst their call rates are going into a death spiral. 

YouTube are now paying small copyright fees too on music downloads.

Netflix, Hulu and Amazon are of course buying rights to stream content online from traditional broadcasters. That's about 3 billion Dollars a year and rising. Online licensing accounts now for a third of the revenue growth at traditional CBS.

Book sales are growing again by about 14% per year on Ebooks means bigger profits for publishers and for authors. Yes, it has meant the death of bookshops but in return, accessibility to books is far greater especially amongst the young and far more of us are reading.

Digital newspapers subscriptions are working to a point too. The New York Times has nearly 700,000 (!) online subscribers. 

The surge in smartphones, in tablets, in ipads coupled with the extension of broadband speeds are driving this growth. EMarketer, a US research firm, thinks Americans will spend more time online this year than on TV. And because people want content, 'on the go', they're becoming more prepared to pay for it.

It's a fairly extraordinary turnaround that Internet companies are now becoming the saviour of traditional media companies such as publishers, record labels and TV broadcasters who tried so desperately to stop it. Instead of embracing it, encouraging it, because better access means higher sales, they were afraid of something they didn't understand.

They'd have sold more far sooner, if they had.

Ad revenue is bypassing Ad Agencies as it goes online. Like the book publishers, the record companies of old, Agencies are pooh-poohing it instead of selling it, embracing it. There's lessons here.

Like the peasant's in Lamb's essay, we know not how to roast pork, other than to burn the house down.

Interesting isn't it? 
You have to laugh though. Irony of ironies.

Apple's on the bounce again. 100 Billion usd gain in 48 days.

Apple is on the bounce again. An extraordinary capital gain (market cap) of 100 billion usd in a month and a half. Shares are just over 500 usd.

An average of 49 Wall Street shops, estimate it should be 525 usd.

In June, their shares were at 2011 levels so this is some ride. And not a good one because that shows both volatility and uncertainty.

They did report good numbers for Q3 (although net profit still declines) and they had a Twitter bounce from an investor, Carl Icahn, showing confidence through seeking accelerated share buy-back programs. Of course Icahn's two tweets also increased his own Apple wealth.

However, if Apple does so and uses its cash pile to buy back stock, the share price will likely extend further - with some suggesting 700 usd, its all-time high.

But with, wait for it, Apple have 145 billion usd in cash and a real strong market brand so Apple is still great and it's still innovating although not to the same extent. 

The new Iphone launch in September should further boost matters and the expected launch of a cheaper, limited IPhone will help too. Apple TV could dominate that market too.

IPhone releases have historically pushed up share values - but be careful - everyone knows that. However, things are good at Apple and just got a whole lot better in the last month and a half, with good expectations ahead. But the volatility is a worry....you can gain a 100 billion in a month but the converse applies.

With their levels of cash though, it's a long, long way to fall.

Personal Jet-Pack gets experimental licence in N Zealand. Big breakthrough for personal flying.

The great thing about being in tech and digital is that nothing is ridiculous. Email 10 years ago was a fantasy..... never mind downloading music or books to your phone. When I was selling email to corporates, the biggest obstacle was that "no one else has it". 10 years ago.

Invention requires the ridiculous thought.

For many years now I've dreamt that transport, personal transport, was the next frontier. Getting from A to B in a car, with all the traffic and road building needs, seems an old fashioned way to go. Far better, to use the uncluttered sky and far quicker. I have no doubt that my kids will travel this way.

NASA have been developing an all electric, one-man home plane called 'Puffin' which flies with vertical take-off and landing allowing you to "park" in your back garden. Not there yet, but it will be.

But yesterday, New Zealand Air regulators have licensed a personal jet pack developed by 'Martin Aircraft' called the P12. It's an experimental personal permit allowing testing 20 feet above ground on un-inhabited water or land areas but it's a big leap forward. The pilot (you and me) straps themselves into a frame and controls it by way of two joysticks with a rocket propelled parachute in the event of trouble.

Ideal, initially, for first-time responders such as emergency crews, and indeed with clear military applications, it is expected to be available generally to the N Zealand public in 2015. Ambitious perhaps, but it is on the way. And it's expensive....for now.

It's also big and cumbersome - not unlike the first computers - but all of that will develop, producing a better, lighter, more affordable version. The big driver here will be demand and unlimited demand there will undoubtedly be.

There's a real sense that technology is easily well advanced to provide personal flying and regulators will come on board in time. It's the new frontier that will require so many sub-systems (mapping, comms, etc) it's going to create another technology wave.

My kids will fly to work. Ridiculous? There's no doubt about it.

Bezo's buys The Washington Post. Why?

Jeff Bezo's purchase of The Washington Post (and it seems to be him personally rather than his company Amazon) still flummoxes me.

He paid a big price - 250 million usd in cash, about 17 times the ebitda profit which is a high multiple - it would for example, give The New York Times a valuation of about 4 billion usd (way ahead of its current market cap).

Such a high price that it's hard to see it as being a straightforward financial play. He's not in it to get his money back running The Post as normal. Especially when you consider further falls in circulation and advertising.

So why?

Clearly he's bought a big brand. The Washington Post is considered erstwhile and authoritative but that being said, one wonders what does he see in newspaper publishing that justifies the price? And what does he see that the current Graham family owners couldn't?

It has been suggested that he just wanted to save an American institution - perhaps, because billionaires like to own newspapers and restaurants (vanity purchasing). The Post of course, was famed for the Woodward/Bernstein Watergate reporting and 250m is pocket money for a man worth possibly, 28 billion usd. Add to that, Bezo's comments that he won't be involved "day-to-day" would seem to indicate that vanity is not the driver.

However, he is known too as a soft hearted, decent guy and without any vanity.

Of course there's the potential for an e-paper play with great distribution potential through his Kindle business. A great newspaper delivered in a great new way. Possibly.

But fundamentally this buys him influence. Although clearly as the Amazon founder he had some of that too, but a newspaper owner gets you into the corridors of power. Papers like The Washington Post, make and break politicians. Make and break Presidents.

So I think that he doesn't have a plan just yet.... but he knows that it will bring kudos and influence - good enough for now. Then he can spend time thinking about how to change online publishing with a world class brand. At 250 million, that might be justification in itself.

Bezo's has gone from techy to establishment. With a 28 billion fortune, 250 million might represent a good investment in just that. Political influence.

UK National Newspapers. 9% pay for online news. Will a billionaire buy them?

Interesting numbers on UK Newspapers from this month's Economist (always well worth a read by the way).

Since 2008, the UK nationals circulation (Britain has 12 nationals) has been in decline and much more when compared to the US, Japan and Europe. They're down by 25%.

UK newspapers traditionally have depended on the casual reader buying off the cover (so a new Royal baby is a great fillip for them) rather than a daily buying habit or subscriptions. Tabloid headlines consequently, are key here to attract that casual reader in the newsagent. 

But it is far easier for a reader not to buy a newspaper in the shop there and then, rather than cancel a subscription which is the prominent way newspapers are sold in the US for example.

The Telegraph (superb publication), FT, Guardian, Independent and Times all are all pushing subscriptions and with some success. From December 2008 to May 2013, subscriptions have gone from 26% to 41% of overall circulation.

The Telegraph for example, are giving away a free Kindle with every subscription and others are bundling digital access with the sub. Clearly too, subs are better revenue long term and give numbers on readers profiles which can be used for targeted Ads. 

9% of British readers are paying for online news (paywalls) up from 4% in 2012. Some newspapers are adding content to their digital edition such as The Sun with clips of Premier League soccer games. Creating more worthwhile content that's worth paying for rather than just, an online version of the newspaper.

All of this though, is not compensating for the loss in Advertising revenue. Newspaper Ad revenue estimated by The Economist, will be 2 billion stg, about half of its 2005 level. The Times loses money, despite its successful paywall.

Like Ireland however, Britain has too many newspapers for the number of readers - it is an over saturated market. And free-sheets, such as The Evening Standard, prosper. 

So with the circulation declines and albeit the efforts to grow subs, the decline in Ads and the march of online, will mean that things will tighten up through the potential closure of some of those 12 titles. Nevermind competitive threats from other and new media. Although as someone said, newspapers are like soccer clubs....some billionaire will buy them.

Indeed. Like Ireland.

Publicis + Omnicom merge Sunday. One response to the ongoing march of digital?

The merger announced yesterday of the 2nd and 3rd largest Ad Agencies, Publicis and Omnicom, is indicative of the threat of digital.

You'll note the PR Merger photo above of both CEO's had the recognisable Arc de Triomphe as a backdrop.....lest anyone be confused who's in charge here. Publicis are a very proud French Group (I worked with them).

Whilst creating the world's biggest Agency Group (leap-frogging WPP's 17 billion), they will have combined revenues of circa 23 billion usd. That's a long way short of Google's 50 billion usd and importantly, both agencies have been able to show little organic growth in a depressed, changing, Ad Agency landscape.

They are established, mature, traditional Ad businesses who are suffering from losses of revenues to digital Agencies and consequently have been showing only single digit growth. Omnicom grew by 2% in the first half whereas Publicis by 1.3% and after suffering a 6%+ decline in Europe.

Their new combined market cap is 35 billion usd whilst Google? 295 billion.

Traditional Ad spending is slowing globally and even in new markets such as Asia and China, only showing 5-7% growth as Clients move away from the traditional Ad and Ad Agency, model. 

From a client viewpoint, the merger does bring more media muscle - bad news for already hard pressed media owners. However, conflict of clients will always be a problem here.

Good creative has nothing to do with size except, a larger Agency will have more creative resources. 

The key to this is the merger savings (estimated at 500 million usd) in an attempt at helping profitability......but that's a lot of pain, a lot of job losses.

Mergers like this, whilst improving shareholders income (both shareholder sets will be 50:50) through cost-savings, does not deal with the core issue - the traditional Agency model is wrong.

Agencies give away their ideas in the hope to profit off the creation and implementation of the work itself. And they continually pooh-pooh digital which clients want, rather than jumping on board.

We will see what happens but in order to achieve those "merger efficiencies" as they say, expect changes at a local country level. Which will mean mergers of local Agencies and redundancies.

But fundamentally it's a response globally to one thing - the ongoing "threat" of digital to Ad Agency revenue. 

A case of, rather merge, than deal with the big issue.....

(Pretty good insight here too from Business Insider http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-big-downside-to-the-publicis-omnicom-merger-2013-7)

Pay your bills with your face. Keep smiling.

Pay your bills with your face. 

Like fingerprints, facial recognition software is even more foolproof and whilst it has been in development for things like security access at Banks, Hospitals and so on, it has never been used for payments.

What happens is that the payment provider holds your encrypted credit card data and your facial features. When you go to pay for something, you simply look into a camera (like at an Airport), it recognises you, clears the payment and you just click 'ok'.

So no need for plastic, no need for cash. Ideal if you're abroad or just stuck somewhere. Furthermore, it has big implications as it develops, for credit card issuers like Visa/Amex. It also has implications for currency exchange businesses and banks.

Developed by a Finnish company, Uniqul, it has been tested in Helsinki according to Mashable. But of course, the key here is the cost and uptake of the camera kit by retailers. You need retailers onside first and foremost and then the confidence of consumers.

But people will like it once they see it works and have used it once. It's a much easier way to pay and the initial intrigue, will drive it on. Furthermore, it should be more secure and overcome credit card theft and ATM phishing frauds. So it's a safer way to pay.

The world just changed.