thinks

Clickz writes about Live adding location-aware mobile. Google already provides location-based personalization via its SMS search. More logs on the fire that’s becoming local search.

The Wall Street Journal points out some tools that enable m-commerce. As the article states, none are fully baked yet, they certainly point the way forward. Are you ready?

Fred asks a great question. The strange reality of social networks is that they’re often more network than social. Anne had her say on this a few weeks ago. But the question remains: How connected offline are you with the folks you’re connected with online? More importantly: Does it matter?

Last week, I noted Seth Godin’s post about fudging the numbers. Now Steve Rubel gives a textbook example of how this works in the real world. While I understand Steve’s point - that Web 2.0 sites aren’t designed to drive ad revenues - I have two huge issues with his methodology:

1. As Steve notes, Microsoft adCenter’s Online Commercial Intention tool is, at present, demonstration technology. In fact, I couldn’t repeatedly reproduce Steve’s numbers. While the results were usually close to Steve’s findings, I got different results running the same query more than once. Apparently, the tool must base its answers on live data (kind of cool, actually), but, I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on its data at this point. Microsoft itself states, “some websites that have commercial intent might produce a score of less than 0.5. If you feel that this is the case with your website, we encourage you to contact us to help improve our scoring mechanism.” Not necessarily confidence inspiring. Much worse in the methodology, though, is…
2. The sites that Steve chose to demonstrate the issue. Comparing Twitter with Amazon? Seriously?!? Apples and oranges, I say. I ran some additional sites (commerce and non-commerce focused), using the same tool. Results below…

• Web 2.0 art trading site: Artflock.com - 62%
• Web 2.0 shopping search site: thefind.com - 47%
• Web 1.0 information site: CNN.com - 45%
• Web powerhouse: Google - 25%(!)

The key point is it doesn’t matter if it’s Web 1.0, Web 2.0, or what-have-you. What matters is how effectively you understand your users and meet their needs. That’s the way you monetize your site.

David Armano is a bit of a god. Not the God, mind you. But certainly worth giving props to, all the same. Whether you’re a geek, a marketer, or somewhere in between, David provides great stuff to help marketers - and business owners - think about their customers’ needs.
Here’s his presentation:

And the post that supports it.

That’s worth a prayer of thanks, don’t you think?

Steve Rubel has coined the phrase “geek marketer,” describing folks who translate between IT and marketing. I didn’t know this was news. I’ve been a geek marketer since 1995. Of course, getting old-line marketers to understand that I wasn’t an IT guy back then was a bit of a trick.

Clearly, I support the notion. Hell, this whole site exists to support the notion. Regardless, the main thing for any marketer, geek or otherwise, to take from Rubel is not to let others define you. If you’re a geek, be a good one. If you’re a marketer, do the same. If you’re somewhere between, go for it. Your success depends on your differences and on your belief in yourself