Thursday 21 June 2012

When Council Even Picks Toronto, We got a Problem.

Last week it was announced that the City of London will be undergoing a website redesign. This seemed long overdue, but incredibly welcoming news to all of us working in the technology sector in this community. However, my excitement was short lived, as I soon found out that the estimated $350,000 project would likely be going to a Toronto firm that had handled similar sites in the past.



As someone that is aspiring to start my own company in this city (Consilience Creative), this news was bleak for several reasons. There are four major web design companies that I know of in this city that could have at least put in a bid for a project of that size. Digital Echidna has worked with numerous not for profits and for profits of all shapes and sizes. rTraction's qualifications go beyond their experience with web design. They are the most civically engaged company on this list. Asides from being involved in organizations like Unlondon, they have built my favorite website in the whole city, LondonTrash.ca. ResolutionIM have built sites for companies like Samsonite before, but more importantly for this, they have done sites for St. Lawrence College, Algonquin College, and Trent University. A website for a city would be a step up from these sites, but it's a similar framework. The fourth is the newest on the stage, tbk Creative, however, in their short time, their work with social media has even landed them on the front page of Yahoo.



Now, the city has said that none of these guys are certified to handle the Microsoft content management system requirement. For those not familiar with web design, that's kinda like saying you won't get your car fixed because the mechanic isn't qualified to fix a Model T. This system, while once dominant, isn't a requirement for building a site as large as the cities anymore, and is incredibly expensive for the licensing fees alone ($32,000-42,000 per year). Do you know how much the equivalent system that all of the London firms are experts in costs? Zero. That's right, all of the London firms are experts on content management systems that have no expensive licensing fees. 


There's another aspect to this though. While we may never know if a London company could have done the site for $350,000 because there was no public tender, that money, and the size of the site that it is for could create jobs not only for now, but in the future for whatever company gets it. The money alone, and the scope of the site would allow all of the companies to hire more employees; creating more tax paying citizens of this city, whose talent we would could retain. However, it would also give a London firm the experience so that the next time this comes up, they have done a site of this size, and can continue doing sites of this nature for years to come.


While it is hard to take a stance on this because all of the details are not entirely known, it is disheartening to myself, and any other young entrepreneur in this city that is thinking of starting a web design business. We have a city that struggles to retain talent, and when our own city council says that they don't think that London firms are good enough, and that they don't want to showcase the talents of this city, what kind of message do you think that sends to me, or anyone else that has the "London vs. Toronto" decision to make? When even our own council picks Toronto, I think we have a problem.

Monday 18 June 2012

Bye Bye Blackberry

Today I did something that many Canadians have done, and more and more continue to do every day; abandon Blackberry. Now, I still have my Playbook, their tablet which I think is amazing, but I had to stop making excuses for my now long out of date Curve, and get something that I wasn't embarrassed to show in public.

I remember the first day I got my Blackberry thinking it was amazing. It was my first smartphone, and by virtue of that alone is was amazing. However, as time went on, it was too old to upgrade to the new operating system (which wasn't very good anyways), I found myself constantly making excuse after excuse for non-existent apps, and my phone began to fall apart, I said enough was enough. 

My old Phone vs. My New Phone

It isn't that Blackberry was always a horrible device, but there were just so many little things along the way. I remember last year during TSN's coverage of the NHL trade deadline (called tradecentre) they mentioned that they were sponsored by  Blackberry. While the anchors may have all been using the devices, I found it incredibly odd that the only tablet app available, was for the Apple iPad.

Even worse, the CBC tablet app, the Canadian publicly funded organization, their tablet app? You guessed it, iPad. I know it's not the CBC's responsibility to support a failing Canadian business, but I guess I'm saying, if they won't who else will? Blackberry was once the darling success story of Canadian technological achievement. I mean, in their hey day, Jim Ballsillie, their former CEO, almost brought a hockey franchise to Hamilton. If that doesn't spell success in Canada, I don't know what else will. However, just as Mr. Ballsillie's arrogance lost him that opportunity, his ignorance to the demands of the consumers lost him his own business. 

The Tradecentre App, Available only for iPad

Now, I thought about staying with Blackberry until the new phones and long overdue operating system came out, but they have even managed to shoot themselves in the foot on that. Not just the constant set backs, but what about the fact that their current ad campaigns are about not being able to send a thousand emails a day on a touchscreen, but their new phone is a touch screen?! It seems like they just don't get it.





What I'm Listening to This Week:

Monday 11 June 2012

Summer Reading

Summer always seems to be the perfect time for reading. Whether it's putting your feet up at the cottage, or just relaxing on your back deck on a nice day, here's my list of some books to make your summer a bit more interesting. 



I was actually on a mini quest to find out who I had lent this book to, when my old prof lent it to me without me asking for it. It's what I imagine having a conversation with Kurt Vonnegut would be like.




My wife got this book, and she has been banned from reading it in any public place because she can't help laughing out loud while reading this book. I would recommend this book if for nothing but the cartoons and the graphs. 



Hunter S. Thompson's lifestyle often times over shadows his writing. This book really makes you question what you think you know about what a human being is capable of. 




My generation will never know war like those who lived through the first and second world wars. I found reading this book really gives you an in depth perspective on the first world war, which I never saw before. It's war through the eyes of a medic, but the battles take a back seat to his romance with a nurse.




You know how people always say the book is better than the movie? Well, this is the epitome of that. Don't get me wrong, the movie was not the worst movie in the world. That is a distinction I hold for Gentleman Broncos. I just think it's impossible to capture all of the subtle things that make this series amazing.



What I'm Listening to This Week:

Monday 4 June 2012

Would you be alright with Advertising if it meant Free Cable?

I know when most people think about marketing and advertising, it is often met with a shudder or a cringe. This has gotten worse in recent years as adveritising has ventured online, and you now have to wait through an ad before watching a Youtube video, or listening to Grooveshark. My focus here is going to solely rest on video.

In recent years there have been more and more services coming out that make having cable or satellite less and less appealing. Things like Netflix, Hulu, and Tivo are legal services. You can watch tons of television shows and movies, whenever you want to. What a novel concept. Now these are only the legal alternatives, I won't get into the multitude of illegal outlets people use.

What does this mean for advertising? What about the networks? Well, it means that it is very hard to get an accurate account of how many people are actually watching your shows. I can't remember the last time I watched a TV show when it was actually aired. There was a time when competing with shows like Friends, or Seinfeld meant doom for any competing shows, but I would argue that is blown out of proportion in most cases now. Sure, for time sensitive things such as sports or American Idol, this might matter, but now a sitcom.

In recent years there has been a huge change in the way we collect information online. This practice, known as analytics, applies in numerous areas from how users interact with websites, videos, and can even include phone calls. Video is an interesting one, because they offer incredible data. You can find out how many people watched your video, for how long, what the peak interest points were, and more and more, you can find out basic demographic information. Our current methods don't tap enough into the evolution that technology has undergone in recent years.

With the introduction of Smart TVs, it seems to become more feasible for networks to begin to abandon the old model of collecting information, where there is a box on top of your television, which family members log into before they watch a program. Networks can now start to look at doing less intrusive advertising, that you might actually find of use to you. That's right, at its core, all advertising is doing is letting you know about something that you might want to buy.


Networks would have more in depth, and accurate information, which means that a show like Community might not have been cancelled in the first place. Think about your market that watches Community, isn't it odd that they are also the age that are primed for downloading? The out cry at the shows cancellation makes me think that maybe Community has a bigger fan base than was reported, and it was just the nature of the shows fan base, that old methods of ratings analysis just don't apply.

Here is what I think could be a cool turn. What if networks start to see that people are pirating their content, and that if they aren't, they are simply watching it on things like Netflix. All of a sudden, what is stopping the networks from simply giving their content away for free on something like their website? The network would be able to charge more for advertising, and also it would be more specific, so its a better experience for the user?

I think this sounds like an amazing idea. What if advertising wasn't obtrusive, and was for products that you were interested in? What if this meant that you got cable for free?

Leave your feedback in the comment section below.


What I'm Listening to This Week:
If I Don't Come Home You'll Know I'm Gone - The Wooden Sky