Has the "consumer-translucentness" an end due to F.T.C. actions?

Todays focus will be of course again on the customer and the “translucentness” the FTC tries to stop.

The New York Times article is talking about the FTC and how it is going to protect consumers online. Apparently the consumer has trouble protecting himself, because large organizations are tracking information gathering it and building whole profiles with data such as: on which websites, during which time of the day, and for how long a user has visited. Selling this, I would say "delicate" information had become a successful business.

As the article states further, the attempt of the FTC to stop tracking consumer information would have a direct effect on the billion dollar business done by online advertising.

By reading the before mentioned article it came to my mind why it is not done the other way around? Why doesn't the FTC give out an order that NO websites are allowed to track any information UNLESS the consumer clicks the "please track my information" button? That is the question. Wouldn't that be much easier for everybody? The companies would only have to change one thing and billions of consumers could just lay back and would not have to worry anymore. Think about it, how many "older people" are surfing the web and have no clue that 1. their information is tracked and 2. that there is a way of avoiding that? If the FTC wants to change something they should be more rigorous about it. The United States in general are a very consumer protective nation, so why not protect the consumer all the way?

Microsoft is mentioned as well and tries to be brilliant by commenting on their new browser, Internet Explorer 8, which gives the consumer the possibility to change settings, so browsing without being tracked can be done. In the same breath it is mentioned that those enhanced privacy controls have to be done at the start of every new browsing session. I say: Wow! Why doesn't Microsoft invent a browser a customer has to install every single time before a new browsing session? That would be the same thing, wouldn't it? Being inconvenient.

So next time you go online think about hitting the “do not track” button, if there is one. If there is none, you are probably becoming even more translucent in that very moment... Think about it.

Mass Discounting - a viable business model?

In the past days media has gone wild regarding Groupon and Google. The approach of offering online coupons to customers so they benefit from certain deals brings back one of the oldest marketing ideas (among many others that will not be discussed further such as: product diversification). How should the customer know that he wants something if he does not know that it exists?

In this case I do exaggerate, but certain products the customer knows about are not on his or her daily shopping list. Groupon helps out. All of the sudden many products are offered such as a skydive, racing hours or a golf course. These services are interesting and seem to be a lot of fun to many people, but the price always reached a little bit over the top. Through Groupon special deals are offered that might have had a demand for years and this demand is being released.

How does that work? Magic? Definitely not. Products are also sold on the basis what customers are willing to pay for them. Speaking in terms of economics Groupon lowers the price (y-axis) and therefore increases the demanded quantity (x-axis) of any product out there. In my opinion this is a very easy approach and thought, but at the same time so genius. Is this business model viable? In my opinion it is - for now.

Google and Groupon
The current New York Times article says that Google has offered Groupon $ 5.3 billion. Investors are concerned about that, because Groupon has an annual revenue of $ 500 million. Further research shows, as the article states, that local online advertising will grow 18 percent (to an amount of $ 16.8 billion) next year.

This merger will give Google an interesting and wonderful opportunity to understand its customers even more. Now google will not only have the customers email addresses and location based information, no, it will give the company much more power in terms of customer insights. The real value of buying that company is the customer insight. Groupon reveals a huge stake of information in terms of what the customer really likes and is interested in. Apparently Groupon has 35 million subscribers worldwide who buy every now and then certain services or products. This information will enrich Google by a lot.

So the questions that should arise to us are: 1.Is the offer of $ 5.3 billion overrated? 2. Did the antitrust division thought this through? 3. Aren't customers becoming even more translucent (see my previous blogs) and justifying my hypthesis of the - translucent customer?