Mario Nissan

+

Profile

Mario Nissan
COO at Flock Advertising
Marketing and Advertising | Mexico City Area, Mexico, MX

Experience

  • Jan 2012 - Present
    COO / Flock Advertising
    Client service, Finance & Taxes, Talent and Technology Strategy
  • Jul 2011 - Present
    Partner / SWARM INSIGHTS
  • Aug 2010 - Present
    Consumer Strategy VP / Flock Advertising
    Current:
    Defending the consumer vs brands and crazy creative ideas :)
    Consumer research, content generation, social media engagement, company operations, user experience & web/mobile development, analytics & metrics, conversion, paid media, earned media, digital PR, social monitoring.

    Off the record, also taking care of the Financial & Technology Strategies.

    Previously:
    In charge of the company's strategic technology use for our customer and inside needs.
    Also taking care of the comany's finances, taxes, HRs, utilities and services, etc.
  • Apr 2010 - Present
    Advisor / Tasty Couture
    Strategic Planning
  • Jun 2006 - Dec 2010
    Advisor / Tecnosinergia, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    CEO, Technology Development and Testing, Administrative Work
  • Nov 2008 - Aug 2010
    Director templeo.com / Televisa Interactive Media
  • Jun 2008 - Aug 2009
    CTO / CyberSafe
  • Jan 2002 - May 2006
    Product Manager / Corporacion Unisol, S.A. de C.V.
    Sales, inventory, purchases, training
Clic aquí para ver mi LinkedIn
+
+

Posts

February 09, 03:06 PM
The Weird interview

To celebrate the launch of Squidoo's new UpMarket magazine, we got permission to post an audio interview I recently did with Darren Hardy of Success. You can find it here.

Thanks for listening.

February 09, 05:46 AM
Inaccurate labels and why we need them (and need to improve them)

If I tell you, "I'm going to the baseball game," it seems as though you're likely to understand what I mean.

Of course, you won't. When George Will goes to a baseball game, it's a religious experience. Me, I don't even like baseball. Or maybe it's my nephew's ball game (the playoffs), or maybe going to the game causes me to miss an important event, and on and on.

We label the experience with just two words, and two words can't possibly capture the emotions and circumstance surrounding an event.

The same thing is true with brands. If I tell you that a new business was funded by USV, that might mean something to you, or not. Or if someone asks you to pay extra for a brand you trust, that's stuck with you through thick and thin, that might be an easy sale. It certainly won't be if your experiences with that label/brand/company are negative ones.

As soon as we put a word on it, we've started to tell a story, a caricature, a version of the truth but not the whole truth.

The label removes us from reality. It takes us away from the actual experience. But do we have any choice?

How else can I get you started down the path to understanding me and my life and my schedule and my projects... labels are just about the best thing available to us.

A well-written book, then, is far more powerful than a blog post, because the book can take more time to get the labels right, to help you see what the author means. Five minutes of a movie is probably more powerful than five minutes reading a book because the tropes of a movie (the soundtrack, the lighting, the dialogue) are capable of delivering more accurate labels if the director is any good.

When there's a disagreement, it's almost always over the interpretation of labels. When you think your job title or your purchase order or your reservation means something because of how it's labeled, you'll end up in conflict if you're trying to work with someone who interprets those labels differently.

The key is in placing the blame where it belongs--on the labels, not on the individuals who are stuck. Get clear about the labels, clear about the promises and what they mean, and you're far more likely to generate satisfaction.

February 08, 05:43 AM
How do they know you're not a flake?

Before your link gets clicked or your proposal gets read, a busy person is going to triage it to find out if it's even worth glancing at. Since everyone is now connected, the new permeability has created a deluge of noise, and just about everyone worth contacting is taking defensive measures.

  • Do I know this person?
  • Did someone I trust send them over?
  • Where does she work? (Ideo? the FDA? The New York Times?)
  • Has she won an award? Is she famous?
  • Are there typos and is the design sloppy?
  • Are they pestering me?
  • Do I already follow this person online?
  • Does music play when I visit the website?
  • Will my boss be pleased when I bring this project up?
  • Who else is pointing to/referencing/working with this person?
  • Is it too good to be true?

Notice that all of these questions get asked before the idea is even analyzed. Doesn't matter that this might not be fair, it's a hurdle you have to cross.

Not all good ideas are pre-proven, sophisticated and from reliable sources. That's not your fault. Doesn't matter. In a noisy world filled with choices, you can't blame your prospects for ignoring you. I know that you're talented and have a lot to offer, but do they?

February 07, 08:39 AM
Horizontal marketing isn't a new idea

But it is the new reality for just about every organization.

Vertical marketing means the marketer (the one with money) is in charge. Vertical marketing starts at the top and involves running ads, sending out direct mail and pushing hype through the media. Your money, your plans, your control. It might not work, but generally the worst outcome is that you will be ignored and need to spend more money.

Horizonal marketing, on the other hand, means creating a remarkable product and story and setting it up to spread from person to person. It's out of your control, because all the interactions are by passionate outsiders, not paid agents.

Most marketers instinctively want control. We reach for the budget and the ad and the press release and most of all, the powerful media middleman. We buy SuperBowl ads or shmooze the reporter.

Horizontal marketing, though, requires giving up control. We spend all of our time and money on a great story and a great service and a remarkable offering. The rest is up to the market itself. You can't control this, and you can no longer ignore it either.

February 06, 08:47 AM
Who is your customer?

Rule one: You can build a business on the foundation of great customer service.

Rule two: The only way to do great customer service is to treat different customers differently.

The question: Who is your customer?

It's not obvious.

Zappos is a classic customer service company, and their customer is the person who buys the shoes.

Nike, on the other hand, doesn't care very much at all about the people who buy the shoes, or even the retailers. They care about the athletes (often famous) that wear the shoes, sometimes for money. They name buildings after these athletes, court them, erect statues...

Columbia Records has no idea who buys their music and never has. On the other hand, they understand that their customer is the musician, and they have an entire department devoted to keeping that 'customer' happy. (Their other customer was the program director at the radio station, but we know where that's going...)

Many manufacturers have retailers as their customer. If Wal-Mart is happy, they're happy.

Apple had just one customer. He passed away last year.

And some companies and politicians choose the media as their customer.

If you can only build one statue, who is it going to be a statue of?

February 05, 05:01 AM
In search of a timid trapeze artist

Good luck with that, there aren't any.

If you hesitate when leaping from rope to another, you're not going to last very long.

And this is at the heart of what makes innovation work in organizations, why industries die, and how painful it is to try to maintain the status quo while also participating in a revolution.

Gather up as much speed as you can, find a path and let go. You can't get to the next rope if you're still holding on to this one.

February 04, 09:20 PM
Will energy consumption stay private?

It's clear that the consumption of energy has external effects that impact more than just the person who is paying for it. Geopolitical, health and economic issues come to the neighbors and nearby citizens of entities that are using a lot of power.

It was always straightforward to see who was burning a lot of wood or drove a huge car. It's easy to see when a company has a huge smokestake belching carbon. What happens when sensors make it easy to see how efficient a machine is, how much of a resource is being consumed and how much exhaust is being spewed? What happens when Google maps shows you the block or the building that consumes the most electricity, or makes it easy to compare across industries?

When we have the opportunity to rank consumption by industry or by neighborhood, will we? We already watch our neighbors litter or have loud parties or paint (or fail to paint) their house...

A significant byproduct of the connection revolution is that things that were private because they were difficult to measure will no longer be private. When devices can talk to each other, the information rarely remains private. It's not going to stop with energy, of course. Just about all our buying decisions are going to be shared, and that changes the marketers job.

In a world of horizontal marketing, where tribes are aware of what their members are up to, I think it's going to happen quicker than most people expect.

[Updates! How's this for sooner than expected?]

February 04, 05:01 AM
Rightsizing your passion

Excitement about goals is often diminished by our fear of failure or the drudgery of work.

If you’re short on passion, it might be because your goals are too small or the fear is too big.

Do a job for a long time and achieve what you set out to achieve, and suddenly, the dream job becomes a trudge instead. The job hasn't changed--your dreams have.

Mostly, though, it's about our fear. Fear is the dream killer, the silent voice that pushes us to lose our passion in a vain attempt to seek safety.

While you can work hard to dream smaller dreams, I think it's better to embrace the fear and find bigger goals instead.

February 03, 05:59 AM
Can I see your body of work?

Are you leaving behind an easily found trail of accomplishment?

Few people are interested in your resume any more. Plenty are interested in what you've done.

The second thing you'll need to do is regularly note what you produce in a log or find some other way to keep track.

The first thing is more difficult: If the work you do isn't worth collating and highlighting, you probably need to be doing better work.

February 02, 02:13 PM
80% off while they last

SOLD OUT. Thanks.

The bestselling ShipIt journal has surprised me in how much impact it has had on the teams that have used it. I ended up selling tens of thousands of them.

I have about 600 left and rather than pay warehousing fees, I lowered the price a whole bunch and will leave it that way until they are sold out. (The rest of the inventory is here). I don't expect to reprint them, sorry.

Also, Jess Bachman's Death and Taxes poster is available at a great bulk price for the next 28 hours at an already funded Kickstarter. I think every classroom and office ought to have one.

February 02, 05:14 AM
You will be disappointed

Sooner or later, you'll ask for something or read something or expect something and you won't like what you get. You'll feel like I wasted your time, wasted your money or didn't meet your expectations.

Not just me, of course. Everyone. Even you. You will disappoint someone, and the organizations you depend on will disappoint you. Expectations keep rising, and promises keep being made. We keep bringing more magic into the world, but rising expectations mean that there's more disappointment as well.

That's part of the deal of being in the world.

The alternative, I'm afraid, isn't to choose a path where we make everyone happy and always exceed their expectations. Nope. The alternative is to hide, to fail to engage and to produce nothing.

A pretty easy choice.

February 01, 05:03 AM
An endless series of difficult but achievable hills

Lightning rarely strikes. Instead, achievement is often the result of stepwise progress, of doing something increasingly difficult until you get the result you seek.

For a comedian to get on the Tonight Show in 1980 was a triumph. How to get there? A series of steps… open mike nights, sleeping in vans, gigging, polishing, working up the ladder until the booker both saw you and liked you.

Same thing goes for the CEO job, the TED talk on the main stage, the line outside the restaurant after a great review in the local paper.

Repeating easy tasks again and again gets you not very far. Attacking only steep cliffs where no progress is made isn’t particularly effective either. No, the best path is an endless series of difficult (but achievable) hills.

Just about all of the stuck projects and failed endeavors I see are the result of poor hill choices. I still remember meeting a guy 30 years ago with a new kind of controller for the Atari game system. He told me that he had raised $500,000 and was going to spend it all (every penny) on a single ad during the Cosby show. His exact words, "my product will be on fire, like a thresher through a wheat field, like a hot knife through butter!" He was praying for lightning, and of course, it didn't strike.

There are plenty of obvious reasons why we avoid picking the right interim steps, why we either settle for too little or foolishly shoot for too much. Mostly it comes down to fear and impatience.

The craft of your career comes in picking the right hills. Hills just challenging enough that you can barely make it over. A series of hills becomes a mountain, and a series of mountains is a career.

January 31, 05:08 AM
The waffle paradox

One way for a candidate to change the conversation around her candidacy: have her followers pelt the opposition with waffles at every public appearance. Eggos in particular are lightweight and their shape makes them easy to toss.

Particularly in primaries, simplicity and certainty are rewarded. The waffling candidate, the one who hesitates to give a clear yes or no answer to every question is seen as weak.

(Worth noting that the word "waffling" didn't start appearing in books much until after the 1960 elections).

Of course, this post isn't about politics at all. Customers and employees and vendors and regulators almost always prefer simplicity and certainty.

There are two ways to begin an answer to most questions we face in organizations:

"It's simple" and

"It's complicated."

Both are usually true. At 10,000 feet, most challenges are simple. But actually making something work is quite complicated.

Nuance is the sign of an intelligent observer. Nuance shows restaint and maturity and an understanding of the underlying mechanics of whatever problem we're wrestling with. After all, if the solution was simple, we would have solved it already.

On the other hand, resorting to nuance early and often can also be a sign of fear, of an unwillingness to go out on a limb and make a difference. Hence the reactions of boards hiring consultants and CEOs, or of passionate primary voters. "Don't tell me it's complicated. Just show me the guts to make something happen."

My vote: your goals and your strategy must be simple. You must have passion and certainty in order to make a difference as a leader. Your tactics, on the other hand, should be layered, multi-dimensional and reflect the patience of someone who cares about reaching a goal.

When Howard Schultz talks about coffee or Jill Greenberg talks about lighting or Cory Booker talks about education, they can impatiently demand clear and simple results. At the same time, successful leaders see the nuance they'll need in executing to get there.

The paradox is that the simplicity we often seek in search of solutions rarely leads to the patient leadership we need to get them.

The irony is not lost on me... the decision on when to be bold is a nuanced one.

January 30, 08:28 AM
(What you get) - (What you were hoping for)

This might be the simplest possible explanation of customer satisfaction.

Dissatisfaction occurs when salespeople and marketers tend to try to amplify the first part (what you're promised) while neglecting the second.

The ability to delight and surprise is at the core of every beloved brand (product, politician, teenager...). Overhype and shady promises will undercut that before it even has a chance to get started. Yes, of course you have to make promises to earn attention and trial. The mistake is when you put more effort into the promises and less into what you deliver. Promise a lot but deliver even more.

[One really important amplification: Research shows us that what people remember is far more important than what they experience. What's remembered:

--the peak of the experience (bad or good) and,

--the last part of the experience.

The easiest way to amplify customer satisfaction, then, is to underpromise, then increase the positive peak and make sure it happens near the end of the experience you provide. Easy to say, but rarely done.]

January 29, 11:03 AM
Prepared to fail

"We're hoping to succeed; we're okay with failure. We just don't want to land in between."

--David Chang

He's serious. Lots of people say this, but few are willing to put themselves at risk, which destroys the likelihood of success and dramatically increases the chance of in between.

January 29, 05:47 AM
Faux familiarity is worse than none at all

Sure, it's easy to grab a first name from a database or glean some info from a profile.

But when you pretend to know me, you've already started our relationship with a lie. You've cheapened the tools we use to recognize each other and you've tricked me, at least a little.

Direct mail used to take advantage of this technique a lot, and since they measure everything, they knew when it worked. Online, though, we're seeing less disciplined marketers (big and small) continually mess it up. The clues are obvious to even the untrained eye--typefaces that don't match, references that don't make sense, and most of all, the weird disconnect we get when we think we're supposed to know someone and can't remember who they are. That's a lousy mood to get your prospect in, I think.

January 28, 05:42 AM
The honest broker

It really is a choice, one or the other.

Either you happily recommend the best option for your customer, or you give preference to your own items first.

Either you believe in what you sell, or you don't.

Either you treat your best partners better, or you treat everyone the same.

Either you shade the truth when it's painful to do otherwise, or you consistently share what's important.

Either you always keep your promises or you don't.

Either you give me the best price the first time, or you make me jump through hoops to get there.

Earning the position of the honest broker is time-consuming and expensive. Losing it takes just a moment.

January 27, 05:22 AM
Reconsidering Gartner's Cycle of Hype

One theory of technology marketing and acceptance goes like this: A technology causes a media hypestorm and rising expectations. Then it crashes to Earth as the popular press and the public discovers that it's not all the hypesters said it would be--through no fault of the technologists who brought it to the world in the first place. Then, gradually, the truth about the technology seeps out until finally it reaches its use case--and then becomes that status quo, just waiting to be disrupted as it previously disrupted what came before.

While the violent vicissitudes of this chart make for good TV movies, in reality very few innovations follow this path. That's because it ignores 'being ignored.'

90% of the time, new technology triggers are widely and aggressively ignored. While we're more eager than ever for a savior that will change everything, the number of technologies, pundits, prophets and entrepreneurs is so large that there's now a line out the door. As a result, most of the things we now take for granted (cell phones, tweeting, insulated windows, email) didn't follow this curve at all.

In fact, just about every innovation I know of has to make it through the wilderness before it gets anywhere close to a hype cycle. The wilderness is the term for the years (or decades) that a founder/entrepreneur/artist/technology must spend being ignored and unfunded before the breakthrough of overnight success occurs.

January 26, 11:06 AM
Who cares?

Unless someone does, things start to fray around the edges.

Often it's the CEO or the manager who sets a standard of caring about the details. Even better is a culture where everyone cares, and where each person reinforces that horizontally throughout the team.

You've probably been to the hotel that serves refrigerated tomatoes in January at their $20 breakfast, that doesn't answer the phone when you call the front desk, that has a shower curtain that is falling off the rack and a slightly snarky concierge. This is in sharp relief to that hotel down the street, the one that costs just the same, but gets the details right.

It's obviously not about access to capital (doing it right doesn't cost more). It's about caring enough to make an effort.

If we define good enough sufficiently low, we'll probably meet our standards. Caring involves raising that bar to the point where the team has to stretch.

Of course, the manager of the mediocre hotel who's reading this, the staff member of the mediocre restaurant who just got forwarded this note--they have a great excuse. Times are tough, money is tight, the team wasn't hired by me, nobody else cares, I'm only going to be doing this gig for a year, our customers are jerks... who cares?

Caring, it turns out, is a competitive advantage, and one that takes effort, not money.

Like most things that are worth doing, it's not easy at first and the one who cares isn't going to get a standing ovation from those that are merely phoning it in. I think it's this lack of early positive feedback that makes caring in service businesses so rare.

Which is precisely what makes it valuable.

January 25, 05:27 AM
Solving problems (vs. identifying them)

Often, we're hesitant to identify a problem out of fear we can't solve it. Knowing that we have to live with something that we're unable to alter gives us a good reason to avoid verbalizing it--highlighting it just makes it worse.

While this sort of denial might be okay for individuals (emphasis on might), it's a lousy approach for organizations of any size. That's because there are almost certainly resources available that can solve a problem if you decide it's truly worth solving.

Put yourself and your people on a path to finding problems without regard for whether or not they are capable of solving them. Queue them up, prioritize them and then go find the help your organization needs to solve them.

Just because you don't know what to do about it doesn't make it less of a problem.

January 24, 05:06 AM
"It's completely up to you"

... and that's the problem.

I was picking out the mat for a framed photo and there were a thousand colors to choose from. The framer uttered the scary invocation, putting the choice back to me.

So many things are now completely up to us, more than ever before. Where and how and when we work and invest and interact and instruct and learn...

If you think you have no choice but to do what you do now, you've already made a serious error.

It seems to me that passing the buck on this merely because it's easier than choosing is precisely the wrong strategy. It enables an abdication of power that will be very hard to reverse. It's up to you, and that's part of the power that you've got.

Back to the framer: I picked, because that's my job.

January 23, 05:32 AM
The pricing formula (S&S)

Years ago, my bosses and I needed to finalize the pricing for a new line of software I was launching. In the room we had MBAs from Harvard (2), Stanford, Tuck and, I think, Wharton. We had three prices in mind, and the five of us couldn't agree. So we did the only scientific thing: we flipped a coin (two out of three, just to be sure).

Pricing your product is actually simple, as long as you consider it from the buyer's point of view. How much it costs you to make something is irrelevant. They don't care (of course, you can't price something at a loss and hope to stay in business for long). The two keys to the analysis:

Substitutes: Every purchase is a choice, and that means the buyer can choose to do nothing or buy something else instead. If there are easy and obvious substitutes to what you sell, that has to be built into your pricing. If you make something rare and unique, you still might not be able to charge a lot--because people can always choose to buy nothing. A 42 carat diamond, for example, might be hard to replace, but it's not worth $100 million unless someone actually chooses to buy it.

Part of the work of design and marketing is to help people understand that there are no good substitutes for what you have to offer, meaning, of course, that you can happily charge more.

Story: The other half of the pricing formula is the story the price itself tells. A Prius at $40,000 or a Prius at $10,000 is the same car, but the price becomes a dominant part of the story. You can tell a story of value/cheapness/affordability, or a story of luxury. If you price your product or service near the median, you're telling no story at all with the price, giving you the chance to tell a story about some other element of what you sell.

If you're not happy with your pricing options, focusing on your costs might not be the right path. Instead, focus on how the design or delivery change the availability of substitutes, and how the price becomes part of the story of your product.

January 22, 05:04 AM
Trading favors

Now that everyone has a media platform, look for even more of the mutual back scratching that comes from tracking favors.

The most corrosive sort of this network amplification goes like this: I do something for you unasked. Then I do something again. Perhaps I even tout you or your work a third time. Then I come to you, point out how generous I've been and ask for you to do something for me. Or I network my way to one person and then use that platform to reach three more, and repeat until I've worked the entire digital room.

Humans have a natural openness to reciprocity. It's a time-honored survival technique, one that allowed us to live together in villages for millenia. Someone who doesn't reciprocate is less likely to be protected by his peers, right? Not only have we been taught reciprocation since birth, but it feels right. It's baked in.

The problem occurs when the trading of favors become mercenary, when alert individuals start manipulating the system for personal gain. Suddenly, every favor is suspect, measured and not at all generous. Suddenly all the likes and links and blurbs become nothing but currency, not the honest appraisals of people we can trust. It means that bystanders have trouble telling the difference between honest approval and the mere mutual shilling of traded favors.

Yes, you can trade your way up, but at some point, the very people who were influenced by all your trades start to realize that you can't be trusted.

Mutual funds deserve to be rigorously measured and relentlessly traded. Favors and taste and allegiances, though, not so much. Like is too important to be something you do because you have to.

January 21, 07:10 PM
Worth a million words

We all know how much a picture is worth. What about a good short video? (hit the play button and watch for thirty seconds--here is the large version). And here's one about obesity.

January 21, 05:28 AM
Insatiable

Long-lasting systems can't survive if they remain insatiable.

An insatiable thirst for food, power, energy, reassurance, clicks, funding or other raw material will eventually lead to failure. That's because there's never enough to satisfy someone or something that's insatiable. The organization amps up because its need is unmet. It gets out of balance, changing what had previously worked to get more of what it craves. Sooner or later, a crash.

More fame! More money! More investment! Push too hard and you lose what you came with and don't get what you came for.

An insatiable appetite is a symptom: There's a hole in the bucket. Something's leaking out. When a system (or a person) continues to demand more and more but doesn't produce in response, that's because the resources aren't being used properly, something is leaking.

If your organization demands ever more attention or effort or cash to produce the same output, it makes more sense to focus on the leak than it does to work ever harder to feed the beast.

Recomiendo: Seth's Blog
+

Posts

February 09, 05:31 PM
Amazon Commercial Takes Shots At iPad’s Price

Amazon has released a new commercial for their Kindle line of e-readers and tablets. The first part of the commercial focuses on Amazon’s standard response in the Kindle vs. iPad debate: the Kindle is easier to read in the sun.

Then the focus shifts to the price. When the dorky iPad owner points out to the hot, bikini-clad Kindle owner that he can watch movies, she points out that her kids can do the same on their Kindle Fires, and that her Kindle and their Kindle Fires together cost less than his iPad.

Whatever your feelings about the iPad, the Kindle Fire, Amazon has taken pretty much the only option open to them from a marketing standpoint. A recent survey showed that the iPad ranked much higher than the Kindle Fire in terms of customer satisfaction. In fact, the feature Kindle Fire owners said they were most satisfied with about their device was its price tag.

What do you think of the commercial? Check it out below and let us know in the comments.

February 09, 05:29 PM
Bing Retains #2 Rank Among Search Engines In January

comScore’s ranking of search engines for the month of January were released today and Microsoft’s Bing has held onto the title of second most-used search engine for the second month in a row.

In December, Microsoft’s Bing unseated Yahoo! to become the #2 rank among search engines and in January Bing cemented that second rank a little further. The percentage of shares among all search engines remained largely unchanged in January from December, which if you’re Microsoft is probably good news. Consistency like that demonstrates that Bing’s bump to the second most-used search engine in December wasn’t just a fluke. Also, any argument about how the holidays inflated Microsoft’s market share in December’s would appear to be largely unfounded.

Given Yahoo’s recent top-level shake-ups, it’ll be curious to see if the percentage shares of the search market change much for the company in February.

Lastly, yes, Google remained Boss Hogg of the trough search engines.

February 09, 05:15 PM
Twitter SMS: Satellite Support Added

Twitter announced today that it has partnered with Iridium and Thuraya, the two largest satellite operators, so that subscribers of these services have access to Twitter SMS.

“Now, even if phone lines and the Internet are inaccessible — for example, in a war zone or after a natural disaster — people will be able to share news and stay informed via Twitter,” the company says on its blog.

“We work with as many carriers as we can to support SMS around the world,” Twitter says. “If your carrier does not currently support Twitter SMS, you can still Tweet. Just use one of our long codes.”

Those can be found here.

As the company points out, Twitter did begin as an SMS service. Over the years, Twitter has become even more SMS-friendly, as evidenced by today’s update.

For example, in 2010, Twitter started letting users in the U.S. follow Twitter accounts via SMS without actually signing up for Twitter.

February 09, 05:08 PM
NOAA Switches From BlackBerry To iPhone, iPad

Late last week we brought you news that energy giant Halliburton was dropping its support for the BlackBerry platform in favor of Apple’s iPhone and iPad. Now it seems that the beleaguered RIM is about to suffer another blow. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is going to be dropping support for BlackBerry as well.

According to an internal NOAA memo obtained by The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple, BlackBerry will officially be struck from the rolls of NOAA’s supported mobile devices on May 12 of this year. Joseph Klimavicz, NOAA’s Chief Information Officer said that new employees will begin receiving the iPhone 4 and the iPad 2, each running iOS 5 or higher. There is no word on whether employees will be allowed to supply their own devices.

This is another blow to RIM, which has been practically hemorrhaging market share to Android and iOS over the past several years. While BlackBerry once owned the mobile enterprise market, they have never managed to properly respond to the threat posed by the extremely popular iOS and Android devices.

February 09, 04:47 PM
YouTube Announces Course Of The Force

YouTube has announced some new original programming that may rival the Olympics.

Chris Hardwick, actor and comedian, has taken to the YouTube blog to announce Course of the Force. Nerdist Industries is partnering with Lucasfilm and Machinima to host the event which will see a five-day Olympic-torch-style lightsaber relay run that will begin on Santa Monica pier on July 7 and end in San Diego on July 11 – just in time for the San Diego Comic Con.

About 500 people are going to line up along the California coastline as runners pass off a lightsaber one person at a time. Segments can be purchased in quarter-mile increments and all proceeds will go to the Make-A-Wish Foundation.

Hardwick details the inspiration behind the event:

Here’s some backstory you didn’t ask for! In 2012, I will be attending my 9th San Diego Comic-Con. While I always look forward to that extended weekend of Nerdvana, I sometimes feel a bit like the commercial shininess of it slightly eclipses its intended spirit. To me, going to Cons as a kid was all about having a safe haven—a place where like-minded folks could come together to celebrate nerdly passions and accept each other for the oddball (by the larger and more boring sector of society’s standards) stuff we were all into. Ultimately, it should be the most fun thing of the year. For poop sake, most of you save up your whole year of cash and vacation time to go to SDCC sowhy not run at it screaming?? This is a rare opportunity to dress like a Sith (or ANYTHING of your choosing, Star Wars-y or not) and run down the beach while power chanting with a glowing sword made of light in your hand. On ANY OTHER DAY that would easily get you arrested or at the very least, detained. Don’t feel like running but want to support someone who is? FINE! Join us for parties, live music and comedy each night along the way.

For those interested in taking part in Course of the Force, you can claim a running spot at the official Web site. Those who buy a part on the course will receive a limited edition lightsaber and a swag bag that would apparently “make a scavenging Jawa jealous.”

The entire relay is going to be streamed on the Nerdist channel for those who can’t make it out.

It’s a good cause that should provide plenty of awesome content for Star Wars and general nerdy fans everywhere.

February 09, 04:41 PM
Apple Is Worth More Than Google And Microsoft COMBINED

All those rumors swirling around the possibility of an iPad 3 release next month seem to be doing good things for Apple’s stock market activity because the company’s shares reached yet another all-time high this afternoon. Earlier today, shares of Apple peaked at $496.75 and as of writing this continue to hover around the $493 mark.

While it’s hardly surprising anymore to hear about how much money Apple has (hint: it’s more than the GDP of most countries), one fact puts it into perspective: Apple’s worth more than Google and Microsoft combined.

I am an ignoramus when it comes to the stock market, but I can at least add this much.

Apple’s market capitalization: $459.66 billion.
Google’s market capitalization: $199.03 billion.
Microsoft’s market capitalization: $256.10 billion.

$199.03B + $256.10B

Granted, Apple is “only” worth $4.53 billion more than the combined financial worth of Google and Microsoft, but that’s still enough money for them to get into the interplanetary real estate market. But let’s arbitrarily compare Apple’s value to lots of other things that are worth a lot of money:

Budget of NASA: $17.8 million
GDP of Romania: $161.62 billion
GDP of South Africa: $275.5 billion
Total military budget of U.S.: $683.7 billion

Actually, that’s all of the expensive stuff I can think of. At any rate, you get the picture. Apple is ridiculously wealthy.

February 09, 04:35 PM
Viral Videos: (R) Gay Marriage Speech, Course of the Force, & Moon Nazis

A viral video is one that becomes popular through the process of Internet sharing, via social media, sharing sites, or good ‘ole email. Everyday we highlight some of the best that are currently viral and some that are trending that way.

Today’s videos feature a thin ice skating, a weatherman for the kids, and a Twisted f*****g Metal ad.

No matter your stance on the debate, you have to hand it to Rep. Maureen Walsh (R). Not only did she go against the tide of her party affiliation, but she delivered the most personal, heartfelt, and powerful speech I’ve seen from a politician concerning the topic of gay marriage. With a small bit of humor as well.

When you think of Star Wars nerds, the last thing you relate them to is an Olympic tradition. However, they’re stealing one to conduct a cool charitable event. May the force be with you…as you pass out from running 10 feet (hat tip to Triumph the Insult Comic Dog for the joke). If you want more details about the event, Zach Walton has a nice write-up

Sarah Palin vs. Moon Nazis, these are the kind of ideas we need more of Hollywood.

Hey there bud, you’re skating on…thin ice. (I’ll be here all evening, folks)

One of those videos where you hate the guy in it for the first 20 seconds, then he starts to grow on you, then you laugh at his Snoop Dogg needs an umbrella for the drizzle joke at the end.

So much going wrong in this video. First, the owner didn’t have the dog vaccinated for rabies and then you have a reporter getting directly in the face of a dog she doesn’t know. However, I love the look of reporters when they cut away from a segment that goes awkwardly wrong.

She prefers the plastic worms used as lures on fishing poles to actual gummie worms. At least there’s no sugar rush.

One of the greatest sounds you’ll ever hear in nature, sounds almost unnatural.

This is Twisted Metal…you f***er (Warning: NSFW – language)

February 09, 04:34 PM
Chocolate For Breakfast Slims Waistline

Tel Aviv University researchers have released research results that suggest eating some sweets after breakfast may help you lose weight over the long term. The study involved about 200 non-diabetic patients which were all considered obese by clinical definition. Each was randomly assigned to a group who either consumed a 300 calorie breakfast or a 600 calorie breakfast which always included cookies, cake, or some chocolate.

Essentially, both groups lost an average of 33 pounds in the first 16 weeks. The difference came in the second 16 weeks. By the end of the 32 weeks, those who skipped the dessert regained an average of 22 pounds. Those who were in the dessert-eating group continued weight loss and shed an average 15 pounds more. In the end, the dessert group lost an average of 40 more pounds more than the others.

The layman’s explanation is simple. The people who abstained from sweets experienced more cravings throughout the day and gave into the cravings more often. Breakfast is the most important meal of the day, but it is also when our appetite is smallest. So if you get your metabolism jump started early and eat that snack first, you have all day to burn it and you won’t be distracted by your cravings.

Keeping extra weight off long term is one of the biggest challenges. This finding could be a key component to helping people eat a steady balanced diet. If you combine this type of strategy with some moderate exercise, weight loss doesn’t have to be a mystery equation. Eat light at night and have sweets early in the day.

Let’s see what the reaction is on Twitter:

It sounds like people are happy with the idea so far. Speaking of Twitter, I just read an article where a man had the idea to use Twitter to track his diet progress. The main gist is that, at first he was inspired by his idea, but he quickly became embarrassed by his late-night fatty food feasts and long periods of inactivity on Twitter do to his shameful diet.

As his tweets will reveal, he persisted and did lose weight. One thing that struck me about his story is how others began to tweet their diets to him. They would share tales of high calorie meals and compare weight loss secrets.

Here’s a brief chronology of his work with the Twitter diet:

February 09, 04:33 PM
LinkedIn Earnings Solid, Q4 Revenue Up 105%

LinkedIn just announced its fourth quarter and 2011 Fiscal Year financial results, and they are solid.

The company saw a 105% increase in revenue for the fourth quarter compared to the same period last year. Q4 revenue was $167.7 million, up from last year’s $81.7 million.

For the entire year 2011, revenue increased 115% to $522.2 million (from $243.1 million).

“Q4 once again exceeded our expectations for member engagement and business growth. It was a fitting end to a memorable year in which we reinforced our position as the pre-eminent professional network on the web,” said CEO Jeff Weiner. “We believe continued focus on our members and technology infrastructure positions us well for accelerated product innovation in 2012.”

The company went public last year.

Here’s the release in its entirety:

Mountain View, Calif. — February 9, 2012 – LinkedIn Corporation (NYSE: LNKD), the world’s largest professional network on the Internet with more than 150 million members, today reported its financial results for the fourth quarter and fiscal year ended December 31, 2011:

  • Revenue for the fourth quarter was $167.7 million, an increase of 105% compared to $81.7 million for the fourth quarter of 2010
  • Net income for the fourth quarter was $6.9 million, compared to net income of $5.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2010; Non-GAAP net income for the fourth quarter was $13.3 million, compared to $5.2 million for the fourth quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP measures exclude tax-affected stock-based compensation expense and tax-affected amortization of acquired intangible assets
  • Adjusted EBITDA for the fourth quarter was $34.4 million, or 21% of revenue, compared to $16.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2010, or 20% of revenue
  • GAAP EPS for the fourth quarter was $0.06; Non-GAAP EPS for the fourth quarter was $0.12
  • For the full year 2011, revenue increased 115% to $522.2 million from $243.1 million.  GAAP EPS increased to $0.11 from $0.07 and Non-GAAP EPS increased to $0.35 from $0.24.  Adjusted EBITDA increased to $98.7 million from $48.0 million

“Q4 once again exceeded our expectations for member engagement and business growth.  It was a fitting end to a memorable year in which we reinforced our position as the pre-eminent professional network on the web,” said Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn. “We believe continued focus on our members and technology infrastructure positions us well for accelerated product innovation in 2012.”

Fourth Quarter Financial Details and Operating Summary
LinkedIn reported revenue of $167.7 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2011, an increase of 105% compared to the fourth quarter of 2010, and the 6th straight quarter of greater than 100% year-over-year growth.

  • Hiring Solutions: Revenue from Hiring Solutions products totaled $84.9 million, an increase of 136% compared to the fourth quarter of 2010. Hiring Solutions revenue represented 50% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to 44% in the fourth quarter of 2010.
  • Marketing Solutions: Revenue from Marketing Solutions products totaled $49.5 million, an increase of 77% compared to the fourth quarter of 2010. Marketing Solutions revenue represented 30% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to 34% in the fourth quarter of 2010.
  • Premium Subscriptions: Revenue from Premium Subscriptions products totaled $33.3 million, an increase of 87% compared to the fourth quarter of 2010. Premium Subscriptions represented 20% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to 22% in the fourth quarter of 2010.

Revenue from the U.S. totaled $112.0 million, and represented 67% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011. Revenue from international markets totaled $55.8 million, and represented 33% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Revenue from the field sales channel totaled $95.8 million, and represented 57% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011. Revenue from the online, direct sales channel totaled $71.9 million, and represented 43% of total revenue in the fourth quarter of 2011.

GAAP net income for the fourth quarter was $6.9 million, compared to net income of $5.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP net income for the fourth quarter was $13.3 million, compared to $5.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2010.

Adjusted EBITDA was $34.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, or 21% of revenue, compared to $16.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2010, or 20% of revenue.

GAAP EPS was $0.06 based on 108.6 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding compared to $0.03 for the fourth quarter of 2010 based on 49.4 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding; Non-GAAP EPS was $0.12 based on 108.6 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding compared to $0.05 for the fourth quarter of 2010 based on 95.0 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding.

“LinkedIn grew over 100% for the sixth consecutive quarter and posted all-time high adjusted EBITDA,” said Steve Sordello, CFO of LinkedIn.  “Our fourth quarter results underscore the company’s success in 2011, which saw revenue and adjusted EBITDA more than double.  In 2012, we will continue to invest in our product, engineering, and sales infrastructure to capitalize on our long-term opportunity.”

For additional information, please see the “Selected Company Metrics and Financials” page, updated through the end of the fourth quarter of 2011, on LinkedIn’s Investor Relations site.

Fourth Quarter Highlights and Strategic Announcements

  • LinkedIn completed the latest phase of the re-architecture of its software development and deployment process, known internally as InVersion, which is the foundation for accelerated product innovation in 2012.
  • LinkedIn continued its international expansion and localization with the addition of three new offices (Tokyo, Japan; Bangalore, India; and Sao Paulo, Brazil), and five new languages (Japanese, Swedish, Indonesian, Malay, and Korean.) 
  • At its Talent Connect conference in October, LinkedIn announced Talent Pipeline, a new solution that allows recruiters and hiring managers to manage, track, and stay in touch with active and passive candidates, regardless of source. Talent Pipeline is currently in pilot testing phase with select Hiring Solutions customers.
  • LinkedIn unveiled two new offerings for Marketing Solutions customers at Connect:11 in October. Company Status Updates and the Certified Developer Program give brands more powerful ways to connect and engage with LinkedIn members. 

Business Outlook
As of today, LinkedIn is providing guidance for the first quarter of 2012 and for the full year 2012 on revenue, adjusted EBITDA, depreciation and amortization, and stock-based compensation. 

  • Q1 FY12 Guidance: Revenue for the first quarter of 2012 is projected to be in the range of $170 million to $175 million. For the first quarter of 2012, the company expects to report adjusted EBITDA of $25 million to $27 million. The company expects depreciation and amortization in the range of $15 million to $17 million, and stock-based compensation in the range of $13 million to $14 million.
  • Full Year FY12 Guidance: Revenue for the full year of 2012 is projected to be in the range of $840 million to $860 million. For the full year of 2012, the company expects to report adjusted EBITDA of $155 million to $165 million. The company expects depreciation and amortization in the range of $70 million to $80 million, and stock-based compensation in the range of $65 million to $75 million.

Quarterly Conference Call
LinkedIn plans to host a webcast/conference call to discuss its fourth quarter 2011 financial results and business outlook today at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time. Jeff Weiner and Steve Sordello will host the webcast, which can be viewed on the investor relations section of the LinkedIn website at http://investors.linkedin.com/. This call will contain forward-looking statements and other material information regarding the company’s financial and operating results. Following completion of the call, a recorded replay of the webcast will be available on the website. For those without access to the Internet, a replay of the call will be available beginning at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time on February 9, 2012 through February 16, 2012 at 9:00 p.m. Pacific Time. To listen to the telephone replay, call (855) 859-2056, access code 45016554.

Upcoming Events
Management will participate in upcoming financial Q&A discussions at investment industry events on February 14th, February 27th, and March 13th.  LinkedIn will furnish a link to these events on its investor relations website, http://investors.linkedin.com/for both the live and archived webcasts.

About LinkedIn 
Founded in 2003, LinkedIn connects the world’s professionals to make them more productive and successful. With more than 150 million members worldwide, including executives from every Fortune 500 company, LinkedIn is the world’s largest professional network on the Internet. The company has a diversified business model with revenue coming from member subscriptions, marketing solutions and hiring solutions. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, LinkedIn has offices across the globe.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures
To supplement its consolidated financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, the company uses the following non-GAAP financial measures: adjusted EBITDA, non-GAAP net income, and non-GAAP EPS (collectively the “non-GAAP financial measures”). The presentation of this financial information is not intended to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for, or superior to, the financial information prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP. The company uses these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision making and as a means to evaluate period-to-period comparisons. The company believes that they provide useful information about operating results, enhance the overall understanding of past financial performance and future prospects, and allow for greater transparency with respect to key metrics used by management in its financial and operational decision making. 

The company excludes the following items from one or more of its non-GAAP measures:

Stock-based compensation. The company excludes stock-based compensation because it is non-cash in nature and because the company believes that the non-GAAP financial measures excluding this item provide meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance and liquidity. The company further believes this measure is useful to investors in that it allows for greater transparency to certain line items in its financial statements and facilitates comparisons to competitors’ operating results.

Amortization of acquired intangible assets. The company excludes amortization of acquired intangible assets because it is non-cash in nature and because the company believes that the non-GAAP financial measures excluding this item provide meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance and liquidity. In addition, excluding this item from various non-GAAP measures facilitates internal comparisons to historical operating results and comparisons to competitors’ operating results. 

Income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustments. Excluding the income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustments from the provision for income taxes assists investors in understanding the tax provision related to those adjustments and the effective tax rate related to ongoing operations.

Assumed preferred stock conversion. As a result of the company’s initial public offering, all outstanding shares of preferred stock were automatically converted into shares of Class B common stock. Consequently, non-GAAP diluted net income per share has been calculated assuming the conversion of all outstanding shares of preferred stock into shares of Class B common stock. 

For more information on the non-GAAP financial measures, please see the “Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Financial Measures” table in this press release.  This accompanying table has more details on the GAAP financial measures that are most directly comparable to non-GAAP financial measures and the related reconciliations between these financial measures. Additionally, the company has not reconciled adjusted EBITDA guidance to net income guidance because it does not provide guidance for other income (expense) and provision for income taxes, which are reconciling items between net income (loss) and adjusted EBITDA. As items that impact net income (loss) are out of the company’s control and/or cannot be reasonably predicted, the company is unable to provide such guidance. Accordingly, a reconciliation to net income (loss) is not available without unreasonable effort.

Safe Harbor Statement 
“Safe Harbor” statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: This press release contains forward-looking statements about our products, including plans for 2012 and our Talent Pipeline product, our planned investments in key strategic areas, and our expected financial metrics such as revenue, adjusted EBITDA, depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation for the first quarter of 2012 and the full fiscal year 2012. The achievement or success of the matters covered by such forward-looking statements involves risks, uncertainties and assumptions.  If any such risks or uncertainties materialize or if any of the assumptions prove incorrect, the company’s results could differ materially from the results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements the company makes.

The risks and uncertainties referred to above include – but are not limited to – risks associated with: the company’s short operating history in a new and unproven market; engagement of its members; the price volatility of our Class A common stock, including in connection with the release of any restrictions on trading in the company’s stock; general economic conditions; expectations regarding the return on our strategic investments; execution of our plans and strategies; expectations regarding the company’s ability to timely and effectively scale and adapt existing technology and network infrastructure to ensure that its website is accessible at all times with short or no perceptible load times; security measures and the risk that the company’s website may be subject to attacks that degrade or deny the ability of members to access the company’s solutions; members and customers curtailing or ceasing to use the company’s solutions; the company’s core value of putting members first, which may conflict with the short-term interests of the business; privacy issues; increasing competition in the market for online professional networks; and the dual class structure of the company’s common stock.

Further information on these and other factors that could affect the company’s financial results is included in filings it makes with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, including the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the company’s Form 10-Q that was filed for the quarter ended September 30, 2011, and additional information will also be set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.  These documents are available on the SEC Filings section of the Investor Information section of the company’s website at http://investors.linkedin.com/. All information provided in this release and in the attachments is as of February 9, 2012, and LinkedIn undertakes no duty to update this information.

February 09, 04:09 PM
Lovestagram Lets Instagram Make Valentine Cards

Do you have a special somebody in your life? Do you want to make their Valentine’s Day special? Use Lovestagram, a new service created by Kaitlyn Trigger, girlfriend of Mike Krieger, co-founder of Instagram.

Lovestagram is being billed as Trigger’s Valentine’s Day gift to Krieger. It allows Instagram users to create custom Valentines Day cards from their photos on Instagram.

It’s a sweet gift and potentially great new service for those who want to make something a little special for their significant others this Valentine’s Day.

Trigger built Lovestagram from scratch after learning Python, Django, Jinja, HTML, CSS, jQuery and Photoshop. It’s an impressive feat and makes the idea behind Lovestagram all the more sweet.

The only downside of course is that it requires an Instagram account to use and the service is only on the iPhone. Us Android users are just left out of the romance, but hey, at least we go straight for the lovemaking instead of wasting time on Valentine’s Day cards.

Here’s an example:

Recomiendo: WebProNews

Chief Finance & Technology Flocker @ Flock Advertising (www.wannaflock.com)


IT expert, gadget lover, workoholic, looking for new challenges


Currently focused on: Search Engine Optimization (SEO), Social Media, Usability and Conversion, Digital Marketing, Tax laws and insights (Mexico).
Before, focused on: IP PBX (Asterisk), large IP video deployments for Telcos, PHP/MySQL programming, wireless networks (microwaves).
Next: Advanced finance, Investments, Stock market.


What I'm selling on Mercado Libre (like Ebay): My Shop


Visit:
WannaFlock      Tecnosinergia

To contact me: maz (at/arroba) maz.com.mx

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz