Disqus - Friends of KeenerGuy

Re: Down 1% Already

tim — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 08:22:59 -0000

Fred,
I agree that Covestor is an intriguing service, particularly due to the "wisdom of crowds" model it - and its peers like CAPS at fool.com - may engender. Don't you worry, though, that the day-to-day score-keeping that's part of its model contributes to the same speculative behaviors that got everyone in so much trouble in 2000? And 1989? And 1987? And... well, you get the point. Wouldn't it provide greater value if it demonstrated the long-term performance of quality companies (i.e., the ones worth investing in), rather than the "quick hit" bumps of folks chasing hot stocks? Being "down 1% already," after two whole days, strikes me as that same short-term mentality that caused all the troubles before. I'd like to see people's trades and performance embargoed for a period (a quarter would be great, but even 21 days would be a start). Or am I living in fantasy land?

Re: How Yahoo! Can Get Out Of The Microsoft Bear Hug

tim — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 10:09:28 -0000

Fred,
Great post, as ever. I do take issue with one point you make, though. "It's possible that social search will be that thing. But Google is investing heavily in social search and there's a good chance that they'll get there on their own." Eh. Maybe. Maybe not. One of Microsoft's biggest issues is that they don't "get" the Internet, largely because they've got so much invested in desktop technologies (Windows/Office). They can't seem to get out of their own way when doing so means killing their Win/Office cash cow. It's a classic innovator's dilemma. And one that I'm not convinced Google is immune to. They might prove me wrong, but it's early days. That's not to suggest that MS or Yahoo will solve the problem. Yahoo arguably has made many better acquisitions in that space in recent years, largely because they had so little to lose. The problem I've seen with Yahoo, Microsoft and Google with these acquisitions is how little they've affected the way the company operates. Yahoo could do so much more with del.icio.us, MyBlogLog, etc. Maybe Google will avoid this trap. But a more likely scenario is that some new player makes Yahoo, Microsoft (joined or separate) AND Google look like dinosaurs.

Re: Twitter Does It Again

tim — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 16:54:45 -0000

Scott,
Thanks so much for the shout out - for both me and for LuxRes.

@warrenss We'll be posting more from @luxres as we go into this week. We're in the process of relaunching the brand this summer, so expect to hear from us. I'm very happy we were able to help Scott out while we're working on the relaunch.

@alan I appreciate you keeping us in mind. Hope we can help you out down the road, too.

Re: Using Powerpoint to Create Web Graphics in a Flash

tim — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:35:00 -0000

Too true. I use Powerpoint for creating graphics and Excel for creating charts all the time. Any port in a storm and, as you said John, whatever tool gets the job done is the right one.

Re: How and Why I Use Evernote

tim — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:43:25 -0000

Great post, John. I live in Evernote, too, though I really like the idea of using monthly tickler files within Evernote. Another idea that I like is using Markdown syntax within my notes. While Evernote offers rich formatting, I can easily copy and paste notes from within Evernote to my blog editor or text editor and convert to HTML, rich text or PDF's while still maintaining readability within the individual notes.

Re: http://www.steverubel.me/post/6070334427

tim — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 07:26:12 -0000

Steve,I get your point. I've got a small tumblog that I've been playing with for a few weeks. And, you're right. It's great as a platform, both for discovery and interaction.

But, here's the thing. I don't follow you because of your platform. I follow you because you highlight great ideas. And, by your scorched earth activity, your old content is now lost. At least to me. You mentioned part of your appreciation for Tumblr is due to Google. Unfortunately, there are dozens of search terms on Google you once ranked for that you'll lose over time (unless, of course, you're planning to import the content to your tumblog).

So, again, I get what you're trying to accomplish. I'm just not convinced you couldn't have done that without scorching the earth.

Re: Writing a Book – Finding Time

tim — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:25:17 -0000

This is awesome advice, Chris.

While I use Evernote all the time, I prefer text editors to Evernote for the actual writing (TextMate on the Mac and PlainText on iPad). PlainText saves to a Dropbox folder, so I can move between devices easily just like Evernote. I wrote a couple of sections yesterday--filling in the outline as you suggest--on a short flight on my iPad, then picked up and wrote a little more in my hotel. I format while writing using John Gruber's Markdown language, which TextMate can convert to RTF, PDF, HTML or (Heaven forbid) LaTex when I'm ready to publish.

However, just as you mentioned, working this way lets me write whenever I've got a couple of minutes free.

Re: Ron Paul: “Read The Law, by Bastiat”

tim — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:57:54 -0000

Great point, Damien. The Constitution represents the choices made by the Founders (and subsequent generations via amendments) of where our shared interests lie. And we can choose to amend the Constitution to reflect changes in our common interests over time.

At the same time, regarding the Declaration of Independence, I don't see where appropriate levels of taxation interfere with "life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness." Does paying taxes deprive you of your life? Clearly not. Do taxes deprive you of your liberty? No. As Damien notes, your taxes are tied to your income. You are free to make as much as you want. And appropriate levels of taxation don't deprive you of the pursuit of happiness. Much as Tim notes above, you can "...SEEK education or SEEK healthcare." For many, education or healthcare may indeed represent paths to the happiness they pursue. The Declaration of Independence declares--and the Constitution establishes to protect--a right to the pursuit of happiness. But neither guarantee happiness itself.

In other words, just because you don't care for a particular outcome doesn't mean it infringes your liberty.

Re: ReadWriteWeb Acquired by SAY Media

tim — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:49:33 -0000

Congratulations, Richard and team! Very well deserved!

Re: ReadWriteWeb Acquired by SAY Media

tim — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:50:38 -0000

Congratulations, Richard and team! Good for you!

Re: The Single Chart That Proves Tim Cook Is Right About the Post-PC World - Alexis Madrigal - Technology - The Atlantic

tim — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:28:32 -0000

In a world of cloud computing and constant sync between the device and the cloud, why do you need physical media slots? I'm not saying they're a bad thing. But why are they necessary in the mid to long term

Re: metsgrrl.com | BLAME BELTRAN, OR: A TALE OF THE JOHAN SANTANA NO-HITTER.

tim — Sat, 02 Jun 2012 16:56:27 -0000

Awesome story, Ms. Grrl. I was at my 25th reunion last night and had no idea what was going on. I have waited my whole life for this and just seeing the highlights later was amazing. Your story helps fill in many of the gaps for me. I'm very jealous and simultaneously thrilled for you. Thanks for the write-up.

Re: Highlights from HEDNA

tim — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 09:40:33 -0000

Evelyne,

Thanks for the great recap and the kind words. Great seeing you at HEDNA and keep up the wonderful work you're doing here.

Re: The Best Books in the World on Writing

tim — Fri, 24 May 2013 10:33:46 -0000

Awesome list, John! I especially love the Stephen King, Robert McKee and Ann Lamont books.

Re: 20 Online Business Experts to Follow on Twitter

tim — Mon, 14 Sep 2015 18:52:01 -0000

Thanks for the kind words!

Re: Google Files Suit Against SEO Firm Accused Of Robocalling, Launches Complaint Center For Users

tim — Wed, 16 Sep 2015 15:54:05 -0000

Long, long overdue.

Re: Be careful what you wish for: Attribute-based selling isn't all it's cracked up to be

tim — Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:36:45 -0000

Oh, George…GEORGE! Not only did I read your article, I linked to it in the "Guest behavior" section of my article. And there are a couple things going on here that we need to discuss.

From your article, "…Each time he adds an attribute to the cart, the ABS engine prices that attribute separately and the consumer can see how each attribute affects the total price of the room." (Emphasis added). That's precisely my concern. We're literally taking what today are opaquely priced attributes and making those prices transparent to the guest. If history is any indication, that's going to lead to more shopping around, not less. That's not illogical; that's experience. If the rate parity battles of the past decade taught us anything, it's that guests continuing to shop around is bad for hotels (see last-minute cancels/rebooks, for one example, assuming they don't choose a different –– or cheaper –– hotel altogether).

Now, if we expose these attributes and wait to show pricing until the final step, that's a different experience than what most describe. But… first, that's a terrible experience. And second, consumers could still "pogo stick" back and forth, adding and subtracting attributes to see how they effect the total price. More importantly, whether or not guests will exhibit that behavior, AI-powered agents _will_ absolutely do this. Google is already guaranteeing flight fares based on what guests should expect to pay thanks to the data they've collected from travel sites (https://www.cntraveler.com/story/google-flights-is-guaranteeing-its-airfares-and-give-you-a-refund-if-its-wrong). Are you saying that won't happen here?

Now, I do agree with your point (and have all along) that "… there are opportunities to optimize the room assignments and improve conversion." Those opportunities also emerge with better room differentiation and upselling too. And, I completely agree there are enormous opportunities to more effectively personalize the experience of guests to give customers exactly what they want. That's a huge – and often untapped – opportunity for hotels that exists right now. Some of what you're describing can be accomplished right with better implementation of existing CRM capabilities (see my point about making it easier for frequent guests to rebook the room/attributes they enjoyed previously).

Finally, I'm not trying to shoot the model before we try it. Far from. What I am saying is that some of the arguments in its favor apply equally to other models — CRM, personalization, improved pricing algorithms, upselling, etc. — that likely have as much or better chance of driving higher conversion, customer satisfaction, and revenues… and that hotels would be well served to explore those options instead of hoping that this time ("THIS TIME!") this is the one, true technology that will make revenues rain from the sky. (And, to be fair, I don't think you're saying that; I appreciate the comment and the thoughtful discussion. The more we discuss the pros and cons openly, the better a result for all hoteliers. Keep pushing for better options and we all win.)

Re: Be careful what you wish for: Attribute-based selling isn't all it's cracked up to be

tim — Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:49:39 -0000

Hi Julie. Thanks for the comment. On my point about "...the data suggests" how guests might – or might not – use ABS, I'm extrapolating from proprietary data around the current use of filtering/faceted search. Current usage in most cases that I'm aware (and I've talked with others who validate this in their businesses) tends to be low. There may be outliers, but those tend to the exception, not the rule.

As for how much effort guests expend when shopping for travel, public research abounds. For instance, this study from Google and Phocuswright found "Fifty-five percent of travelers we surveyed agree that they have to check too many sources of travel information before making a decision. And those decisions, once a traveler makes them, are stressful. Travelers are most concerned about finding the best price for their vacations—more so than with any other discretionary purchase that we asked about (such as electronics, home improvement, finances)" [Source: https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/age-of-assistance-travel-marketing/]. Expedia also has research (available for download here: https://info.advertising.expedia.com/travel-consumers-path-to-purchase-research-for-marketers) that shows the number of sites guests use before booking travel. Phocuswright, of course, offers plenty of research on the topic as well including this report.

Thanks for the question and hope this helps!

Re: Be careful what you wish for: Attribute-based selling isn't all it's cracked up to be

tim — Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:01:18 -0000

Hi Simone. Thanks for your comment and your patience on my reply. What's interesting about this "debate" (though, actually, I think it's a very healthy discussion) is that there are multiple interpretations of what ABS is. The version I believe you're touting, where intelligent agents acting on behalf of guests to find the "best" options for their stay, is very much different than, for instance, what @George Roukas is talking about, where guests choose a series of attributes and then it's dynamically priced. Of course, the latter could (and likely will) lead to the former, but they're definitely different visions of the experience in the immediate term.

In either case, I'm not convinced those represent a net positive for the industry.

Why this matters is that, once we release the genie from the bottle and make it possible for individuals – whether human, rules-based software, or intelligent agents – to know the price of specific attributes, we can't easily go back. We'll have exposed the prices of individual attributes to the guest. And, while some folks will undoubtedly pay more for those attributes, many will not.

Instead, aren't we equally well-served by improving current CRM and personalization capabilities to merchandise targeted offers to guests based on their past activity online and on-property without exposing the individual components?

Separately, do we really think that once we've exposed these individual attribute prices to the world that intermediaries won't expect access to the same inventory of attributes? Won't hotels who depend on OTAs for a meaningful share of business want to provide that same information for fear of losing placement or revenues?

In any case, it seems to me that the companies most likely to provide these intelligent agents are the same folks we currently worry about. Do we really want OTAs, Google, or Amazon acting like Hopper to predict the best price and timing for every hotel stay? I can easily envision a future where a hotel's AI-based agent and a user's AI-based intelligent agent fight to determine the "best" price from their individual perspectives, as if we placed a humidifier and de-humidifier in the same room. But that's a probable outcome once we've exposed that data to the consumer or their intelligent agents.

I want to be clear about this. As noted in the article, I'm not opposed to finding better ways to merchandise our offerings. And we have enormous opportunity to better personalize those offerings based on guest preferences and behaviors. We should all want to give guests better – though not necessarily more – options to choose from. I'm just not convinced that exposing prices to guests for each of the various attributes associated with a stay is in the long-term best interest of most hoteliers.

Re: Be careful what you wish for: Attribute-based selling isn't all it's cracked up to be

tim — Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:05:49 -0000

Hi @Simone Puorto. See my reply to your earlier comment on this. I agree that we want to simplify choices for guests. I just think we have differing points of view on whether exposing individual attribute pricing is ultimately a positive for hotels. But I appreciate the discussion and think it's incredibly important for us to have a healthy debate about the benefits and risks here. Believe me, if attribute-based pricing ultimately results in big returns for hotels, I'll be happy to be wrong on this one. 😉

Re: Preview:Does Google’s “Zero Click Search” Marks the End of Hotel Paid Search Marketing?

tim — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 10:14:04 -0000

Google seems to be doing just fine here. Don't forget that Google reported an 18% YOY increase in ad click revenue on its own properties (search, maps, Gmail, etc.) in Q2 last year and a 19% YOY increase in Q3 (Google will report Q4 numbers next week). Yes, some of that is coming from HPA and other products, but "zero clicks" isn't an issue here.

One thing to keep in mind is that Google's "Know-Go-Do-Buy" framework focuses on user intent and that the overwhelming majority of zero click searches are likely higher in the funnel ("Know" searches) or for "Go" searches such as "restaurants near me." Hotels still seem to get a fair bit of traffic from paid Google sources.

The decline in clicks has been far more obvious in organic. And if you look at Bing during the same periods, it appears that its organic traffic has held flat or increased. So, I don't a "zero click" issue affecting paid at all. Quite the contrary. And, with roughly $30B per quarter riding on this, Google's unlikely to allow that to happen going forward.

Re: Is Expedia's recovery program a genuine help for Hoteliers?

tim — Mon, 06 Jul 2020 11:08:29 -0000

Maya Angelou famously said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.” Expedia is not a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is a wolf in wolf’s clothing. That doesn’t make them evil. They’re just doing their job. Expedia’s job — the job their shareholders expect of them — is to acquire as much inventory as possible to attract as many travelers as possible. Without access to all of the inventory from each hotel it displays, Expedia’s value proposition fades. Chains and independent hotels have increased their use of member rates and “book direct” offerings over the last couple of years, which hurts Expedia as the one-stop shop it must be to deliver on its value proposition. It’s no coincidence that Expedia has faced increased competition from Google at the same time that “book direct” campaigns have thrived.

Never one to let a good crisis go to waste, Expedia is using the existential risks facing many hotels right now as an opportunity to regain access to your inventory -- all of it. Whenever Expedia says they’re doing something solely in the interest of hotels or the industry it’s a good time to keep an eye on your wallet. Just as we saw after 9/11 and the Great Recession, Expedia views the current downturn as a way to (re)position itself as the “default choice” for travelers by ensuring it has access to 100% of your hotel’s inventory.

Does that mean you should avoid their “partner recovery plan”? Yes, with one caveat. That one caveat: Your job during the current downturn is to survive. Do what you must to get through the current situation. Yes, it’s likely a short-term win at best if your property “does well” on Expedia during this recession. And there are almost certainly ways you can attract your fair share — or more — from the relatively small number of travelers in market at the moment without giving away access to inventory you’re better served keeping for direct channels. Using a “backyard and bundle” strategy to reinforce your property’s value proposition can offset many of the benefits you might achieve from OTA’s. That doesn't mean you won't use them. It just means you won't give up more to them than necessary to gain the "benefits." But, if you’re facing imminent financial peril, you’ve got to do whatever it takes to stay solvent. Ideally, you can manage that without letting the wolf further inside your doors.

Re: Pricing principles to help hotels maximize revenue during the pandemic

tim — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 09:12:55 -0000

Vikram, I'm usually such a fan of your work. And, generally, there's some good advice here. But, I have a few big problems with your thesis. First, hotels don't deposit "money" in the bank; they deposit profits. To make the math simple, a 150 room hotel running at 50% occupancy charging $200/night will lose $1200 in top-line revenues and almost an equivalent amount in profits per night for every 10% they discount. Just to get back to break-even profit they'd need to sell an additional 10 rooms or so. And they have to do it night after night. In this economy, that's a big lift.

Second, while I do think that dropping rates now makes it harder to raise rates later, the bigger problem is very little prevents your competition from dropping theirs. Then it's simply a race to zero to see who can survive longest at the lowest rate. The best way to win that race is not to run in it. Hotels should look at how to increase value-adds and improve the value proposition to guests to attract revenue and get their fair share -- or more -- of demand in the marketplace. It's more sustainable, differentiates your product from the guys across the street, and will likely make it easier for you to remain profitable both during the downturn and beyond.

Finally, while I agree that hotels must do what they need to to survive in this economy, they need to work carefully with OTAs once they've accounted for their survival, not simply take every dollar of revenue they can get. OTA's aren't evil. I'm not suggesting hotel owner/operators turn their noses up at them. However, OTAs increase variable costs to properties by an additional 15%-20% for every room sold. Even if you account for property-direct marketing costs, that's still usually a 5%-6% premium over direct cost of sales. And that means further reduction in profits for already cash strapped properties.

We completely agree that hotels must do what they've got to do to survive right now. And we completely agree that trying to forecast when this crisis will end is a waste of time. Assume that this will continue past 2021 and do what you need to last that long. But maximizing profits -- not revenues or even profit margin -- is the best way to ensure survival for the long haul. And dropping rates/increasing distribution costs is a very tough way to get there.

Re: Samson and the Pirate Monks

Tyler — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 -0000

Scott - I just bought this book today and I can't wait to dive in. Pretty cool that you got to meet Nate...this book has received some pretty good reviews.

Re: Visualize Digg data in treemaps : 2 (now with pretty power)

Tyler — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:28:39 -0000

Cool site...like the set-up