Seidman's Online Insider - Vol. 5, Issue 9

============================================================================

Visit the Online Insider on the Web for additional content and access

to the Insider Talk discussion forums. A new Seidman's 25 is now up!

< http://www.onlineinsider.com >

============================================================================

reproduced in any medium for noncommercial purposes as long as

attribution is given.

IN THIS ISSUE

- What's Happening in Insider Talk

- Correcting a Correction

- Life and the Internet

- More Fun With Numbers

- Quotes of the Week

- Stock Watch

- Subscription Info

If you've been dying to see my fish and my cat or even if you haven't,

here's your chance: < http://www.onlineinsider.com/html/about_me.html >.

The links to the pics are at the bottom of the page at the above URL.

What's Happening in Insider Talk

================================

Note: you can avoid the hassle of cutting and pasting all the links

below by viewing the current issue at www.onlineinsider.com and

using the links there.

"The notion that it is simply honorable junk mail if the person will

remove you, if you ask, does not hold water, knowing that asking to get

off the list is the trigger that many folks use to send you more stuff.

It is often better to just not reply. There is no way to know if the

person sending the stuff is honorable in advance, unless they have done

the truly honorable thing and asked you if you want to be on the list in

the first place." -- Cliff Kurtzman, president and CEO of Tenagra, in

the Policy conference:

< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=policy&t=9&q=49 >

"Yahoo! performs a useful service, but it's no more likely to inspire

brand loyalty than the catalog at the public library or the water &

sewer department." -- Durant Imboden, Boardwatch Magazine columnist, in

the Web conference:

< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=web&t=16&q=3 >

"The comments about leveraging AOL infrastructure are on target and will

be a key part of CompuServe 5.0. But the CompuServe brand will continue.

With its own identity, personality and character and with web forums.

Most of us recognize the forums as a key asset that are better than what

AOL or anyone else has. It'd be dumb to blow that up (and in saying that

I know there are people participating in this thread who'll conclude

that we'll do it anyway because it's dumb; but I can't help them)." --

Bob Kington, VP of programming, CompuServe, in the Online conference:

< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=16&q=131 >

Correcting a Correction

=======================

In last week's "off-week" update, I corrected a statement in the

February 22 issue where I'd said that AOL did not offer flat-fee

options outside of the US. I said that AOL did in fact offer

a flat-fee option in both the UK and Germany. AOL International

spokesperson Kirsten Powers contacted me to let me know that

there is no flat-fee option offered in Germany. According to

Powers, the reason I may have been told otherwise by some

readers is that AOL is testing different price plans. Such

tests are not available to the general public.

Life and the Internet

=====================

A couple of new services are attempting to use the Internet to

complement life events, major or minor. Getting married, having a baby

or selecting a college are major events that affect a great many

people. Planning and coordinating a family reunion or Little League

baseball practices or even a car-pool schedule -- well, these are not

major life events, but people live with this stuff, and the Internet

could be used as a tool to disseminate information.

An example of a company that's going after major life events is

LifeServ, a start-up based in Englewood, Colo. LifeServ's first

product, WedServ, offers a software tool called WedLink that lets

couples plan and organize that special day. Couples also get to set up

a "WedSite" that serves as a tool for the wedding guests by providing

them the most up-to-date information straight from the engaged couple.

Gift registries, pictures, directions to the church, hotel

accommodations and the like can all be made available online. Point

your guests to the Web site for the most up-to-date info. It's an

interesting model and one that, as more and more folks get online,

becomes very practical.

The business model is simple: Give the service away and charge the

merchants that definitely want to reach this target audience. As a

couple steps through the planning phase for the wedding, certain

merchants are recommended on the basis of a profile the couple has

filled out. LifeServ gets money on what's effectively very targeted

advertising, plus a cut of any resulting transaction.

WedServ is an interesting model, and LifeServ won't stop there.

LifeServ plans to launch services centered on having a baby and picking

a college. My biggest concern for LifeServ is distribution of its

software. But, given the nature of the life events it's going after, it

has interesting distribution opportunities in terms of handing out

software that go beyond simple banner ads, print and other marketing

media. It could partner with merchants. For example, it could cut deals

with jewelry stores in which they give the software to couples who buy

engagement rings. Or it could make arrangements with obstetricians to

distribute disks. To succeed, I think, LifeServ will have to be

effective at nailing down its non-Internet marketing strategy, but it's

a great concept. The company's current marketing efforts include

creating traditional Internet partnerships as well as, with WedServ,

making deals with wedding merchants and publications. For more

information, see < http://www.wedserv.com >.

Though it's not specifically targeting major or minor life events,

Seattle-based start-up Throw, Inc.might be better off it were targeting

such events from a marketing point of view. Instead it's going after

the much broader and currently more competitive space of online

communities. Throw's product, InstantOnline, will offer a compelling set

of features and tools that easily and quickly let you add and share

information and create "virtual communities." It's currently in private

beta.

"In addition to email, discussions and chat, InstantOnline offers an

address book, photo album, events calendar, bookmark file and much, much

more," according to text on its Web site. "With pre-set community

templates like 'Team Sports,' 'Book Club' and 'Virtual Office,' it's

even easier to build a specialized community. You know what your

community needs; InstantOnline gives you the tools to meet those needs."

InstantOnline can get you started quickly with templates such as its

starter pack, plus a family template, a book-club template, a

sports-team template and, yes, even a wedding-planner template (you give

access to your community to all your guests, then give them the URL).

One of the advantages of InstantOnline is that it lets you communicate

in real time with anyone else currently logged in to your community. It

also intends to be more object-oriented than other services. For

example, you can link almost anything to anywhere. You can have a photo

album for browsing photographs, but you also can embed a picture

directly into a message in a message thread.

The biggest concern I have for Throw's InstantOnline is that, like me,

it isn't exactly sure what it wants to be when it grows up. On the one

hand, it seems to be trying to position itself to take on

GeoCities-style build-your-own-home-page-in-our-neighborhood products.

On the other hand, it's going after a hybrid free/fee plan where many of

the applications available to you in a community (say, messaging) will

be free of charge, while others (such as a calendar function) may carry

a fee. Last, and worst, in my opinion, Throw appears to want to

sacrifice its message for a chance at more exposure.

InstantOnline's tag line is "Aren't there times when you don't want all

of America online with you?" It's a sly ploy that attempts to make the

subtle statement "when you only want to be with the people you want to

be with," while also making a backhanded reference to AOL. Such a tag

line obscures the real message of what Throw is attempting to do with

InstantOnline -- allow you to communicate easily with the people you

want or need to communicate with in a great forum for doing so. The tag

line seems to imply that when you're online you're always burdened with

EVERYONE else who's online too. That's clearly never the case. And the

backhanded AOL comment might be construed to imply: "Do you really need

all that stuff on AOL, or do you need this?"

That said, the tag line still may be a good approach. Why? AOL is the

giant, and everyone loves a David-and-Goliath story. It's the same

rationale CNET used when it launched Snap! Online. CNET suggested Snap!

was competing with AOL. "Hello Snap. Goodbye AOL!" the Snap! T-shirts

joked.

So when InstantOnline launches more formally, it may get a lot more

press exposure as a result of the AOL nature of its tag line. Let's

hope this won't obscure the underlying potential of InstantOnline: We

think we have great tools that will let you more easily share

information among your friends, people with like interests and/or your

co-workers.

You can find more information at: < http://www.throw.com >.

More Fun With Numbers

=====================

It's been a while ...

First off, we have a survey from Business Week and Louis Harris that

concludes concerns over privacy block the way to increased Internet

commerce.

According to the survey results, 78 percent of people who go online say

they'd use the Internet more if they believed the privacy of their

personal information and communications was protected.

Privacy is a big deal. No question about it. But I often find myself

pondering editorial products and pollsters' fixation on the issue of

privacy and the Internet. The focus, if anything, only increases

people's fears. And maybe that's not bad -- I'd probably argue it

isn't. But what irritates me is that these pollsters and editorial

products don't raise privacy issues that concern other forms of media.

Not so with the Business Week-Harris survey.

When I read the news release for the survey and saw that it concluded

people trust the Internet less than other forms of communication, I

wondered how the study approached that. I've concluded from the results

that a lot of people are worried about almost all forms of privacy

invasion. Of course, the release didn't emphasize that 80 percent of

the respondents are at least somewhat concerned about giving credit card

information to catalog phone service representatives. Likewise, 80

percent are at least somewhat concerned about providing their credit

card information on the Internet. The difference is that only 56

percent of the respondents were VERY concerned in the telephone-catalog

instance, while 65 percent were VERY concerned about giving their credit

card data on the Internet.

Seventy-eight percent of the respondents who actually go online report

they have never bought anything via the Internet (22 percent report they

have).

Most telling and problematic for Internet advertising in general may be

the finding that 62 percent of respondents are not at all willing to

give personal and financial information about themselves so they can

receive targeted ads. Add the 22 percent who are not very willing and

you have 84 percent who are at least not very willing to provide this

information.

David Simons, managing director of Digital Video Investments, looked at

the above results and wondered what impact the privacy issues would have

on online marketing. He contrasts the 84 percent above with the fact

that "targeting not obtainable via other media has forever been the

major promise of online advertising."

Other interesting tidbits from the Business Week-Harris study:

- 59 percent of respondents say they never register when a site requires

registration that asks for personal information.

- 77 percent are at least somewhat concerned about the security of

conducting personal-banking transactions online.

- 51 percent of those not online say they'd be more likely to start

using the Internet if the cost was lower.

- 67 percent of those online say they'd be likely to use the Internet

more if the cost was lower. (Given the proliferation of flat-fee

service, I don't understand this response: It seems like saying,

"Because I *am* paying $19.95 now, I use the Internet less than I would

if it was $9.95." And yet they are paying.)

- 53 percent of those not online say they'd be more likely to start

using the Internet if it was less complicated.

- 64 percent of those online say they'd use the Internet more if it was

less complicated.

And the study even covered spam!

- 39 percent of those not online say they'd be more likely to go online

if they could control businesses' sending them marketing messages they

didn't want.

- 58 percent of those who are online say they'd be more likely to use

the Internet more if they could control businesses' sending them

marketing messages they didn't want.

Full details at: < http://www.businessweek.com/premium/11/b3569107.htm >.

*Online Shopping Increases*

According to research by Stamford, Conn.-based @Plan, 24 percent of Web

users are actively shopping online. Sounds high to me, and I went to

@Plan's Web site < http://www.webplan.net > to see whether I could find

out more, but at the time I visited, the only information available

without a subscription was the company name, address and phone number,

and an e-mail address for getting info on subscribing. I would say

@Plan isn't using its own Web site to sell its own goods very well, but,

hey, that's just one guy's opinion. According to the news release

issued on March 2, the five "Web Purchase Retail Categories" showing the

greatest percentage growth in the past nine months are:

1. Airline ticket reservations (up 301 percent)

2. Stocks and mutual funds (up 291 percent)

3. Computer hardware (up 111 percent)

4. Car rental (up 105 percent)

5. Books (up 94 percent)

None of this strikes me as outrageous. While the percentages are high,

you're starting from very low usage, so these kinds of increases aren't

shocking. That books are low relative to airline tickets only indicates

(to me) that books were already selling better nine months ago and

earlier.

In the nostalgia department, the following content sites have the

highest percentage of viewers who have been on the Web for more than two

years:

1. CMP TechWeb

2. Jumbo

3. PC Week Online

4. ActiveX.com

5. HotWired

I'm sure they danced a jig in Manhasset over that one! That

technology-related sites occupy all five places sounds right to me.

The following content sites have the highest percentage of viewers who

have been on the Web for less than six months:

1. ABC.com

2. Autoweb.com

3. RollingStone.com

4. Penthouse

5. MTV Online

This I found interesting. ABC.com is still relatively new itself, so no

big surprises there, especially with the promotion on AOL. That music

sites occupy two of the five slots is also not shocking. I'm surprised

that Penthouse is on the list! Not a slam on Penthouse, I'm just

surprised people admitted visiting the site.

>From our friends at Find/SVP Emerging Technologies Research Group (which

is now Cyber Dialogue) ... According to the fourth-quarter 1997 results

for the American Internet Usage survey update:

- 41.5 million adult Internet/online users in the United States

- 24.2 million men

- 17.3 million women

You've seen bigger numbers than the ones above. You've seen WAY bigger

numbers. I trust these numbers the most (though I do have one concern,

which is noted at the end).

- 21 percent of all U.S. adults are online

- 27 percent of all U.S. adult males are online

- 17 percent of all U.S. adult females are online

The younger an adult you are, the more likely you are to be online:

- 33 percent of all U.S. adults 18 to 29 years old are online

- 38 percent of all U.S. adult males 18 to 29 are online

- 27 percent of all U.S. adult females 18 to 29 are online

- 27 percent of all U.S. adults 30 to 49 are online

- 31 percent of all U.S. adult males 30 to 49 are online

- 22 percent of all U.S. adult females 30 to 49 are online

- 12 percent of all U.S. adults 50-plus are online

- 16 percent of all U.S. adult males 50-plus are online

- 9 percent of all U.S. adult females 50-plus are online

More people use the Net from home than from work:

- 70 percent of all online U.S. adults use Internet at home*

- 46 percent of all online U.S. adults use Internet at work*

- 27 percent of all online U.S. adults use the Internet at both home and

work*

AOL -- not quite as big as the rest of the online world combined, on a

user basis:

- 17.5 million U.S. adults use AOL (remember, we're talking users, not

accounts)* or

- 42 percent of all U.S. online adults use AOL* while ...

- 24 million U.S. online adults don't use AOL* or

- 58 percent of all U.S. online adults don't use AOL*

On a subscriber basis, it looks a little different (but remember, not

all users subscribe to anything):

- 10.1 million U.S. adults subscribe to AOL* (note, this tracks right

on with AOL's own reported subscriber statistics for domestic usage in

the fourth quarter of 1997).

The Microsoft Network: The survey doesn't track well with data reported

by MSN, or else MSN is holding back on us!

- 9.2 million U.S. adults use MSN*

- 3.7 million U.S. adults subscribe to MSN*

This is extremely surprising on a couple of levels. For one thing, the

users-per-account ratio is much higher than it is for AOL; this is

especially surprising since MSN stopped giving out numbers at 2.5

million. While there's an argument that says Microsoft might want to

mask growth amid all the antitrust considerations, I have trouble buying

that Microsoft would lowball its U.S. numbers by such a huge amount

(consider that a portion of MSN's 2.5 million reported included

international subscribers and the above is only for U.S. subscribers).

According to Cyber Dialogue VP, Tom Miller, "Possible explanations

include: some survey respondents confusing using MS online support with

using MSN, thus overstating the data; or MSN has more subs than they

admit to."

*Extrapolated from Find/SVP data

Quotes of the Week

==================

"Push isn't dead, it's hard." -- PointCast chairman, president and CEO

David Dorman

"You've been somewhat hard to nail down."--Sen. Orrin Hatch to

Bill Gates during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.

Stock Watch for the Week Ended March 6, 1998

============================================

Courtesy of InfoBeat's CLOSING BELL < http://www.infobeat.com >.

52 Wk 52 Wk P/E Week

SECURITY CLOSE HIGH LOW Ratio CHNG

---------------------------------------------------------------------

AT&T Corp................ 61 66 1/2 30 3/4 21 0.0%

Amazon Com Inc........... 76 3/4 79 5/8 15 3/4 -0.3%

America Online Inc....... 121 1/2 125 38 5/8 467 +0.1%

Apple Computer Inc....... 24 7/16 29 3/4 12 3/4 +3.4%

At Home Corporation Ser A 36 37 1/2 16 5/8 +5.4%

C/Net.................... 37 3/16 46 1/2 15 3/4 +2.5%

CMG Info Svcs. Inc....... 58 1/4 57 10 7/16 +21.6%

Cendant Corporation...... 39 38 11/16 19 1/4 650 +4.0%

Cmp Media Inc Cl A....... 24 3/4 29 3/8 13 3/4 33 +4.7%

Concentric Network Corp.. 13 7/8 16 7 7/8 -4.3%

Cybercash Inc............ 12 15/16 24 1/4 10 1/8 -5.0%

Earthlink Network Inc.... 50 54 1/2 8 5/8 +2.0%

Excite Inc............... 48 7/16 50 1/2 7 1/2 +2.5%

FTP Software Inc......... 2 3/16 7 1/4 1 1/2 +9.4%

GTE Corporation.......... 55 1/2 55 3/4 40 1/2 19 +2.5%

Hewlett Packard Company.. 61 9/16 72 15/16 48 1/8 21 -8.1%

IBM...................... 98 1/8 113 1/2 63 9/16 16 -6.0%

ICG Communications Inc... 36 1/2 34 3/4 8 5/8 +8.5%

Infoseek Corporation..... 18 3/8 17 15/16 4 3/8 +11.7%

Lycos Inc................ 43 3/8 43 3/4 11 3/16 +5.1%

MCI Communications Corpor 47 1/2 48 15/32 27 5/16 48 -0.6%

Mecklermedia Corp........ 25 29 3/4 16 1/2 46 -8.2%

Microsoft Corporation.... 82 3/4 86 43 3/4 57 -2.3%

Mindspring Enterprises In 57 3/8 55 1/2 6 5/8 +18.6%

Netmanage Inc............ 2 11/16 5 1/4 2 3/32 +1.1%

Netscape Communications C 19 3/16 49 1/2 14 7/8 -0.9%

Network Solutions Inc. Cl 23 1/8 26 3/4 11 3/4 75 +14.1%

Newsedge Corporation..... 10 1/16 16 5 -9.5%

Onsale Inc............... 28 11/16 35 1/4 4 5/8 0.0%

Open Market Inc.......... 18 15/32 19 3/4 6 1/2 +11.9%

Oracle Corporation....... 26 7/8 42 1/8 17 5/8 38 +9.1%

Psinet Inc............... 8 11/16 9 3/4 4 1/4 +12.5%

Quarterdeck Corp......... 2 1/64 4 1 3/16 -5.7%

Realnetworks Inc......... 16 3/16 19 3/8 13 1/2 +7.9%

Security First Network Ba 13 5/8 14 5 1/4 +25.2%

Silicon Graphics Inc..... 14 3/4 30 5/16 10 15/16 92 -2.0%

Sportsline Usa Inc....... 30 11/16 27 3/4 7 +30.5%

Sprint Corporation....... 68 1/8 67 7/8 41 7/8 31 +3.2%

Spyglass Inc............. 8 1/2 12 4 1/16 +1.4%

Sun Microsystems Inc..... 42 3/4 53 5/16 25 7/8 23 -10.2%

Vocaltec Communications L 21 9/16 33 1/4 6 -6.7%

Worldcom Inc............. 38 1/4 39 7/8 21 1/4 96 +0.1%

Yahoo Corporation........ 80 9/16 75 3/4 14 41/64 +10.0%

Dow Jones 30 Industrials. 8,569.38 +0.2%

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Subscription Information

========================

To subscribe to this newsletter by e-mail:

Send an e-mail to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the BODY of the

message type:

SUBSCRIBE ONLINE-L FIRSTNAME LASTNAME

Example: Subscribe Online-L Robert Seidman

If you'd like to remove yourself from this mailing list, send a message

to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the body of the message type:

SIGNOFF ONLINE-L

A Web-based version of the newsletter is available at:

< http://www.onlineinsider.com >

Search This Blog

Strange Texts

Seidman's Online Insider - Vol. 5, Issue 9

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BOTTOM LIVE script

MENSA IQ test with answers

Fawlty Towers script for "A Touch of Class"