Good Idea, Wrong Place to Advertise It

This morning on the radio I heard a promotional advertisement for Feed the Pig.   I have heard things about this site before and decided to check it out.   It is outstanding.   They have calendars so you can see ways to save money throughout the year, and there are  many tips on how to pinch pennies.

Basically the concept is to teach people how to save, knock down their debt, and generally help them to not waste money  (things that many modern day Americans are horrible at).   I can’t really see a downside to this.   The site is sponsored by the American Institute of CPAs.   I am not sure why they put up the site, but I wholeheartedly support it.

I give the site a big thumbs up, but think I will give their choice of advertising venues a small thumbs down.   I was reminded this morning of  Feed the Pig  while listening to Bloomberg Radio on XM  on the way in to work, getting my business news for the day.  

**Quick aside:   I have three choices of business news to pick from on XM:   Fox Business, CNBC and Bloomberg.   I choose Bloomberg because it is just the facts, with interviews sprinkled in – and the interviews are with interesting and smart people.   In addition, the interviews are always respectful and low key even if people are disagreeing, unlike some of the other places where there are a bunch of idiots yelling and screaming at each other.   In other words, Bloomberg Radio seems more professional to me.**

I really don’t think that anyone who seeks out Bloomberg Radio doesn’t understand the simple concepts of saving and debt that Feed the Pig is trying to teach.   I just think that these are wasted advertising dollars.   A better target IMHO  would be radio stations, magazines  or TV networks that reach places where the people are perhaps not educated or are  unaware of the concepts that Feed the Pig is educating people on.

It is almost like putting ads up for scrap booking during an NFL football game.   Not the right demographic.

Cross posted at LITGM.

Jack & Suzy Welch on the Economy

In their BusinessWeek column, Mr and Ms Welch respond to a reader’s question:

How does today’s financial crisis compare with the beginning of the Great Depression and the 1930s?

In response, the Welches say that while “real global pain” lies ahead, the situation is unlikely to wind up in a catastrophe on the Great Depression level. Their reasoning is interesting–basically, they offer 4 factors that differentiate the Depression era from our own:

1)”In 1930 the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act ushered in years of international retaliation and discord. Today’s crisis is marked by a high degree of free trade and global cooperation.”

2)”In 1933 the National Industrial Recovery Act encouraged labor and industry cartels. The result was a decline in U.S. competitiveness—again, hardly the current case: American companies have never been in better fighting form.”

(The NIRA was passed in 1933 and was in force until it was found unconstitutional in 1935. It involved cartelization and extreme micromanagement of the economy, and is generally considered to have been one of FDR’s more unwise innovations, delaying rather than assisting the recovery from the Depression. Interestingly, NIRA was strongly backed by Gerard Swope, one of Jack Welch’s illustrious predecessors as head of GE.)

3)”Finally, a second Great Depression is unlikely because of the institutions created to prevent one, foremost being the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., with its authority to insure deposits, critical to stabilizing the banking system.”

4)”Others say we’re marching into French-style socialism. Au contraire. The U.S. government has a century-long history of handling interventions with a fast-in, fast-out approach. In 1984, to take a recent example, it bought 80% of Continental Illinois National Bank but sold it just 10 years later to Bank of America. In 1989 it created the Resolution Trust Corp., which cleaned up the savings and loan crisis, then quickly packed up. TARP, the federal bailout plan, looks to be no exception, as its loan terms give banks flexibility and strong incentives to pay off the government within five years.”

I agree with Jack and Suzy Welch that we should not be panicking about the economy and that comparisons with 1929 are overdrawn. However, I also think that the economic future will be tremendously influenced by the election results–and that an Obama administration, combined with a strong Democratic congressional majority, would, very likely, dilute or negate three of the four factors that they list as separating us from the Depression era. While the result would probably not look as grim as 1929, it would still be pretty bad.

Read more

Too Many Clicks, Too Much Typing

Compare and contrast:

Renew two software licenses

-Login at software company website. Both licenses are listed. A “renew license” link appears next to each license. There is no way to select both licenses for simultaneous renewal.

-Type name, address, etc. on online order form.

-Click link to “preferred” credit-card processor.

-Type name, address, credit card info on online form.

-Click “pay” link. Get rejected by credit card company.

-Repeat entire process starting at software company home page. Get rejected again by credit card company.

Read more

“Managing by the Numbers”

A recent article in Business Week is titled “Managing by the Numbers” and it focuses on IBM’s attempt to build a system to assign staff to appropriate engagements around the world. Rather than relying on manual processes, a central planning group is gathering capabilities for each of their employees and attempting to let the computer match skills to opportunities.

I have a lot of experience in consulting at a number of different organizations. If you are interested in the challenges (and opportunities) of running or being part of a professional services organization, I suggest that you read “Managing the Professional Services Firm” by David Maister.

The types of examples given in the book are staffing a web services engagement in the Philippines; there is an expensive (high ranking) consultant on the bench (meaning – unassigned and not currently earning income for the firm) in a faraway country vs. a less skilled (and cheaper) local consultant who could also be assigned to the job – which to choose? This is the type of “problem” that the program is supposed to solve. The implied conceit is that consultants are interchangeable, and you can just build a team out of individual skill sets, have them show up at the work site, and pull off the engagement.

When I worked at one of the large consulting firms, in order to save space, they went to a “hoteling” concept. Since consultants were usually on the road and not in the office, some bean counter figured that it would be cheaper to not give anyone a permanent office and just have them occupy whatever space was available on the occasion that they had to work in town. The company did attempt to link your phone to your location and sometimes even had a nameplate ready for you, along with a little cart for your office supplies, so you were able to get started working with a minimum of effort. The company only had to have office space for the people likely to show up, which was maybe 25% of the total staff on a given day, saving them in rent money.

Read more

For Roughnecks, It Ain’t Funny

Instapundit says:

CANDIDATES RUSH TO  rescue oil companies:  “With the price of petroleum having fallen from almost $150 per barrel last summer to about $81, the campaigns of both Barack Obama and John McCain rushed to outline their respective plans to rescue beleaguered oil companies from nose-diving profits and earnings.” Heh. It’s about time!

No offense to Glenn but the people working in the oil fields aren’t laughing.  

Read more