Business

You are currently browsing the archive for the Business category.

Patch Monday: WAN optimisation and the Facebook patent

11 March 2010 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | No comments

ZDNet Australia logo: click for Patch Monday episode 33

The perceived speed of your internet connection isn’t just about raw bandwidth. The National Broadband Network won’t automatically speed up everything.

In this week’s Patch Monday podcast, Steve Dixon from Riverbed Technology explains how inefficiencies in TCP/IP network protocols mean that latency can be as much of a problem as bandwidth. “WAN optimisation”, which is something Riverbed and others sell, can help.

And Kimberlee Weatherall provides some perspective on the controversial Facebook “news feed” patent for “Dynamically providing a news feed about a user of a social network” into perspective. She teaches intellectual property law at the University of Queensland.

You can listen below. But it’s probably better for my stats if you listen at ZDNet Australia — where you’ll see some of the comments already posted — or subscribe to the RSS feed or subscribe in iTunes.

Besides, you’ll get it faster than waiting for me to post it here.

Please let me know what you think. We accept audio comments too. Either Skype to stilgherrian or phone Sydney +61 2 8011 3733.

Vodafone, I just don’t trust you

23 February 2010 in Business by Stilgherrian | 13 comments

Yesterday a long-running “difficulty” with Vodafone was finally resolved. Maybe. After more than a year, a refund cheque arrived. But thanks to Vodafone’s continued incompetence I may not be able to deposit that cheque.

The cheque is for the $9.89 credit remaining on my account when I stopped doing business with Vodafone in November 2008. That it took so long to get that money is a story in itself, and it’s told over the jump.

The stupidity, however, is that after all this hassle Vodafone has made out the cheque to “Stilgherrian Pty Ltd”, as if I’m a company.

How does any competent organisation do that? Especially when there was no “Pty Ltd” in my account details? Especially when I specifically requested in writing for the cheque to be made out to “Stilgherrian”?

Fortunately I’m known at my local Westpac bank branch, so maybe they’ll allow me to deposit the cheque. I’ll let you know how I go.

Other people have told me they’ve had trouble getting Vodafone to refund money too, and had to drop the magic words “Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman” before they saw any action. While in my case the figure was less than $10, if Vodafone is consistently failing to pay out credits then it would amount to a significant scam.

Not good enough, Vodafone. If you owe people money, you return it to them. Promptly. Without questions. And if it takes longer than a couple of weeks you apologise for the delay.

Read the rest of this entry »

Patch Monday: Online industrial espionage

25 January 2010 in Business, Internet, Privacy by Stilgherrian | 4 comments

ZDNet Australia logo: click for Patch Monday episode 27

Following the allegedly-Chinese attacks on Google (and 33 other corporations), and following Hillary Clinton’s assertive speech on Internet Freedom, online espionage is in the news — and it’s my topic on the Patch Monday podcast this week.

My guests are Mark Goudie, who heads the forensics practice at Verizon Business in Melbourne; and Ajoy Ghosh, security executive with Logica in Sydney.

You can listen below. But it’s probably better for my stats if you listen at ZDNet Australia or subscribe to the RSS feed or subscribe in iTunes.

Please, let me know what you think. We now accept audio comments too. Either Skype to “stilgherrian” or phone Sydney 02 8011 3733.

No, Stilgherrian’s financial projections are bullshit

23 January 2010 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 7 comments

OK, so I was wrong. Very wrong. And Citi was right, perhaps even conservative with their estimates of Google’s revenue turnaround.

The other day I was sceptical that Citi’s analysis showed Google suddenly reversing three years of declining revenue growth. They predicted that the revenue growth for 2009 Q4 would be 16%.

I scoffed. I figured the fat red line (right) was a more appropriate projection of the data in the graph.

Well, Google’s actual Q4 revenue growth was 17%. That’s the green dot.

Bastards.

Now Bob Bain, who actually knows how to read these numbers, has found a more detailed review. He points out that while net profit was allegedly up fivefold, Google did write off a billion dollars as “impairment of equity investments” last year. I don’t know what that means, but it sure sounds like it’d make last year look a bit wobbly.

Now, check this chart of Google’s share price for the last two years.

Broadly speaking, it shows the share price dropping as the global financial crisis kicked in, and then recovering. Apart from that tiny little downturn in the last week or two, Google’s share price is back up to where it was two years ago.

Lessons?

  1. The stock market is a long term investment, unless you really want to immerse yourself in the crazy world of the day traders.
  2. When it comes to the stock market, I haven’t the faintest fucking idea what I’m talking about, and you should ignore me.

Any questions?

Internet financial projections are bullshit

21 January 2010 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 13 comments

It’s no secret that the high-growth venture-capital-driven Internet industry is a hype-laden circus of misinformation. But today’s Chart of the Day from Silicon Alley Insider (right) really takes the biscuit.

Here we see that since Q3 of 2006, Google’s quarterly revenue growth has steadily declined from a cancerous 70% year-on-year to under 10% for the last three quarters.

Now there’s nothing wrong with an 8% growth rate. That’s pretty much up there with China, for instance. And the only countries growing faster than China are starting from a very low base. Think of such economic powerhouses as Angola, Bhutan, Rwanda and Timor-Leste.

OK, I know countries and companies aren’t the same thing, but that’s not my point.

Look at the bottom right of that first graph.

Citi reckons that Google’s growth in the next two quarters will increase in a more-or-less straight line that’s even steeper than that most recent quarter-on-quarter increase. Based on fucking what, Citi? That’s the only quarter showing growth in the entire chart!

Surely this second graph is a more realistic projection based on the data available.

There’s precisely zero science here. I just grabbed the straight-line tool in my graphics program and drew in a red line by eye. I certainly couldn’t be arsed doing this properly with, you know, mathematics. But…

Honestly, which of these “projections” looks more realistic to you?

As I say, there’s no science here. Perhaps we can add some analysis.

What factors might be affecting Google’s potential for increased revenue growth?

On the plus side:

  • Google is operating in a marketplace which is still growing, and perhaps even growing faster than last year as we emerge from the global financial crisis. Then again, so is everyone else.
  • Google’s got a new product line coming out, those Android phone thingamabobs, and people are wetting themselves to get one. Well, at least until Apple reveals their new toy next week.
  • Google pwns the Internet.
  • What else?

But working against that:

  • Google is subject to increased competition, especially from Microsoft’s Bing and related products and services.
  • Rupert Murdoch is up to something, although admittedly he might not have the faintest idea what he’s doing.
  • Every market eventually reaches a plateau. The key bullshit image of the first dot.com boom was the classic revenue projection of a start-up: exponential growth continuing forever. Well, here in rich white Western countries, all the folks who are using the Internet are pretty much there already. There might be more volume of data, but the amount of attention span you can sell to advertisers ain’t going to rise so much.
  • What else?

We also need to remember that these are revenue figures, not profit. And that’s my core point. Simplistic “Oooh, aah!” gawking over one numerical measure without context is wankery. Why do we let analysts get away with it?

All that said, I’m no financial analyst. What would I know? So if you know better, set me straight. There’s a “Reply” box below…

Oh, and Google’s Q4 revenue figures will be announced tomorrow. So we’ll have one more real data point then. Stand by.

Tikatok to return copyright to creators

25 November 2009 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 1 comment

Following up yesterday’s post about Tikatok, where I pointed out what I considered to be their overly-greedy grab for intellectual property rights over their users’ content, it turns out they’re changing that User Agreement.

Tikatok community manager Neal Grigsby writes:

I am Neal Grigsby, the community manager for Tikatok. I wanted to thank you and your readers for your comments about Tikatok’s User Agreement, and to let you know that we are in the process of updating the User Agreement to reflect that authors will own all original materials that they submit to Tikatok. Tikatok will own any underlying Tikatok templates that are used by the author while on www.tikatok.com, as well as any other content that is licensed from third parties by Tikatok.

That sounds more like an appropriate balance to me. I’ll post a link to the new policy when it appears.

Tikatok profts from your child’s unpaid labour

24 November 2009 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 21 comments

[Update 25 November 2009: Tikatok is in the process of revising its User Agreement to reflect that authors will own all original materials that they submit. See the comment from Tikatok's Neal Grigsby.]

Screenshot of Tikatok website: click to visit website

“Always read the fine print,” we’re told. Too bloody right when it comes to scummy websites like Titatok. Watch out, kids, they’re stealing your creativity!

On the surface it looks pleasant enough. Smiling kiddies, pastel colours and the chance to share your child’s creativity with friends and family. But read the terms and conditions and you’ll soon see that the slogan “Capture your child’s creativity” is literally true.

Your child’s creativity will be captured. By Tikatok. They’ll profit by using your children for unpaid child labour.

Check out this section of their User Agreement with my emphasis added:

V. Ownership of Submissions

Certain areas of the Site will permit you to send materials to Tikatok such as stories and drawings. Upon submission, all creations, ideas, concepts, notes, drafts, stories, artwork, drawings, photographs or other information of any nature (collectively, the “Submissions”), submitted by an author to the Site shall be deemed to be, and shall remain, the property of Tikatok, and the author will be deemed for all purposes to have assigned all of his or her worldwide right, title and interest in and to such Submissions to Tikatok and waived any “moral” or author’s rights therein. None of the Submissions shall be subject to any obligation of confidence on the part of Tikatok, and Tikatok shall not be liable for any use or disclosure of all or part of the Submissions. Without limiting the foregoing, Tikatok shall exclusively own all now known or hereafter existing rights to the Submissions of every kind and nature throughout the world, and shall be entitled to unrestricted use of the Submissions for any purpose whatsoever, commercial or otherwise, without compensation to the provider of the Submissions.

The book or on-line display of the book on the Site will contain a notice substantially in the following form: “Copyright © 2009 by Tikatok LLC. All rights reserved.”

Yes, that’s right. Anything you give to Tikatok they claim as theirs. Upload a family photo or your child’s stories and drawings, and Tikatok will be able to do whatever they like with it, including sell it for profit, without any payment to you or even any acknowledgement.

Don’t you think that’s just a little bit disgusting?

I think this is appalling. Especially when Tikatok is focussed on the creative output of children. And specially when they’ve got the gall to say, further down in their User Agreement:

You may not use the Site for commercial purposes.

Now it’s common enough when you enter a competition, say, for your submissions to be licensed to promote that competition or the sponsor. That’s the exchange — in return for your chance of winning the prize. But this is naked theft. From children. I spit upon them.

As I say, always read the fine print!

[Hat-tip to Stephen Loosley for spotting this outrage.]

The Importance of Authenticity

19 May 2009 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 5 comments

CeBIT Australia logo

Here’s my 5-minute presentation from WebForward@CeBIT last week, on the importance of authenticity when using social media for business.

It’s recorded on a Nokia N80 phone by Mike Seyfang so it’s a bit rough, but you’ll get the content. You’ll also hear me swear a few times because, well, that’s apparently what I’m now expected to do.

One key theme is that if businesses try to micro-manage every aspect of the communication between their employees and the rest of the world — denying that there are mistakes, or that some people don’t like them — they’ll end up becoming paranoid psychotics. I hope to expand upon that in due course.

Mike also recorded the presentations from my co-panellists Hugo Ortega, Kate Carruthers and Nick Hodge, but not Laurel Papworth for some reason.

I did see a “proper” video camera on the day, so I think CeBIT will place higher-resolution video online in due course. I’ll let you know if and when that happens.

Google Rank and website basics: a practical example

10 May 2009 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 35 comments

Photograph of Dunlop Volley tennis show (black)

The shoe in the photograph is the Dunlop Volley Classic tennis shoe. A black one. If you’ve met me in the flesh, you may have noticed that it’s my default footwear. Comfortable. Practical. Cheap.

Thing is, the Volley website, which I’ll talk about shortly, exhibits everything but those attributes. Fail.

I don’t play tennis, or any sport for that matter. The thing about the Volley Classic, though, is that its rubber sole offers a firm grip on all sorts of surfaces. Even in the wet. Indeed, I’m told that people in certain SEKRIT professions like them because they’re perfect for scurrying across rooftops on dark, rainy nights.

And they’re black.

If you use a black felt-tip marker, you can colour in that white flash at the rear of the shoe so it’s completely black, and at night you’re totally invisible just like a ninja.

From the ankles down.

The reason I’m telling you all this is because this morning I bought a replacement pair of these truly awesome shoes. I’m sick of my chiropractor giving me grief about the holes in my current pair. Yesterday my usual supplier was out of stock, at least in size 11. But just now I bought new shoes — before 9am on a Sunday — without even getting out of bed.

It’s a lesson in the importance of making sure your website is properly indexed on Google, and that you concentrate on what really helps make a sale.

Read the rest of this entry »

Join me at CeBIT in Sydney next week?

04 May 2009 in Business, Internet by Stilgherrian | 12 comments

CeBIT Australia logo

Last year I told CeBIT to FOAD after I’d been underwhelmed in 2007. They said thank you, and issued me with a discount code and a media pass. This year they’ve invited me to participate in a panel at WebForward@CeBIT. That means I can offer two random scroungers deserving readers a cheap ticket.

CeBIT is the big IT trade show thingy running 12 to 14 May, with a bunch of conference streams attached. WebForward@CeBIT is one of them.

On 14 May I’ll be joining my colleagues Laurel Papworth, Kate Carruthers, Nick Hodge, Hugo Ortega (who I don’t think I’ve met) and chairman Jye Smith to discuss how you can “Capitalise on Social Media for Business”.

Because I’m a panellist, I get two tickets to the full 2-day conference at a discounted price of $178 + GST instead of the listed $1295 + GST.

If you’d like one of these discounted tickets, make your case by 9am Sydney time on Wednesday 6 May. Explain why you’re deserving, and I’ll pick the two scams reasons I like.

If you miss out, you can still save $160 off the on-site registration price by using the promotional code stilwebca09. You’ll need to insert the code when prompted during on-line registration at www.mycebit.com.au.

« Older entries