Can Too Many User Reviews Cause Brain Damage?

I was recently reading an article on The Economist on the value of someone adding the 3,202nd review to Amazon about the new Harry Potter book. In interviews with consumers, many feel that it is just not worth the time, as their review will just get lost in the mix. I personally can only handle reading a handful of reviews before my head begins to hurt.

Although I am not sure about the impact of adding review number 3,203 to a Harry Potter book, Google Analytics has found that volume does make a difference. According to John McAteer, a director at Google, volume of reviews does impact transactions, “Single digits didn’t seem to move the needle at all,” says Mr McAteer. “It wasn’t enough to get people comfortable with making that purchase decision.” Seems like that magic number was more in the range of 20 reviews for a specific product to effect transactions. An eVOC Insights study reveals that 63 percent of online shoppers are more likely to buy from sites with ratings and reviews.

If you think about this for a second, it makes total sense. I mean, the reason we even read reviews in the first place is to try to understand consumer sentiment or popular opinion for the product or category in question.

Think about the last time you tried to book a hotel for your vacation. More than likely you knew generally where you wanted to stay, and you probably had some specific requirements like nice pool, close to the beach or close to shopping. From there, you probably started reading the reviews of each hotel that met your location requirements, above 3.5 stars, to try and figure out which was the best one for your special trip. After reading 15 reviews for each of the 10 hotels that you identified on Trip Advisor, and an hour later, you probably have narrowed it down to 5 possibilities. From here the frustration mounts as you now go to Hotels.com to see if you can find more information to help you decide. If this is inconclusive, you now seek another travel site like Expedia to see if there maybe more insightful information there. Several hours later, with no clear answer, you toss a coin and heads it is; Sheraton here we come. Did it cause brain damage? Unclear, but I would’ve surely used less curse words in the process.

The key here is that we all care about the experiences, knowledge and opinions of the general population when it comes to making purchasing decisions. But the issue with the review infrastructure available today is that we are left to try to determine popular opinion independently by reading the reviews of the masses. While reviews have shown to be a great way to help people make purchases, it is far from perfect. In this vacation hotel example, wouldn’t it have been more efficient if magically you knew that the most popular hotels were 1) Marriot, 2) Sheraton and 3) Doubletree based on the opinions of 10,000 people? From there you could read the individual reviews for those three hotels to make your final decision. If this were all magically true – how much time would this have saved you? Think about all the headaches it would have solved!!!

Now if we can only make this magic a reality.

It reminds me of days of communication; before we had email, we were relegated to snail mail and fax machines. In those days, we imagined what it would be like if we could send messages instantly to people…. now look where we are.

TheCrowd is gathering……..

Is Anyone Listening to the US Auto Market?

On April 27, 2009, GM proposed a new restructuring plan in an effort to convince the US Government to give the company $11.6B in bailout versus the $5B originally agreed. GM proposed that $10B of this bailout be transferred to stock which would give the Government a 50% holding in the company. There are many other headlines in this plan, including a proposal to the United Auto Works to forgive $10B in healthcare debt in return for a 39% stake in the company. The Government is now in similar talks to save Chrysler.

Now, I am all for supporting the US auto makers, if only for nostalgia reasons to one of the countries foundational industries. However, I believe that this kind of plan simply prolongs the inevitable, which is that both companies are ultimately doomed. Unless they can start to build products that people actually want to buy!!!

In the last several years, I have personally looked at buying a Ford, GM and a Dodge SUV. In each case, I ended up buying an Acura and two Hondas. Why did I turn my back on our countrymen? Well, because as a consumer, I try and make the best purchase I can for the money that I have. Anytime I go to purchase a new car, I do extensive research to the point that it drives my wife crazy, to ensure that we make the most educated decision. The result thus far has been that Honda Corporation had a superior product for the money.

I realize that we are seeing a slump in auto sales worldwide, and in fact, several Japanese makers are also asking their government for assistance. In this case though, GM’s problems go much deeper. In 2007, GM lost the top position, as world’s largest automaker, to Toyota. Since then, they have continued their decline rapidly.

It seems to me that where GM really needs help is not just a longer “lifeline” but rather a new “lifestyle”. The reason Toyota was able to overtake GM was because they understood the customer better and built better products. The bottom line is that they listened to the crowd, and the crowd spoke with its wallet.

As hard as it may be, I think that GM needs some tough love first, before the Government provides any assistance. The company has been carrying floundering brands such as Pontiac and Buick for several years and is just now realizing that it might be time to shed dead weight. Just as the wisdom of the crowd has had its say on GM by not buying its products, GM must now listen to this same wisdom and figure out how to build products that people want to purchase.

Hold on my little GM, help is on the way. TheCrowd is gathering……..

Does Time Heal Wounds… From a President?

This month, we have caught a few glimpses of our old boy, George W. Bush. Starting with the opening pitch for the Texas Rangers, then his first public speech in Calgary, and then a meeting in China for the Boao forum, George W. has been busy. Although I admittedly voted for him for his first term, I did not vote for him second term; hence I spent his final four years disliking him and his policies. The country agreed with my opinion, as his exiting approval rating in January 2009 was 34%. That was on the rise, from the 29% he was averaging during several months of his presidency.

In watching him the last few weeks, I kind of liked him again. Not as an ex-president, but just as a guy who I would like to grab a beer with (although he claims not to drink anymore). I started to remember some of the good times with ol’ Georgie, like when the economy was strong in 2003 and how after September 11th, the country as a whole was pretty safe. Let’s not get in an argument about who should get kudos for these things, in this case, because it is really irrelevant. The point is – I started to not hate him as a much.

Several presidents have left office with low approval ratings, such as Harry Truman’s 34% approval, Richard Nixon’s 24%, and Jimmy Carter’s 34%. Now, for me, Harry Truman was a great man and President ending WWII. According to Wikipedia, “Truman has been consistently ranked by scholars as one of the greatest U.S. Presidents.” As for Jimmy Carter, he may not have been a great president while in office, but he has since become a national hero and often called upon by world leaders as the negotiator of diplomacy. I do not know this for sure (yet), but I am guessing that if we took an approval rating of Jimmy Carter’s presidency today he would score much higher than 34%.

The truth of the matter, wisdom does change over time as does popular opinion. Now, I am not a fortuneteller because if I was, I would have accepted that Director of Sales job at Nvidia back in 1995 (hello dummy). But the way we view Bush in three years from now will be different than how we view him today, or how we viewed him 100 days ago.

Similarly with popular opinion, people change their mind, and hence wisdom changes. One of the biggest challenges with market research today is it is difficult to accurately attain accurate consumer sentiment real time. This may be a key contributor as to why 85% to 90% of all products developed ultimately fail in the market.

But those winds are changing, and TheCrowd is gathering…..

Can Fame Come For Us Normal People?

We all have heard about Ashton Kutcher’s challenge to Larry King, a race to be the first person to hit 1M followers on Twitter. Kutcher claims that he didn’t think a single person (Kutcher) could possibly have a greater impact on the public than an entire media network, so he decided to try it. This challenge did have its incentives attached. In addition to the promise of donations to charities, Kutcher promised to ding-dong-ditch Ted Turner’s house if he won. Kutcher is already a very popular figure in the world of media, but what he did, in effect, was ask for the wisdom of the crowd to determine the level of his popularity versus that of Larry King. The crowd spoke, and Kutcher now has 1.3M to CNN’s 1.1M followers on Twitter.

This is not a one off phenomena, and this practice is becoming more and more popular. Recently, there was a report that several radio and lower-tier TV personalities have been using Twitter to create and grow their following, to impress their superiors in an effort to increase their value. In one case, a radio personality was able to leverage their increased following and fame on Twitter to renew their contract. This is, in effect, really crowdsourcing fame and using the wisdom of the crowd to prove their popularity.

This is not to say that these personalities were not already popular in their own right, as I am sure they are. However, what these people have done by utilizing Twitter is create their own mini American Idol, which is another great example of crowdsourcing in media. The beauty of tools like Twitter is that it levels the playing field, allowing the crowd to determine who is the most famous, most popular and most liked. In the case of Twitter, the general public speaks or votes by choosing to follow certain personalities or individuals. If for example, Ashton Kutcher challenged me to a race, I would most likely not stand a chance. Much as it is hard to admit!!

With that said, if I worked full time on my Twitter status, I could dramatically increase my followers, from the 278 that I currently have to a number much greater. In fact, several people have done just that. I am following a woman on Twitter with the handle, @ijustine, who has 475,000 users. However, today the crowd has spoken, and they choose @ijustine over @jbennette.

In fact, the crowd is speaking everywhere – but how do we get a hold of it for more practical uses?

TheCrowd is gathering……..

Is One Opinion Enough to Land an Airplane?

This past Sunday, the pilot of a 6-passenger turbo prop plane was taking off from Marco Island Florida heading to Mississippi and died during ascent. The plane was carrying four passengers: Doug White, his wife and two teenage daughters. Shortly after take off, White noticed that the pilot had passed out. The plane was on autopilot so there was no immediate danger. White tried for 30 minutes to revive the pilot to no avail. White, a licensed pilot, had 150 hours experience on smaller Cessna aircraft but had never flown a plane as big as the King Air plane.

White radioed air traffic control to explain the problem and in response one of the controllers called a friend, Kari Sorenson, who had King Air flight experience. The air traffic controller relayed the events in the plane to Kari and in return Kari gave step-by-step instructions back to White through the controller. White landed the plane safely and everyone (except for the deceased pilot) was ok all due to the expertise of Sorenson and the resourcefulness of the air traffic controller.

In this case, one opinion or expert was plenty to save the day. Who knows what would have happened if air traffic control was not able to find a King Air expert? What this air traffic controller did was leverage his network to find an expert to contribute their experiences to solve a problem. Sorenson was willing to help because his friend asked. This is a type of crowdsourcing.

There are similar problems that we all run into whereby one opinion is plenty to solve a problem. For instance, if my car broke down on the side of the road, the expertise of my mechanic would be plenty to solve the problem assuming I had one and knew had to get a hold of him. We are starting to see solutions hit the market that can solve this exact problem of connecting experts with those who have a problem in that exact segment. Although this level of expertise might not be needed on regular basis, these solutions will serve to be extremely helpful.

In our daily lives, there are probably far more issues that we run into whereby the aggregated opinions of a larger pool of people matters more. The dilemma at hand often mandates the size and demographic of that pool desired to provide an opinion. For instance, if I want to know the cheapest place to buy gas in Los Gatos, I would only care about the opinions of 30,000 people who live here. At the same time, if I wanted to know the single best crossover SUV less than thirty thousand dollars, then the opinions of 500,000 people would be more appropriate. If I wanted to know the single most popular movie currently playing in theaters then 1,000,000 opinions of people over thirty is probably more appropriate.

You might say, “Gosh, it would be great to have that kind of power.” To which I would say TheCrowd is gathering………….(April 30th)

Can Crowds Solve Crime?

In the world of solving crime and tracking down criminals, the process of police work today is very secretive for the most part.  Traditionally, when an officer is in pursuit of evidence to track down or identify a suspect, this process is done under the cloak.  We have all seen the movies of the solo officer working in a vacuum to find an assailant. 

Technology is beginning to change this process, as the public continues to show its support in helping our crime fighters.  One of the most effective methods today of involving the public to solve crime is the AmberAlert, for child abductions.  When abductions are reported, the incident immediately posts on all active freeway traffic signs, the Emergency Broadcast network, plus text messages and e-mails to subscribers (I just subscribed myself).  The website boasts several success stories using this powerful tool, including the following.

In July 2007, three children, ages 14 days, 9 years and 11 years, were forced out of their mother’s car by an acquaintance in Meridian, Idaho. Within one hour of an AmberAlert being issued by the AAWP, an officer in Ontario, Oregon located the vehicle used in the abduction, and the children were returned safely. Because both Idaho and Oregon are members of the AAWP, the alert went out to law enforcement in both states and doubled the chances that the children would be recovered.

In Australia, a program called Crime Stoppers has gone a step further in institutionalizing the use of crowdsourcing to solve crime.  On CrimeStoppers.com, the police post wanted criminals and unsolved crime incidents to solicit the help of the crowd.  The program has been well received, and it has seen some substantial growth:

“The 2007-08 financial year results for your program have seen continued growth in all areas.  We believe this growth stems from increased community recognition and participation.”

The following figures depict some of that growth

- 43145 calls (up from 34572)

- 12770 Information reports sent for Investigation (up from 11772)

- 1048 arrests (up from 1011)

- More than 19 million website hits (up from 16 million)

The truth of the matter is that the crowd is here to help, and given the right tools and opportunities, much can be accomplished be enabling this level of participation.  This is not to say that the world of public safety and crime solving should be on public display.  There must be some lines drawn for sure, as there are reasons to keep things secret.  But as this data suggests, there are plenty of reasons to increase the involvement of crowds.

The Crowd is gathering………

Is a Twitter and Google Marriage Wise?

According to TechCrunch this morning, Twitter is in talks to be purchased by Google.  The last valuation of Twitter a few weeks ago was ~$250M, so the purchase price would have to be somewhere north of that.  I can see how this makes sense for Google, but is this really the wise choice for Twitter?  The answer to that question is really dependent on whether or not Twitter has identified a sure bet business model; my hunch is that the answer to that question is a resounding NO.

Now I use Twitter most every day.  I see it as a value to my life, but would I pay for it?  No.  Are there plenty of ways for Twitter to make money? Yes.  However, they need to move fast, as the technological barrier to entry is not very big.  The real barrier to entry is the user base that they have accumulated, which grew 33% in February to 10M unique subscribers. 

Part of the reason for the high level of monthly user adoption to this new communication mechanism is the grass roots feel of the application.  YouTube mirrored this same grass roots feel and growth rate back in 2006, when Google purchased them.  At the time Google purchased YouTube, everyone thought that profitability was surely around the corner.  However, in August of 2008, Google disclosed that YouTube was still not profitable.  Hmmm.

So that brings us back to the original question.   Regarding the wisdom of this transaction, you have to segment which crowd you are asking.  If you are asking for the collective wisdom of the Twitter users, I am guessing that the answer would be that Twitter should remain independent.  At the same time, if you were to gather the collective wisdom of the Twitter and Google employees, I believe that the answer would be, “run, don’t walk to complete this deal”.

I have to say that I would agree with both sides here.  I personally never use YouTube anymore, which was not a conscious decision but just kind of happened that way.  Similarly, I think that once this transaction is complete, Twitter may lose a lot of its luster.  However, I think Twitter should not consider hesitating whatsoever.

It is my humble belief that Twitter is far away from anything that resembles profitability.  I also believe that the days of large valuations for unprofitable companies are coming to an end.  With the down turn in the economy, I think that the patience of the shareholders, to take the massive dilution required to acquire these unprofitable companies, is waning.  I think what we are seeing is an economy that goes back to basics, with more realistic valuations based on fundamentals.  It is quite possible that some companies, like Twitter, will still be able to ride the hype.  On the other hand, those opportunities are becoming far and few between.

So, who is right in my imaginary scenarios outlined here?  As a more recent user of Twitter, I would have to agree with the majority of users.  Keep Twitter independent!  At the same time, as a capitalist, I would have to agree with the majority of the Twitter employees, “Do the deal, do the deal”.  

Getting to the point, the wisdom of the “entire” crowd is valuable but sometimes the granularity of the crowd’s wisdom can be important.  Now if only we could really access it. 

The Crowd is gathering…….