Archive for the ‘web 2.0’ Category

Using non-core products as a loss leader!

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

One of the best ways (If done properly) to add additional revenue to your ecommerce sales is to sell non-core products (at cost or even at a loss) to gain additional core sales and new customers.

A great example that I found this weekend, is B&H Photo. They sell a variety of non-photography related computer and technical products. What quickly caught my attention is that many these products are being sold well below any other online retailer’s price, even cheaper than anyone on eBay. I don’t have access to wholesale computer accessory costs, but I imagine that they aren’t making much money, if any, on their computer product sales.

So how is this smart marketing?

When an established website like B&H draws sales from non-core products, they gain additional customers and brand exposure. What they gain by selling at cost, is the opportunity to sell other products for profit, and they gain repeat customers. In the end, if the amount of money spent marketing and supporting non-core products is minimal, there is absolutely no downside to this practice. If they aren’t making money from those computer related sales, they’re making money from those additional customers that are also interested in cameras, memory cards, photography accessories, and more computer accessories.

A good idea for some but not for everyone:

This practice can be a strong marketing technique, however, it will not create a sustainable business model for everyone. A businesses that can most effectively harness this technique must have a strong search engine presence, or the ability to draw sales and traffic at little to no additional cost. This technique is probably not a good idea for a startup business unless you really know what you are doing. A business must also have access to related but non-core products at a very competitive price.

Obvious potential pitfalls:

  • Some strong reserve must be used to not cannibalize existing profit margins, as it extremely easy to sell short on everything. Don’t make everything a loss leader, only those non-core products that you are adding.
  • Another danger is accidentally migrating from one core product type to another. It needs to be clear to yourself and to your customers what your business is there to do. If you are a photo shop, that sells some computer accessories, it should be clear that you are not a computer accessory seller that has some photography equipment. This is absolutely key in protecting your brand, and sustaining your business model.
  • The other products that you decide to sell must be related to what your business does. If would make no sense for an online flower shop to start selling car parts. You need to be careful not to dilute your brand, message, and what it is you currently do with completely unrelated products.
  • You do not ever want to enter an arena that will create a lot of additional customer support requests. This is a quick way to nullify any gain you get from additional customers and sales.

The big picture:

It’s sometimes difficult to grasp the concept of loosing money on one place to gain money in another. If you have the ability to step back and look at the big picture, you will find that there are numerous areas where a loss here can create a huge gain somewhere else. Small steps should always be taken when testing out a system that has both the potential for a loss and a gain, but I think that many will find that this is a useful, appropriate, and completely possible marketing technique.

ShareThis

Original post by jestep

Cool new forum hosting/service: Lefora

Wednesday, May 7th, 2008

A

Original post by Robert Scoble

Web 2.0, Please Meet Your Host, the Internet

Wednesday, May 7th, 2008

I have a major problem with many of the Web 2.0 companies that I meet in my job as a venture capitalist: They lack even the most basic understanding of Internet operations.

I realize that the Web 2.0 community generally views Internet operations and network engineering as router-hugging relics of the past century desperately clutching to their cryptic, SSH-enabled command line interfaces, but I have recently been reminded by some of my friends working on Web 2.0 applications that Internet operations can actually have a major impact on this century’s application performance and operating costs. So all you agile programmers working on Ruby-on-Rails, Python and AJAX, pay attention: If you want more people to think your application loads faster than Google and do not want to pay more to those ancient phone companies providing your connectivity, learn about your host. It’s called the Internet.

As my first case in point, I was recently contacted by a friend working at a Web 2.0 company that just launched their application. They were getting pretty good traction and adoption, adding around a thousand unique users per day, but just as the buzz was starting to build, the distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attack arrived. The DDOS attack was deliberate, malicious and completely crushed their site. This was not an extortion type of DDOS attack (where the attacker contacts the site and extorts money in exchange for not taking their site offline), it was an extraordinarily harmful site performance attack that rendered that site virtually unusable, taking a non-Google-esque time of about three minutes to load.

No one at my friend’s company had a clue as to how to stop the DDOS attack. The basics of securing the Web 2.0 application against security issues on the host system — the Internet — were completely lacking. With the help of some other friends, ones that combat DDOS attacks on a daily basis, we were able to configure the routers and firewalls at the company to turn off inbound ICMP echo requests, block inbound high port number UDP packets and enable SYN cookies. We also contacted the upstream ISP and enabled some IP address blocking. These steps, along with a few more tricks, were enough to thwart the DDOS attack until my friend’s company could find an Internet operations consultant to come on board and configure their systems with the latest DDOS prevention software and configurations.

Unfortunately, the poor site performance was not missed by the blogosphere. The application has suffered from a stream of bad publicity it’s also missed a major window of opportunity for user adoption, which has sloped significantly downward since the DDOS attack and shows no sign of recovering. So if the previous paragraph read like alphabet soup to everyone at your Web 2.0 company, it’s high time you start looking for a router-hugger, or soon your site will be loading as slowly as AOL over a 19.2 Kbps modem.

Another friend of mine was helping to run Internet operations for a Web 2.0 company with a sizable amount of traffic — about half a gigabit per second. They were running this traffic over a single gigabit Ethernet link to an upstream ISP run by an ancient phone company providing them connectivity to their host, the Internet. As their traffic steadily increased, they consulted the ISP and ordered a second gigabit Ethernet connection.

Traffic increased steadily and almost linearly until it reached about 800 megabits per second, at which point it peaked, refusing to rise above a gigabit. The Web 2.0 company began to worry that either their application was limited in its performance or that users were suddenly using it differently.

On a hunch, my friend called me up and asked that I take a look at their Internet operations and configurations. Without going into a wealth of detail, the problem was that while my friend’s company had two routers, each with a gigabit Ethernet link to their ISP, the BGP routing configuration was done horribly wrong and resulted in all traffic using a single gigabit Ethernet link, never both at the same time. (For those interested, both gigabit Ethernet links went to the same upstream eBGP router at the ISP, which meant that the exact same AS-Path lengths, MEDs, and local preferences were being sent to my friend’s routers for all prefixes. So BGP picked the eBGP peer with the lowest IP address for all prefixes and traffic). Fortunately, a temporary solution was relatively easy (I configured each router to only take half of the prefixes from each upstream eBGP peer) and worked with the ISP to give my friend some real routing diversity.

The traffic to my friend’s Web 2.0 company is back on a linear climb – in fact it jumped to over a gigabit as soon as I was done configuring the routers. While the company has their redundancy and connectivity worked out, they did pay their ancient phone company ISP for over four months for a second link that was essentially worthless. I will leave that negotiation up to them, but I’m fairly sure the response from the ISP will be something like, “We installed the link and provided connectivity, sorry if you could not use it properly. Please go pound sand and thank you for your business.” Only by using some cryptic command line interface was I able to enable their Internet operations to scale with their application and get the company some value for the money they were spending on connectivity.

Web 2.0 companies need to get a better understanding of the host entity that runs their business, the Internet. If not, they need to need to find someone that does, preferably someone they bring in at inception. Failing to do so will inevitably cost these companies users, performance and money.

Original post by Allan Leinwand

American Eagle Features Products on the Fly

Wednesday, March 5th, 2008

American Eagle Outfitters recently AJAX-ed up its web design including its navigation menu. What’s different about AE’s flyout menu that’s different from Office Max’ and Eddie Bauer’s navigation redesign is that it actually merchandises within the flyout. Here’s what I mean:

American Eagle Outfitters Redesign Navigation

When you roll over a section in the horizontal menu, a sub-menu appears with some featured items. In the example above, you see one featured Clearance item from each category: men’s, women’s and aerie.

Navigation Close-Up

This technique allows you to show more content without a click. Clicking away from a page means another click if you want to go back. But flyouts give the user a faster peek at what’s behind the menu buttons. And if you accidentally roll over a menu item, you may be enticed by that 50% off offer you otherwise would not be aware of.

The downsides of AJAX-y menus are they cover up content, can be finicky and require steady mouse control to operate properly. Or worse, they can appear when you don’t expect them too when you mouse a bit too close to the hot-spot. Not everyone will find this a usability improvement.

I noticed when you click on the Clearance button you get different featured items. I think it would be better to keep the same items as in the flyout, because a customer may click out of habit, and wonder where that green camisole disappeared to. You want to minimize the “whoa, what happened?” factor, especially when you’re introducing Web 2.0 coolness that may involve a learning curve. (Even for technosavvy Millennials like the AE customer. It just might be mom or grandma picking out a gift).

American Eagle Clearance Landing Page

Text in the red box doesn’t need to change after you click on Clearance. If a customer clicks on Clearance, he/she understands it’s the clearance section, you don’t have to restate the obvious. When it comes to online copy - less is more.

All-in-all, it’s a pretty neat idea. What do you think about merchandising within navigation? Love it? Hate it?

PS: If you’re interested in merchandising tips and trends, be sure to sign up today for our upcoming webinar: Effective Online Merchandising: What Sells?

Effective Online Merchandising: What Sells?
Free webinar: March 13th, 2008, 9am PT/12pm ET
Guest Panelist: Mike Svatek, Director, Marketing & Product Management, Baynote
Register to Attend

Original post by Linda Bustos

Continue Shopping Means What?

Monday, February 11th, 2008

Continue ShoppingYou’ve added your item to your cart, but you’re not finished shopping. So, you look for the “Continue Shopping” link to thrust you back to…to what? The product page? The category page? The home page?

Most sites don’t give you a clue where you’ll end up. GrokDotCom mentioned this in Grok’s Biggest Gripes about the ecommerce experience, and an informal survey of the author’s contemporaries revealed 100% of them found this irritating.

I’ve observed a number of different ways to handle “Continue Shopping” navigation in my online shopping escapades. I decided to check out 100 of the top internet retailers and round up the methods used and the frequency of each. The following is a rundown on “Continue Shopping” options, frequency and examples for your inspiration, curiosity and comments.

AJAX Pop-Up - 19%

Love or hate Web 2.0, 17 out of 100 retailers use an AJAX popup to indicate an item has been added to the cart. Though this is nice and convenient to keep the shopper on the product page, it can be hard for inexperienced online shoppers to notice what’s happened. Some sites are more obvious than others.

Patagonia and Moosejaw Mountaineering use a roll-out notice in the top right of the product page. You must click to close this box, but both retailers place the close button in the same place, with the same icon. This is Moosejaw’s:

Moosejaw Mountaineering Example

Can you figure out how to close this window?

(more…)

Love Your Landing Page: Tips to Increase Ecommerce Conversion
Free webinar: February 14th, 2008, 9am PT/12pm ET
Guest Panelist: Khalid Hajsaleh, President, INVESP Consulting
Register to Attend

Original post by Linda Bustos

Looking Back: The Year in Web 2.0

Monday, December 24th, 2007

A

Original post by Anne Zelenka

Jakob Nielsen Thinks Web 2.0 Sucks. Is He Right?

Thursday, December 20th, 2007

Thumbs Down 2.0Jakob Nielsen recently wrote an article “Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous…” In it he proposes that many Web 2.0 trends are not only useless for web users but can actually cut into your profits. He covered a lot of ground (definitely check out the article) and made a lot of good points. But a couple things don’t sit too well with me.

Nielsen Bashes AJAX

Nielsen argues AJAX and rich user interfaces are too complicated for the average user. Even though AJAX makes it easier to get more done on one page without reloading, it’s easy for people to miss the subtle changes on the page and think nothing happened. This could be a problem for “add to cart” and “checkout” processes. He recommends you stick with the old-school, page-by-page way of doing things.

“Users often overlooked modest changes, such as when they added something to the cart and it updated only a small area in a corner of the screen. It’s deadly for e-commerce sites when users can’t operate the shopping cart, so it’s usually best to stick to simple shopping-cart designs that everybody understands.”

Kudos to Howard Kaplan over at GrokDotCom for pointing out the fallacy of Nielsen’s arguments.

“Aren’t websites “more usable” today than they were then? Absolutely. So, a better question for Jakob would be, with so many of the top sites focusing on usability for so many years, why aren’t Conversion Rates any higher? According to the latest Shop.org numbers, they’re not even trending upward.

If he’s right, and the “web is a tool” users, as most usability practitioners would like to call your site’s visitors (can you think of any positive meanings to the word ‘users’?), attempt to accomplish tasks, Conversion Rates (the ratio of actions taken per total visitors) should have risen each-and-every year (until, naturally, the big-bad Web2.0 trend came to bring them crashing down).”

(more…)

Analytics: 12 Things to Learn from Christmas ‘07
Free webinar: Date To Be Announced, January 2008
Guest Panelist: To Be Announced
View the ecommerce webinar archive

Original post by Linda Bustos