Nettle: One User's Experience

Aaaaaaaaaaiiiieieeeee!!!!!

But there it is, MP3.com, with its flashy new homepage that proves that the World Wide Web can still, in late 2002, offer surprises. Too bad they're not always pleasant surprises...

By the way, clicking on the "Listen" menu in the new navbar hanged MS Internet Explorer (in MacOS X).

I find it telling that my.mp3.com receives very little of the facelift treatment. A sign of things to... go?

Experts Exchange

Server Outage

Update

Everyone Who's Anyone, Whether They Want to Be or Not

Google Tip:
To find agents with Google, what I do is first type in the agent's name in quotes and then add the word agent. So a search query might look like:

"Robert Gottleib" agent

If you just type in the agent's name, you'll get results for every person with that name, which is a time-waster. Sometimes the results are better if you use the word "agency" instead of "agent." Often, you can find out which authors are signed to this agent by appending "my agent" to the name. This digs up interviews with authors, or author websites, that proclaim "so and so is my agent." Very handy. by Brian L. Dear

This nettle article will, I suspect, chiefly resonate with writers and people in the publishing biz: editors, publishers, and literary agents. However, I encourage all intrepid nettle fans to stick around and read on!

I made an extraordinary discovery last evening, one that it seems very few people know about (until now!), and I want to share it with you. It's a website, a labor of love by some guy who must have taken months to put it together. A website of particular interest to writers who don't have literary agents yet. I'll admit I've been hesitant to write this article, because in a way, one could argue the last thing the publishing industry needs is more publicity about the website I'm going to be reviewing. But I just couldn't resist. I'm not so sure his site is going to be around long, so we must enjoy it while it lasts. I suggest reading this whole article before visiting the site. In fact the article concludes with a suggested way of reading the site (complete with glass of wine and appropriate music).

First, Some Background.

As some of you may know, I happen to be writing a nonfiction book. So I'm into the whole publishing thing these days, very focused on the book and everything that goes into getting it published. Getting signed by a trade publishing house in 2002 is not easy, nor is it easy to find That One Literary Agent Who Loves Your Book At First Sight And Will Make It Their Mission In Life To Find The Best Publisher For You. Especially if it's the author's first book. But like anything, all good things come to those who ... persist, dig in, fight the good fight, hang in there, and never give up. (I didn't say "wait" because when it comes to getting a book published, nothing comes to those who wait. You have to keep working in between the days and weeks and months of time that pass between sending your queries out to agents and hearing back from them.)

This article is about what one writer did while waiting.

For months I've been reading about agents in various directories and guidebooks and howtos and all that. I've gone to writers conferences. I've met some agents. I've corresponded with some. I've even gotten some interest, and am working on revisions based on agent feedback. So things are looking up. I still occasionally Google for agents, to see what's new on the ones I'm tracking.

During my Googling session last evening, I came across a web page that mentioned an agent I was investigating. The web page was unfamiliar -- very clean page, tan background color, with the most unusual design. The page was immensely long --- my browser's scrollbar squished down to a few pixels high --- and there didn't seem to be any order to the information on the page. I scrolled to the top and clicked on a link for "Home".

"Everyone Who's Anyone in Adult Trade Publishing", the home page announced. Here was a homepage that looked just like the cover of a book. Nothing fancy, strictly business.

"Adult Trade?" I admit, when I saw that, I thought, uh-oh. Don't go any further. These are not the agent-droids you're looking for. Underneath the big title were four links to agents, editors, and publishers in the US, UK, and Canada. I assumed this website meant "adult" in the commercial publishing industry sense, not in the "other" sense (you never know what you're getting into on the web). So I took a chance and clicked on the "United States Literary Agents" link. Right away I recognized some of the agent names listed on the page. Some of these agents I've met, some I've even spoken with, or corresponded with. "Adult Trade" simply means "non-children's trade books" --- the novels and nonfiction you buy at Amazon or Barnes & Noble or Borders or Waldenbooks or whatever. Not to worry.

I kept browsing through the huge page. Hmmmmm, I thought, interrrrresssssstinnngg. Everyone's emails are here! Incredible! Lynn Nesbit's! Mort Janklow's! Top top agents who only deal with top top authors and multimillion-dollar advances! Not a chance in the world they would deal with any unknown whippersnapper, and absolutely not a chance in the world they'd want their email addresses plastered all over a public, freely-accessible website for the world to see... for spammers to see. Omigod! Look at this stuff! This is unbelievable!

What did I do? I stopped reading immediately. I went back to the site's home page. I selected the "File" menu from the browser. Then I selected the "Save" option off of that menu. I saved the page to my hard disk. Then I went to the first page of the agent listings. Did File -> Save again. Saved. Went to the next page. Saved. And so on. For the whole site. Save it all. I mean, this site is a goldmine --- for writers. It's the worst nightmare imaginable, I suspect, for a lot of agents. I have strong doubts it's not going to be around for very long. A lot of these agents are lawyers. (Many agents and editors will no doubt be changing their email addresses because of the E.W.A. site. E.W.A. no doubt has caused a lot of pain and hassle in agent and publisher IT departments everywhere. And there's no doubt in my mind that any editor who has heard of E.W.A. will never represent him.)

The guy who put this E.W.A. site together, one Gerard Jones (not the comic book guy, he'll have you know), is an author who has two novels he's trying to sell. Right away, this site appeared to me to be a collection of rejection slips from hundreds of agents and editors all over the U.S. In fact, that's what I thought the site was, initially. "My Rejection Slip Saga." Every author gets rejected. It's part of the dues one must pay. I figured, by the end of Page Four, I'd see an acceptance, and a happy ending. Wait. Omigod. It's rejections all the way down. And not just rejections, either.

And it's not just agents. Jones went after editors at publishing houses as well. There are two huge pages of editor info, complete with their correspondence and rejection letters. If someone replies to Jones' email, no matter what the reply, Jones prints the email for all to see. Anything an agent or editor says in email is captured and presented in blue. Jones' replies then follow in black. If the agent or editor writes back, Jones prints that too. In blue. Jones seems to like having the last word (although, I suspect that editors and agents are going to have the last laugh). Entire email exchanges are included right in the directory. It's very much like what I imagine the experience of reading someone's personal copy of the Writer's Market 2002 Guide to Literary Agents to be, complete with thousands of personal scribblings in the margins, and, tucked here and there among the pages, printouts to all of the personal email correspondence between the unknown wannabe author and every agent listed in the book. This thing is extraordinary. On multiple levels. It's creepy, it's fascinating, it's hilarious.

I've never felt so much empathy for poor agents.

Take this memorable exchange, with one poor Mitchell Ivers, an editor with Simon and Schuster. Ivers received Jones' initial mass mailing, announcing the web directory he was creating.

"I don't accept unsolicited email submissions," Ivers curtly wrote back.

"The vast majority of editors don't even respond to unsolicited email submissions. Thanks. G."

"So don't send them. It's the moral equivalent of spam," Ivers replied. "My two cents: get an agent."

"I like sending them," Jones wrote back. "The publishing industry is the moral equivalent of incest. I've got two books, one fiction and one nonfiction, both of which are better than anything Simon & Schuster has published in the last ten years..."

"Who are you?" said Ivers. "You must be a virus. I'm delieting your first email. Identify yourself or to hell with your spam."

"Dear Mitchell: I'm not a virus. Don't be silly. Go to this website..."

"It may not be a virus but it's still a SCAM," Ivers wrote back. "Can't wait till this is illegal."

Usability, Shmusability
A nettle-style critique of these pages would be fairly straightforward. I mean, if you are a writer looking for a directory of agents that's readily usable as a quick reference, you're going to be disappointed. The design does not lend itself well to readablity or quick-scanability (although Jones has provided a search capability, and it does work). Massively long pages, arranged in seemingly unknown order, with different shaped boxes of text.... it's pretty to look at, the kind of thing e.e.cummings might do if he were still around, hacking HTML tables, but usability-wise, it's difficult to use.

Or is it? It occurs to me that this is not a directory, it's a story, a work of art. Of course! In fact, to fully appreciate this story, here is what I recommend you do:

How to Best to Appreciate "Everyone Who's Anyone"
First, you need to get some things:

• 1 candle.
• 1 match.
• 1 bottle of red wine.
• 1 glass.
• 1 computer with Internet connection.
• 1 CD of the Satyagraha opera by Philip Glass. (If unavailable, a CD of Powwaqatsi will suffice. But definitely, the musical soundtrack to this experience must be the repetitive, minimalist music of Philip Glass. Absolutely no question.)
• Several hours to burn.

Step 1. Turn off the lights in your room.
Step 2. Light candle with match. Place next to monitor.
Step 3. Open wine, pour into glass. Sip.
Step 4. Pop on some headphones and Fire up the Philip Glass music.
Step 5. Fire up web browser. Connect to the website.
Step 6. Start on Page One, and you slowly scroll down, reading every line, every box, every entry, and a few hours later you end up on Page Four, amused, shocked, a little scared (it's like standing over the shoulder of a stalker), and very, very sympathetic towards agents and editors everywhere.

Reading "Everyone Who's Anyone" is like watching certain scenes in Michael Moore films, where he takes his video camera and microphone and walks into the lobbby of some major corporation, asking to see the CEO. The receptionist gets nervous, calls for some Corporate Communications guy to come out. The CC guy comes out, and your textbook "How can I help you?" "You can help by getting the CEO" exchange begins. At some point you see the expression on the poor CC guy's face change to one of "um, this guy is a kook, time to call the cops..."

Jones has succeeded in creating a whole new kind of multi-media. A multi-layered directory. On one layer, it's simply a directory of names, addresses, and email addresses. On another layer, it's his own personal saga of trying to find a publisher for his books. On yet another layer, it's a window into the personalities of some very well known agents and editors.

I can't wait to see what happens next.

Netflix Strikes Again

Another SPAM
Got a second SPAM email from Netflix today. This one is interesting. First, the message.

Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 23:08:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Netflix 
Reply-To: mailservice@netflix.com
To: xxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx 
Subject: Have More DVDs to Watch
Message-ID: <12345.blablabla.Javamail.ml@mx7>
X-Mailer: NetFlix.com Hammer 0.5

Dear Brian,

Do you find that three movies isn't enough for your family? Need extra 
movies for the kids?  Did you know that Netflix offers plans where you 
can get four, five or even eight DVDs out at a time?

With over 12,000 movies we have enough movies to satisfy even the biggest
 movie lover in your home.  
Go to: http://www.netflix.com/SubscriptionChange?action=2&nfso=blablabl 
to upgrade and start enjoying more movies.

Netflix Ultimate
8 Disks Out - $39.95/month
For the ultimate at-home selection of DVDs at an incredible value, choose 
our Ultimate Program.  Get movies for everyone in your household. It lets 
you have 8 movies out at a time for a flat monthly fee of $39.95.

Netflix Plus
5 Disks Out - $29.95/month
Ideal for members who want a larger selection of DVDs at home, our Plus 
Program lets you have 5 movies out at a time for a flat monthly fee of $29.95.

Netflix Bonus
4 Disks Out - $24.95/month
With variety, value and an extra movie, our Bonus Program lets you have 4 
movies out at a time for a flat monthly fee of $24.95.

-Your Friends at Netflix

We are committed to protecting your privacy. We will not sell, rent or disclose 
your personally identifying information to third parties without notifying you 
of our intent to share the information and giving you an opportunity to prevent 
your information from being shared. You can review our privacy policy anytime.

SRC: BLABLABLA
(c)2002 Netflix, Inc.

This message was mailed to [xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx]

So why do I find this email interesting? Let's see.

1. I'm not in the 3-DVDs-out deal. Netflix thinks I am.
Easiest way to lose the interest of a customer when pitching something to them: attempt to upsell the customer from tier Y to tier Z, when in fact the customer is at tier X. I'm not in the three-movies deal with Netflix, but this email demonstrates that somebody's script in Netflix's "Hammer" system thinks I am.

Maybe the script has a bug in it. Maybe the script did check my customer records, did note that I'm not in the three-DVDs-out plan, and custom-tailored the SPAM message accordingly. But then something went horribly wrong, like a variable getting clobbered, or a buffer overflow, or an initialization coming too early or something. Possible. Likely? Who knows.

It's just as likely, unfortunately, that this spam just went out to all Netflix customers, across the board, without regard to whether they're in the three-DVDs-out plan or not. Me, I'm in the two-DVDs-out plan (never heard of it? Read on!). The Plan Netflix Doesn't Want You To Know About. Or, The Plan Netflix Is In Denial About, more likely.

I don't think this is a programming bug. I'm thinking GIGO (garbage in, garbage out.) My question for the Email Marketing Manager: what exactly did you tell Engineering to do?

2. "Hammer"? What am I, a Nail?
So Netflix's spam system appears to be called "Hammer". Kind of a weird name for a spam system. (I remember the one at MP3.com was called "Cannon". When we let that thing pump out 10 million Sephora purfume spams a day, why, you could feel the building's foundation rumble.)

Note that "Hammer" is only at version 0.5. Methinks it still needs some work. And is it really running on JavaMail? Aiiiieeeee.

3. Privacy is Important, But Getting the Details Right is More Important
Netflix smartly posts a privacy disclaimer in the email, assuring customers that the company will never, ever sell or disclose its information (at least, not until it decides to do so like, say, Amazon). I would love to see a disclaimer that not only assures the customer that their privacy is protected, but also says, "We care about serving you well. If this email contains erroneous assumptions about which subscription plan you are actually in, or if through this email the company has otherwise made a fool of itself, you be sure to let us know and we'll immediately work to correct the mistake" and providing a URL to a form to fill out back on the site and a customer support representative will respond within 4-6 weeks and ---- waitaminnit. No no no no no. Wrong. The customer shouldn't have to do anything. This is the responsibility of the company. Two words: "Quality Assurance". Look into it.

Netflix Lite
So if I'm not at the three-DVDs-out subscription plan, what plan am I at? Why, the double-secret probation two-DVDs-out plan, otherwise known as "Netflix Lite", costing $15.13 a month ($13.95 plus tax). So I can rent any number of DVDs but only two can be "out" at any time. Considering I'm located within 100 miles of a Netflix distribution center, this is not a problem as the discs arrive in 1 day. Well, this is not a problem for me. I suspect it is a problem for Netflix.

Netflix doesn't promote the "Lite" program anymore. I suspect it still exists because of worth of mouth -- that's how I heard about it. (Hmm, upon proofreading I see I said "worth of mouth" instead of "word of mouth". I kinda like that error, so I'm keeping it in.) I also suspect it still exists because a loss-leader customer is still more valuable than no customer at all. When my free 10-day trial was over, I emailed customer service and told them I'd like to stay on and be a Netflix customer, but I didn't want to do the 3- or 4- or 5- or 8-out plan. I wanted to do the 2-out plan, but that wasn't listed on the change-your-subscription page on the Netflix site. The customer service rep put me into the Lite plan, no questions asked, and that was that. I wonder if the Lite plan is profitable for Netflix. Judging from the SPAM above, it's clear that Netflix wants me to have as many discs sitting around my house as possible. Netflix would prefer I keep them for a long time. The only thing I can assume is that they prefer it this way because it costs them money to send them out and receive them back. So if you are an "active" customer like me, then that is more costly to them. Ironically, this is the complete opposite of Blockbuster, where they want the discs/tapes back ASAP, and they penalize you if you're late. I've never been late to a Blockbuster. I've been accused of being late several times, but I had proof each time and I was able to show them that they were wrong.

If I could, I'd up the rate to 12 or 14 DVD rentals per month, still on the 2-DVDs-out plan. Technically, it's doable. I mean, on day 1 of the month, Netflix pops two DVDs out of my queue and mails them to me. I get 'em on Day 2. I watch them on Night 2. I mail them back on Day 3. Netflix gets 'em Day 4, and sends out two more from my queue. I get them Day 5 and watch them that night. And so on and so on. Problem is, that's a lot of DVDs to watch in one month, and it cuts into my movie-going at movie theaters like Madstone. (Wouldn't it be something if it turned out that what Hollywood wanted us to do is start perceiving the phyiscal theatre-going experience as nothing more than a chance to see the sneak preview of what the subsequent DVD's going to contain? In other words, you go to the movies to audition future purchases or rentals.)

UPDATE: Continued in Part Eight...

Netflix Revisited (Part 6 of a Series)

Summary of Video Rental Activity
So I've been a Netflix customer for about two months. I've rented 16 films so far, with two more hopefully arriving in the mail tomorrow. That makes 18 in about 60 days. (Thank you, Netflix, for the "rental history" option. It is most excellent.) I'm still a Blockbuster customer, but my Blockbuster rental activity is dramatically reduced (3 or 4 movies in 60 days, as opposed to what was routinely 15-20 movies per 60 days.) So what am I renting now at Blockbuster? VHS movies -- mostly foreign, documentary, and indie (in other words, everything BUT "blockbusters"!) -- none of which have "gone to DVD" yet. Solve that problem, Netflix, and my Blockbuster days are over.

The Phases of the Netflix Customer Life-cycle
So I've passed from Phase One, namely, Netflix Newbie. This is the phase of the brand-new customer, who takes a chance, signs up for the free 10 days of service, selects some DVDs to rent, and sits back and waits. Phase One worries include: Will the discs arrive? Will they be damaged? Will they be the right discs?

When the first discs arrive, you enter Phase Two: you discover how the discs are packaged (as cheaply but durably as possible -- thanks to Tyvek!), you watch the movies, and you notice your worries have changed. Phase Two worries include: where did I put those envelopes? Did [insert family member name here] throw them out? Did I put the right DVD back into the right sleeve? Does it matter? Will I remember to mail the discs today? Will they get back to Netflix safely? If they don't, do I have to pay? And so on.

Then comes Phase Three: the committment. You sign up for the pay service, your ten days being up. At this point you're not used to just going wild and clicking the button for every single movie that strikes your fancy. That behavior comes later. :-) For now, you're still selective. You cautiously add a handful of DVDs to your queue and visit your queue often to see that they've been added. The trepidations about whether the discs will arrive in the mail lessen as you see the increasingly-routine Netflix emails arrive in your inbox, announcing receipt of the discs you've returned, followed by new emails announcing the sending of the next N movies from your queue.

I'm now into Phase Four. The Borg phase. Total assimilation. I visit the site less and less, but when I do, I click "rent", surf around the site some more, click "rent", surf, rent, surf, rent rent, surf surf, rent rent, surf surf, done. I occasionally look at my Queue numbers -- but rarely visit the Queue page. Phase Four worries: I have no idea what movies are next in the queue. Oh no, they're dry documentaries! What was I thinking! Oh, can I change them in time? Oh no. That just won't do for this weekend!

Netflix probably hopes I never reach Phase Five, which is where the customer starts thinking, You Know, There's More to Life Than Renting And Watching DVDs, and worries what one worries about when one starts thinking such things. Right now I am locked into Phase Four, so all is well.

My First Netflix SPAM
Netflix, I had hoped you guys wouldn't, but you did. You spammed me. And guess what. Your offer was completely non-relevant and uninteresting to me. Here's the email:

******************************************************************

*NETFLIX*       Lights... Camera... Action!       October 2, 2002*

******************************************************************

Dear Brian,

From time to time, we like to feature a movie that we think you may 
find particularly interesting.

Blade 2

Blade (Wesley Snipes) is a half-vampire sworn to eradicating the 
bloodsuckers who lurk in the shadows.   But when a new kind of bloodsucker
-- the dread "reapers" -- is unleashed, the Vampire Nation asks  Blade to help 
his longtime foes prevent a nightmare plague that would wipe out human and 
vampire alike.  Directed by Guillermo Del Toro (Cronos, The Devil's Backbone),
Blade II mixes high-tech action with crimson terror.

More details: http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?blahblahlablhablablablaablabl

Rent: http://www.netflix.com/EmailRent?blablablablablablablablablablablablablablala

Want to see more recommendations? Come check out your Best Bets!

http://www.netflix.com/Recs?blablablablablabl

Tip: Try rating more movies. Each time you rate a movie we record your vote 
and use it to help recommend movies!

http://www.netflix.com/RateMovies?blablablablabla

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

Give Free Rentals!

Here's your chance to tell your friends and family how easy and convenient it is 
to rent DVDs from Netflix.  Click below, enter their e-mail address and we'll invite 
them to try Netflix for FREE.

http://www.netflix.com/SpreadTheWord?blablablablabla

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

-Your Friends at Netflix

***************************************************************

BESTBUY.COM

Pre-order American Idol and get an exclusive bonus disc!

http://www.netflix.com/ShowEmailAd?blablablablablablablablablablablablabla

On October 15, TV's surprise hit of the summer comes to DVD. And when you 
order the limited-edition American Idol: The Search for a Superstar from 
BestBuy.com, you'll receive an exclusive bonus disc, featuring extras like "A 
Day in the Life of Justin" and "Judges' Profiles."

On the American Idol DVD itself, you'll also receive tons of special features, 
like:

* Top 10 Finalists: The Complete Auditions
* Top 10 Arguments: When Judges Attack
* Top 10 Tips: How to Be an American Idol

Check out BestBuy.com's Movies store for more of your favorite films.

http://www.netflix.com/ShowEmailAd?blablablbalablablablablablablablablablablabla

***************************************************************

From time to time, we send our members newletters showcasing some new 
releases we think they may find  interesting. If you would prefer not to receive
these e-mails in the future, please click the link below to unsubscribe.
http://www.netflix.com/EmailSubscription?blablablablablabla


SRC: blablablablablabl
(c) 2002 Netflix, Inc.

This message was mailed to [xxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxm]

Blade 2!?!?!?!? I mean, come on. You've got to be kidding! Netflix: hear me now, jot this down in your database. I hate vampire flicks. Except for really weird ones like Nosferatu, and Coppola's Dracula (the latter seen every, say, 5 years, is okay) -- other than that, I just plain don't like the genre. I have not seen Blade 1. I have not seen Blade 2. There is a reason. You now know it. :-)

I figure, your bizdev guys cut a deal with Best Buy and you need to deliver them a certain number of agreed-upon impressions ("eyeballs"), right? And so my eyeballs were handy, why not send the SPAM to me, right? Bzzt. Wrong. Your site should notice I visit with regularity. When I do, I always populate the queue with a few more flicks. I have 72 movies in my queue right this moment, That should give you an indication that I'm kinda happy with the service and don't need any prodding. I appreciate your need to do bizdev and get the deals and expand your revenue sources, but this kind of email wreaks of 1999. I urge you to explore alternative, more progressive, approaches. I encourage you to consider Jeff Bezos' approach (which I still admire): VERY occasional emails, very folksy, very humble, telling a story, or, as Cluetrain would suggest, carrying on a conversation. Extending an invitation. Inviting me to learn something new about you. Inviting me to share in the discovery of something new. That would be quite different from sending me a 1999-era "eyeball" bizdev-deal SPAM. Sure, my viewing the email now counts as an "impression" and you can add 1 to the "impression count" in the contract you have with BestBuy. But did you ever stop to consider that the term "impression", to the customer, has a different meaning than to a product manager thinking, "eyeballs looked at"? To the customer it means "made an impression". In this case, you made a bad one.

Customer Input vs Company Output
What I really like about Netflix is how little time the service requires of me. And, as time goes on, my time requirement becomes even less and less. Yet the quality of the company's output --- the discs it mails to me --- remains high. So my perceived value of the service is high. The fact that I perceive that the time I must take to cause the company to output stuff to me is less and less, causes me to perceive an increasing value of the company's output to me. Compare to other ecommerce sites:

Other sites, like eBay, have over the years been rather notorious for the amount of user input required to get ANY output -- in other words, to get stuff shipped to you. The registration process was gnarly and time-consuming, the bidding process was hair-raising and time-consuming, and the post-auction process was "you're on your own", an iffy venture with an unknown third party. eBay has been addressing these issues over the past couple years with Checkout, Sell Your Item 2.0, and improved Registration user flows. All meaning the amount of user input goes down, without reducing the quality of the company's output. That's good.

To me, this is what makes Netflix attractive. It is in the sweet spot of the graph. The goal for an ecommerce business is not to get to the upper right-hand corner of that graph. The goal is to get to the far lower-right-hand corner of that graph. The amount of USER INPUT, meaning time and effort spent reading, clicking, deciding, ordering, on the website, should be as minimal as possible yet at the same time, the quality of the output of the company should be high. As time goes on, if input decreases yet output stays high or even goes higher, that makes for one happy customer. Do less, get more. That's what customers want.

Out of Site, Out of Mind
A note of caution to Netflix: right now I'm happy because I can make quick decisions, 10-15-30 seconds on the Netflix site, add some more DVDs to the queue, and I am "out of site, out of mind". In the old days, say, 1999, this would have been a nightmare. Site stickiness was all the rage: how do we get you, the user, to stay on the site for longer and longer periods of time? Now, with businesses like Netflix, the equation has shifted: the customer is asking, how do I come to the site less and less but still remain a loyal customer and get value out of my subscription? I think Netflix is doing a good job here. HOWEVER, the SPAM shifts Netflix out of the sweet spot. It requires MUCH more of my time to deal with an email from Netflix in my inbox -- hmm, it's not a notification, it's not telling me it received something, it's not telling me it sent me something, is it telling me there's a problem with my account? Is it telling me that there's some great new feature or functionality or deal on the site that I'm going to benefit from? Hmm, I'll have to open the email and read it... hmm... waitaminnit... this is SPAM... oh no...Netflix... how could you... In fact, because of a chance ordering of my Eudora filtering rules, it's a lucky thing I saw this email at all, because it was a prime candidate to be automatically dumped in my "trash" mailbox. Reason: I scan for the word "unsubscribe". Anything that has that in it, and hasn't already been caught by a higher-up filter, gets trashed. In this case, the "from Netflix" rule was triggered first, so I saw your SPAM. But as Dubya would say, fool me once... fool me twice... won't get fooled again! :-)

More Thoughts on Ratings
I visited the Netflix homepage today and was greeted with a bunch of recommended DVDs. I've seen, or I own, most of them. For ones I've seen but don't own, it still bugs me that I can't tell Netflix, "I've Seen It, I Liked It, and I DO want to rent it some time, so REMIND ME about it!". Apparently this still isn't a big deal to Netflix. Oh well.

I noticed some new stuff on the site: the No Opinion option. Hmm. So now I can indicate to Netflix that I have no opinion about a particular DVD that's recommended to me. Whereas "Not Interested" suggests that the user does not care for the film and it should not be recommended to the user ever again, what does "no opinion" imply? I'm still left wondering if you say anything to Netflix about a movie -- whether you love it, hate it, or don't care at all -- does that mean, never, ever (for all intents and purposes) recommend it again? I keep thinking about the "like / don't like" / "own / don't own" matrix I drew up back in Part Four of this Netflix review. Especially the "like but don't own" quadrant. I submit that Netflix is still missing the boat here. As a customer I still have a perception (it may very well be wrong, but hey, you never really explain it on the site, guys!) that any communication from me about my interest or lack-thereof in a particular DVD means I will never have it recommended to me again. And so I am hesitant to tell Netflix about anything unless it's a "Not Interested", or it's something that I have seen, sorta liked, but wouldn't lose any sleep if I never saw it again.

And I think this is a shame. I already regret that rate-fest I went through the first week I was a customer. I got online, and rated everything in sight -- all the movies I'd seen in theaters or own already or have already rented thru Blockbuster. But what I was unable to tell Netflix was, hey, most of these movies I wanna rent, so keep recommending 'em to me! Be a reminder service for me!

When I think of personalization in the DVD rental space, I envision a scenario as follows. Imagine if Blockbuster were completely personalized for ME. Imagine if the local store KNEW I was about to hop in the car and head over. Imagine that at that moment, the employees scrambled and arranged, along all of the top and next-to-top (i.e. most visible) shelves in all the nearest aisles, all the movies I liked, have seen in a theatre but expressed an interest in renting in the future, or haven't seen but might like. So when I arrived at the store, the experience I had was one of "oh yeah, I forgot about that flick, definitely wanna rent that!" and "oh yeah, that one too!" and "cool, that's a great one!" and "great, didn't know this was already out in DVD, this one's a rental too!" and so on. This is what my experience should be on the Netflix homepage.

In fact, if it were up to me, this is what I would like to see on my personalized Netflix homepage: a grid of 100 DVD thumbnail images (approximately 2x larger than the sizes Netflix currently uses), with the first 25 letters of the title, in a small font underneath, and then underneath the title, two buttons: "Details" and "RENT". No ratings, no descriptions, no nothin'. (In fact, get rid of the "Details" button if you want, just make the image clickable -- if I clicked the image, that'd mean I want details.) So all there'd be would be a grid of 100 DVD boxes, say 5 columns, 20 rows. As if I were looking at a shelf in a store. Gotta make the images larger so I can read 'em better, but you'd be surprised how recognizable they are even when pretty small. I would call this the "iconic" interface --- heavy on the pictures, light on the text. The only other options for me would be to move forward or backwards --- meaning, show me the previous 100 DVDs, or the next 100 DVDs. To me, this is a high-bandwidth-user option that not everyone would like, but it would be great for me. It could be a "mode", an alternative method of browsing the site, in addition to the conventional way that exists now. For years I have recommended that music sites do the same thing (this works just as well for CD covers, 100 at a time).

Well, that's enough for now.

UPDATE:

Continued in Part Seven...

A Hearty Welcome

When Print Ads Go Online

Back in the 1980s there was a nice little computer rag in San Diego called Byte Buyer. Printed on newsprint, Byte Buyer was a great way to find out good deals on PCs, Macs, and accessories, as well as find out dial-up numbers for scores of Bulletin Board Systems (BBS's) -- we're talking totally pre-WWW, pre-AOL here. At one point Byte magazine came along and claimed trademark infringement, and Byte Buyer was forced to change their name. The name they picked, ComputorEdge always rubbed me the wrong way. I think it was the "O". :-) Ever since then I've called it "ByteBuyor"...

Anyways... I mention ComputorEdge because a few years ago they started doing something on their website that I thought was very cool. They started including all of the print ads from the print version of the magazine.

"B-b-but... who cares about print ads online!? Why is this a big deal?" That might be what you're thinking right now. Nobody reads ads anyway, right? Ads are bad. Ads are evil, right? Banner ads are worthless -- people tolerate 'em (sometimes they don't) -- but they have no value, right? So how could reproductions of actual print ads possibly be useful? Oh, I believe they can be quite useful. In fact, I've visited the ComputorEdge site countless times over the years to browse their ads -- that's the reason I went to their site -- for me, that was the content I was looking for: what did Datel Systems, a local San Diego PC clone dealer, have on sale this week? How much were local decked-out Pentium boxes going for? What about Chip Merchant -- what were this week's deals at that venerable San Diego institution? (I've always loved the Chip Merchant business name -- simple, direct, plain: not a "tron" or "dyna" or "onics" or "sys" or "data" in sight!).

Advertisements become content when relevance reaches a certain point. For me, anyways. I like ads. I study ads. When I read a magazine or newspaper, I not only read the articles, but I study the ads. For some ads, it's because I am genuinely interested in that company, service, or product. For others, it's because I want to understand the design, brand, and message. I am probably not your average print publication reader. (Then again, who knows? Maybe I am? My personal "conversion rate" is, I suspect about the same as everyone else: way, way, way under 1%.)

So when I recently discovered that the San Diego Union-Tribune was offering all of their print advertisements through the website (well, not all their ads, unfortunately, but many), I was pleased. Two publications here in San Diego doing the same thing. The beginning of a trend?

Turns out, it is. In fact, as I should have guessed, there's a startup cashing in on the trend: AdExpedia, based in Chico, CA. (Now the first thing that struck me about AdExpedia was, um... their name. Um, I think these guys may be in for a ByteBuyor situation of their own if they're not careful...)

For years I subscribed to the print publication of the Wall Street Journal. I should have been the ideal customer to transition over to the Online Edition of the WSJ when that originally launched. I was intrigued. I used it while it was free. But nothing beat the print edition. I wanted to know who was spending $100,000 to run a full-page ad that day. I loved reading the occasional cheeky full-page ad from Steve Jobs, or IBM, or one of the princes of Saudi Arabia. Or the full-page hostile takeover pleas from beleagured shareholders for or against a merger. It was all part of the WSJ reading experience. The online edition just wasn't the same without those big ads from the paper. And the small ads too: the houses, the boats, the Ferraris, all of that was interesting to browse through -- what are the trends? Are prices up this week or down?

Now, AdExpedia comes along and they're making a business of it. Not everyone is impressed, however. INC. Magazine recently did a profile on AdExpedia and the reviews were mixed. They're in for a challenge, no doubt about it. But for this reader, what AdExpedia and ComputorEdge are doing is a completely natural and reasonable next step in the merger of print and online media. Really, in the end, the whole damn print publication should be available daily as a fresh PDF.

Then I'd be happy. :-)

Update 20:13 PST
Another sign of this increasing trend. Google's entering the biz in a way too, with their new beta test of Google Catalogs, where you can browse -- you guessed it -- high-res scans of actual mail-order catalogs. Yes! Save those trees! (Now if only our friends at the AIGA would take a hint...)