cow

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5943860/disgusting-pink-slime-company-launches-billion-dollar-offensive

Disgusting Pink Slime Company Launches Billion Dollar Offensive (Updated)In America, it’s not illegal to sell disgusting cow purée washed with ammonia for human consumption. But, according to BPI, the company that makes this dystopian meat filler, it’s illegal to talk about it. Time for a $1.2 billion lawsuit.

Mother Jones reports that BPI, which caught an enormous amount of (deserved!) hell for selling the grotesque quasi-protein, is “launching a $1.2 billion defamation suit against ABC News and three whistleblowers-two federal employees and a former BPI worker -who spoke to the news network.” This is what you do when you want to silence your critics after they call you out for doing something gross to the poor, uninformed, beef patty-chomping American public. But unless you work at ABC, this isn’t such a big deal. What is a big deal is that pink slime could be on the verge of a vile, goopy comeback.

Cargill, one of the largest privately owned companies in the United States, is a firm like BPI—they manufacture food on a massive industrial scale. They’re also keen on pink slime, and according to internal focus groups, they think the US public might be too. Why? We’re forgetful and generally don’t care about reality: “The issue is perception, not facts or science,” says a Cargill rep. Americans have extremely low attention spans. We’re done freaking out about pink slime—or “finely textured beef,” as the food factories call it—and have moved on to other worries, like Islam and re-runs of The Big Bang Theory:

“We found that in a month’s time the issue was in consumers’ rear view mirror and fading fast.  When they learned how this 100% beef product is produced and why it has value to everyone from farm to fork, they were comfortable with it being included as part of their ground beef.”

Cargill is now considering a re-launch of their own pink goop crap formula, meaning all the undesirable parts of the cow could be headed to your grocery store again in time for next BBQ season. Yum. [Food Navigator via Mother Jones]

Update: A BPI rep wrote in to say the original image included with this post was not, one of their products.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 17th, 2012 Uncategorized No Comments

Infinity Blade on iOS more profitable by the pound than any other game we’ve made

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/27/epic-games-infinity-blade-on-ios-more-profitable-by-the-pound/

Infinity Blade 1 on iPad

Traditional console makers have often sworn up and down that mobile doesn’t make money for game development. That might still be true for some developers, but you’ll get a very different answer if you ask Epic Games. Co-founders Tim Sweeney and Mark Rein have collectively described the currently iOS-only, Chair-developed Infinity Blade as the “most profitable game we’ve ever made” when considering the amount of money and time invested relative to the money coming back. Yes, that includes even the Gears of War series, which most consider Epic’s primary cash cow. Sweeney, like his long-time competitor Johh Carmack at id Software, is also taken aback by the power stuffed inside the latest generation of mobile devices — a 2012 iPad is nearer the performance of a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360, he tells Gamasutra, and the pace is only picking up. Even more insights await in the interview with Sweeney; click below if you want a hint of what one of gaming’s pioneers has to say about where your tablets, phones and (yes) PCs are going.

Epic Games: Infinity Blade on iOS more profitable by the pound than any other game we’ve made! ori ginally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 27 Jun 2012 19:22:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  sourceGamasutra, Mark Rein (Twitter)  | Email this | Comments

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012 news No Comments

Here’s Facebook’s Next Big Business

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-heres-facebooks-next-big-business-2012-2


Facebook’s ad revenue may not be growing fast enough to justify a $100 billion valuation. But ads are not the company’s only source of revenue.

Payments are becoming a big deal as well.

Last summer, Facebook started charging companies like Zynga 30 percent of each transaction — like purchasing a virtual good like a cow. (That’s a big reason why Zynga accounts for 12 percent of Facebook’s revenue, alhough that figure includes advertising as well.)

So although payments started as a tiny sliver of Facebook’s overall revenue, now it’s up to about 17 percent of the total.

As companies start to sell other kinds of goods through Facebook, like concert tickets, this percentage could grow.

facebook ad revenue split 

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, February 3rd, 2012 news No Comments

Here’s Facebook’s Next Big Business

Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-heres-facebooks-next-big-business-2012-2


Facebook’s ad revenue may not be growing fast enough to justify a $100 billion valuation. But ads are not the company’s only source of revenue.

Payments are becoming a big deal as well.

Last summer, Facebook started charging companies like Zynga 30 percent of each transaction — like purchasing a virtual good like a cow. (That’s a big reason why Zynga accounts for 12 percent of Facebook’s revenue, alhough that figure includes advertising as well.)

So although payments started as a tiny sliver of Facebook’s overall revenue, now it’s up to about 17 percent of the total.

As companies start to sell other kinds of goods through Facebook, like concert tickets, this percentage could grow.

facebook ad revenue split 

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, February 3rd, 2012 news No Comments

Verizon Wireless Gets Its First Portable 4G COW [Verizon]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5846299/verizon-wireless-gets-its-first-portable-4g-cow

Verizon Wireless Gets Its First Portable 4G COWThe next time you’re in Florida for a sporting event, your LTE connection could be provided by a COW, Verizon’s portable cell phone tower on wheels.

The carrier’s first 4G COW was delivered to Pembroke Pines and will be used at major public events throughout the state of Florida. The mobile cell tower lives up to it acronym. It weighs 24,000 pounds, measures 1,080 inches with its antenna extended, is powered by super-sized generators and can provide supplemental phone and data coverage for thousands of Verizon customers. [Electronista]


You can keep up with Kelly Hodgkins, the author of this post, on Twitter, Google + or Facebook.


drag2share – drag and drop RSS news items on your email contacts to share (click SEE DEMO)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 4th, 2011 news No Comments

Branding is still a useful activity? Reach and frequency is still a useful metric?

Source: http://community.microsoftadvertising.com/blogs/analytics/archive/2009/07/06/getting-back-to-basics-why-web-advertising-needs-traditional-media-metrics.aspx

Getting Back to Basics – Why Web Advertising Needs Traditional Media Metrics

posted Mon, Jul 06 2009

by Young Bean Song MSFT

Trying to build a brand marketing campaign without traditional target reach and Gross Rating Points (GRP) estimates is like trying to diet without the concept of calories. The analogy of dieting and advertising works on many levels.

continue reading Young Bean Song…

My response…

RE: “Patty Wakeling, an industry veteran who leads Unilever’s Global Media Insights Group, recently reminded me that in today’s retail environment, the choice between the branded versus the generic option are separated by less than an inch on the shelf. It was a sobering reminder of the power of branding, and why so many companies are willing to spend so much to build their brand equity.” But in the case of Whole Foods’ own store brand, 365, many people perceive it to be better than branded options (or at least equivalent). So they tend to choose to buy the 365 product instead. In other cases, what used to be brand equity/value is now perceived as an undesirable premium. Take another example — the rise and popularity of Trader Joe’s where 80% of the products sold are house brands. Consumers care about the product and its quality and value; consumers no longer care (as much) about the brand that is slapped on the package if the contents inside suck.

A brand used to be a mark or symbol burned onto a cow’s butt to signify what ranch it came from. And if people knew the ranch had a good reputation for raising healthy cows, they would buy the cow. The brand helped simplify the purchase decision. These days, advertisers carefully manicure “brand messages” and shout them at target consumers using various one-way channels such as TV, print, radio, and banner ads. But like Scott Cook, Intuit, said, “A brand is no longer wht we tell the consumer its – its what the consumers tell each other it is.” So branding as we know it (advertisers shouting claims at target customers) is less relevant or even unwanted entirely by modern consumers. And brand equity, which used to be a large, fungible item on the balance sheet (technically known as “good will”) may be far less valuable today. Consumers don’t just take the advertisers’ word for it; they will do their own research and buy what is actually valuable and useful.

Companies that actually develop useful and valueable products or services that consistently deliver on their promise — Apple, Drobo, Zappos, JetBlue, etc. — can even cut out their brand advertsing entirely because their brand IS their consistent delivery on the promise of value and usefulness. For example, has Apple EVER claimed they have awesome design and are easy to use? NEVER! But their products consistently deliver on those 2 attributes. So that’s how modern users would describe Apple’s brand to their friends.

A “brand” is earned over time. “Branding” is no longer a useful activity (and furthermore it is damned expensive — media costs — and ineffective — because it is the advertiser making claims that modern consumers don’t believe, assuming they saw the ad in the first place).

From AdAge — people buying private label, generics, or store brands (quality of which are pretty comparable to name brands)

Private Labels winning the battle of the brands
http://adage.com/article?article_id=134791

What do you think?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, July 8th, 2009 digital 3 Comments

Dr. Augustine Fou is Digital Consigliere to marketing executives, advising them on digital strategy and Unified Marketing(tm). Dr Fou has over 17 years of in-the-trenches, hands-on experience, which enables him to provide objective, in-depth assessments of their current marketing programs and recommendations for improving business impact and ROI using digital insights.

Augustine Fou portrait
http://twitter.com/acfou
Send Tips: tips@go-digital.net
Digital Strategy Consulting
Dr. Augustine Fou LinkedIn Bio
Digital Marketing Slideshares
The Grand Unified Theory of Marketing