Ecom-nomics 101

Welcome to my blog. This topic is hardly orginal, but, they say, write what you know. In my case, I am hoping to use my writing to get at what I don’t know. While that list is obviously rather long, right now I am referring to what I don’t know about ecommerce.  And mostly, that is business process.

In the abstract, it is easy to do things the “right” way.  Test, test and test some more. Keep testing, so they say, and things keep getting incrementally better. This philosophy is fantastic for its universality. It works equally well for SEM, email marketing, site design, checkout optimization, etc.  There are some pretty good books about it, but this title makes my point Always Be Testing. So true. And so wrong. Or not wrong, rather, often impractical to the point of impossible.

Business process is the great question of the next decade of ecommerce. How do you build structures that can lead to efficient optimization, not just cyclic testing? How do you find the most fruitful areas of yield? How do you know when NOT to test? How much should you invest in making untestable things testable? What kind of organization structures work best?

These, and others like them, are the questions I have for myself. These are the questions that I want to try to answer in my writing. I won’t be able to do it alone, for certain, but perhaps, someday, a comment or two may help.


One response to “Ecom-nomics 101

  1. I don’t know Mark. I think this does open a new area of competition, and competition is always good. With Google essentially owning the search market, there is little reason for them to improve the service, so something that might take eyeballs away, like Twitter, will hopefully spur them on.

    However, to date I haven’t found Twitter to be an incredibly good alternative. For example, I follow the Twitter feed for “lightning deals”, yet 90% of those hot deals are of absolutely no interest to me. So, to get the 10% I want to see, I have to suffer through, essentially, “spam”. Amazon does not have options to customize the lightning deals in a way I like.

    And that is how search engines like Google cropped up to begin with – helping you customize what it is that you want to see when you want to see it.

    Twitter (or similar services) need a way to me to only “follow” specific things, as opposed to specific “people” (or in this case, ads from a company). I don’t think I would want to follow “Fox News” (assuming I even of their political leaning, which I’m not). I might want to follow “Fox News – Political News – Northern California”, but I don’t think such an option would exist. The way Twitter works now, Fox would have to build all those Twitter accounts to service that kind of feed, and I don’t see them doing that.

    Given that Twitter now has an API for searching posts, and Google and Microsoft have inked deals with them for that API, I actually see Google staying on “top” here. Something like Google News, instead of linking to actual stories, may instead link to twitter posts of those actual stories, so Google is still your destination. And then who is to say that Twitter wouldn’t start scraping those TinyURL links posted by Fox News themselves, so that you don’t have to click and leave Twitter to read the article?

    However, in the meantime, I think we will all benefit, since competition in this space for eyeballs will only increase.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s