These darn kids today & their newfangled music formats!

It seems that teenagers don’t buy CDs anymore.  They have moved beyond the compact disc in a big way. 

I know this because I just read this article in the LA Times, which says that in 2007, half of all U.S. teenagers bought zero CDs.  Well, almost half… it’s 48%. 

That’s sort of astounding.  I remember being a teenager–barely–and I bought a lot of tapes and CDs.  Hey, back off…I’m just old enough that my youth spanned the gap between cassette tapes and CDs. 

But regardless….I bought a lot of music. 

And I don’t think music is any less important to teenagers today than it was to kids in my day.  It’s pretty clear what’s going on:  iTunes and illegal song-swapping have killed the compact disc… or at least maimed it. 

The illegal sharing of music online continued to soar in 2007, but there was one sign of hope that legal downloading was picking up steam. In the last year, Apple Inc.’s iTunes store, which sells only digital downloads, jumped ahead of Best Buy Co. to become the No. 2 U.S. music seller, trailing Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Please note that Wal-Mart is the number one music retailer in the U.S.  Also note that Tower Records went out of business in 2006.  Also note how sad these two facts make me.  And the article says that computers are to blame.  Here’s a snippet:

Rachel Rottman, 14, says she hasn’t bought a CD in a year. The Santa Monica High School freshman says she downloads five or six songs a day, using paid services such as iTunes and social networking site MySpace, where bands post songs for free download. Rachel said she had about 2,600 songs stored on her computer.

Before getting a computer in the seventh grade, she always bought CDs. But now it’s too much trouble, she said.

“You have to go to the store and then you have to pay — I don’t know how much, $12, I’m guessing? — then you have to put it on your computer,” Rachel said. “When you download it, it’s right there.”

Man, this girl is out of touch if she thinks CDs are only $12. 

But seriously, she’s right.  Buying a CD is, to this generation, just an unnecessary step in the process of getting your favorite songs on your iPod or uploaded to your MySpace page.  By the time people my age start becoming grandparents, the age of the physical medium for entertainment will have come to a close.  Movies, TV shows, music and more will be all digital.  These crazy teenagers today just don’t care about holding something tangible in their hands.  They care only for the music. 

In a decade or so you’ll find quaint little throwback boutiques opening up in trendy places like Nashville and Austin and they’ll sell things like CDs, DVDs, BluRay Discs, and other physical media like magazines and books.  And hippie people will shop there and remember the days when your entertainment dollars actually brought you something you could hold in your hand and touch.  And those things will cost $100 a piece, because they’ll be nostalgic items now… antiques. 

But the trend has too much momentum to be stopped now.  Digital media is the wave of the future.  You can either ride the wave, or let it overtake you… but there’s no stopping it, that’s for sure.  I can just hear the Scooby-Doo CD manufacturers howling about how they “would’ve gotten away with it too, if it weren’t for you meddling kids.”

Hey, at least music itself isn’t dead… yet. 

The actual headline of the news story reads “Automated Killer Robots Are a Threat to Humanity.”  I know, another gem from the “Well, Duh! Center for Research & Obvious Findings.”

Hmmm.  They even interviewed “experts” for this story. 

How many experts does it take to tell us what we already know?  In fact, can you think of one person in your circle of friends who wasn’t already sort of leaning towards thinking that automated killer robots might be dangerous?  Maybe my four-year-old nephew.  He would actually be in favor of killer robots, I’m guessing. 

Everyone else?  Yeah, we already drew this conclusion ages ago, after watching any one of a number of good sci-fi movies.  Neo, Sarah Conner, & Optimus Prime have been telling us for years that automated killer robots might be dangerous.  There are, of course, countless other movies where similar themes are explored.  But the bottom line is this:  there is definitely such a thing as giving a robot too much AI. 

Maybe it depends on the kind of job we’re asking that intelligent robot to perform.  I guess I’m fine with giving a bunch of artificial intelligence to a robot on an automobile assembly line.  Give that guy the authority to make decisions.  That’s okay.

But the robot tooling around the Iraqi desert… the one that has an automatic weapon with him?  Yeah, not so much.  I don’t even trust most human beings with an automatic weapon; I’m certainly not going to breathe easy with machines running around with AK-47’s.  Guns don’t kill people… automated killer robots do.  Watch Terminator 2 if you don’t believe me. 

Here’s a quote from the “expert” that pretty much agrees with everything I’m saying:

“I have worked in artificial intelligence for decades, and the idea of a robot making decisions about human termination terrifies me,” Sharkey said.

Consider me terrified as well.  Also, consider me completely underwhelmed by this unnecessary and redundant news article.  Automated killer robots are dangerous?  Okay.  I think I knew that already.  Next you’re going to tell me that kids shouldn’t do drugs, that gas is expensive, and that tornadoes can be scary.  Well, I guess it’s comforting to have the “experts” backing up our fears at least. 

You may remember when we wrote about the shady dealings by the sneaky jerks over at Network Solutions.  For some time now, if you search with Network Solutions to see the availability of a domain name, the company registers it automatically and holds it for five days.  This means that you can’t buy it from anyone but them…for five days. 

There are a few problems with this.  First, Network Solutions is more expensive than most of their competitors.  So I should be able to search available domains at any of the registrar companies’ sites, and then choose to purchase said domain wherever I see fit.  But it’s not working that way over at Network Solutions.  They are the schoolyard bullies of the internet.  They steal your lunch and make you buy it back from them… at a premium.

Well, now they’re being sued for this shady practice.  And I think…well…it’s about time for this Network Solutions lawsuit to happen…maybe it’s even overdue. 

The lawfirm Kabateck Brown Kellner put out this press release announcing the suit.  From the release:

“Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states.

Whenever someone searches for the availability of a domain name through Network Solutions’ website, the company immediately registers the name for itself, preventing other companies from selling it and forcing consumers to pay Network Solutions’ expensive fees.

If a consumer were to go to another, cheaper site to register the name, they would find the name is “unavailable.” Consumers are never informed that inquiring as to a name’s availability through Network Solutions results in the company holding a monopoly on selling that name.”

ICANN, the nonprofit that oversees domain name purchases, is also named in the suit because they aren’t doing anything to stop Network Solutions. 

Look, we said this before and we’re not afraid to say it again–until all our clients know to avoid the schoolyard bullies–don’t search for domain names through Network Solutions.  Oh, and also, don’t do business with them period.  Why would you want to after knowing this? 

Even if they reverse their policy, there are still plenty of reasons to avoid them.  Their domains are nearly four times as expensive, that’s been covered.  But they also have a difficult-to-navigate administrative control panel.  It’s hard to figure out how to do things with your domain, whereas the other registrars like Bulk Register make it intuitive and easy. 

And forget about transfering a domain name out of Network Solutions.  I mean, sure, it can be done.  But the second you change the domain status from ‘locked’ to ‘unlocked’, which is required before you can transfer it, Network Solutions puts the domain in a “transfer lock status”.  That’s right.  They take it out of “domain lock” only to put it in “transfer lock.”  Gee, thanks.  Then they hold the domain in stasis for 60 days just because you changed some of your administrative contact information or asked for the domain to be unlocked. 

As they did with the domain-stealing bit, Network Solutions claims that this “transfer lock status” is to protect you…and keep some hacker from logging in and stealing your domain without your knowledge.  But then why do none of the other registrars feel the need to do this?  I’ll tell you why.  Because they aren’t sneaky jerks and schoolyard bullies.  Network Solutions’ only reason for this transfer lock is so that you can have 60 more days to contemplate whether or not you really want to leave their service.  They’re hoping–I’m sure–that by the time 60 days have passed, that you’ll forget all about the fact that you even wanted to transfer the name in the first place. 

I’m not a mean guy.  I have no interest in bashing companies just for the sake of it–you can read through this blog and see that we rarely do that.  But there’s just so much going on at Network Solutions that we feel we need to warn our clients.  It seems they care WAY more about squeezing every dime out of you than they do about you.   And that’s what’s led to this Network Solutions lawsuit. 

For the record, we recommend you use Bulk Register, or GoDaddy, or just call us and we’ll take care of it for you.  But unless you enjoy forced overcharges and unnecessary hassles, don’t search for or buy a domain name through Network Solutions. 

Remember all those HD DVDs you spent the last 8 months buying, because everyone said that HD DVD would win the format war with Blu Ray?  Yeah, they’re basically worthless now. 

Okay, maybe not worthless.  But definitely worth less.  Cue the violins.

Blue Ray is now the king.  BlueRay has killed HD DVD dead.  First degree murder.  Blue Ray is the big winner, as Toshiba has announced they will cease production on the HD DVD players.  Toshiba was the major backer of the HD DVD format, with Sony backing Blu Ray.  Over the last couple months, more and more battles went Blu Ray’s way.  Movie studios like Warner Brothers announced they would only produce their films on Blu Ray and retailers like Wal-Mart decided to only carry the Blu Ray format. 

Most consumers had held off buying either, choosing to wait for the dust to settle and a real winner to be declared in the format war before jumping on board the high definition DVD bandwagon.

Now the choice is simple. 

Expect the $5 bin at Wal-Mart to soon be filled with any remaining HD DVD titles they have yet to burn off.  Blu Ray disks, though, will likely continue to be expensive for now. 

From the article:

“We concluded that a swift decision would be best,” Toshiba President Atsutoshi Nishida told reporters at his company’s Tokyo offices. “If we had continued, that would have created problems for consumers, and we simply had no chance to win.”

I can’t claim any insider knowledge on this one.  I haven’t waded out into the high definition DVD waters just yet.  Hey, I’m old enough to remember how Betamax owners felt when VHS won out.  And I definitely had a few friends get burned in the whole Laser Disc fiasco.  So I will forever be a cautious and patient embracer of technology. 

That being said, I’m pretty pumped about this news.  Not that Blue Ray won, but simply that one of the two formats won.  Now, with a clear victor, we the consumers can breathe a bit easier.  Prices will slowly begin to fall for Blu Ray stuff, and the format itself will probably get even better.  And you know Sony has to feel good right now–they were behind the infamously failed Betamax format back in the 1980s. 

Of course, this win by BlueRay will have an impact in the video game console battle as well.  Sony put the BlueRay player in their Playstation 3, while Microsoft went with the HD DVD player in the XBox 360.  Oh well.  Something tells me that Microsoft has enough going for them that they’ll weather the storm.

Of course, in just a short time, most everything is going to go digital.  And we won’t buy our movies in any physical format whatsoever.  We’ll buy them in the form of downloads.  It’s already happening, actually.  While Blu Ray may have scored a victory today, it will sadly be a temporary one.  Soon enough, all formats will lose out to the digital download.  And frankly, I’m alright with that. 

Anyway, go buy your Blu Ray players, people.  It’s safe now. 

So the reason you’ve always had to pay for your WiFi connection at Starbucks is that the coffee chain had a contract with T-Mobile for their Internet service… and that contract was expensive. 

Now Starbucks has switched over to AT&T for service, and that deal will save them some money.  So they want to pass the savings on to you, in a way.  If you are one of the Starbucks customers that uses a “Starbucks purchase card” (whatever that is), you will now get 2 hours of WiFi for free.  Additional 2-hour blocks will be $3.99. 

Oh, you can also pay for a WiFi membership of sorts, for $19.99, which will give you unlimited free access to the web at all 70,000 AT&T hotspots (even the non-Starbucks ones). 

Here’s a quote from some Starbucks big-wig about the new arrangement:

Welday said the company viewed the deal with Starbucks as a “competitive opportunity.”

“Here we are with the nation’s largest Wi-Fi network,” Welday said. “Consumer trends are clearly pointing toward an increased need and desire to access broadband outside the home and office — what a terrific opportunity.”

Yes.  It is a terrific opportunity… to rip people off.  Look, maybe I’m closed-minded, but I tend to think that if I can get WiFi for free (at such wonderful establishments as Panera Bread or Krystal) then having to pay for it somewhere else is ridiculous.  The list of places that carry free WiFi for customers is growing by the day.  Starbucks is banking on their customer loyalty (to the coffee) to make some money off the WiFi, and that’s aggravating to me. 

Sure, I like their coffee.  Who doesn’t?  But I don’t like it enough to pay extra just to view the Internet while I drink it.  Panera’s coffee is pretty darn good too, and I can surf the web for hours on end there without having to pay any extra cost or hold a special type of purchasing card. 

But I know that there are many of you who are Starbucks junkies, who have gladly paid the necessary WiFi fees all along.  So for those people, this is probably welcome news. 

It’s sort of like the Wall Street Journal news we covered recently (where they’re making more content free, but still charging a premium for other stuff), where something that used to cost a lot of money is made free-er, but still not completely free. 

Also:

AT&T also is giving Starbucks’ more than 100,000 U.S. employees free wireless accounts and said it will soon extend the Wi-Fi at Starbucks to its wireless phone customers.

So great… if you happen to work for Starbucks…your WiFi will be completely free.  In your face, customers!! 

AOLHoo?  YahooOL?  Let the next round of name-guessing begin. 

Seems as though Yahoo has told Microsoft to go take a hike.  Well, that’s not a terribly surprising move, but that doesn’t mean it’s a smart one. 

Rumors are now swirling that they’re back talking merger with AOL.  Yeah, right.  Because AOL is sooooo much better an option than Microsoft (show of hands:  is anyone else frankly surprised that AOL even still exists?). 

I think Yahoo telling Microsoft to get lost is really just a corporate version of the old salary-negotiation thing.  They’re trying to get Microsoft to up their bid, plain and simple.  I don’t think there’s really any benefit for Yahoo in merging with AOL…in fact, the only benefit appears to be that AOL isn’t Microsoft. 

I don’t think for a second that Yahoo is really going to merge with AOL.  This is just a bargaining tactic.  I think the AOL-merger is just as likely as a Yahoo/PizzaHut merger.  Mmmm.  Pizza. 

So now the world waits to see how Microsoft responds.  I’ve read about how Microsoft’s stock has dropped a bit since their offer went out to Yahoo–lowering Microsoft’s value an amount almost identical to what they offered Yahoo.  Ouch.  So… will they increase their offer even more?  Or will they hold the line?  Whatever they choose to do in response, it’s pretty clear that this is all going to get more interesting from here.  Seems obvious, too, that Yahoo as we know it–as a standalone company–is nearing its end. 

We’ll do our best to stay up on the news and keep you updated.  I think Microsoft is still going to be buying Yahoo, when all is said and done.  Exactly how and when and why and how much is what we’re waiting to see, but any other outcome would surprise me.  And yes, before you ask… I’m totally an expert in the area of $44 Billion mergers. 

Yahoo doesn’t really want to be owned by Microsoft.  And who can blame them?  I know I don’t want to be owned by Microsoft.  A Microsoft takeover of Yahoo will almost certainly mean a loss of a lot of jobs, as divisions get merged and rolled together.  And Yahoo has always seen Microsoft as competition, so there’s some underlying dislike there already. 

Yahoo’s CEO sent a memo out to his troops, detailing the current status.  He says:

“Our board is thoughtfully evaluating a wide range of potential strategic alternatives in what is a complex and evolving landscape.”

Translation:  “We’re desperately trying to find some non-Microsoft company to buy us out instead, but time is running out.” Rumors swirl that Yahoo put out feelers to the likes of Google, NewsCorp, AOL, and even Comcast… to gauge possible interest in one of those behemoths taking them over instead of Microsoft.  It’s like in school, when I was a big nerd, and allowing myself to be bullied by one guy meant that all the other bullies would leave me alone.  The lesser of two evils, if you will. 

Yahoo just doesn’t have many options.  They’re already cutting jobs and losing profits.  I’m no economics professor (at least, not anymore I’m not), but Microsoft timed their offer rather perfectly.  From the article:

If Yahoo rejects Microsoft, most analysts believe the company will have to line up another acquisition offer or make radical changes to satisfy disillusioned shareholders.  But most analysts doubt any other potential suitor will have the financial muscle — or desire — to try to outbid Microsoft, which has $21 billion in cash and a market value of nearly $265 billion.

If Yahoo spurns Microsoft’s advances, and doesn’t find another company to buy them, they will now likely face a lot of angry stockholders who might wonder why.  As this article states:

If it spurns Microsoft’s offer, Yahoo’s board of directors will be under pressure to give stockholders a soothing cash payout or even borrow money to buy back shares and turn the firm private.

So, Yahoo is backed into a corner.  They have to do something.  And so far, none of the other bullies have stepped up to plop down the billions.  One thought I read a lot about is that Yahoo–whose search used to be powered by Google as recently as 2004–might turn over it’s search operations to Google again, cutting enough costs in the process to allow them to stay independent.  But Yahoo worked hard enough for years to develop their own search division–to compete with Google–that just reverting to the past would seem like a giant step back. 

Google, you may know, is vehemently against this merger.  Cue the chorus of “Duh” from the peanut gallery.  A Microsoft/Yahoo merger means a huge new competitor for Google’s dominance in search, and Google knows it.  MicroHoo (or YahooSoft) would also be a company bolstered in the area of online advertising–another market Google has a bit of dominance in.  I’m not sure Google’s argument that this merger hinders an open, competitive web holds any water (especially when compared with the numerous acquisitions and mergers Google themselves are guilty of. 

We’ll keep you posted.  Just know that one way or another, Yahoo as we know it is going to change.  My money’s on the merger going through.  And while Yahoo and Google may not prefer that, I do think the end result to us users is a good one.  A significant competitor in search can only mean better search service for all us computer users out here in the real world. 

The Doritos commercial during the second quarter of the Super Bowl last night, where the mouse is jumping through the wall, was the perfect metaphor for the game itself.  The guy with the Doritos, the one setting the mouse trap with a tiny corner of one chip, then sitting back and stuffing his face… that guy is the Patriots.  Confident, favored, the “clear winner” before the contest begins (and he knows it). He even sets up a chair so he can sit and watch and revel in his opponent’s defeat.  

But he didn’t count on his prey, the mouse, being tougher and more prepared for this challenge than could have been expected.  Here, take a look:

See, that’s what you get when you underestimate your opponent.  The NY Giants were the bullies last night, physically dominating the Super Bowl for pretty much the entire game.  Their defensive front pushed around the Patriots offensive line from the second quarter of the game on.  I will admit that I was rooting for the Giants, but calling them the winners of the physical battle in last night’s game is not a biased statement… it’s just a fact.  They were tougher.  That was one of the greatest upsets in NFL history.

But the real Super Bowl water cooler discussion this morning in most offices won’t have anything to do with the game itself.  Instead, office workers across the country are right now debating the greatest and the worst of the Super Bowl commercials.   What’s your favorite?  If you missed any, you can go here to check them all out. 

I clearly enjoyed the Doritos mouse jumping through the wall.  It was as funny as it was unexpected.  Many seem to think the Etrade baby spitting up was great–though a little gross. 

Or how about the trailer for Pixar’s summer 2008 movie, Wall-E?  That was pretty hilarious.  And the Macy’s parade balloons chasing after the coke bottle balloon was very clever as well.  And I was also a fan of the Pepsi/Justin Timberlake commercial. 

Seems like every year, though, the sum total of commercials is underwhelming.  Why does it always feel like previous years had a better crop? 

Hmmm, now my only challenge is to find a way to relate this post to technology, since this is a technology blog and all.  Hmmm.  Well, I did watch part of the game online.  And I watched the rest of it on a flat-panel HD TV.  That’s techy, right? 

I suppose we could talk about the tasteless GoDaddy/Danica Patrick commercial, since it relates to domain purchases.  But that’s just what GoDaddy wants us to do, now isn’t it?  Each year they get racier and racier, all for the sake of the free publicity that’s generated by having a super racy ad–and look at me, contributing to it.  Sorry. 

Well, how about the Etrade commercials?  They’re about a web-based business.  That’s techy. 

Oh, who am I kidding?  I just wanted to talk a little football and share my favorite commercials from the big game.  Time will tell which is the best, as everyone goes online over the next weeks to watch the ones they liked best over and over.  This year’s winner, for me, is the Doritos mouse jumping through the wall.  Great commercial, great analogy for the way little brother Eil and the Giants won the Super Bowl. 

Lost is back, and I’m pretty happy about it.  There are several of us in the office who watch, and each week we come into the office stammering and yammering about the latest developments.  Even if you don’t watch Lost, there’s no denying it’s a powerful mystery that has millions wondering every week where the next twist or turn will occur. 

It’s as good an excuse as any to talk about viral marketing.  Viral marketing is any marketing attempt where the fans themselves are the marketers–where the message spreads like a virus.  Usually it’s a video or a website that people are just compelled to forward to each other through email.  You may have heard about some of the viral marketing efforts for The Dark Knight (which claimed that the Joker had his own website at WhySoSerious.com–a site that has now added a black ribbon memorial for actor Heath Ledger) or Cloverfield (which featured a number of puzzle-related sites such as the Ethan Haas Was Right game). 

But no one does it better than Lost.  There have been countless online games, books, side mysteries, and other online content that feeds the underlying mystery of the show.  Back in the show’s first season, the fictional airline (Oceanic Air) had its own website, where you could click around and fiddle with the book-a-flight interface to unlock other secrets of the story.  That site currently has an alert message that All Flights Are Cancelled–in keeping with the mythology of the show. 

If you follow Lost, you now know that some of the survivors of flight 815 make it off the island.  And there appear to have been six of them total–hence the question “Who are the Oceanic 6?”  We don’t know how or why they get off the island, as we’re only getting flash-forward vignettes that give us hints. 

We do know that Jack, Kate, and Hurley are three of the six.  So the question becomes…”Who are the other 3 of the Oceanic 6?” 

We’re competing here in the office with a small pool, where each of us has guesses at which survivors will make it off the island.  My money?  It’s on Sayid, Sun, and Claire.  I think Sayid will make it off the island, simply because he doesn’t trust Locke.  The other two I’m picking because one is pregnant, and the other just had a baby.  Seems like a new child is as good a reason as any to get off that island. 

Just a guess, obviously.  And yeah, if you don’t watch the show, you’ve either stopped reading already or I’m beginning to seriously bore you. 

The point is this:  Lost is the viral marketing champ, and that’s evidenced by fans everywhere (including us here in the office) obsessively drawing up scenarios, discussing mysteries, and following the online clues.  The show’s mythology even has its own Wikipedia page, separate from the main Lost entry!  Every season of the show sees the produers upping the ante in terms of hype and mystery.  And the big viral push this year is “Who are the Oceanic 6?”  The billboard pictured above was photographed in Florida the week before this year’s premiere.  Think about that… part of Lost’s viral marketing campaign involves real-world, old-school-advertising in the form of a bill board.  Because they knew some obsessive fan would take a picture of it and put it online and the furor would begin.  Lost has come to point in its life where the episodes themselves are viral marketing efforts, as the producers put so many tiny clues and hints and references in the background that fan-sites have cropped up all over the place to post screenshots and pour over the details looking for clues. 

Listen, viral marketing is not just for the big guys anymore.  Sure, they own the market…they may have perfected it.  But viral marketing is a phrase that sort of first got its name back in the days of the Blair Witch Project, where producers counted on folks who thought the footage of the film was real passing the word of the film to their friends via email.  The little guys are the ones who started this whole thing.  And “viral marketing” can be as simple as a fun post on your company blog or website that you try and get folks to link to.  If you’ve heard of social bookmarking sites like Digg, Reddit, or Mixx, then you should know that these sites are full of content that is essentially linkbait. 

 ”Linkbait” is a form of viral marketing where content with mass appeal is created and then submitted to social networking sites like the ones mentioned above.  Stories that make the home page on Digg have been known to receive tens of thousands of site visitors in a day’s time–often crashing the server of the target site.  And stories that make the home page also generally lead to a bunch of new links to that site across the web–and links are terribly valuable in terms of search engine placement.  Here’s a quote from this excellent summary article on the benefits of linkbait:

While there are many factors that search engines use to determine how they will rank a web page - one of the most powerful elements is how many links point to it. Search Engines treat incoming links to your site like votes - (I’m over simplifying here) the more votes you get the more they’ll see others as valuing your page.

So let me give you an example:  You run a football blog.  Let’s say you just love football and the NFL and you write about it on your personal website.  And maybe your regular, every day content is a summary of the week’s games and predictions for the next week’s match-ups.  A good viral campaign for you would maybe be to create a list of some football-related thing….say “The Top 10 Most Amazing Super Bowl Comebacks Ever” (which would be a timely list, no?) and you write a little synopsis for each game.  Then, with a little luck, it gets picked up by Digg on the home page and your little football blog gets thousands of hits and a hundred links.  Within days you’re ranking #1 on Google for a ton of football-related queries and your once-little blog now has hundreds of subscribers. That’s how linkbait works.

That’s the hope, anyway.  Viral marketing is definitely a hit or miss endeavor.  There’s no way to know what content will set the web on fire.  But that hasn’t stopped companies far and wide from trying. 

We have a few clients trying some very clever viral marketing ideas, some smaller than others, some more successful than others.  Developing and implementing viral marketing and linkbait campaigns is a bit of a new service for us–heck, it’s new for everybody–but we’re having a blast helping out sites that want to reach a huge audience quickly, or develop a strong group of devoted followers.  If you think we might be able to infuse your online marketing efforts with a little extra zing, give us a shout and let’s talk about it. 

Or we can just talk about Lost and who you think the other 3 members of the Oceanic 6 might be.  Perhaps an even better question to ask would be “Who aren’t the Oceanic 6?”  Either way, it’s fun to talk about, isn’t it? 

Microsoft has a crush.  On Yahoo.  And their in the courting phase, so Microsoft is sending flowers and candies and standing outside Yahoo’s window holding a boom-box that plays Peter Gabriel’s “In Your Eyes.” 

In case you’re not following me:  Microsoft has made a takeover offer to purchase Yahoo for $44.6 Billion. 

Wowzers.  That’s a lot of cash.  More than I’ve got lying around.  This dwarfs Google’s purchase of YouTube for $1.6 Billion.  (Also, how weird is it to read a story about a possible Yahoo takeover on a Yahoo News page?)  Will the new company be called MicroHoo or YahooSoft?  You make the call.  But the thought of a possible Microsoft Yahoo merger sort of blows my mind.

Who knows if Yahoo is going to take the offer.  They did just have to lay off about 1,000 employees, so I’m sure they’ll consider it.  This article has a copy of the letter Microsoft sent to Yahoo’s board of directors.  Here’s an excerpt:

“We believe this proposal represents a unique opportunity to create significant value for Yahoo!’s shareholders and employees, and the combined company will be better positioned to provide an enhanced value proposition to users and advertisers. We hope that you and your Board share our enthusiasm, and we look forward to a prompt and favorable reply.”

Well that sounds like one of the sweetest, most romantic suggestions I’ve ever heard.   

And think about the kind of super competitor to Google that would be created by a Microsoft/Yahoo merger–I’m talking in terms of search here.  Their collective marketshare, customer base, and expertise would combine to form the first serious challenge to Google’s dominance in years.  It would allow them to innovate instead of just always following Google’s lead.  So for that reason, I’m all for it.  Competition is good for the marketplace; it makes companies work harder and perform better. 

Stay tuned for more information on this possible purchase.  Like papparazzi on the Hollywood streets we’ll be following this potential coupling of two of the big three web/search giants.  Microsoft has gotten down on bended knee and is now nervously awaiting the blushing Yahoo’s answer.  Will it be “Yes” or “No?”  Are Microsoft and Yahoo getting married?  Oh–and will it be MicroHoo or YahooSoft?  Because that’s almost as important as whether or not the merger goes through.  Almost.