Before I even explain this idea, I gotta say that I love it. SwipeGood is a start-up that leverages consumers' desire to help out others and donate to charities, while understanding the lack of time most people for acts of goodwill. To get over this hurdle, SwipeGood has harnessed the use of credit card purchases.
In their words, 'SwipeGood rounds up all of your credit card purchases to the nearest dollar and allows you to donate the difference to the charity of your choice. It's the easiest way to give to charity!'
If that wasn't self-explanatory, here's the details of how it works: As a user of SwipeGood, you start by signing up and selecting your charity of choice. You'll also need to register the credit card you'd like to use. After that, you simply use that credit card as you normally would. SwipeGood will then round up each purchase made with that card to the nearest dollar, donating the difference to your charity at the end of each month. On average, it will equal about $20 per month, SwipeGood says, though users can also set an upper limit. How do they make money, you ask? Participation in SwipeGood is free for charities. But users pay a service fee of 5 percent of each monthly donation.'
With Generation G continually on the rise since 2008/2009, this is a great execution and capitalization on an important and popular trend. I can personally say that I've sat in boardrooms and pitched ideas very similar (if not exactly similar) to a few clients over the past 2 years, but no one wanted to bite on it. I'm glad to see that another group of guys put this together as a full-time project, independent of a particular company, with hopes of capturing more consumer purchases and ultimately changing the world.
Okay, maybe changing the world is still a pipe dream for a company that's learning to walk, but if you aren't motivated by a dream and a better world...what's the point?
Good on you, SwipeGood. Signing up for this service makes a whole lot of cents. ~ p
Pages
My Review for 'The Social Network'
I finally watched The Social Network last night. I meant to catch it on the big screen, but for three reasons I didn't. 1) I was very busy during the time it was out, 2) I have a tough time going to see any movie now that is not in 3D - I feel like it is not worth the money, 3) I have a big screen, Blu-Ray and Bose surround sound at home.
My rating for the movie is 7.5 out of 10. Considering my loyalty rating for Facebook is about 8 out of 10, it didn't disappoint. It also didn't blow me away. This might be due to the fact that it just won the Golden Globe for Best Picture, Best Screenplay, Best Director and Soundtrack, so my expectations were higher than they would've been had I watched at the box office. It also might be because I feel like they left out some key facts and interesting moments, including: 1) When Facebook surpassed MySpace in terms of members. 2) When Microsoft tried to buy it with continual refusals by Zuckerberg that only made them want it more - eventually ending in a $15 billion bid and evaluation. 3) When Facebook was considered an enemy of the State and the World through their aggressive prospective on our information and privacy laws (this is still happening). 4) Live streaming of the Obama Inauguration. 5) When Facebook DID eventual display ads to make money, and discovered that their power of data is their true asset. 6) When Facebook introduced and popularized virtual gifts and social gaming, and then turned gaming into revenue stream as big as their ad revenue. 7) The entire idea of a 'status update'. 8) Poking.
These are just a few off the top of my head. Maybe people don't care about that stuff. But I feel like it would've added more texture to the story, granted as well as about 10-15 minutes of film.
This reminds me of the movie Ali starring Will Smith. At the end I wanted more, not because it was the best movie I had even seen, but because I knew there was more to tell. I felt the same at the end of this movie. In this case, however, I realize that perhaps the biggest part of the story has yet to be written. The Social Network 2, anyone? I'll be ready for it in 2020.
All this being said, I think the acting and the screenplay were both great. JT has proven himself to carry a supporting role in a big movie. I can see his next step to be carrying a leading role in a sub-par movie. The story also carried itself along nicely and paced very well. I might've never felt blown away, but I wasn't bored either. ~ p
My rating for the movie is 7.5 out of 10. Considering my loyalty rating for Facebook is about 8 out of 10, it didn't disappoint. It also didn't blow me away. This might be due to the fact that it just won the Golden Globe for Best Picture, Best Screenplay, Best Director and Soundtrack, so my expectations were higher than they would've been had I watched at the box office. It also might be because I feel like they left out some key facts and interesting moments, including: 1) When Facebook surpassed MySpace in terms of members. 2) When Microsoft tried to buy it with continual refusals by Zuckerberg that only made them want it more - eventually ending in a $15 billion bid and evaluation. 3) When Facebook was considered an enemy of the State and the World through their aggressive prospective on our information and privacy laws (this is still happening). 4) Live streaming of the Obama Inauguration. 5) When Facebook DID eventual display ads to make money, and discovered that their power of data is their true asset. 6) When Facebook introduced and popularized virtual gifts and social gaming, and then turned gaming into revenue stream as big as their ad revenue. 7) The entire idea of a 'status update'. 8) Poking.
These are just a few off the top of my head. Maybe people don't care about that stuff. But I feel like it would've added more texture to the story, granted as well as about 10-15 minutes of film.
This reminds me of the movie Ali starring Will Smith. At the end I wanted more, not because it was the best movie I had even seen, but because I knew there was more to tell. I felt the same at the end of this movie. In this case, however, I realize that perhaps the biggest part of the story has yet to be written. The Social Network 2, anyone? I'll be ready for it in 2020.
All this being said, I think the acting and the screenplay were both great. JT has proven himself to carry a supporting role in a big movie. I can see his next step to be carrying a leading role in a sub-par movie. The story also carried itself along nicely and paced very well. I might've never felt blown away, but I wasn't bored either. ~ p
Phoenix Jones is a Real-Life Superhero...Minus the Super and the Hero.
Spiderman. Batman. Superman. Phoenix Jones. Yeah, for real. There is a guy, and from the reports I've heard, potentially a group of guys, fighting crime on the streets of Seattle. And, needless to say, it isn't going very well. Phoenix Jones recently had his nose busted after trying to break up a fight between two dudes. He also had a gun held to his head and was taunted by some hoodlums. Oddly enough, I can associate with the gun-to-the-head thing from when I was 'jumped' (as we used to call it) by a small town gang when I was about 15. I don't have to tell you that it's not a fun thing to experience.
Regardless, I have mixed emotions about Phoenix Jones. I was a comic book kid, and I still love that stuff now in my 30s, especially the Hollywood adaptations, so on one hand, I love this guy. As Seinfeld said, 'Every man thinks of himself as a low-level superhero'. Damn straight, Jerry. My fiancé just bought me Superman boxer-briefs, and my response was 'I'm going to need another 12 pairs of these.' I'm also frankly shocked that it took this long for someone to try and pull this off. On the other hand, this guy obviously took watching Kick-Ass way too seriously.
Lastly, this guy is an idiot...but I think most every man will secretly respect him and, perhaps, even be jealous of his courage, even if it is bordering on psychotic. Phoenix Jones, you may not be a Hero or very Super, but you can take a bullet for me any day. ~ p
Obsessed with Facebook? You're Not Alone.
To gain an understanding of how quickly the Facebook domination is becoming more dominate over the web, this chart is already out-dated. It was reported yesterday that Facebook is actually closing in on 600 million members, if they aren't already there yet. That's quite amazing, but what's even more amazing is...they aren't finished yet. Where is the ceiling for Facebook? Will they reach 1 billion people? Do they need China to open their doors to continue this powerful, seemingly unstoppable growth? I would assume 'yes' to all of the above, but it the meantime, take the next minute to look in awe at these stats, because in two minutes, they'll change again. ~ p
23 differences between Facebook and Twitter
1) I use Twitter for real-time news reporting. Example, I follow @raptors for real-time, game-time updates. Facebook.com/raptors tells me what time the game started.
2) I use Facebook for pictures. Example, I will not go to someone’s Twitter page to look through a bunch of pictures from a bachelor party. I do that on Facebook.
3) I update my status on Facebook. I tweet my every move. My Facebook status is a summary of events, or the best event that has happened within a 12-hour period. And I share the events from hour 1 through 12 on Twitter.
4) I stalk people on Twitter. Example, combined, I look @Mashable, or @SportsGuy33, and even @KingJames, 100 times a day, every day. I do not look at anyone even close to that much on Facebook. You know, come to think of it, there should be a once a day rule for looking at someone else’s Facebook page, as it is much more personal. Actually, it would be cool if Facebook made it an option to select and control how many page views you could get in one day, and give and take away permissions to certain people.
5) I randomly ideate for Facebook a lot more than I do for Twitter. Example, see above.
6) I put Facebook first over Twitter when I speak or write about them both in the same reference. Example, see this question. Also, refer to title.
7) I personally know every one of my Facebook friends. I personally know about 15% of my Twitter followers.
8) I have two-way, three-way, four-way conversations and connections with people I generally know on Facebook. Because of that, Facebook is more personal for me. Example, I comment on pictures, videos, quotes, articles, and other comments on Facebook, and this can be within a stream that’s 5-5000 comments long. I might reply to a Tweet every once in a while, which is an isolated dialogue, and retweet others’ posts, which is a huge compliment to that personal, but still fairly impersonal.
9) I add to discussions on relevant trending topics with people I don’t generally don’t know on Twitter. Example, I add Tweets to events I find interesting, like #thedecision, #inception, #g20, #vmas, #bieberfever, with people who I am not following and are not my followers.
10) I follow celebrities on Twitter. Example, I do not go to Chris Bosh’s Facebook page unless I’m told to via Twitter, blog post, or ESPN article.
11) I watch videos on Facebook. Example, I first watched keyboard cat on Facebook. Second example, I watched the latest @KingJames Nike commercial, ‘What should I do?’ through Facebook. I went to Twitter to read what @KingJames was saying about it.
12) I refer to people and celebrities via their Twitter name, not their Facebook url. Example, see above.
13) I use Twitter more on my phone. Example, before I go to sleep and when I wake up every day, I read ESPN, check Twitter, and read either SmartBrief (morning) or blog posts (night) on my Blackberry. I wait until I get to work to check Facebook.
14) I go to Twitter to follow events. I go to Facebook to watch events. Example, I went to Twitter to follow both the G20 Submit, and this summer’s NBA free agency fiasco (yes, that was an event, a sporting event). I watched Obama get inaugurated, and Michael Jackson’s funeral via Facebook, both in real-time, of course.
15) I share Facebook with my off-line friends. Example, when I break into my sister’s Facebook account and rewrite her Facebook status to something that makes me sound like the best brother in the world, I will share that with whoever is standing around me before and after posting it. Second example, I will call people over to my computer screen to watch a video on Facebook, or to look at how ridiculously drunk, stupid, hot, or not, someone looks in a picture.
16) I have more fun on Facebook. Example, see above.
17) I like Facebook more. Example, this point. Also, refer to previous two points.
18) I like Twitter more. Refer to this point. Also, refer to points 9 through 14.
19) I go back and forth with which one I like more, Facebook or Twitter or Facebook or Twitter. Example, this point. Second and third examples, points 17 and 18. Note, this is a not a difference but rather a constant difference of opinion I have with myself.
20) I defend Twitter. I don’t have to defend Facebook. Examples:
Not me: ‘Twitter is a fade.’
Me: ‘It’s changing the way people get information – from search-centric to influence-centric’
Not me: ‘Twitter doesn’t make money, they will collapse any day.’
Me: ‘Twitter is changing behavior. As Bill Gates said, “To be successful, create a need and then provide that need” – the money will come.’
Not me: ‘Twitter is a single-focused service. Facebook is taking over the entire web.’
Me: ‘True.’
Not me: ‘I love Facebook.’
Me: ‘Me too.’
21) I am more loyal to brands on Facebook. Example, I engaged in Starbuck’s Holiday Campaign via Facebook – watched the Video, shared the 2 for 1 deal, bought and drank the kool-aid, I mean, Peppermint LattĂ© (don’t judge me). If I do see a deal on Twitter, I will take note and occasionally act. I just don’t see them as often due to their tweet streaming.
22) Facebook has a movie.
23) Twitter has a bird.
Got any more differences? Add them below. ~ p
Is the Playbook everything I want iPad 2 to be?
I got an iPad for Christmas. I took it back. My reason was obvious and logical: I am waiting for the next one. This mythical next one is supposedly launching March 15th. But that is completely unofficial and just based on the cycle of other Apple products. Still, it was good enough for me. I want a camera. I want to use FaceTime. I want a better screen and more storage in a lighter, more powerful package. Too much to ask for iPad 2? Maybe. But it is right on par with Blackberry's first edition of the Playbook.
This isn't the first time I've seen a demo on the Playbook. But it is the first time I've seen a product demo so close to launch with what I describe as 'in-the-moment' testing. Who knows how many takes this Jeff guy took, but it looks unedited and real, and so does the 'bar stamp' on his hand as he takes us through the features. Nice touch.
So as I wait and wait and wait for iPad 2 to come and out almost certainly let down my high expectations, I get closer and closer and closer to getting everything I want right now in the Playbook.
What do you think? Should I wait or buy a Playbook? ~ p
Bold New Starbucks Logo
It's a new year that will be full of new things, from cool movies, to newly offensive but amazingly addictive music, a kazillion more mobile apps, an annoyingly vast selection of tablets, re-thunk e-messaging, the highly anticipated mobile e-wallet, and so on.
To start the year, however, this post is not focussed on a new trend, or a cool piece of technology, or the latest web site that will add 10 minutes of web-time to my day and still manage to make my life easier (yeah, right). No, this post is about design. Or, rather, the redesign of what has become in the opinions of many, an American icon.
It's a preview of the new Starbucks logo. And, well, I'm not sure how I feel about it.
To start, I am a Starbucks man. I don't really like 'other popular coffee shops'. Yeah, I said it. Their coffee is typically crappy, and the environment is not worth suffering the time I spend in line. If someone doesn't like Starbucks coffee, I generally think they are a wussy. I think if my Grandma drank Starbucks, she would've said, 'It's strong and it'll put hair on your chest!' That hasn't really happened in abundance for me yet, but I still agree, it's strong and I like it.
Anyway, the new logo is, at first glance, a bit weak to me, but at the same time, it's very bold. Let me explain. As you can see, there is no thick, strong black and green border surrounding what they call Siren (the half-naked mermaid-esque chick). This makes it visually weaker. But they've also totally removed the company name and what they offer, 'Starbucks Coffee'. This makes it bold.
I understand the logic. 'We offer more than coffee, so why limited ourselves to being associated with just that product?' Agreed. But does Starbucks think they are so widely recognized in America and in the world that they can change their logo to eliminate any point of reference to what they sell? And for those who have never really paid attention to the mermaid icon, will people know who they are? This is to say that Starbucks is not just an industry icon, or an American icon even, but instead a globally iconic brand. That puts them in a class with Nike's Swoosh, McDonald's Golden Arches, and Apple's, well, Apple.
That is a bold move. And I can't help but think about the Artist Formerly Known As Prince. Meaning, it could backfire if it's overused and not supported, especially in new markets, with a clear cut name and offering.
Or, as I'm sure Starbucks is thinking, after selling a billion coffees and teas in this new cup, people will get the idea.
Or, as I'm sure Starbucks is thinking, after selling a billion coffees and teas in this new cup, people will get the idea.
What do you think? Is Starbucks powerful enough to pull this off? Will they have to revert to a modified version of the logo in new markets or where their brand recognition is low? ~ p
Balls Were All the Buzz in 2010
In 2010, we were all socially buzzing about balls. More specifically, the balls shown in the Axe 'Clean Your Balls' commercial. According to Zeta Interactive, the ad beat out Nike's 'Lebron/Rise', Old Spice's 'Smells like a Man', and even Betty White's Snickers spot that topped the Super Bowl ad meter for the most-liked ad. To prove this out, Zeta claims to 'scour 200 million comments on social media, including blogs, tweets, message boards and other outlets, and then determines sentiment to arrive at its rankings'. Whatever, I'll buy it. That ad was hilarious. Even though Old Spice's 'Smells like a Man' crushed 'Clean Your Balls' on YouTube - 25 million views compared to 4.5 million. According to Zeta, it had better over all buzz. Check them out below.
Here is the complete list of top 10 socially buzzed ad campaigns. ~ p
Here is the complete list of top 10 socially buzzed ad campaigns. ~ p
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




