dotMobi

What's in a brand?

I have been thinking about branding a lot lately.  Actually, it's been something that has cropped up from time to time, specifically, companies who tie their brand identity to specific distribution mechanism and later face a hard decision on what constitutes brand identity.

I will pick on a now-defunct company emblematic of the boom years. Do you remember pets.com?  That was their brand.  It wasn’t "pets" but "pets.com". Clearly those were the boom years, and they chose to add the TLD suffix .com to their brand. 

They are not around anymore, so you may ask, why am I fixated on this question now?  Well because I came across this post by Ross Dunn.  In it he describes a presentation by iCrossing on designing their new website:

"..... She also went on to state that iCrossing decided to proceed with the subdomain concept rather than a separate domain such as a .mobi. In this case their mobile site is located at mobile.icrossing.com; a sensible concept that retained the branding of the top level domain name without having to re-brand a new one (i.e. going with the .mobi version)"

If you believe that the TLD is a core part of your brand, then how many "brands" would you say a company like Amazon or eBay has with active sites under .com as well as well as .de and .co.uk, .es, .dk, and so on?  Or is it that Amazon is the brand and the way they "append" the brand indicates which market their content is targeted at? 

In case you were wondering, I believe the latter.  In an earlier post, I argued that it is not about content but about distribution.  A .mobi TLD is not a "brand" but an add-on to your brand indicating the content is meant for distribution on mobile.  I am fairly certain Amazon would say their brand is "Amazon", so would eBay and Coca-Cola and Pepsi and all the other best known and beloved brands.

The brands that face the most difficulty with branding questions such as these are ones who earlier on tied their identity to the one wagon of communication prevalent at the time, while the rest of the industry moved onto rails, autos, and air. 

This is limiting and short-sighted.  Here is an example: AT&T actually stands for "American Telephone and Telegraph".  How much business do you think AT&T does in "Telegraph"? At the time it seemed a great idea, but now it sounds dated.  They solved that dilemma by simply calling themselves AT&T and have stuck to it steadfast.   

Bottom-line: Think about your brand (and the content that it represents) and define it a lot more broadly.  Allow the various "brand appendages" such as TLDs to be a guidepost for the distribution and not part of the core identity of the brand. 

How A Tragedy Teaches Us How Dependent We Are On Mobile Communication

Many of you may know that dotMobi's US office is based near Washington DC in Virginia. Exactly a week ago, the residents of Virginia, and indeed the nation, were horrified to learn that a gunman had massacred 32 students and teachers on a rampage.  Our hearts go out to the families touched by the tragedy.

It’s fair to say that the "six degrees of separation" rule applies.  In other words, search long enough and someone here knows someone else who has a son or a daughter at Virginia Tech and was frantically trying to reach them, most often via their mobile phone.  It was no different here.

Many of us who are old enough remember having to find a public payphone (and having enough change), or having to wait until you found a land-line to make the call.  Thankfully times have changed and in the events of emergencies such as these, many were grateful to be able to make contact with their loved ones.

I know it is easy to play "Monday morning quarter back" and I am not intending to do that here.  But I have to believe that there are lessons learned in this tragedy for all of us.  I cannot help but wonder about the extent our schools, government, and public facilities take advantage of the mobile technology to deliver information.

An easy way to do this is to capture mobile phone numbers as key contact data for emergencies, and disseminate text messages as alerts and updates.  In fact, George Washington University has such a system as part of their upgraded alert plan, as recently discussed by the GWU president Joel Trachtenberg on NPR.

Further: What if the information was targeted, say, using the capabilities of the phone (such as those with built-in GPS) to alert only those affected and give them a specific information without causing unnecessary alarm and panic amongst the larger population?

Yes, I know there are a lot of issues to solve still (privacy, data protection, new phone technology), but think back 10 years ago.  A lot of what is possible today was but a dream.

All I am proposing is that we learn from tragedies such as this to understand how best to utilize the resources we already have and plan for how they should be used.

First Mobile Webbys Nominees Announced

Some good news to share: last week, the Webby Awards announced the nominees for their first mobile Webby awards. Three .mobi sites made the final list: Travelosa.mobi, Dada.mobi and Otto.mobi; that represents 20% of the nominees. And that means two of the first three mobile Webby awards could go to .mobi sites! (Two of the sites are in the same category).

In the interest of full disclosure, dotMobi is the Founding Mobile Sponsor of the 11th annual Webby Awards. Sponsorship aside, dotMobi had no influence in the nomination criteria or on which sites were chosen for the competition. The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences is a scrupulously impartial organization, which makes the nomination of these sites a happy surprise for us.

Two other .mobi sites -- Dir.mobi and eIndia.mobi -- were named as "official honorees" (That translates to "honorable mention" but it's still good to be recognized, I say).

All of this is more remarkable when you consider that developers have been working on the .mobi domain for only six months. Looking at it that way, it's impressive to see five .mobi sites recognized as examples of good mobile design against sites that have been around much longer.

You can vote for your favorite .mobi nominees in the Webbys' People's Voice competition until April 27. In fact, you should vote right now.

Generation Mobile Web

Those born between 1978 and 1997 are often collectively described as “Generation Y”. That’s 10-30 year olds.

Wikipedia cheerfully suggests the Y-ers also enjoy classifications like “the Net-”, “the i-”, “the Google-”, “the MySpace-”, and “the MyPod-Generation”. The preceding generation (mine!) is Generation X: those thirty-somethings born between 1965 and 1978.

But despite Wikipedia’s assertions, and assuming this is even a valid question, who’s generation actually lays claim to today’s web?

It’s got to be the latter.

Generation X’ers founded eBay, Yahoo, Google, Paypal, and no doubt thousands of the web sites that the world uses today without a second thought. Look around at all the A-list bloggers out there too; almost all in their 30’s I would say.

While the basis for the world’s networking infrastructure was probably a baby-boomer thing, it was undoubtedly my generation that developed the web as a mainstream medium.

And - wait a minute - that suddenly makes me part of the on-line establishment.

Start looking at it in these terms and it’s a bit of a shock (and certainly no help in helping me avoid an inevitable mid-life crisis!)

So this got me thinking. Each generation generally has a desire to overturn - or even revolt - against their established precedents.

And if we learn from the many times this has happened throughout human culture in the past, one can easily see that it’s going to happen again. Today’s web is undoubtedly due for such a shake up. And I’ve no doubt that mobile is going to be the significant factor in that coup.

The evolution of the web on to the mobile medium is completely inevitable.

(Look: take the really long view… can’t you see yourself reminiscing about those good old .com days? When folks used to have to sit down in front of a lonely screen to interact on-line with the rest of the world? How quaint.)

But what is dawning on me is this: that the coming revolution isn’t something that will be driven through the adoption or innovation of today’s establishment. Those lonely PC screens are Generation X’s comfort zone. We find ourselves struggling with small screens and small keys to even glimpse the potential of the next decade’s on-line experience.

So I’m looking to Generation Y. They’re the mobile generation. They’re the ones looking for a new angle. They’re looking for a paradigm that they can adopt, pioneer, and make their own. And they’re going to be the creators and the guardians of the web in the coming decades - the web that will finally call itself truly mobile.

(Oh, and they’re the ones with the small fingers)

Most importantly, they will do wonderful things with the mobile web. Darwinian things that the now-conservative institution of today’s web would probably never grasp, risk, or predict.

Should Generation X-ers be surprised? Should we react? Should we stifle?

No. Of course not. We should roll with it. We should encourage, guide, and then, when required, stand back and watch with awe. Don’t milk the calf. Yes, we can help to provide the the base technologies, the open ecosystems (and, of course, the domain names...), but the medium may never be ours.

We X-ers have played our part. Now it’s our responsibility to allow our successors to build their own legacy. Is that perhaps the real Web 2.0?

(A version of this article previously appeared on my personal blog)

It Isn't About ".Com Versus .Mobi" -- If you believe that, read on...

In my view, it's not about .com versus the world of TLDs or, for that matter .mobi versus .com/.net/.org etc. 

Take this post from Frank Shilling.

The downside with new TLDs which sell themselves based on a platform is that they are typically exclusive of others.  Don't have a .mobi?  “Well!! ~ You’re just not getting access to our suite of software or services then :-p.”  .Mobi could give away their domains and still wouldn’t get traction because the drawing card is just not big enough. Don’t get wowed by a bunch of Telco’s which have trouble even agreeing on foundational phone platforms. These folks are touting .mobi as much out of “fear of missing something”.  I have not seen what I would call a world changing plan..  .Mobi could give away tools that can turn straw into gold and yes, some folks will switch, but in my opinion .TV, .Mobi etc have “no chance” without such a world-beater of a plan. This plan would have to have such a "wow effect" that it would land on the cover of every paper in the world in order to rival .com.  Better to open your platform to .com holders.

Let me address this, by way of clarification:

1) "Well!! ~ You’re just not getting access to our suite of software or services then :-p.” Not true. Go to our developer forum, download the handbook (free), build a site (free), join the forum (free), or get training (free).  Our certification program, which you do pay for, offers value whether or not you use .mobi.

So you may ask, "why do we do this?" Which  brings me to...

2) "Don’t get wowed by a bunch of Telco’s which have trouble even agreeing on foundational phone platforms" Well... Our investors aren't just a "bunch of Telcos." They invested in dotMobi, not to take advantage of the money to be had in the domain registration business, but to help jump-start the expansion of Internet on mobile devices.  (Something that was lacking for a long time.)  And they did agree on a set of standards -- W3C's mobile web initiative -- If  that is what is meant by "foundational phone platforms."

3) ".Mobi could give away tools that can turn straw into gold and yes, some folks will switch.." We do give away tools and know-how, but it is not about switching from .com, co.uk or any of the others for that matter.  Have your .com, but if your customers are increasingly mobile -- and most of us are -- then you want to design and author a site that is specific to their needs during those times when they're not in front of a 17" screen with an all-you-can eat DSL plan and some time to spare.

4. "Better to open your platform to .com holders"  Goes back to my first point, really. We actually announced back in February that dotMobi is building the directory of all mobile optimized content, which uses .mobi as well as other TLDs, including .com.  To quote specifically:

"The dotMobi database is a catalog of all mobile content available on the Internet today and is quality-rated by location, category, relevance and suitability to download content easily on a mobile phone. The database will contain all mobile content in existence, including .mobi sites, country specific sites, .com sites, WAP sites and other mobile-optimised content."

.xxx vs. .mobi? An Informed View

I do not know how many of you recall the commercial by "Syms", a discount clothing store in the late 80's and 90's.  The ad was stark, with clearly un-media savvy execs s-l-o-w-l-y declaring that "At Syms, an educated consumer... is our best customer."  Although the ad was amateurish, there was a lot of wisdom in those words.

Which is why I take the time again and again to set the record straight.  To have an informed market, and therefore customers, one must presume that the sources of news and  information must be at a minimum factual and accurate.  This means undertaking a minimum level of due diligence and frankly homework. 

Case in point:

In an article reporting the demise of the .xxx domain, the writer accusses ICANN for practicing a bit of hypocrisy (emphasis mine):

"Compare the rejection of .xxx to the approval of .mobi. ...Several ICANN directors who voted to reject .xxx did so because they believed there were "credible scenarios" in which ICANN would be forced to answer for content regulation under .xxx, which is not its mission. Its mission is the technical stability of the DNS.  These same directors had no such concerns when unanimously approving .mobi, which proposed to regulate the content of a mobiles-only top-level domain. The .mobi domain was approved despite convincing arguments that it "broke" the spirit of the DNS by using top-level domains as protocol denominators."

Where do we say, or have we ever said, that we regulate the "content" of a mobile site?  The fact is that we enforce three mandatory rules (Is it in xhtml? Is it a second-level? Does it have frames?), all of which are automated and can be machine-tested without anyone ever knowing the content of the site.  To compare .mobi and .xxx using this criteria is ill-informed, and a disservice to the user.

The writer goes on further to draw a distinction between .xxx and .mobi in terms of the "sponsored community".  Here is an excerpt:

ICM's community would have consisted of pornographers. A pretty distinct group of folk. The .mobi community by contrast was "restricted" to everybody on the planet who owns a mobile phone -- a higher percentage of the population of Earth than those who own a PC. The gated community of .mobi ergo has a potentially broader audience than .com.

Ok - where to begin? First lets lay out the hierarchy: Sponsor, community, end users. The sponsor part is easy. The community we serve is any individual or business who would like to extend their reach into the mobile channel and do so cost-effectively. So we provide the domain name as well as a whole host of tools and resources -- free, BTW, and open to anyone regardless of whether they use .mobi or not.  We do this so that the end-users, anyone with a mobile phone, can easily and cost-effectively use the Internet.  This fits in nicely with ICANN's own definition.

There is confusion here between the definition of sponsors, the community it benefits (porno industry) ,and end users. I will not get into the merits of .xxx or ICANN's decision (later post perhaps) but the key point here is:  How does .mobi compare in any way with .xxx?

I urge any writer, blogger, pundit: Please... do a bit of fact checking.  Our website has a whole host of information on our policies, progress, initiatives etc.  Without such preliminary and much needed due diligence, opinions parade as facts, facts become blurred and submerged, and we end up with an uninformed public and, by definition, an uninformed market.

It's Not Content, It's Distribution

I recently came back from the ICANN meeting in Lisbon, Portugal.  During the course of three days, we met with no fewer than 25 different registrars. 

Many of you who are familiar with this channel know that the term "registrar" nowadays is an oft-used term that doesn't capture the real business model of the many enterprising companies who are "ICANN accredited registrars." Many of those we talked to would consider themselves web hosting providers that enable businesses large and small to develop an identity and a footprint by providing hosting, site creation, certs, e-commerce platforms, and yes an identity in the form of a Top Level Domain (TLD) or a Country Code Top Level Domain (ccTLD) to base it on. 

For these companies, a domain is often the commodity piece in the range of offerings.  The real margins are in the "value adds" like certs, e-commerce tools, and hosting.  That said, the industry as a whole is looking for ways to differentiate itself, given that the whole context or presumption behind all of the services they provide is PC tailored content and access.

Now, let's look at mobile hosting: The average size of site done for mobile (if done right) is a fraction of the size of a site created to be accessed via PC.  It doesn't require a different set of hardware, so no new investment.  The tough part is to create the sites so it works well and rates at least a 4 out of 5 on the Mobile ready Report.  That problem we have solved by offering the dotMobi Site Builder free of use!   

Now, let's take a look at what's happening on the "content" side.  Recall the rallying cry in the late nineties "Content is king."  Well everyone seems to have heard that call.  Everyone it seems is a content publisher; witness the rise of blogs (such as this one) and individuals who self-publish. 

The new rallying cry ought to be "it's not about content, its about distribution."  Namely, "How do you take all the content that is now vying for our attention, and build a new more targeted and expanded distribution channel?"  With mobiles outstripping PCs four to one, and Internet access always-on and available to many of these devices, mobile is the new distribution channel.

So why do I go to great lengths to lay out the arguments above? Because the "aha! moment", as one of my colleagues calls it, is when people see they are able to use .mobi and all the openly available tools and resources to offer a new distribution channel to their customers.  (And BTW build a differentiated and profitable business for themselves.)

They also know that if they do not provide the tools and the means for businesses to establish a mobile distribution channel, someone else will. 

No revelation here, as that is exactly how they themselves got started in the early days of the Web, and provided services to large and small businesses where the established telcos were too slow or encumbered to offer their toll-free and yellow-pages services for the then-new distribution channel... the Internet.

BTW - Did you notice our newest investor?

Last week at CTIA the CEO and President of Visa, John Philip Coghlan delivered the keynote.  Stating that the concept of turning the cell phone into a credit or debit card, is "inevitable", he announced Visa's investment in dotMobi.  Visa now joins thirteen other companies as the latest investor in dotMobi. 

If you glance at the names, Visa stands out as being the only one not traditionally associated with the mobile space.   And its a welcome addition! Why? it simply underlines that dotmobi is not just relevant to a select group of "mobile" companies, but rather to a larger base of companies, who see mobile as a the next iteration of the Internet and not simply as a technology.

At the same time that the announcement was made, the dotmobi team was split across the Atlantic. Part of our team, including our CTO and our development team were attending CTIA, while I attended ICANN in Lisbon along with the rest of the sales and operations team.  (That is, where we finally were able to watch the announcement on YouTube.)  Though we have been somewhat understated about this announcement and have simply posted the release on our site, we strongly believe this is huge news. 

As evidenced by the reaction of one of our channel partners at ICANN upon hearing the news: "With these level of (investors) companies ... mobile commerce is bound to happen".  We certainly hope so, and now we are well positioned thanks to our latest investor.