Tag Archives: Coca-Cola

Nearly 200 Web Sites Attacked by Turkish Hacker

0 turkish hack

Nearly 200 Web sites, several of them major ones, were having their addresses redirected to the wrong location this weekend, reports ZDNet’s Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols. Some of them included Coca-Cola, UPS and The Register, a popular United Kingdom technology news outlet. READ MORE »

Fight the Faux: Battling Cybersquatting

our beautiful site

It’s not only the McDonalds and Coca-Colas of the business world that have to fight to protect their Internet addresses from cyber criminals who will try to ride on a brand’s coattails and pick up business from unsuspecting, potential customers who type in the wrong URL. Back in 1994, one of the earliest so-called “cybersquatters” was a journalist, former Newsday writer Joshua Quittner, who successfully registered “mcdonalds.com” in the rules for registering brand names changed. Quittner ended up selling the brand to the fast food giant, and donated the money to charity. But other cybersquatters have looked to simply cash in. In the years since, however, small and mid-sized businesses have increasingly had to take legal action to protect their business domain names. Earlier this year, GoDaddy.com, a mid-sized Internet firm based in Conroe, Texas, won an arbitration proceeding from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and won the transfer of 10 different domain names — godaddyebay.com, godaddythis.com, and godaddythat.com among them – registered by Clark Signs, of Mableton, Ga., and Graham Clark of Del Mar, Calif. A bigger issue for small business The number of complaints about Internet domain names brought to WIPO, an international body based in Geneva that has become one of the leading dispute resolution centers for Internet names, has been steadily rising – from 1 case in 1999 to more than 1,900 this year so far. Among them are a growing number of small and mid-sized firms that realize someone else may be trying to siphon off their business by registering similar domains in the popular dot-com top-level domain. For business purposes, dot-com has become the gold standard for how to find a business online. “It’s probably more of an issue for small businesses,” says John Berryhill, a Media, Pa. attorney who does a brisk business in protecting domain names from cybersquatters for client. If you’re an Internet user and you can’t find Coca-Cola on the Internet, you know to go to a search engine and try some combination of the soft drink giant’s name. “But if you are a smaller, less well-known business and somebody has usurped your business name as a domain name,” Berryhill says. “You’re not even going to get a toehold on being found.” Large companies are primarily concerned with people chipping away at their good will by registering similar names or slight variations of spelling. But they’re not in any serious jeopardy of disappearing from the Internet, Berryhill says. For a smaller business, if some one else has got your domain name, then potential customers may not be able to find your outpost online. Fighting the cybersquatters Some cybersquatters — or their brethren, “brandjackers,” who register variations of famous brands – are simply looking to make money off of business they can pull away from more well-known firms or figure that the business ultimately may offer to pay them for the domain name. “From a financial perspective, it is to take money off of Web visitors who were really looking for the famous brand holder,” said Ari Master, COO of CitizenHawk, a company specifically focused on identifying and eliminating cybersquatters. “Cybersquatters register hundreds, if not thousands, of misspelled domains based on every well-known company’s trademarks,” said Master. “At this level, it is totally impractical and cost prohibitive to shut down these rogue sites through manual methodologies.” The deceptive websites are often used as landing pages for spam offers or in phishing attacks. These cybersquatting website may even try to take a consumer’s credit card information with the intention of stealing that person’s identity. Cybersquatting offenses were up 19 percent in the first three quarters of 2007 over the same period in the previous year. That’s according to the “BrandJacking Autumn 2007″ report released by MarkMonitor. Between the second and third quarters the rate increased by 10 percent alone, rising from 286,801 occurrences in Q1 to 342,512 at the end of Q3.  “Brand abusers take a shotgun approach — trying to get to as large an audience as possible,” said Andrew Horton, director of product management at MarkMonitor. He said very often the larger the brand, the larger the target. Howeve,r “for some industries a popular brand is not a function of company size.” Preventing domain confusion Any brand can fall prey to cybersquatting and other forms of brandjacking. It’s prudent to safeguard your brand in advance of such attacks. “The best defense is to put together a brand protection strategy for your company,” said Horton. “The first step is to prevent abuse from occurring by registering domains defensively. If you’re doing business overseas, make sure you register your most valuable domains and brands in the countries in which you are doing business. “You may want to register popular variants like ‘acmecustomerserivce.com’ or acmeproducts.com,” Horton advises. “Use your Web logs and Web analytics to help you identify the most popular terms that your customers are using online to find you and consider registering those terms to protect your traffic from brandjackers.” CitizenHawk’s Master suggests going so far as to think like cybersquatters. “I would highly recommend taking a proactive approach to protect against cybersquatters,” he said. “This includes purchasing the cloud of sites that surround the branded terms — the most likely misspellings — as well as derivations of the branded term — like ‘newbrandsucks.com.” The company has a tool on its website where domain and brand owners can see some of the top misspellings and alternate domains just to get things started. “While there will be no way to get all of them up-front, taking a strategic brand management approach from the beginning will stop a lot of future attacks,” says Master. Call for help in fighting brandjacking Google and other companies that operate sponsored links networks have rules against trademark abuse and can be helpful. While they can’t monitor the sponsored links bided on through their system, they will take down any that infringe on trademarks, once notified. The use of logos and other copyrighted materials is also a problem. Watermarking images, and having computer programs crawl the Web and detect such violations can go a long way toward protecting your brand. Another simple measure Horton recommends is to use notification services like Google Alerts to see how your name is being used. This is often referred to as a vanity search, and through most notification services it’s free, and effective. Plus sometimes you learn of the good ways people are talking about your brand.

Fight the Faux: Battling Cybersquatting

our beautiful site

It’s not only the McDonalds and Coca-Colas of the business world that have to fight to protect their Internet addresses from cyber criminals who will try to ride on a brand’s coattails and pick up business from unsuspecting, potential customers who type in the wrong URL. Back in 1994, one of the earliest so-called “cybersquatters” was a journalist, former Newsday writer Joshua Quittner, who successfully registered “mcdonalds.com” in the rules for registering brand names changed. Quittner ended up selling the brand to the fast food giant, and donated the money to charity. But other cybersquatters have looked to simply cash in. In the years since, however, small and mid-sized businesses have increasingly had to take legal action to protect their business domain names. Earlier this year, GoDaddy.com, a mid-sized Internet firm based in Conroe, Texas, won an arbitration proceeding from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and won the transfer of 10 different domain names — godaddyebay.com, godaddythis.com, and godaddythat.com among them – registered by Clark Signs, of Mableton, Ga., and Graham Clark of Del Mar, Calif. A bigger issue for small business The number of complaints about Internet domain names brought to WIPO, an international body based in Geneva that has become one of the leading dispute resolution centers for Internet names, has been steadily rising – from 1 case in 1999 to more than 1,900 this year so far. Among them are a growing number of small and mid-sized firms that realize someone else may be trying to siphon off their business by registering similar domains in the popular dot-com top-level domain. For business purposes, dot-com has become the gold standard for how to find a business online. “It’s probably more of an issue for small businesses,” says John Berryhill, a Media, Pa. attorney who does a brisk business in protecting domain names from cybersquatters for client. If you’re an Internet user and you can’t find Coca-Cola on the Internet, you know to go to a search engine and try some combination of the soft drink giant’s name. “But if you are a smaller, less well-known business and somebody has usurped your business name as a domain name,” Berryhill says. “You’re not even going to get a toehold on being found.” Large companies are primarily concerned with people chipping away at their good will by registering similar names or slight variations of spelling. But they’re not in any serious jeopardy of disappearing from the Internet, Berryhill says. For a smaller business, if some one else has got your domain name, then potential customers may not be able to find your outpost online. Fighting the cybersquatters Some cybersquatters — or their brethren, “brandjackers,” who register variations of famous brands – are simply looking to make money off of business they can pull away from more well-known firms or figure that the business ultimately may offer to pay them for the domain name. “From a financial perspective, it is to take money off of Web visitors who were really looking for the famous brand holder,” said Ari Master, COO of CitizenHawk, a company specifically focused on identifying and eliminating cybersquatters. “Cybersquatters register hundreds, if not thousands, of misspelled domains based on every well-known company’s trademarks,” said Master. “At this level, it is totally impractical and cost prohibitive to shut down these rogue sites through manual methodologies.” The deceptive websites are often used as landing pages for spam offers or in phishing attacks. These cybersquatting website may even try to take a consumer’s credit card information with the intention of stealing that person’s identity. Cybersquatting offenses were up 19 percent in the first three quarters of 2007 over the same period in the previous year. That’s according to the “BrandJacking Autumn 2007″ report released by MarkMonitor. Between the second and third quarters the rate increased by 10 percent alone, rising from 286,801 occurrences in Q1 to 342,512 at the end of Q3.  “Brand abusers take a shotgun approach — trying to get to as large an audience as possible,” said Andrew Horton, director of product management at MarkMonitor. He said very often the larger the brand, the larger the target. Howeve,r “for some industries a popular brand is not a function of company size.” Preventing domain confusion Any brand can fall prey to cybersquatting and other forms of brandjacking. It’s prudent to safeguard your brand in advance of such attacks. “The best defense is to put together a brand protection strategy for your company,” said Horton. “The first step is to prevent abuse from occurring by registering domains defensively. If you’re doing business overseas, make sure you register your most valuable domains and brands in the countries in which you are doing business. “You may want to register popular variants like ‘acmecustomerserivce.com’ or acmeproducts.com,” Horton advises. “Use your Web logs and Web analytics to help you identify the most popular terms that your customers are using online to find you and consider registering those terms to protect your traffic from brandjackers.” CitizenHawk’s Master suggests going so far as to think like cybersquatters. “I would highly recommend taking a proactive approach to protect against cybersquatters,” he said. “This includes purchasing the cloud of sites that surround the branded terms — the most likely misspellings — as well as derivations of the branded term — like ‘newbrandsucks.com.” The company has a tool on its website where domain and brand owners can see some of the top misspellings and alternate domains just to get things started. “While there will be no way to get all of them up-front, taking a strategic brand management approach from the beginning will stop a lot of future attacks,” says Master. Call for help in fighting brandjacking Google and other companies that operate sponsored links networks have rules against trademark abuse and can be helpful. While they can’t monitor the sponsored links bided on through their system, they will take down any that infringe on trademarks, once notified. The use of logos and other copyrighted materials is also a problem. Watermarking images, and having computer programs crawl the Web and detect such violations can go a long way toward protecting your brand. Another simple measure Horton recommends is to use notification services like Google Alerts to see how your name is being used. This is often referred to as a vanity search, and through most notification services it’s free, and effective. Plus sometimes you learn of the good ways people are talking about your brand.

26 Most Fascinating Entrepreneurs: Richard Branson

Richard Branson Virgin Group because he’s game for anything. In fact, everything. Whatever else he may be doing at any moment (the “whatever else” here being preposterous understatement), Richard Branson is also cutting a figure. You’ve seen it. There’s the grin (not smile), the goatee he’s worn since decades before everyone else did, the still-leonine head of hair that even at age 54 gives him the appearance of always plowing through the wind like a man on the prow of some very sweet ship. He’s short, but people say you don’t notice it because he never stands in one place long enough for the necessary comparisons. He’s one of those fearless, twinkling guys you hear about who’s always certain that the next thing — the very next — well, that will be something else, that’ll be the best. Branson for better or worse is brio personified. Everything about him seems propelled. That figure he cuts is anything but irrelevant. The more you look, the more you realize it might be the most important of several important things about him. Not that Branson’s body of work isn’t admirable. Beginning with a student newspaper at age 17 and a record label to which he signed the Sex Pistols in his mid-20s, Branson has built the Virgin Group into an international conglomerate of some 350 companies, many of them still tiny but all of them combining for more than $8 billion a year in sales. We know, of course, about Virgin’s music businesses and transcontinental airline and pay-as-you-go mobile phone service — which the company claims has become the fastest business ever to reach $1 billion in revenue. Most of us have glimpsed newscasts about Virgin Galactic, Branson’s bid to take paying customers into space. And we’re all soon to hear incessantly about Virgin’s launch of a domestic air carrier in the United States, which Branson judges to be a miserably served market. But how many of us know about Virgin’s limousine companies and wine business and trains, and its enterprises that rent bikes, make cosmetics, operate bridal shops (Virgin Brides), run health clubs, sell holidays, offer balloon flights, and market lingerie (VirginWare — “sleek, smooth, and sexy underwear”)? Though it’s hard to picture anything Branson does as being underpublicized, only 10% of Virgin’s business is done in the States, so most of us here are bound to overlook the odd juice bar and manicure shop in the swelling Virgin empire. Branson can’t seem to stop himself, and he doesn’t appear to care how badly he gets flamed by critics (starting with the much-maligned 1984 launch of the now extravagantly successful Virgin Atlantic airline). Said one guru/academic, echoing many: “A brand can’t stand for music stores, airlines, mobile phones, colas, financial services, and on and on. There’s no brand on earth that can do that. That’s ego.” Branson shrugs. “Yeah, I know,” he says. “The conventional wisdom is you should specialize in what you know and never stray from that, but no other brand has become a way-of-life brand the way Virgin has. And it wasn’t us setting out to become a way-of-life brand, it was me continually being interested in learning new things. We’ve got people all over the world who are coming up with great new ideas, and trying them doesn’t actually cost us a lot relative to the overall size of the group.” So they try. In the process Virgin has developed a business method that Branson calls “branded venture capital,” whereby he starts and manages all manner of new companies under the Virgin name while partners provide most of the investment. On the February afternoon when Branson is explaining all this by phone he happens to be sailing into Antigua, his cell connection coming and going as he rounds some headland or other and then picks his way through yachts in Nelson’s Dockyard, which the seasoned Caribbean sailor will recognize as one of the partyingest of the Leeward Islands ports. Branson had Virgin colleagues aboard, and later that night would be sharing a spirited evening out with 15 or 20 of them, his notebook as ever alongside. “I keep a notebook in my pocket all the time,” he says, “and I really do listen to what people say, even when we’re out in a club at 3 a.m. and someone’s passing on an idea in a drunken slur. Good ideas come from people everywhere, not in the boardroom. “Anyway, it’ll be a really fun evening, I’m sure,” he says innocently, seeming genuinely unaware of whatever envy he might be triggering on the other end of the conversation. “I always have tried to make sure I work from an environment that’s pleasant and fun. If the chairman’s having fun, it’s easier for everyone else. “And if it’s fun, you’re going to keep going until you drop.” The afternoon’s expensive floating obstacles be damned, Branson was characteristically free with his thoughts as he talked. Here are excerpts from what he said: “The world is a massively more hospitable place for entrepreneurs than it was 20 years ago. In most industries it is virtually possible to think of the world as one country. All our expansion plans are overseas: China, India…. We’re really not interested in a new thing unless it can become global.” “Even the smallest, youngest companies should not be frightened to go overseas. The opportunities in the world are immense — China has a growth rate of 9% to 10% a year, and you should go there and participate in it and enjoy it. Enjoy it.” “Lavish praise on people and people will flourish; criticize people and they’ll shrivel up.” “Give people a second chance if they screw up. Even people who have stolen from us have become, when given a second chance, incredibly loyal and valued employees. I don’t know where I’d be if I hadn’t been given second chances.” “If you can run one business well you can run any business. There just needs to be a crying-out need for you to enter the marketplace. The time to go into a business is when it’s abysmally run by other people.” “Most of our businesses do succeed, but if something completely fails, then as long as we bow out gracefully and pay off all our debts, and nobody gets hurt, then I don’t think people disrespect Virgin for trying. The public appreciates someone having a go; it appreciates the attempt. Who’s been a success in life who hasn’t failed?” “It’s important for the company’s sake that the chairman not get bored.” “My general philosophy in life is you never really go wrong saying yes.” “I want Virgin to be as well known around the world as Coca-Cola.” It’s that last comment that too many observers have used to sum Branson up. And yet, even the Coke comparison does him inadequate justice and risks missing the point. Coca-Cola has never opened a business to fly passengers to the moon. Nor has it expanded into online auto sales. Or railroad operations. Or any of a hundred other things Branson’s appetite has led him to undertake. Will that appetite thin Virgin’s brand to worthless dilution? It’ll be a kick to watch and find out. But back to that figure the man cuts, because in the end it’s not the deliriously ambitious branding ploy or even the deliriously ambitious appetite that attracts us to Branson and braces us, and offers us inspiration. It’s something about the figure itself, the way it is not just sensible and straightforward but steadfastly alert and delighted and fun. When is Branson working? When is he not? It all appears so seamless and so authentically pleasing. Unlike many of our most vaunted and imitated entrepreneurs, Branson forever strikes one as not compulsive or haunted or even, strangely enough, driven — though no one ever questions his drive. No, instead he just keeps looking like he’s on the prow of that sweet boat, grinning because he knows a secret, happy because he doesn’t know exactly what’s next but is absolutely sure that it won’t be dull and will quite possibly be a good deal better even than that. Michael S. Hopkins Martha Stewart, Martha Stewart Omnimedia because she took one for the team Richard Branson, Virgin Group because he’s game for anything. In fact, everything. Michael Dell, Dell Computer for being brilliantly straightforward Jim Sinegal, Costco because who knew a big-box chain could have a generous soul? Diane von Furstenberg, Diane von Furstenberg Studio for staging an elegant comeback Julie Azuma, Different Roads to Learning for offering hope and help to the parents of autistic children Fritz Maytag, Anchor Brewing for setting limits Ray Kurzweil, Kurzweil Technologies and other companies because he is Edison’s rightful heir Craig Newmark, Craigslist for putting the free in free markets Jack Mitchell, Mitchells/Richards because his family business makes an art of customer service Frank Robinson, Robinson Helicopter for whipping an entire industry into shape Mark Melton, Melton Franchise Systems for giving immigrants their shot at the American Dream Michelle Cardinal & Tim O’Leary, Cmedia and Respond2 for rewriting the rules for husband-and-wife teams Mike Lazaridis, Research in Motion because someone had to stand up for all those frustrated engineers Trip Hawkins, Electronics Arts and Digital Chocolate for still scrapping Warren Brown, Cake Love and Love Cafe because only in America will someone quit a secure job as a lawyer to start a bakery Muriel Siebert, Muriel Siebert & Co. for being a notable first with a worthy second act Chuck Porter, Crispin, Porter + Bogusky for verging on reckless Katrina Markoff, Vosges Haut for setting a completely unreasonable goal for her business Barry Steinberg & Craig Sumerel, Direct Tire and Auto Service for showing the power of the peer group Victoria Parham, Virtual Support Services for serving as a mentor to military spouses Tom LaTour, Kimpton Hotels and Restaurants for staying at fleabag hotels so that we don’t have to Mitchell Gold & Bob Williams, Mitchell Gold for creating a true comfort zone Izzy & Coco Tihanyi, Surf Diva for kicking sand in the face of conventional wisdom Tony Lee, Ring Masters for saving 16 jobs, including his own Rueben Martinez, Libreria Martinez Books and Art Galleries for simultaneously building a business and nurturing Latino culture

Warehouses Unplugged

Following is a sampling of the major players in the wireless data-collection industry, listed alphabetically. For more information, please visit the companies’ Web sites. Company: HHP (Hand Held Products, Inc.)Headquarters: Skaneateles Falls, N.Y.URL: www2.hhp.com/hhp/index.tplSpecialties: Makes image-based data-collection solutions for mobile, wireless, and transaction-processing applications. Serves retail distribution, warehousing, logistics, and manufacturing markets, among others. Major customers include the U.S. Postal Service, Federal Express, Coca-Cola, and Continental Airlines. Company: ICS, Inc.Headquarters: Jacksonville, Fla. URL: www.icsfl.comSpecialties: Develops and implements software for supply-chain management, including wireless applications. Products include LogiMax warehouse logistics-management solution. Company: Intermec Technologies Corp.Headquarters: Everett, Wash. URL: www.intermec.comSpecialties: Makes integrated data-collection products, including bar-code scanners, wireless LANs, and development software. Customers include: Dee Electronics, Davis Cookie Co., Bass Pro Shops, and Shenandoah’s Pride Dairy. Company: Psion Teklogix Headquarters: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada URL: www.psionteklogix.comSpecialties: Makes handheld, vehicle-mounted, and speech-directed wireless data devices. Products used for warehousing, distribution, transportation and logistics, and by repair, inspection, and field teams. Specializes in solutions for companies with multiple sites, complex operations, and large inventories. Major customers include Great Lakes Cheese, Port of Corpus Christi Cold Storage, Lego, and Toyota. Company: The Ryzex GroupHeadquarters: Bellingham, Wash. URL: www.ryzex.comSpecialties: Develops and services integrated bar-code, data-collection, and wireless technology solutions using hardware and software from many vendors. Offers rental and leasing options as well as less-costly refurbished equipment. Company: Symbol Technologies Inc. Headquarters: Holtsville, N.Y. URL: www.symbol.com Specialties: Makes bar-code laser scanners and data-capture devices, mobile and handheld computers, and wireless networks. Serves retailers, logistics and transportation businesses, manufacturers, health-care providers, and hospitality companies, among others. Through agreement with Xplore Technologies Corp., Symbol recently began marketing a rugged tablet PC. Company also makes module transforming any Handspring Visor into a bar-code scanner. Company: TAL Technologies Inc. Location: Philadelphia URL: www.taltech.comSpecialties: Makes variety of data-acquisition and bar-code software products for wireless networks; also manufactures bar-code scanners. Analysts suggest considering the following questions when investigating wireless data-collection systems: Do you need bar-code scanning capability? How big an area must the wireless network cover? Can the vendor accommodate your needs if your company grows or moves into larger space? How will the system work with your existing IT environment? How rugged are the handheld computers? Have they been tested to withstand being dropped, and if so, what were the test results? What other options are offered for mobile devices? For instance, can they be mounted on vehicles or worn on the body?

Ideas For Sale

The Big Idea A handful of entrepreneurs are building marketplaces designed to hook up creative thinkers with businesses that need them. Is the world ready for an eBay of ideas? Anyone who has spent time hunting for his glasses only to discover them on the bridge of his nose can relate to Sanjay Goel’s feelings when he finally came up with the business idea for which he had been searching for half a year. The idea was this: to build a Web site for ideas. Ideas are now widely regarded as the lifeblood of the economy. By some measures the market for the transfer of intellectual property has hit $100 billion. Increasingly, organizations are looking outside the ranks of employees to find these ideas. Last year, for example, mining company Goldcorp Inc. offered a total of $500,000 for the best ideas for getting 6 million ounces of gold out from under a lake in Ontario. The incentive paid off so well that the Canadian company upped the ante in March, offering a total of $2 million for other stellar gold-mining ideas. You can’t even say it’s not rocket science: NASA recently called on the world at large to come up with a scheme for launching a probe to Pluto for less than $500 million, having scrapped its own, more expensive plans. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands, and possibly millions, of people routinely generate ideas that could conceivably make someone a lot of money or otherwise improve the lot of some subset of humankind, but they’re clueless about what to do with them. Send them uninvited to a company? Call a patent lawyer? Hire an intellectual-property agent? Start a company? Take out an ad? All are avenues conventionally taken by those imaginative thinkers who don’t simply let their ideas die on the vine. But maybe a better notion is to bring the Internet’s aggre- gating capabilities to bear on idea matchmaking, in much the same way that eBay has brought together buyers and sellers of collectible goods. And so it was that the company Goel and Sharat Singh founded, called Ideas.com, along with a small pack of competing Web sites, intended to pull in orphaned ideas and funnel them to businesses willing to pay cold, hard cash for the best of them. “We’re creating a marketplace of ideas,” says Goel. “The ideas that are now being wasted are extremely valuable to companies.” Trafficking in ideas, of course, entails complexities that Beanie Baby traders never had to worry about, including the daunting difficulties in determining and valuing ownership of ideas. But, as with so many dot-coms, the biggest barrier faced by Ideas.com and its competitors has been having to struggle with unproved revenue models in an investment market that has turned its back on Internet companies unlikely to turn a quick profit. Indeed, time may have run out on Ideas.com. On July 31, Goel and Singh were seriously considering shutting down the company. But in bringing his company as far as he did, Goel managed to raise a question that may continue to beguile companies and individuals for years to come: can the Internet help transport ideas across organizational boundaries and in doing so render obsolete the entire notion of corporate boundaries? HIDDEN JEWELS: “The ideas that are now being wasted are extremely valuable to companies,” says Sanjay Goel, founder of Ideas.com. Sanjay Goel was born in Delhi, India, to parents who expected him to become an engineer or a doctor. But Goel was fascinated with business and by age 12 had cofounded a thriving neighborhood magazine-rental stand. He dutifully trudged off to the Indian Institute of Technology in 1984, where he studied electrical engineering and secretly planned to start a business when he graduated. But, like many of his classmates, he felt obligated to first grab a master’s degree in the United States, and he ventured to UCLA. After a stint as a robotics researcher in Japan, Goel returned to California in 1990 and reinvented himself as a programmer specializing in finance. “I had zero background,” he says. “My whole thing is I’d rather fail doing something very ambitious than succeed doing something that’s not ambitious.” After a year of programming, Goel decided it was Wall Street or bust, so he loaded up his aging Honda Civic and headed cross-country. In New York City he had several interviews, to no avail. His credit cards were maxed out, so Goel decided he’d drive a taxi to make ends meet — only to learn that a taxi driver’s license would cost $300 — $290 more than he had. Still, he wouldn’t budge from his goal. “I’m either going to do what I want or nothing,” he says. “There’s nothing in the middle.” He was counting his change to see if he had enough money for a meal when Citibank called and offered him a position in its investment-banking division. By 1998 Goel had already been named the division’s managing director — a career rise of unheard-of velocity in the staid world of big-time investment banking. Despite the success and his indulgence in on-the-edge hobbies — he carried his parachute with him on business trips, began flying airplanes and helicopters, climbed Mount McKinley, and started motorcycling and windsurfing — Goel became increasingly restless. In 1999 he realized that, for all his daring exploits, he had been keeping his back turned on the biggest adventure of all: building a company from scratch. Goel came up with a sensible course of action: develop a business plan, get funding, and then resign from his position. He then promptly rejected his own advice and quit on the spot. “It had to be a clean break,” he says. “I have enough confidence in myself to know that for the second time in my life I was going to restart my career.” Goel had already come up with what he thought was a golden business idea: an innovation marketplace. Now he had to figure out how to make such a thing work. He took to spending his days at the New York University Law Library, reading about innovation. “The books were telling me that companies understand the value of innovation, but that they haven’t found an optimal way to deal with it,” he says. But what sort of business could close that gap? For months Goel researched the problem and couldn’t nail down an answer. Then, as if in tribute to the adventitious nature of idea generation, the solution came to him in his sleep. “I woke up and said, ‘Now I’m ready for this,” he recalls. The idea behind Ideas.com was simple enough. Anyone could post to the site a brief description of an idea. Corporate executives in need of an R&D boost paid a fee to become affiliated with the site, along with monthly fees to maintain their affiliations. The executives perused the postings, and if they liked what they saw, they could negotiate directly with the poster. Postings described such things as a Web-based system for taking opinion polls; a laboratory bench that prints documents; and a heated, rollable pad for covering a sidewalk before a snowstorm. Companies paid commissions to Ideas.com of as much as 30% on ideas that they bought. (Neither Goel nor his customers will divulge how high any of those fees ran, except to say that the prices depended on company size and other unnamed variables.) Idea contributors paid nothing. If Goel had had any doubts about the plan’s viability, they evaporated when he shared his idea in late 1999 with Venky Harinarayan, a former UCLA classmate who had sold his own dot-com, Junglee, to Amazon.com in 1998 for $250 million. “I had been talking about it for 30 seconds when he told me to stop. I thought he was going to kick me out of his office, but he immediately offered to invest,” Goel says. Harinarayan brought in his two Junglee cofounders, and the three chipped in $1.2 million to get Ideas.com off the ground. It launched last November with 15 employees. Among the executives who joined the start-up’s board of advisers was John Seely Brown, the near-legendary former director of Xerox’s ultrainnovative Palo Alto Research Center. Things can get prickly in the field of idea vending when, for starters, a potential buyer notifies an idea poster that he or she wants to hear more about the idea. To sell the idea, the author must spell it out to the prospective purchaser. But once the idea is explained, the business could take it and run with it without paying. “How do you simultaneously advertise what an idea is while maintaining it as a secret?” asks Stephen Margolis, head of the economics department at North Carolina State University. For that reason, he says, economists call an unshared idea a form of “impacted information,” meaning that it is hobbled by a breakdown in market forces. Goel was well aware of the dilemma. “It was the first and main issue we had to deal with,” he says. To get around it, the site encouraged idea sellers to ask prospective buyers to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs). Sellers were urged to enlist the “principle of incremental disclosure” — that is, to unveil the idea in layers of increasing specificity. After each layer was revealed, the buying company could demonstrate its good faith with a payment or by upping the price it was proposing to pay for the idea. If negotiations broke down, the buyer left the picture, in theory without having seen enough details to implement the idea. Thus one Ideas.com contributor listed an idea for a “Computer Mouse (special type)” in this oblique manner: “It is a normal mouse with some very useful additional features.” More details were available to “serious buyers,” he or she noted. In fact, incremental disclosure is the means by which the business world has long handled the sale of trade secrets. Trade secrets are designs and processes that aren’t patented, typically because their owners fear that competitors will glean the secret from the patent file and find a way to implement it without violating the strict confines of the patent. (Think Coca-Cola recipe, which has never been patented.) Incremental disclosure became particularly popular in the 1970s, after Asian companies proved maddeningly adept at turning U.S. businesses’ own innovations against them. “Certain offshore organizations with far more experience than us would send armies of guys over to look at information on the pretext of evaluating the company for a joint venture,” says Kathryn Rudie Harrigan, Henry R. Kravis Professor of Business Leadership, at Columbia Business School. “These people were actually intellectual-property vacuum cleaners, and they got away with it until U.S. companies became more savvy and found ways to break their information into pieces with a pricing schedule.” Goel concedes that NDAs and incremental disclosure don’t offer ironclad protection against unscrupulous companies bent on stealing ideas. But he insists that most idea sellers recognize that unethical companies are the exception. “Individuals generally have a sense that companies will treat them fairly,” he says. “It’s in a company’s interest to reward someone for contributing an idea. The value of an uncooked idea is generally a small fraction of the value which the company is going to derive from it. Buying an idea isn’t a one-shot transaction, it’s a magnet for attracting the best ideas going forward.” In other words, the best way to make sure smart thinkers send you their most valuable ideas — as they come up with them — is to buy their half-baked ideas now. Ronald S. Jonash, managing director of Arthur D. Little’s Global Technology and Innovation Management Practice and chief of innovation at ADL, agrees that companies need to be cautious about leaving idea generators feeling exploited. Jonash has worked with the automotive-supply industry and says that employees at many supply companies are not inclined to share new ideas with General Motors because of its reputation for taking ideas and developing them on its own. Chrysler, meanwhile, paid some suppliers to develop promising ideas in exchange for the exclusive rights to the resulting product for two years. That — along with other creative relationships with suppliers — is why Chrysler became the preferred customer of more than 75% of all suppliers, says Jonash. HIGH RISK, HIGH REWARD: “I’d rather fail doing something very ambitious than succeed doing something that’s not ambitious,” says Goel. Even if an Ideas.com posting attracted a company that wanted to do the right thing, the formidable task of placing a value on the idea remained. Typically, the buyer and the seller would take their own shots at coming up with a value and then the negotiations would begin. “When it comes to assessing an idea’s worth before the idea is implemented, wilderness is a good word for describing the position you’re in,” says North Carolina State’s Margolis. In cases where a reasonable sales estimate can be made for products based on the idea, he notes, a royalty of 2% to 10% of revenues is a rough rule of thumb. But if the product couldn’t exist without the idea, he adds, the figure is frequently 30% of revenues and can go even higher. The amount may dip to a tiny fraction of a percent if the idea represents a slight improvement in an established product, such as a better knob in a car. Things only get more complicated from there. In most cases, it’s not clear up front whether an idea will end up being worth implementing at all, let alone how well the resulting product will sell. “Generally speaking, an idea by itself is worth nothing,” says Mel Lazar, managing partner of Lazar Levine & Felix LLP, a New York City accounting firm that specializes in business valuation. “The question is, Can you take that idea and put it into a business in a form that will generate income?” For that reason, Lazar thinks the chances that a company will pay much money for an idea it spots in a Web-site posting are small. And even if it is willing to pay, it will probably enlist a hardball negotiator to get it cheaply. “The average guy would get run over,” he says. Goel doesn’t argue with the suggestion that the majority of posters are unlikely to score big financially. But he points out that for many idea authors, money isn’t the main point. “A large number of people are very happy just seeing their idea taken to fruition, even if they never get paid for it,” he says. “If you come up with an idea for a new windshield wiper and it gets implemented by an automaker and before you know it millions of cars around the world are using it, that’s a very powerful experience.” Of course, the man who had that experience, an inventor named Robert W. Kearns, spent decades in court trying to get automakers to pay up, eventually receiving $30 million. Still, Goel has a point: the average person who comes up with a modestly good idea isn’t likely to hold out for big bucks at the almost certain cost of seeing the idea ignored. In any case, even if the site had been frequented by the most fair-minded of buyers, the vast majority of ideas posted there didn’t seem destined for the big time. Consider this posting, from “skankinARTboy,” for a “Wider Salsa Container”: Hey tostitos — i am a lazy college student. I buy nachos and chips all the time, and i personaly hate that i cannot dip my chips into your tiny containers. Half-way empty your container becomes impossible to dip into. I undestand you can pour it out but guess what? America is lazy, and convience is the key to marketing. So shorter but wider container, same glass cost, it hold the same amount and it is better for all lazy people who sit and eat your chips and salsa on the couch. To help idea buyers skip the junk and root out the gems, Goel worked on “reputation engines” that would have enabled at least some site visitors to rank idea sellers. But he warns that ranking ideas isn’t as reliable as ranking baseball cards on eBay. “It’s hard to say that an individual who in the past has not come up with good ideas will not come up with good ideas in the future,” he says. Conversely, he adds, someone who has had one good idea may not ever come up with a useful idea again. He would not allow sellers to rank buyers. “Everybody believes their idea is very powerful and that it deserves significant reward,” he says. Clearly, posting a random idea in the hope that a company will seek it out and buy it is a long shot. But Goel built some twists into Ideas.com that were intended to strengthen the odds. One was that a company could pay Ideas.com to allow posters to submit ideas for that company only. In fact, of the 50,000 ideas that the site received, 48,000 were such “dedicated” ideas. Unfortunately, many of them were addressed to companies such as Apple and GM that didn’t pay Ideas.com for the privilege of receiving ideas. But Goel didn’t mind. He used the homeless missives to entice those companies to join. Of course, corporations have always received unsolicited ideas from eager innovators, and in general it’s caused them giant headaches. Ideas from the public tend to be not only less than earth-shatteringly useful but also not unique. ADL’s Jonash explains that even in-house ideas typically aren’t original. For instance, after a recent productive brainstorming session that ADL had with a corporate client’s scientists and managers, research revealed that most of the resulting ideas were already known to the industry. But try telling that to the proud idea submitter who is promptly blown off by a corporate R&D manager, only to see his or her idea appear in a product the next year. Large companies are so routinely hit with lawsuits by such sincere but misguided idea producers that, notes Margolis, many have set up departments whose sole function is to ensure that over-the-transom ideas almost never make it to the desk of any employee who might be working on a similar project. From that perspective, a steady stream of unsolicited ideas doesn’t seem like the answer to the business world’s dreams. That’s one reason more-experienced inventors and idea producers often turn to intellectual-property agents who shepherd submissions to corporate buyers and negotiate deals. That’s all well and good, says Goel — if you don’t mind paying commissions of 15% or more and waiting a year to get an answer. Why not let the Internet do what it’s best at? Goel asks — which is avoiding the need for a middleman and eliminating the friction. In fact, Goel Offered an even more compelling use of the Internet than giving idea generators a chance to promote their ideas to corporate buyers. He helped companies put their problems in front of idea generators. When a fee-paying company wanted the public to try its hand at coming up with a winning idea, it posted an “Idea Quest.” Coca-Cola offered $5,000 each for two Idea Quests: “an energized packaging system” and “a new fun and healthy kids’ drink.” And Sears ponied up $5,000 for the best idea for “hand and bench tools for the 21st century.” Ideas.com also wrote its own Idea Quests. Those quests were by far the more interesting, including “new personal handheld devices” and “a better election process for the U.S.” The Idea Quests from outside companies, in contrast, had a public-relations feel to them. Which was exactly as it should have been, says Jonash. He argues that the real benefit of soliciting ideas from the public is not to get usable ideas but rather to make customers feel like part of the team and to provide market research. Steven Kirn, former vice-president of innovation and organization development for Sears, agrees that opening up a dialogue with customers is one of the big payoffs of soliciting ideas. “We wanted an effective and efficient way to make customers feel there’s a point of contact where they can tell us what they’re thinking,” he says. But Kirn also insists that Sears was pleased with the results of the Idea Quest. “Out of 130 to 150 ideas sent in, probably about 12 to 15 of them were pretty viable,” he says. “That’s not a bad ratio of ideas to ideas worth thinking about.” The winning idea — for an improved wet-dry vacuum attachment — might never have made it to the right person’s attention at Sears if it hadn’t been for the contest, he adds. “In the past Sears didn’t have a consistent way to deal with submitted ideas,” he says. “Some might have made it to the fast track, but some probably withered.” Not surprisingly, many entrepreneurs see potential in a marketplace of ideas. Some, like Rob Brazell, coauthor of a 1995 book called The Idea Economy, have focused on mass-market ideas — that is, ideas aimed at Joe Consumer. Brazell, who founded a site named Ideaexchange.com, says, “I wanted the everyday useful idea that would deliver immediate return on investment to consumers.” The ideas that appear at Ideaexchange range from the mundane (how to keep your shoelaces from untying) to the offbeat (how to improve your singing range) to the esoteric (how to double your cattle yield without cutting your wheat yield). Idea buyers rate ideas. I bought an idea for $5 about how to reduce the number of lost signals on cell phones. I’m prohibited from revealing the details. But I can report that the notion was simple and helped a bit. People can also post idea requests on the site. I found one from a businessperson looking for an idea for a Web company, another from someone seeking a shark repellent, and one pleading for antiwrinkle secrets. Brazell is convinced there is gold in such trivialities. He charges idea generators for listing an idea for sale; they name their own price for their ideas. The seller splits any revenues with Ideaexchange. Brazell won’t disclose revenues or profitability but says he has $22 million to work with, all raised from private investors. By this past summer Brazell had expanded his vision of the company and planned to eventually provide paid content of many kinds, including a deep well of how-to information. He recently purchased the assets of the bankrupt eHow, a site that offers thousands of tips on everything from how to feed an orphaned kitten to how to save money on taxes. But Goel’s more direct competition came from sites like IdeaDollar.com, BrightIdea.com, and NewIdeaTrade.com, all of which are gunning for business-oriented ideas. Those sites don’t seem as polished or as well stocked with ideas and idea solicitations as Ideas.com did, but each has its own twist on the concept. It’s too soon to say which of those sites will catch on. Niaz Ahmed, founder of NewIdeaTrade, says that his willingness to let businesses access all ideas on the site without paying any fees gives his advertising-supported site a competitive advantage — at least for the time being. Ahmed, who won’t disclose the company’s financial details, admits, “How long we’ll be able to continue to offer this service for free, I don’t know.” Ideas.com’s short life is, of course, just about over. Visitors had downloaded more than a million pages by the summer, Goel says. The company had raised a second round of financing but was unable to raise a third. At press time Goel and Singh had laid off all their employees, and Goel was jetting off to London to interview, once again, for banking jobs. But Goel, ever upbeat, still believes in his dream. “One day,” he says gamely, “someone’s going to make a lot of money from it. It’s just not going to be us.” Had his financial prospects allowed it, Goel planned to expand his services. He wanted to set up a branded version of the site accessible through Coca-Cola’s Web site; there, visitors would have submitted ideas only to Coca-Cola. Creating branded idea sites was supposed to become an important source of revenues for Goel’s company as more and more businesses recognized the value of soliciting ideas but didn’t want the cost and hassle of building their own idea-handling system from scratch. And he was working on offerings that would have enabled client companies to set up versions of Ideas.com accessible only to specific groups — employees, for example, or suppliers and customers or outside professionals likely to be useful contributors. “These companies already spend a lot of money to reach out to these groups for ideas, even though they might already be members of their commu- nity of interest,” he explains. In fact, Goel had recently changed the name of the company to Ideation Networks Inc., to emphasize that Ideas.com was just one manifestation of a grander plan to set up many different idea-collection engines. Steven Kirn, for one, thinks that’s the right way to go. “Where I think we’re headed is that there will be some problems that we’ll want everyone in the world’s ideas on, and others where we’ll establish relationships with communities of inventors,” he says. Jonash, too, believes that companies will want a portfolio of “idea banks.” Some of the most successful idea networks, he notes, involve large corporations’ paying for the expertise of small companies. Most of the large pharmaceutical companies now work closely with small biotech companies, he points out, and in the computer industry Cisco has created a successful model for providing generous funding to small enterprises and then acquiring them on friendly terms if their technology pays off. Coca-Cola, meanwhile, recently created a sort of in-house incubator called Fizzion to fund and support start-ups whose services could be of value to Coca-Cola. Other large companies are likely to follow those models, and online idea swapping could become a standard part of corporate R&D. Small companies especially may be big beneficiaries of idea networks, since they’re less likely to have experts in-house. And they typically don’t have an army of people that they can send to conferences and trade shows to scope out new ideas, although those are among the best places to find them. Consider Cirrus Design Corp., a small manufacturer of aircraft in Duluth, Minn. Dean Vogel, vice-president of research and technology at Cirrus, notes that some of the company’s ideas for aircraft features come from randomly encountered sources. As an example, he offers the fellow who was ogling one of the company’s planes at an aviation show. The man casually observed that a minivan-style sliding door would make it easier to get into and out of the plane. Vogel overheard him, and Cirrus execs have since been thinking about how a sliding-door mechanism could be made lightweight enough for the plane. “If you can reach out to the world, you’ll be harvesting a lot more brains than you could afford to hire,” says Vogel. Goel had been planning to push the envelope even beyond Ideation Networks. For example, he speaks of creating networks that would enable everyone in a company’s “value chain” — that is, suppliers through customers — to put their heads together not just to trade formal ideas but to interactively solve problems, meet needs, and create new opportunities. But he appears to have also discovered that his concept for commercializing ideas is one idea that the world may not yet be ready to pay for. Even if that’s the case, Goel is not likely to give up permanently on his ambitions. “I don’t like to dabble,” he says. “I like to take my adventures all the way.” David H. Freedman is a contributor to Inc. Hold That Thought When does a simple thought become transformed into something you can buy and sell? Reporter Kate O’Sullivan spoke with some inventors, investors, and experts who’ve struggled with that question. Steve Jurvetson, managing director of venture-capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson, invests in early-stage companies. Kevin Rivette is coauthor of Rembrandts in the Attic: Unlocking the Hidden Value of Patents. Scott Randall founded FairMarket, which builds online auctions for such businesses as the Miller Brewing Co. John Kowalski, CEO of Load Hog Industries, turned his unlikely invention into a product that attracted the attention of Ford Motor Co. (See ” The Pickup Artist,” June 2001.) And Paul Moller built a company around his own invention — a flying car. (See ” This Is Rocket Science,” July 2000.) Here’s what they said about idea marketplaces. Is an online idea marketplace a valid business concept? Steve Jurvetson: “At some level I do believe that there’s a worldwide marketplace for information. … But I’m not sure there’s a thriving market for patentable ideas.” Paul Moller: “In the early ’70s I could have benefited if I had had such a process available to me. It would have maybe been a great way to get exposure for some of the other products I’ve developed.” What would it take to make something like this work? John Kowalski: “They’d have to build some credibility. Any exchange of soft product is really hard to track. Who’s buying? Who’s selling? What’s been sold? I would think anyone with a substantive idea would be concerned about throwing something like that into the barrel. It might be knocked off, and then you don’t get paid.” What could cause such companies to fail? Kevin Rivette: “If I’m going to download my novel idea into somebody else’s database, that completely eliminates my ability to get patents in other places in the world. Once you’ve made a publication for sale, bingo, you can’t get patent rights. Once you’ve put it up on the site, you’ve published it for sale. That is the triggering event at which point you should have filed for your patent application in most of the world.” What do you think of the notion of corporations’ offering branded idea marketplaces? Scott Randall: “I love the democratization of the idea-collection process. This is the truest form of listening to your customers. The goodwill generated would be enormous. Consumers will shower tremendous loyalty on those companies that are perceived as listening best to their needs. The major caveats would be the legal ownership questions, the potential disputes around people submitting similar ideas but not getting credit, and the royalties associated with paying the inventors.” Is this concept ahead of its time? Paul Moller: “Oh, no. I don’t think it’s ahead of its time at all. I think, like a lot of things, there will probably be half a dozen [companies] that come and half a dozen that go, and I think there will be one who eventually separates himself from the pack.” Please e-mail your comments to editors@inc.com.

There?s Still a Lot of Life Left in These Old Economy Companies

David Komansky, chairman and CEO of Merrill Lynch & Co., finds it ironic that the head of a financial services firm gets asked to lecture on the new economy these days. “Our company has been called ‘ a relic from the Cro-Magnon era’ ,” he said. “But because of the patterns that started in the last year, some of the virtues of the old economy companies have now become more accepted.” Komansky, who met with students at Wharton last month as part of the Zweig Speaker Series, had some interesting advice to offer his audience, including this: There is no time like bad economic times to start a business career. “Bad times breed opportunities. Those who don’ t have the courage to drive hard in bad times fall by the wayside,” Komansky said, noting that he is not quite sure an economic downturn is coming in any case. “But I would not hesitate to come into the financial services business in bad times … This business gives extraordinary people a chance to do extraordinary things.” At the same time, Komansky pointed to the arrival of a “new age” for business: “Globalization, deregulation and advanced technology will continue to make businesses both larger and more nimble, national borders have become irrelevant and learning to function all around the world is now a fundamental part of the financial services business.” And despite the dot-com shakeout, there is no denying the effects of technology. “Strangely, technology may have affected our business more than any other,” said Komansky. “The best-selling product on the Internet is not music, not toys, not flowers or gifts, but stock.” What this all means, he added, is that to be successful in the new economy, you need a blend of old and new economy virtues. In recognition of this, Komansky proceeded to offer his audience a list of five paradoxes of the new economy. First, he said, scale is just as important as innovation. “In the business press over the last few years, it was always reported that the small companies could be more innovative, that to be creative, you had to be small and flexible,” he said. “But I feel that if you want to take these ideas and do something about them, you need scale and resources. Before long, only a handful of global players will be able to bring these new ideas to all markets,” he said. “Frankly, we welcome that and want to be a part of it.” The second paradox is that in a world of endless choices, brand matters. Despite all the new Internet companies out there, only a few, like Amazon, have become household names. “I’ ve heard it said that if you took away all the products from Coca-Cola and left the managers with the brand name, they could build up the company again in five years,” he said. “But if you took away the brand and left them with the products, they’ d be out of business in those same five years. New or old economy, brand still matters.”

All about Title Tags

We have previously talked about the basics of search engine optimization. Now it’s time get down to the meat! In this column we’ll drill into one of the most important factors in achieving high search engine rankings, the title tag. What Is a Title Tag? A title tag is essentially an HTML code snippet that creates the words that appear in the top bar of your Web browser — for example, “XYZ Company Home Page.” These words were entered into the title tag of the site’s HTML code. They don’t appear anywhere on the actual Web page. The HTML code for a title tag looks like this: < HEAD> < TITLE> XYZ Company Home Page< /TITLE> < /HEAD> The title tag is usually the first element in the < HEAD> section, followed by meta description and meta keyword tags. (You can get more information on metatags in the glossary.) Some Web site creation tools automatically generate the title tag from information you provide. You may have noticed Web pages that are labeled “Page 1,” “Page 2,” or “Home Page” in the browser bar. Labels like these are used by beginning Web site designers who simply don’t know how to use title tags for maximum benefit. Search Engines and Title Tags All search engines use title tags to gather information about your Web site. The word(s) in the title tag will appear in the hyperlink listings on the search engine results page; people click the hyperlink to go to your site. Arguably, your title tag is second in importance only to the actual text on the page in determining your site’s ranking with the search engines. So far as placement of your title tags is concerned, most search engine experts agree that it probably doesn’t matter if the title tag is the first element in the < HEAD> section. However, I believe that good coding practice argues for placing it first. What Not to Put in Your Title Tag More important than the placement of the title tag are the words you put in the tag and the order in which those words appear. Many site owners mistakenly believe they should put their company names in this tag. This is only a good idea if you are a well-known company that people will be searching for by name, such as Coca-Cola or McDonalds. Otherwise, you should assume that most potential customers will be searching for specific products or services, not a particular company name. For example, if your company is named “Johnson and Smith Inc.” and you are a tax accountant in Texas, putting only “Johnson and Smith Inc.” in your title tag will probably be fruitless. If you absolutely insist on including your company name in the title tag, put it at the end of the tag, after the more important keyword information. (A number of search engine gurus believe that some search engines give more weight to words that appear first in the title tag.) Title Tags Should Be Specific Keywords and Phrases As the tax accountant in Texas, you would want your company’s site to appear in the search engine results for searches on keywords such as “Texas tax accountants” and “CPAs in Texas.” You would need to be even more specific if you prefer to work for people only in the Dallas area. In that case, use keywords such as “Dallas tax accountants” in your site’s title tags. This is a key point: If you’re seeking customers or clients only in a specific geographical region, your keywords need to reflect that geographical specificity. People looking for a tax accountant in Dallas may begin their search by simply entering “tax accountant” in the search engine. However, once they see that their search is returning accountants from all over the world, they’ll narrow the search by adding “Dallas” to their search terms. When they do, you want your site to be right there on the first page of new results. In our Dallas accountants example, you could create a title tag that says < TITLE> Dallas tax accountants< /TITLE> or you could say < TITLE> Dallas CPAs< /TITLE> . However, there’s more than enough space in the title tag to include both of these important keyword phrases. (In fact, search engines will display 60 to 115 characters of your title tag.) Here’s an example of a better approach: < TITLE> DALLAS tax accountants dallas CPAs< /TITLE> You’ll notice that I used the word “Dallas” twice and also placed it in ALL CAPS once. Most search engines are not case sensitive, but AltaVista and HotBot are. This means that your site may well rank higher on those search engines in response to a query that is entered in ALL CAPS. (Studies have shown that most people use all lowercase letters when they type their search engine queries; however, enough use ALL CAPS to make this worth the effort.) An interesting note: Several years ago I noticed that in some engines, pages with keywords in ALL CAPS sometimes ranked higher than pages with all lowercase keywords. This occurred even with the noncase-specific engines. Although this was not a scientific study, I’d love to hear from any readers who may have observed the same phenomenon. As for placing the word “Dallas” twice in the title tag, I have found this approach to be both permissible and effective. Just make sure that you don’t put the same words right next to each other. For example, a tag that reads “Accountants in Dallas – Dallas CPAs” is very likely to trigger a red flag with the search engines, so that the word could get ignored entirely. It’s also not a good idea to use a word more than twice or to repeat more than one or two words total in the title tag. However, if you keep these caveats in mind, I strongly urge you to repeat one or two keywords in your title tags. In fact, I think it’s a must! Use Only Keywords and Phrases that Are in the Text on Your Page If you’re not sure what to put in your title tag, take a look at the text within the page itself. If you’ve done a good job with your writing, you should find all the keywords you need right there on your page. Simply choose the most relevant ones for the title tag. If you can’t find any good keywords on your page, it’s time for a rewrite. The optimal approach when creating a Web site is to think of all the keywords that best reflect your business, and then compose text around those words. When you go to write your title tag, you simply revisit the keyword list, make sure the keywords are being used on the page, and poof, you have a good, keyword-rich title tag. But remember: If the words don’t appear somewhere in the text of your page, they shouldn’t be in your title tag. Using our tax accounting firm example, suppose you look at the text on your page and notice that the phrase “Texas tax accountant” doesn’t appear anywhere on the page. Does this mean you shouldn’t use this phrase in the title tag? Well, yes and no. If you’re not willing to change the text on your page, then no, you shouldn’t put those words in your title tag. However, you can also forget about ranking high for those words! The smart thing to do is to rewrite the text on your page so that it uses the keywords that are important to you. This doesn’t mean to just stick the words at the top or bottom of the page. It doesn’t mean to hide them in the background. Nor does it mean to put them in a tiny font so that no one will notice them. And it doesn’t mean to simply put them in your meta keyword tag. If keywords are important enough that you want your site to be found under them in the search engines, they are important enough to be elegantly incorporated into the body text of your page. Once you have incorporated important keywords into the text of your site, all you have to do is take these same phrases and put them in your title tag. It really is that simple. Copyright © 1995-2000 Pinnacle WebWorkz Inc. All rights reserved. Do notduplicate or redistribute in any form.

The Metamorphosis

Editor’s introduction: Sometimes it seems as if the Web has turned the world upside down. In the hype-ridden landscape called “dot-com,” it’s easy to assume that only the young, the new, the original idea conceived by two kids in their basement will survive. Out with the old. How untrue that is. The two companies profiled here — Plural in “The Metamorphosis” and Camera World in ” When Something Clicks” — are hardly start-ups. Their leaders have been running steady, profitable companies for years. They’re taking those years of experience managing entrepreneurial brick-and-mortar companies and using every ounce of their knowledge to transform their businesses into winners in the online world. CEO Roy Wetterstrom, never a guy to fear change, is rebirthing his 11-year-old company to take great advantage of the new economy. And Camera World has built on its 22 years of experience fulfilling customers’ expectations to transform itself into an E-commerce business. BRAVE NEW COMPANIES One morning Roy Wetterstrom awoke to find that his company had been transformed into an underdog. To get the buzz back, he’s remaking his business from top to bottom Roy Wetterstrom grew up on a 60-acre farm in Ham Lake, Minn. As legend has it, he sold eggs by the side of the road at the tender age of 11. At 14 he used his egg money to buy a chain saw and switched to selling firewood. Even then, apparently, he was willing to give up a good thing to hatch something new. That long-ago gambit pales in comparison with what Wetterstrom has at stake these days. He’s spending millions of dollars on the risky proposition that he can reshape Micro Modeling Associates — his rock-solid $54-million client/server consulting business — into a company at the leading edge of the dot-com revolution. “We’re going to transform ourselves into a top-tier Internet services, strategy, and development company,” states the 35-year-old CEO. The agenda is bold, but then again so is the individual behind it — a lanky, quietly intense man with dark hair and a slight midwestern accent. Eleven years ago he left a cushy job in Minneapolis, not far from where he grew up, to start a company. He moved his wife, Emily, and their West Highland terrier to a two-bedroom apartment in Manhattan’s Battery Park City — on Christmas Day, no less. In the cramped quarters of the second bedroom, Wetterstrom launched his new business. It grew so rapidly that in 1992 he snapped up a lease on lower Broadway in what eventually would become prime Silicon Alley rental space. But all that — in Wetterstrom’s take-big-risks world — is ancient history. Today he is remaking his business into an adviser to dot-coms and corporations moving online. To underscore its new mission, the company will even junk its old name. As of March 15, 2000, Micro Modeling will be known as Plural. To get to this point, Wetterstrom has hired three image-building consultancies, is recruiting three new senior executives, and is on track to add 185 employees to his company of 375 by year’s end. He has added a creative group and a management-consulting practice, reined in his sales force from selling the same old client/server stuff (the equivalent of ditching the egg business), dismissed his public-relations firm, and even started exploring potential acquisitions. And he’s done all that while commuting weekly from Minneapolis. (He and his wife moved back in 1994, when they decided to have a family.) On Monday evenings, when he boards the flight to LaGuardia, he says good-bye not only to his wife and three-year-old son, David, but also to his baby daughter, Margaret, who was born in April 1999, in the middle of all the madness of turning Micro Modeling into something entirely new. Brawny upstarts have been grabbing Internet work from Micro Modeling’s longtime customers. Wetterstrom’s vision for transforming Micro Modeling into Plural boils down to this: First, the company is forgoing all new client/server work — the work that made it a star — in favor of all-Internet projects. Second, the company will risk being unprofitable for the first time in its history. To make matters trickier, the company will soon find itself under the microscope of the unforgiving public markets. “We’re driving ultimately to an IPO, and that is bringing a lot of issues to the fore,” Wetterstrom says. For the CEO and his peers in the high-tech consulting world, the pressure to author a shrewd Internet strategy can be particularly brutal. Investors — as well as employees and customers — often push consulting companies’ CEOs to build Web practices. Of course, although that process is stressful, the potential upside is enormous. The companies that the new Plural will compete with have been soaring in the public markets despite being relatively young and small. Old-line technology-consulting companies like Micro Modeling don’t make waves on NASDAQ. Wetterstrom would like to grab a larger share of the Internet consulting business — and he believes that a big shake-up is needed to do it. “We want to put a stake in the ground and say, ‘This is who we are,” he says. It’s also who they have to be. Brawny upstarts like USWeb/CKS, Razorfish, Proxicom, Viant, Sapient, Scient, and iXL have been grabbing Internet work all over the place, including from Micro Modeling’s longtime customers. And there are signs that steady client/server work is starting to tail off. In contrast, the sheer volume of Internet consulting is increasing more rapidly than any other kind of tech consulting, says Wetterstrom. Other key trends: companies are moving funds once earmarked for Y2K problems over to Web development; the market for Web consulting is highly fragmented; and the financial-services industry — Micro Modeling’s turf — is particularly bullish on the Web. “I saw after doing an analysis of the market and making a judgment on the market opportunity that this was a no-brainer,” Wetterstrom says. A no-brainer, indeed. “If Micro Modeling hadn’t made the transition, growth would have been a challenge,” observes Edward S. Caso Jr., a securities analyst following the IT-services industry and senior vice-president at First Union Securities, in Baltimore. “A service company has to offer what the client wants, and in IT what they want is constantly changing.” Roy Wetterstrom and a partner (who has since left the company) started Micro Modeling in 1989, with the intention of customizing Microsoft Excel for financial-services companies. Merrill Lynch was the business’s first customer, and it went on to work with 23 of the 25 largest investment banks. Revenues grew at a brisk pace, landing it on the Inc. 500 in 1997 and 1998, with an astonishing five-year growth rate of 814% in 1998. Wetterstrom claims that Micro Modeling’s annual operating profit has been about 15%. In late 1998, Wetterstrom raised $20 million in capital from TA Associates, a Boston concern that invests in late-stage private businesses, and $15 million in credit from Fleet Bank. He began staying up nights, thinking seriously about an initial public offering. He started schmoozing potential underwriters. He felt sure that he’d take Micro Modeling public within 12 to 18 months. But a funny thing was happening on Wall Street. The gap between valuations for client/server consulting companies and Internet consulting companies suddenly widened. “Clearly, we began to see that there were haves and have-nots when it came to market value,” Wetterstrom recalls. Regardless of profitability, he says, “traditional consulting companies were trading at around one times revenues, while Internet consulting companies were trading at 20 times revenues. The market was sending us a loud and clear message.” Micro Modeling already possessed some Internet expertise. One particular coup came in 1997, when the NASDAQ Stock Market engaged the company to create a password-protected extranet for listed companies. Not only has the (ongoing) project been lucrative, but Micro Modeling’s employees loved the work. Given a taste of the hype-ridden Internet world, staff programmers wanted more. Wetterstrom provided training for his technologists in anticipation of Web-related work. But it didn’t come. Wetterstrom and his team hadn’t sold their message – We can handle your Web projects – the way the upstart Internet consulting companies had. By early 1999 the CEO had come to believe that the Web was the future of his company, that client/server work was its past. The sooner the company moved wholeheartedly into the new space, the better. On August 31 of last year, Wetterstrom attended a clubby one-day analyst conference hosted by First Union Securities’ Ed Caso. The CEOs of nine public Internet consulting companies spoke, as did Wetterstrom and three private-company peers. “It was a pretty interesting and crystallizing event,” he recalls. “Clearly, the capital markets were viewing us as being well positioned in this space.” But he found his competitors’ presentations even more interesting than the offhand comments of admiring investment bankers like Caso. As the other CEOs described their companies, he slipped into a reverie about Micro Modeling’s future: “It just became so clear that (a) this was obviously the right space to be in, and (b) we were positioned to win this space. But I also realized that being positioned to win and winning were two different things.” Wetterstrom decided to beat the Scients and Viants of the world at their own game. That would mean making some brutal decisions. It would mean dumping Micro Modeling’s solid PR company, despite an amicable relationship, and replacing it with not one but three hot image-building companies from Manhattan’s chatty Internet clique. It would mean infusing the company with new talent — some of it taken from the Internet creative world, a world that the client/server programmers had had little to do with. And it might mean letting some of the new folks run roughshod over Micro Modeling’s 11-year-old culture. It might not be fun. But it might do the trick. Micro Modeling’s most obvious challenge was to lose its clunky name. “One thing that all of the public companies in this space have in common is an extremely strong brand,” the CEO says. “I wanted to see a much, much bolder approach to raising brand awareness.” He’d already tried rebranding the company once. But he’d taken a halfhearted approach by changing “Micro Modeling Associates” into “MMA” — attempting to keep old customers happy while moving toward the new. The $250,000 transformation failed. “We wanted to keep our options open,” he says. “We had very strong brand recognition within certain circles — good circles, like Wall Street and Microsoft. But I came to the conclusion that ‘MMA’ raised more questions than it answered.” The questions were as fundamental as “What is MMA?” and “What does it want to sell?” The business was suffering an adolescent identity crisis. Managers talked about providing creative and strategic consulting, but technology consulting was the company’s only real strength. Most employees were “champing at the bit” to diversify into creative and strategic work, but there were still pockets of resisters, says Wetterstrom. Customers, too, were recalcitrant. “Their natural tendency is to continue to call us for the same type of work. I’ve been trying to transition away from that for six months,” he says. Frustrated, the CEO devised a comprehensive plan to transform MMA into a full-service interactive strategy and development company. “We were only going to become a top-tier player by being much more aggressive,” he recalls. “And we could only accomplish that by sending a really, really loud message to the world that we were something new and something different.” Wetterstrom looked hard at his management team. He realized that he needed more talent — leaders who could re-create the company from the inside out. He also needed to free himself up from the demands of the day to day. He hired a search company to recruit a president (he will remain CEO) and a chief marketing officer. But perhaps the most dramatic change would be the one his younger brother, Derek, would make. Derek had been with the company almost from its inception, and, as chief financial officer, had helped Roy grow the company at its remarkably steady pace. Now he would take over the top corporate-development role, so that the company could hire a CFO with IPO and public-market experience — a new manager who could take the transformed company public. The next step was to identify a leader who could take charge of the complicated brand-building project. Wetterstrom found William Luddy, a caustic showman who plied his trade at Agency.com, a respected Web-design and marketing shop. Luddy would establish the revamped company’s new creative capability — Wetterstrom hired some 30 new employees just for that purpose — and today serves as acting chief marketing officer. Though Luddy’s brash style stands in stark contrast to Wetterstrom’s midwestern reserve, the CEO embraces Luddy’s New York sensibility. “Bill’s quite a passionate person, which I think is good. If he went off into the corner, I don’t think we’d be able to get where we need to go quickly enough,” says the CEO. What Plural needs to do is dazzle investment bankers on a visceral level. A larger-than-life character, this one man — this outsider — will have a disproportionate impact on the rise or fall of the company. First off, he’s been leading the charge to change its name. Last September he hired Lippincott & Margulies — the Park Avenue corporate-image company that handles Coca-Cola and Amtrak — to create a new identity. Over the course of the next three months, L&M vetted a series of names in foreign languages, with trademark lawyers, and in front of focus groups. Around Thanksgiving, Wetterstrom signed off on Plural. “I like it because it means working together with our customers and with our partners,” he says. “And I was thrilled that we could get a six-letter Internet address in English.” As if renaming the company isn’t enough, now Luddy has set his sights on adding a touch of dot-com chic to its entrenched techie culture, both to increase visibility and to help attract and retain the new employees the growing business needs. “Roy was primed for me to come in the door and say we needed to change things out of some prima donna prissiness that’s perceived to be part of creative services. But I think I caught him flat-footed when I said we needed to change things for the sake of recruiting and retention,” says Luddy. “Bill is not shy at all about letting us know what types of cultural issues we need to be thinking through,” Wetterstrom says. “For example, he’s told us that we have to be sensitive to physical-work-space issues. The traditional corporate office — a cube environment — doesn’t play well in the creative world, so we’re looking into different furniture layouts and a more warehouse-like environment.” The new Plural culture will feature more than just exposed brick. The company is working with clientele it has never served before. To get the new dot-com customers he wants, Wetterstrom is offering them discounted rates and making up the difference by taking equity. His goal is to build a “mutual fund” of pre-IPO dot-coms and use that equity to retain current employees and to attract new talent. His new client roster includes an online grocer SimonDelivers.com as well as Web sites AtYourBusiness.com, Easyrebates.com, and TechnologyNet.com. Of course, taking on the dot-coms means that Plural will expand its focus beyond financial-services companies — its bread and butter since Merrill Lynch first signed on. But Wetterstrom foresees using the dot-com portfolio to sell Plural’s new service offerings back to the financial-services companies whose business made him successful in the first place. Amid all of that activity, the CEO’s biggest concern is getting enough oomph out of the Plural name launch to ensure that good customers start knocking on his door. To that end, Luddy has devised a three-inch-thick project plan of marketing milestones. Nothing is being left to chance. Helping Luddy execute his plan is the company’s polished in-house publicist Connie Hughes, an elegant Manhattanite who is as meticulous in her choice of words as she is with her attire. In hopes of burnishing the Plural rebranding campaign, Hughes replaced MMA’s Minneapolis-based PR company with Neale-May & Partners, which handles several top dot-coms, including E*Trade. She is also working with another firm, Farago + Partners, the creators of Barnes & Noble’s advertising. “It helps if you have partners who are part of the momentum,” says Hughes. “They’re really psyched about this, and we feed on that.” At a mid-December holiday party, Wetterstrom unveiled the new name internally. This month, the company will hold “Plurums” — meetings with customers and partners — to explain its new positioning. Still, despite the best-laid three-inch-thick plan, the rebranding effort remains challenging. “All sorts of questions come up,” Hughes says. “There was an event in late February with a sponsoring opportunity. It would have been perfect for us, but it was too close to the name change. It’s a balancing act. We want to capture mind share, but then if we do that as MMA, we’ll have to reeducate the market later.” And what if the name doesn’t work? “I’m still chewing on whether I like the name or not,” says First Union’s Caso. “It has an Internet feel without the obnoxious dot-com after it, but I think I would have liked Wetterstrom Inc. or something like that. But that’s a personal, Ed Caso bias.” Doubts like those create anxiety, and they’ve taken a toll on the company. So has the latest financial wrinkle: though Wetterstrom publicly predicted that revenues would jump by 50% in 1999 — on CNNfn no less — they grew only by 14%. And profits dropped below 5% for the first time in years — and may stay there. “The mode that we’re in now, it’s not realistic to be at or even near historic levels of profitability,” he says. “Our goal is to remain profitable at much lower margins.” And there’s still that small matter of Plural’s IPO. Wetterstrom would like a late 2000 offering, capitalizing on the momentum of the new-name marketing campaign, which in turn would get a boost from an impending IPO. Whether all of this will play for the public markets is “the $64,000 question,” says Caso. “Micro Modeling could have gone public two years ago, but the multiples are meaningfully higher for technology-service companies today in this new format — with strategy, creative, and technology together.” Cut through the investment banker’s jargon, and what the company really needs to do is dazzle the bankers on a visceral level. It needs to project that this is the deal they need to get in on, and quick. Ironically, the company that was in Silicon Alley before the Alley was a golden name among hungry VCs now has to act as if it belongs there. It needs to recapture the buzz it had back in its heyday, when customers were beating down its door, when revenues were growing exponentially. To do that, it needs smart strategic thinking and managers who can lead split-second change. And it needs tough people who can stay one step ahead of burnout. Wetterstrom has found that level of enthusiasm in his new managers. But even they can’t sustain that frenetic pace forever — at least not without a break. Already Luddy says, “I’m going to be burned out, but that’s life. That’s part of the ride. That’s what I signed up for.” He jokes that he’s going to Hawaii, posthaste. And Hughes has booked a day at a spa. Only their CEO doesn’t seem tired or anxious. His energy seems to come from some deep reservoir of entrepreneurial ambition. The same urge that compelled him to buy that chain saw to sell firewood is pushing him forward now. “Part of me is sad to see the Micro Modeling name retired,” the CEO admits. He’s quiet for a moment. “But a much bigger part of me is excited and energized by Plural.” Mike Hofman is a staff writer at Inc. The New Math As Roy Wetterstrom’s company has evolved,Wall Street has changed the way it does its algebra: FINANCIALS 1998 MICRO MODELING 1999 MMA 2000** PLURAL Revenues $47.4 million $54 million $81 million Profits* 15% Below 5% 4%-8% Inc. 500 growth rate 814% 565% 485% *Profits refers to operating margin, not net income **2000 financials are projected Source: Plural Wall Street Valuations: Ed Caso from First Union Securities gave us a formula for the Street’s valuation of companies like Roy Wetterstrom’s. We plugged in Wetterstrom’s numbers: Micro modeling: 1998, $23.7 million to $94.8 million (0.5 to 2 times revenues) Plural: 2000, $405 million to $2.4 billion (5 to 30 times revenues) Roy’s Rules If you’re like Roy Wetterstrom and you’re transforming your company, you have a lot to think about. Here are Wetterstrom’s rules for revamping: 1. Make sure your employees are happy before you hire new ones. There’s no surer way to piss off your employees (read: lose ‘em) than to forget about them when you pass out those juicy stock options to new recruits. Wetterstrom started giving stock options to every employee two years ago. If you haven’t been doing the same, you’ll have to improvise a new plan that weds the equity needs of both new recruits and tenured employees. 2. Push responsibility down the chain of command to free up your time. To make a big strategic shift, you’ll need to take a breather from the day-to-day stuff. Wetterstrom’s solution is to make each of Plural’s regional offices responsible for individual profit-and-loss reports. That way, local managers are more likely to come up with innovative, profitable ideas on their own — leaving Wetterstrom to be the corporate visionary. 3. When you radically alter your product mix, keep a sharp eye on pricing. It’s hard to know how best to price new products — and it’s equally difficult to know which of the new offerings will be the most profitable. Wetterstrom has hired a chief knowledge officer , Jon Powell , who will study how to price and sell different Internet consulting packages and thus maximize margins. 4. Finally, think about your next iteration. Wetterstrom decided specifically not to call the company Plural.com for fear that the ubiquitous suffix would pigeonhole it in years to come, the way Micro Modeling had done in the 1990s. “We see the market changing, and I’m not sure that ‘dot-com’ will have the same resonance in 2005 that it has now,” says marketing guru Bill Luddy. “There might be a fin de siÈcle attention to dot-coms” that won’t last, he adds. Read about another Brave New Company in ” When Something Clicks“