10 things I didn’t know last week #199

1. Futarchy is a form of government proposed by economist Robin Hanson where prediction markets are used to determine which policies will have the most positive effect.

2. Narratophilia is a sexual fetish in which the telling of dirty words to a partner is sexually arousing.

3. Mensur is a kind of fencing practiced by some student corporations (Studentenverbindungen) in Germany Thanks Anais

marlboro-morley

4. Morley is a fictional brand of cigarettes that has appeared in various television shows, films, and even video games.

5. Earth’s water is older than the solar system, the sun, and the Earth.

6. People in countries that suffered banking crises quite sensibly often prefer to save in cash.

7.  Announcers and commentators of the 1950s spoke transatlantic speech: « you literally could not hear bass tones before stereo technology ».

8. Nazi invented the Olympic Torch relay as a way to tie the Third Reich to the glory of ancient Greece.

9. Early 1800’s Firefighters would use their soaked beards to breathe through the smoke.

10. Henry Ford wrote a pamphlet called « The International Jew: The World’s Problem« 

Does it really pays off to provide a better customer experience?

empirisme expérience rocher caillou météo

There’re a lot of examples of brands we love thanks to their UX both online and offline: Nespresso, Google, Uber, Apple…

There’re a lot of brands we hate because of their UX: telcos, retailers, governments, banks, insurances…

But is a good UX a true indicator of business performance?

Theres a gazillions of counter examples undermining our belief to make UX a key factor of success.

Think about Free, about Carrefour, about CanalPlus, about an awful lot of brands skyrocketting without even considering people… Sometimes this is after sales, sometimes this is stores, sometimes this is hotline or sometimes this is the website. A lot of brand don’t give a damn and still succeed. A couple of weeks ago, one of the 3 main French Telco was bought out by an outsider famously known for its nightmarish UX. Still don’t give a damn.

Is it a matter of market? Not exactly. Good and bad UX sit everywhere.

Neither segment. There’s good and bad UX (think about Audi) within premium or low-cost (think about Dacia).

Neither a problem of competition: some monopolistic areas are neglected – think about gov taxes webpages or TV channels exclusively broadcasting event such as Olympics or football games – where highly disputed areas such as banking or retail despise UX too.

It’s probably a matter a respect then. Or share of wallet. Or pleasure.

Why should we invest in good UX beside marginal tricks such as growth hacking? Does growth hacking makes you product better?

NO.

10 things I didn’t know last week #171

1. As for a lot of French Olympics competitors in ski, Jean-Claude Killy was custom officer.

2. If hotels bibles are Gideon bibles, it’s because of the people who dropped them in rooms.

3. A few Beatles hidden references: Dear Prudence, Savoy Truffle, You Never Give Me Your Money, Everybody’s Got Something to Hide Except for Me and My Monkey…

4. Orson Welles in a wine advertising:

5. 4.5 millions French kids were born thanks to a classified Bible: Le Chasseur Français.

6. The uber modern Nautilus motto: Mobilis in mobile.  Thanks Maud

7. The average French exec spends 16 years of his life in meeting.

8. Following John Bohannon, Powerpoint is the first enemy of the economy.

9. Brogue shoes were first used in Scotland and Ireland so that water could easily drain out of the shoe when on wet terrains.

trickers-brogue-shoes-main

10. Why is the mouse cursor slightly tilted and not straight? Because of the poor screen resolution of the Xerox park computers during 70’s. Merci Olivier

Hail to the weirdos : Nike fait un pas de géant en direction de l’anormalisation

Mieux que 99% des marques, Nike a compris l’intérêt de la communauté communautaire face à la communication de masse : plus de sujets de conversations + plus de clients + plus de prospects = plus de potentiel… De fait, la marque a développé ces 20 dernières années un discours adaptés à chacune de ses communautés de clients/prospects, depuis les amateurs de golf en passant par les collectionneurs de sneakers.

[Plus important encore, Nike n’a pas attendu le web ou la fragmentation des channels pour parler à ses communautés, preuve qu’on peut faire dans la dentelle avec des outils de masse…]

A l’occasion de la sortie du film L’Étrange pouvoir de Norman, Nike a lancé une édition spéciale de chaussures qui sera distribué aux gagnants d’un concours sur Twitter (où Nike invite les gens à poster des photos d’eux à l’époque où ils étaient weird kids).

Outre la nature du concours très cohérente et pertinente, Nike prend une décision de propre à un leader : parler aux weird kids.

Ça n’a l’air de rien mais pour une marque qui vend historiquement de la performance, on s’imagine plutôt que le client rêvé de Nike est un(e) sportif(ve) accompli. Aujourd’hui, la marque a bien compris que :

  1. Le monde n’était pas composé que d’athlètes professionnels ou aspirant pro.
  2. Les athlètes pro ou aspirants sont un peu moins nombreux que les athlètes amateurs ou non-athlètes…

Sa dernière campagne durant les JO reposait précisément sur cette ambition : tout le monde est sportif à son niveau. La performance est une notion subjective (cf. Dove et la beauté).

 

En partant à la conquête de l’univers des misfits, Nike ajoute une corde à son arc en misant sur la longue traîne des « sportifs » : une infinité de faibles pratiquants.

Bravo à Nike. Les marques doivent respecter les singularités, ne serait-ce que pour le potentiel commercial qu’il recouvre.