Yesterday I posted my opinion on where the Comcast decision would take consumers on the Internet – based on my past experience,  watching the FCC’s decisions over the last year,  and knowing (thanks to past experience) that the “stars were aligning” for the Big Telecoms to gain a monopolistic edge over the consumer’s use of the Internet.  Ultimately, this would reverse the “affordability” of its use at a time when Americans can least likely afford the additional costs.

Today, the Washington Post adds to my concerns of yesterday about how the ruling might affect the Internet: http://bit.ly/ComcastRulingSpeculation and consumers in the near term.  One thing I disagree with in this article is their correction remark where they say that ISPs cannot choose to throttle or block based on “type” of service.  To a degree that is correct, but to a larger degree what the ISP is able to do is block ports that types of traffic specifically use. For instance, VoIP uses specific ports to transmit it’s traffic.  If those ports are blocked and filtered, it is true that an ISP could exclude Skype, Vonage and other VoIP provider’s service, while at the same time, permitting the ISP’s choice of providers (who are paying their way) or simply allow only their own offering.

My post on Facebook yesterday was a warning, a ‘shot over the bow’ from a former “last mile provider”, or “Local LEC” as they called us small competitive ISPs who resold major carrier lines using our own routers and created unique special services.  Those days were great – we were the R&D for the ‘big boys’ in the ISP world.  If we succeeded, they copied.  Eventally they shut us out by lobbying the FCC hard and long to overturn the original ruling that allowed us to co-op their lines at wholesale rates.  This Comcast lawsuit, and the Appeals Court ruling, are just another “nail in the coffin” for that kind of growth and ingenuity.  It also does not bode well for the Consumer who will soon find themselves being nickled and dimed for eveything they want to do online…or worse simply being told “sorry, we don’t support that”.

This is not a “property rights” ruling, it’s a ruling that creates a future monopoly of the Internet by large ISPs, (think MaBell and the phone industry before it was broken up and prices were regulated), as they slowly and almost silently slink through the night, negating any gains that the consumer achieved in the “early days” of the Internet prior to 2006.  I sincerely hope that the FCC works fast to try to stem this tide.

Kwedit is currently only for digital goods, however, their partnership with 7-11 Stores will create a new payment method that changes the landscape of online sales, especially using Kwedit Direct!

In the New York Times article “Buy Now, Pay Later (Maybe with your allowance), Kwedit bring online purchasing to the under-13 crowd, as well as a tipping point to add new buyer personas to e-commerce.

Currently, Kewdit is being used strictly for digital goods in children’s games, where they can make purchases of digital goods in the game using a promise to pay.  As they do pay for the goods, their “kwedit” score goes  up, allowing them to purchase more on a promise.  Kwedit is reportedly seeking the “sweet spot” where the kewdit limit is not too high, but not low enough to discourage the purchases.  At the same time, the digital goods sellers suffer no real loss for non-payment (except obviously their time in creating them).

The cooler part of this new platform is the potential in the future availability to add “Kwedit Direct” as a payment form for all other online transactions.  According to the New York Times article, the buyer will be able to make a purchase online using the Kwedit account, then print out a bar code and take it to 7-11 to make a payment in person using their cash, or their credit or debit card.

This potentially increases online sales to those who have avoided buying online because they do not want to expose their bank account, credit or debit cards – or they simply do not have one.

This is an exciting opportunity for online merchants and worth watching as it rolls out!

Economic hardship has impacted every facet of life – and that is also true for law firms (yes, I know you find that hard to believe, but they are experiencing layoffs as well).  One law firm has stepped up, listened to their clients, and answered a need clients were complaining about.

I read an impressive story that will be published in the Tampa Bay Business Journal’s latest edition. Foley and Lardner, LLP, raised the bar in client satisfaction, and erased the biggest fear of anyone who is thinking of hiring a lawyer.

That fear is about receiving a bill for more than they expected in legal fees.

Its a universal problem – people don’t hire lawyers even when they should, because they do not believe they can afford to.  It’s not just the initial retainer, it’s the fear that once the attorney is retained for a matter, the bill becomes an unknown quantity – a day to day worry that they may have a second legal issue to deal with when they can’t afford to pay their lawyer.

Foley and Lardner, LLP get an A+ in client care, because they LISTENED to their clients, and answered their concern.

In fact, they may create a World Wide Rave as defined by David Meerman Scott in his book of that title.  They gave up control to the client – Rule 3 of the Rave!!   When it comes to billing and budgeting of legal matters, they have successfully taken away the fear of  that big ulgy surprise when their clients open the envelope containing their legal bill every month.

In response to client concerns (this is a concern of ANYONE who hires a lawer for ANY legal matter),  they developed a proprietary software system, part of which allows clients of all 1000 of the lawyers in the firm to interactively share real-time billing information and keep their legal matter on a budget.  Clients can go online anytime and see trending in the billable hours by their lawyer,  and make contact to discuss options for their case BEFORE they go over budget and have yet another legal matter to deal with.

The full story was reported in the Wall Street Journal on Jan 5, 2010.

To be honest, this system does more than just allow the client to manage their legal bills and budget, and that is why it cost $1 Million to put in place.  However, this is a true investment in the firm.  It serves as a management tool, as a client communication tool and as a marketing tool to attract new business!

Smaller firms will say they can’t afford $1Million investment to do the same thing.  They don’t have to.  Small firms can do the same thing, very easily, using much simpler tools.  The real question has always been:  will they come out from behind the curtain on fees and allow the client control?  Will they allow the client to speak honestly and hold them to a budget the client can afford?  If they are smart, they surely will do that – and reap the rewards of (a) honest communications with their clients; and (b) growth of their law practices.

The bar has been raised – let’s see if a precedent in billing practices has now been set,  and which lawyers and law firms creatively  rise to the occasion!

In an online article from Media Post,  Robert Half Technology conducted a recent study and found that in regard to social networks,  businesses complained that “time-sucking social networks hurt their productivity”.

“It takes away from primary responsibility,” Dave Knapp, regional vice president for Robert Half told the San Francisco Examiner. “When socializing on sites such as Facebook, we lose track of time.”

[Is he even SERIOUS? Makes you wonder what kind of people he thinks he employs!]

According to the study, other concerns of these companies included being worried about employees leaking sensitive information.  The survey indicates an amazing 54 percent of these businesses block social networking sites.

So, in 2010 will these Corporate Giants realize the VALUE social media offers to their bottom line and be more creative in using it – or will they continue with the same old rhetoric of productivity losses?

The key issue here is simple:  these companies lack the creativity to do what is best for their bottom line.  In corporate environments C-level executives have an “all-or-nothing” mentality.  Either ALL employees get access, or NONE get it.  Why?  They certainly have IT professionals on staff who can manage their server traffic.  Why not give it to their recruiters and marketing department?

Leaking sensitive information?  I don’t know about you, but that sounds like an excuse to me to continue the “norm”.  After all, how many employees that are not a C-level do you know that have access to sensitive corporate data?  My experience shows that answer to be “NONE”.  If it is the C-level Executives you are worried about leaking it, then WHY are they in those positions?  RHETORIC.

My Solution:  Attend our Feb 18th, 2010 Seminar given by David Meerman Scott, a true Thought Leader!

Don’t use ‘attendance’ as your excuse, either!

We will be providing a LIVE STREAM of the event – and you can experience the power of social networking while you attend because we will have a live chat, Facebook and Twitter feeds!  Our roving cameras will provide you with a front seat so it’s just like being there – and on breaks they will be talking to VIPs, Attendees and even our Presenter, David Meerman Scott!

C-level Executives!  I challenge you to come get creative and increase your bottom line for the New Year!

Source:  Media Post;   SanFrancisco Examiner