Before last Monday I was overly excited about the upcoming WWE championship match between the title-holder, John Cena, and challenger, CM Punk.
From a storyline perspective, it had the stakes of a major showdown.
If CM Punk won the championship, then he would leave with the company's belt and possibly defend it on other shows. Of course, this would never happen unless CM Punk's departure was a ruse and a cross-promotional deal with another company had been made.
The WWE had been having a hard time making me care about the upcoming PPVs and their respective championship bouts—each was merely one of a series of matches that would happen over the year.
Now—for the first time in a while—the WWE has managed to capture a sense of urgency in its main-event picture.
Cena is not just defending the championship against another challenger; CM Punk is not just the next in a line of wrestlers waiting for their shots.
Until last Monday the storyline had me absorbed. It wasn't just another story, but the future of the WWE Championship, and despite CM Punk's supposed planned departure, the match could have easily gone either way.
If Cena had won, it would have been just another notch on his long list of victories. If Punk had won then, it would have been the opening for a really interesting story in which the company's top belt would be no longer available for the men who see the championship as their ultimate goal.
Banks Cashing In On Data
If a person's primary method of payment is some type of credit or debit card, the banks know everywhere that person goes, what they spend their money on, what their preferences are, what locations they frequent and so on.
Selling that data is an interesting method of making money for banks. Federal regulations are strict on what customer data banks can share and with what entities. According to the Tribune story, the bank's system is set up in such a way that the deals are coming from the bank, not from the merchant. Data is processed between the merchants and the banks through intermediaries, such as Cartera or Cardlytics. Personally identifiable information is randomized and customers are given numeric codes, of which only the bank will know who the user truly is.
According to the Tribune, 58% of customers have redeemed at least one deal. The incentive programs are opt-out, which 2% of customers have chosen to do. Merchant funded incentive programs could be a $1.7 billion vertical for the banking industry by 2015, even with the banks only taking 25% of the fee for the incentive.
Privacy, Data, Money = Advantage Banks
Opt-in or opt-out is a tricky question when it comes to data and privacy. Companies like Facebook have gotten into hot water with privacy advocates by making changes to their privacy policy and settings opt-out in a way or place that a lot of users will not notice or check. Think of it this way - are you getting offers from your bank? Did you remember the bank asking you if it could share your information or was it in the fine print of your cardholder's agreement somewhere?
When it comes to the Internet, money is inextricably tied to user data. The companies with the most data about their users tend to make the most money. Banks are the perfect avenue for incentivized deals because they can offer merchants exactly what they are looking for.
For instance, a 29-year-old male with an income above $40,000 that purchases shoes three times a year would be a perfect target for a deal from Designer Shoe Warehouse or Footlocker. Groupon cannot give merchants that level of granular information.
What will this mean for the fledgling daily deals industry going forward? Groupon had a litany of risk factors in its filing for its initial public offering and "inability to stave off competition and clones" was one of them. Facebook and Google are secondary players in this market. Both have created various types of deals and "offer" campaigns, and they both pose a problem to the primary players since they already have significant amounts of user data.
Yet, the banks have more information about customers than any Internet company ever could. If the financial industry starts muscling into deals, do the likes of Groupon and LivingSocial stand a chance?
reputation management sites
Great <b>news</b>: Service industry now slowing down, too « Hot Air
Great news: Service industry now slowing down, too.
Great <b>news</b>: Service industry now slowing down, too « Hot AirLanguage Log » <b>News</b> Flash: BBC Admits Error
Update #2 — Google News Archive has nothing for AptiQuant, and LexisNexis yields 26 hits, all from 7/29/2011 or later. This is additional evidence that AptiQuant is a hoax, though it doesn't tell us what kind of hoax it ...
Language Log » <b>News</b> Flash: BBC Admits ErrorCBS <b>News</b> Chief: 'We Did Lose Some Viewers' During Katie Couric <b>...</b>
Jeff Fager sees a brighter future ahead with Scott Pelley as anchor.
CBS <b>News</b> Chief: 'We Did Lose Some Viewers' During Katie Couric <b>...</b>
No comments:
Post a Comment