Proctor and Gamble survey on clean drinking water was enlightening about what we don’t understand about clean water. Fortunately, clean water is getting easier to come by for billions of people who didn't have it, thanks in part to new PandG technology developed for the places that need it the most.
Основные фондовые индексы США торгуются в красной зоне в понедельник из-за распродажи в технологическом секторе, которая была вызвана сообщениями о незаконном доступе к данным пользователей Facebook (FB), а также разработке Apple Inc. (AAPL) собственных экранов. На выходных СМИ сообщили, что компания Cambridge Analytica, которая работала на президентскую кампанию Дональда Трампа, получила доступ к информации о 50 млн. пользователей Facebook без их разрешения. Некоторые аналитики отмечают, что данная ситуация говорит о системной проблеме в бизнес-моделе Facebook, и может способствовать усилению контролю над платформой со стороны регуляторов. Акции FB в моменте обвалились на 7%. Акции других компаний так называемой группы FAANG (включает Facebook (FB), Amazon (AMZN), Apple (AAPL), Netflix (NFLX), и Alphabet (GOOG)) подешевели на 1.6-4%. Инвесторы также готовятся к заседании Комитета по открытому рынку (FOMC) ФРС, которое начнется уже завтра, а его итоги будут озвучены в среду вечером. Заседание FOMC является основным ожидаемым событием текущей недели. Важность приближающегося заседания обусловлена ожиданиями относительно принятия федрезервом решения об очередном ужесточении денежно-кредитной политики и обновлением макроэкономических прогнозов. Кроме того, это будет первое заседание ФРС, где председательствовать будет новый глава регулятора - Джером Пауэлл. Ранее Пауэлл дал понять, что он не против четырех повышений ставок в текущем году. Подтверждение подобных сигналов окажет существенную поддержку доллару, так как ранее большинство участников рынков ожидали только трех повышений. Большинство компонентов индекса DOW в минусе (26 из 30). Аутсайдер - Caterpillar Inc. (CAT, -2.85%). Лидер роста - The Procter & Gamble Company (PG, +0.56%). Все сектора S&P в минусе. Наибольшее снижение показывает технологический сектор (-2.1%). На текущий момент фьючерсы демонстрируют следующую динамику: Индекс/сырье Текущее значение Изменение, пункты Изменение в % Dow 24678.00 -287.00 -1.15% S&P 500 2720.00 -36.00 -1.31% Nasdaq 100 6870.50 -173.50 -2.46% Crude Oil 61.83 -0.58 -0.93% Gold 1316.30 +4.00 +0.30% U.S. 10yr 2.85 0.00 0.00% Информационно-аналитический отдел TeleTradeИсточник: FxTeam
Kenneth Anderssson for HBR/Getty Images Inventive companies like Amazon and Tesla are constantly churning out new products and services, but there is something else that they, and other distinctive enterprises, are also in the business of producing: their version of leadership. A research project we just completed suggests there might be something important and innovative going on in this department, too. The “challenge-driven” leadership we found in our study of MIT leaders might not be right for every kind of enterprise, but we suspect it will spread to many more in years to come. The idea that high-performing organizations might have something distinctive going on in their leadership behaviors, and not just their marketplace offerings, is not new. Firms like GE and Procter & Gamble have long been seen as crucibles of managerial talent development, in which certain kinds of leaders tend to be forged. Scholars including Dave Ulrich and Norm Smallwood and Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner have explored the concept of building “leadership brands.” Headhunters dine out on these differences. This means, for one thing, that it’s good to develop some self-knowledge on this point. If an enterprise can figure out what kind of leader reliably emerges from its ranks—and especially if it doesn’t like what it discovers—it can start doing something about it. If it’s not clear what kind of leadership works best at your company, here’s one strategy for figuring it out. Pay attention to who quits or gets fired — especially new hires — because it can signal what leadership skills matter most. One senior executive did just that at her global firm where creative output counts. She said: “If you’re not interested in being provoked to act creatively, then you’ll have a boring life here. But if you like being provoked and it opens up your creative capacity, then you have an opportunity to react to the provocation. If you don’t react though, sorry, but you’re at the wrong address and I’ve seen many people being at the wrong address here. You either belong here or you don’t and many people leave, voluntarily or involuntarily, after three to six months.” If you like the kind of leader your organization typically produces, protect that kind of leadership. That was the desire that motivated us to venture into a year-long research project at our own institution, MIT. We had the strong sense that there was something distinctive about the “MIT style of leadership”—some behavioral line that we could trace from the students’ infamous hacks to the alumni’s entrepreneurial ventures. That sense was redoubled when we started interviewing people we saw getting big things done here. To our surprise, they weren’t typically comfortable talking about themselves as leaders. Some even seemed to have a kind of allergic reaction to the word, associating “leadership types” with overly confident climbers, eager to rise in the careers and start delegating the real work. If we were looking at a new version of leadership, this was one with an anti-leadership strain running through it. As we dug deeper, we discovered the key to those attitudes—and to much else about how teams get work done at MIT. People here don’t follow leaders, they follow problems. The most important work, then, of what we would call the “leader” in a situation is to seize on some intriguing, inspiring, barely-solvable problem, and frame it in a way that draws other smart and skilled people toward it. In this “problem-led” version of leadership, moreover, the person taking charge often changes with the phases of the effort. Through a fluid “stepping up and stepping out” process, team members take on more responsibility when the need for their particular knowledge or skill is greatest. A lot of things turn out to work differently when leadership is challenge-driven — as we saw from the winning MIT Hyperloop Team to the work of the Langer Lab to the community that pulled together to erect the Sean Collier Memorial. Along the way, we also realized that what we had been calling the MIT style of leadership was actually bigger than MIT; we recognized its earmarks in other organizations, too, that are known for taking on big challenges. Leadership styles, or brands if you prefer the term, are always contextual. Different kinds of leaders are minted in different organizations, and whether they can succeed elsewhere is always a question. And leadership styles have their times as well as their places; perhaps challenge-driven leadership is particularly well-suited to our current moment, with its high levels of ambiguity and opportunity. It seems, too, like a leadership style that becomes more workable where high degrees of connectivity make it easier to assemble ad hoc teams and have them be productive. In other words, it seems like the kind of leadership the twenty-first century—the digital age—has enabled and will increasingly demand.
Принадлежащая китайскому интернет-гиганту Alibaba площадка Tmall открыла для Procter & Gamble (P&G) фирменный онлайн-магазин в России, рассказали «Ведомостям» представители компаний. Это будет один из крупнейших партнеров в России, подчеркивает представитель AliExpress и Tmall Антон Пантелеев. Среди брендов P&G – Gillette, Pampers, Oral-B, Fairy, Head & Shoulders и др.
Yagi Studios/Getty Images In 2011, GE embarked upon an ambitious attempt to digitally transform its product and service offerings. The company created impressive digital capabilities, labeling itself a “digital industrial” company, embedding sensors into many products, building a huge new software platform for the Internet of Things, and transforming business models for its industrial offerings. GE also went to work on transforming internal processes like sales and supplier relationships. Some performance indicators, including service margins, began to improve. The company received much acclaim for its transformation in the press (including some from us). However, investors didn’t seem to acknowledge its transformation. The company’s stock price has languished for years, and CEO Jeff Immelt—a powerful advocate of the company’s digital ambitions—recently departed the company under pressure from activist investors. Other senior executives have left as well. The new CEO, John Flannery, is focused primarily on cutting costs. GE is hardly the only company to run into performance issues and sooner-than-expected executive departures in the midst of a huge digital transformation effort. Lego recently defunded its Digital Designer virtual building program. Nike halved the size of its digital unit in 2014 by discontinuing its Nike+ Fuelband activity tracker and some other investments. Procter & Gamble wanted to become “the most digital company on the planet” in 2012, but ran into growth challenges in a difficult economy. Burberry set out to be the world’s best digital luxury brand, but performance began to suffer after initially improving. Ford invested heavily in digital initiatives only to see its stock price lag due to cost and quality issues elsewhere in the company. These companies spent millions to develop digital products, infrastructures, and brand accompaniments, and got tremendous media and investor attention, only to encounter significant performance challenges, and often shareholder dissent. At P&G, then-CEO Bob McDonald was asked to leave by his board, as was Ford CEO Mark Fields. At Lego and Burberry, the CEOs leading the digital charge stepped into lesser roles. What can we learn from these examples of digital dreams deferred? How did these smart, experienced leaders make decisions that don’t look so smart in hindsight? They made the investments, they got a lot of exciting feedback from their digital leaders and from the press, they increased the investments, and the cycle repeated. However, while their companies had plenty of resources, the big digital bets did not pay off quickly enough, or richly enough, to counter the drain they represented on the rest of the business. We think there’s something more here than executive over-exuberance or slowing markets. This kind of unfortunate decision has happened over and over again, in wave after wave of transformative business technology. It happened with e-commerce, when companies like Staples and Walmart invested heavily in separate e-commerce units, only to have those units drain the company of resources. It happened with analytics and big data, when companies like Sears and Zynga invested millions in creating analytics units that never paid back their investments. And now it’s happening with digital transformation. Several key lessons emerge when heavy commitments to digital capability development meet basic financial performance problems. A clear one is that there are many factors, such as the economy or the desirability of your products, that can affect a company’s success as much or more than its digital capabilities. Therefore, no managers should view digital — or any other major technological innovation — as their sure salvation. Second, digital is not just a thing that you can you can buy and plug into the organization. It is multi-faceted and diffuse, and doesn’t just involve technology. Digital transformation is an ongoing process of changing the way you do business. It requires foundational investments in skills, projects, infrastructure, and, often, in cleaning up IT systems. It requires mixing people, machines, and business processes, with all of the messiness that entails. It also requires continuous monitoring and intervention, from the top, to ensure that both digital leaders and non-digital leaders are making good decisions about their transformation efforts. Third, it’s important to calibrate your digital investments to the readiness of your industry — both customers and competitors. For example, when P&G was making its digital push in 2012 and 2013, it was already well ahead of most companies—and perhaps all of them—in the consumer products industry. Our assessment is that it probably still is, even though the digital push was slowed when McDonald departed. P&G could probably have lost little ground to competitors had it invested in digital in a more targeted fashion. Today it does so; no digital initiative is undertaken at P&G if it doesn’t fit the strategy closely and if it’s not hardwired to value. This digital governance discipline is an excellent idea given that the company is now under attack by a different corporate raider. Finally, when things are not going so well in the existing business, the call of a new business model can become more powerful than it should. Many a person has allowed the excitement of a new relationship to destroy their stable, if less exciting, married lives. Similarly, the prospect of launching a sexy technology-based business is tantalizing. The allure of digital can become all-consuming, causing executives to pay too much attention to the new and not enough to the old. Sears’ investments in analytics were not a bad idea, but the company’s facilities and service needed investment more. Although Nike’s executive team was derided for shrinking the digital unit in 2014, the move allowed them to focus their continuing digital investments on higher-value activities. The company’s recent decision to cut staffing and product variety in the existing business, while continuing to improve digital sales channels, appears to be an effort to optimize across both. There’s something different about technological change that causes senior executives in large, established firms to act differently than they might otherwise. When investing in a typical strategic change, managers are usually pretty clear about what they want to accomplish and what it will take to get there. There’s a lot of work to get things right, but they know where they’re going and how to measure progress. If the indicators move in the wrong direction, they can take action to set them on the right path, or can make the choice to de-escalate the investment. With innovative information technology, however, executives sometimes lose their rational decision approaches. Certainly it’s true that in times of radical technological change there’s a lot of figuring out to do. Executives have to understand what new technologies can do, and understand their impact on markets, products/services, and distribution channels. These decisions are inevitably influenced by hype from vendors and the media, expensive consultants offering “thought leadership” insights, many high profile experiments, and a few exciting success stories that keep people wanting more. A charismatic CIO or Chief Digital Officer may make it even harder to be level-headed in those heady times. Amid the excitement and uncertainty of a new technological era, it can be very difficult to distinguish between investments you need to make ahead of the market and investments that must be in sync with market readiness. As a CEO it can be tempting to think about the early phases of radical technological change as a chance to dominate a new market rather than learning about the market. Investing ahead of the curve makes sense when we know what the curve is. But with digital transformation there’s a lot of exploration and understanding to accomplish before the curve starts to take shape. When digital investments don’t quickly pay off, CEOs can feel that the issue they’ve encountered is about not spending enough, rather than the company (or the market) not knowing what the end state actually looks like. They can fear that reducing a highly public commitment to the new business could be seen as failure rather than smart decision-making. They may double down on their chosen strategy rather than pivoting toward the profitable approach, hoping to bully the market rather than learn about it. In time, markets learn more about what they want, producers learn how to deliver it, and the way forward is clearer than it was before. At this point, it is much easier to make clear-headed decisions about digital. But funding a “big digital” strategy during the figuring out process can take more patience than investors have. Of course, not all companies with short-term digital indigestion are making bad decisions. In e-commerce, what started 20 years ago as a radical innovation — and then radical destroyer of market value — is now standard practice in every industry. The leading companies, even those that made large unprofitable investments early in the transition, were able to pivot toward more profitable e-commerce strategies. In digital, as with future waves like IoT, AI, and conversational commerce, executives would be wise to be wary about the siren call of new technological innovation. Instead of ramping up quickly, only to ramp down painfully, it would be much better if companies can make steady progress toward the right end state without making such costly mistakes.
Сэмюэл Грингард. Интернет вещей. Будущее уже здесь. (The Internet of Things). – М.: Альпина Паблишер, 2017. – 188 с. ISBN 978-5-9614-6472-6Как говорили почти четыре десятилетия назад персонажи фильма «Москва слезам не верит»: «Ничего не будет – ни кино, ни театра, ни книг, ни газет. Одно сплошное телевидение!» Сегодня таким «новым телевидением», грозящим изменить мир, а заодно поглотить все и вся, стал так называемый Интернет вещей (Internet of Things, IoT). Эта концепция оказалась закономерным развитием глобальной компьютеризации, которая началась в конце прошлого века. А термин «Интернет вещей» был впервые использован Кевином Эштоном, который рассматривал возможность использования радиочастотных меток для совершенствования логистических процессов в компании Procter&Gamble, где работал младшим бренд-менеджером.Концепция Интернета вещей заключается в электронном преображении материального мира вещей и предметов путем подключения их к сети. При этом выделяют два типа устройств. Физические, которые самостоятельно не создают и не передают цифровые данные, если специально для этого не подвергаются улучшениям. И цифровые, которые предназначены для генерации данных и их передачи для дальнейшего использования. Подключенные в единую информационную сеть, эти устройства способны предоставить новые типы данных, ранее недоступные. А также функционировать без наблюдения за ними человека и даже со временем совершенствоваться, используя алгоритмы машинного обучения.( Читать дальше... )Вы также можете подписаться на мои страницы:- в фейсбуке: https://www.facebook.com/podosokorskiy- в твиттере: https://twitter.com/podosokorsky- в контакте: http://vk.com/podosokorskiy- в инстаграм: https://www.instagram.com/podosokorsky/- в телеграм: http://telegram.me/podosokorsky- в одноклассниках: https://ok.ru/podosokorsky
The so-called 'FANG' stocks have risen by 63% since the beginning of 2017, compared with a 20% gain in the S&P 500; and, the last two days have seemingly shown the same stocks to be the safe-haven hiding spot for investors (up 7% off Friday's lows amid trade war turmoil)... But as Grizzle.com's Chris Wood asks, what are the risks of continuing to own these stocks after the huge gains of recent years? One obvious risk is an accelerating monetary tightening scare on rising inflation concerns in America, given that highly rated growth stocks are most vulnerable to higher interest rates. But to Chris Wood, a probably greater fundamental risk is regulatory, most particularly in the cases of Facebook and Google. This risk is being driven by the increasingly evident backlash against social media as people finally wake up to what should have been obvious years ago. That is the sinister aspects of search engine and social media monopolies. But if such a backlash is building, with a recent cover of The Economist magazine titled ‘The new titans: And how to tame them’, the issue is whether this backlash turns into regulatory action creating meaningful downside risk for the relevant companies’ share prices. This is certainly a risk. The best critique of social media seen by this writer is a book published last year titled, Move Fast and Break Things, by Jonathan Taplin. This book, written by a former 1960s music producer turned academic, highlights the monopolistic aspects of Google and Facebook, as well as the way they are engaged in a process that is destroying critical cultural infrastructure such as news and art, as well as fanning partisan politics by encouraging extremes only to communicate with each other in the by now well understood “echo chamber effect”. One of the more interesting revelations, among many, was the disclosure that Google staffers had at least 427 meetings at the White House during the Obama presidency, or an average of more than once a week. Fake News and Fake Clicks Then, of course, there is the ongoing brouhaha about so-called fake news, given the growing evidence of clever Russian exploitation of social media during the American presidential election. This has led to a series of articles questioning, in particular, the role of Facebook. Thus famous British historian turned polemicist Niall Ferguson, posed a pertinent question in Britain’s Sunday Times last October. “Is Facebook a platform for all ideas? Or the most powerful publisher yet?” This is certainly a question worth asking in a world where a terrifyingly large number of people, particularly younger people, seem to gather their news from Facebook. This is why it is increasingly hard to deny the longstanding reality that Facebook in recent years has primarily been a media company posing as a technology company rather than the other way round. Then there is the issue of whether Google’s and Facebook’s estimated 60% share of digital advertising revenue is really merited given the seemingly questionable nature of many of the ‘clicks’. Interestingly, Procter & Gamble (P&G) cut more than US$100 million in “ineffective” digital advertising in the second quarter of last year and found little impact on its domestic sales. Social Networks: The Exchange of Personal Data for Instant Gratification If this is the growing noise, many will protest that such concerns aired by aging counterculture relics such as author Taplin, a former manager for Bob Dylan’s backup group The Band, reflect generational chasms, and that millennials will continue to see nothing wrong in handing over all their data in return for instant gratification. Maybe. But it was interesting to this writer to see a Hollywood movie The Circle released last April. While certainly not a great film, the film did succeed in highlighting the creepy nature of social media as all privacy is sacrificed to the principle of being ‘connected’. And most of the actors were millennials. What is certainly the case is that the original libertarian ethos of the internet has long since degenerated into abetting and enabling a surveillance state. But beyond such ‘soft’ cultural issues of privacy, there are also practical commercial ones raised by the intensifying scrutiny. The most important is antitrust and whether these monopolies, given their dominant market share as a result of the ‘network effect’, should be broken up and, worse case for the share prices, turned into regulated utilities. In this respect, historians will know that America has a long and proud tradition of ‘antitrust’. Meanwhile, another dimension of the anti-competitive aspect of these business models is the way Google and Facebook seek, usually successfully, to buy any startup that could disrupt their domain. The obvious example is WhatsApp. On this point it is worth recalling that, during the approval process of that merger, Facebook pledged to the European regulators in 2014 that it would not share WhatsApp users’ data with the Facebook platform but started doing so in 2016. As a result, the European Commission fined Facebook €110 million last May. Alibaba and Tencent: Social Control Trumps Monopoly Risk Still the issue is, obviously, not what the Europeans do, but what action if any comes out of the U.S. In the meantime, a regulatory drive on the antitrust angle is much more likely in the U.S. than China. Whereas the degree of control in the marketplace is by its very nature controversial in the West, the degree of market dominance exercised by China’s internet giants, Alibaba and Tencent, is an enabler of increased social control from the standpoint of China’s central government, and therefore has real utility value in political terms. This is why it is probably safer to own the shares of China’s internet giants than the American ones. Read more here...
Для большинства людей, всю свою жизнь проработавших в маркетинге, нет ничего более загадочного, чем спонсорство Олимпийских игр
crosailes/Getty Images Rise Science came to IDEO with a challenge. The young startup had built a robust data platform for college and professional athletes to track their sleep and adjust their behavior so that they played at peak performance. But for the players, the experience was challenging. Rise expected athletes to look at data-driven charts and graphs to determine what decisions to make next, but players struggled to find those insights. Rise was convinced they just needed easier-to-read charts and graphs. As IDEO designers and Rise’s data scientists spent time with players and coaches, they discovered that Rise didn’t have a data visualization problem, they had a user experience problem. Charts and graphs were far less important than knowing when to go to bed each night and when to wake up the next morning. Within a few weeks, the charts and graphs moved into the background of their app and an alarm clock and a chat tool took center stage. Rise Science’s app, before (left) and after (right) user research-informed design. In the 18 months since relaunching their service, Rise Science has signed up over 15 of the most elite pro and collegiate sports teams, as well as several companies who hope to improve employee performance and wellbeing through better sleep habits. This example shows how human-centered data science can result from interdisciplinary teams incorporating design thinking into their approach. Instead of a version of data science that is narrowly focused on researching new statistical models or building better data visualizations, a design-thinking approach recognizes data scientists as creative problem solvers. We’re not suggesting that the disciplines of data science and design merge, but rather that if practitioners work together and learn each other’s art they will produce better outcomes. Many of the techniques we use in our human-centered design process at IDEO—user research, analogous inspiration, sketching and prototyping—work well with data-driven products, services, and experiences. User Research Data by themselves are inert—dumb, raw material. Making things smart will mean designing with data in a way that reflects and responds to the functional, social, and emotional behavior of users. If you start with the needs and insights of people rather than leading with data, you can gain insights through the combination of qualitative design research and exploratory data analysis. This hybrid approach can radically change the user experience for the better and be a true differentiator. For example, Rise and IDEO visited college athletes in dorm rooms and training facilities to develop a deep understanding of their day-to-day needs – a common design-thinking practice known as user research. We observed that nearly every component of the player’s life is scheduled, measured, and optimized. Giving them more data to digest was simply too much to ask. We also learned that the onboarding experience and service touchpoints like in-the-moment sleep coaching were just as important to the athletes’ success as the data visuals tied to their sleep. Data scientists see the world in unique ways, but they can only leverage that point of view when they have a chance to go out into the world and spend time with human beings. Engaging data scientists in design research produces powerful insights and, more importantly, unlocks empathy for the people who will be touched by the data engines they develop. Analogous Inspiration Analogous inspiration is another design-thinking technique that data scientists can add to their toolkit. That approach was key to the success of a project with Procter & Gamble. When the global organization deploys new technologies, they invite 50 key employees to a two-day training summit. When those employees return home, they are charged with teaching others the technology. While the training itself was effective, the process of hand-picking key employees was fraught. Turns out the people who were picked were not influential enough to spread their new knowledge throughout the company. Our Data Science team found analogous inspiration in research on how diseases spread through social networks. In most cases of epidemiology, we are interested in disrupting and preventing the spread of a disease. In this case, we wanted the disease (a new technology) to spread as quickly as possible through the social fabric of Procter & Gamble. We wanted to engineer a technology pandemic. The epidemiologic model allowed us to discover that the hand-selected employees, while close to senior leaders, were too centrally located to meaningfully spread something new throughout the organization. We suggested a different approach: Select participants who were distributed throughout the organization, but strategically located to spread the technology through the social fabric of the organization. We tried hundreds of millions of combinations of people that were best positioned to collectively spread this new technology. The initiative was so successful that the resulting group of ambassadors have been reused for several other change management programs. Sketching and Prototyping Data scientists can use sketches or prototypes to get user feedback, just the way product designers do. Although there’s a fog of ambiguity that descends during the exploratory data analysis phase, using the designer’s trick of making data visual helps your brain see patterns that suggest a few ways forward. The key here is to not be afraid to iterate: A pattern might lead you to look at the data in a particular way which then causes you to look at patterns in a completely new light. You might also choose to return to exploratory data analysis to pivot or change directions altogether. Start with a lot of skepticism, as the data could be dirty or missing fields, hence indicating patterns that are off-course. In another Procter & Gamble project, for example, we began with simple sketches which were shared with key stakeholders to get their input. Before ever writing a line of code we were able to learn what a desirable interface might look like. It’s hard and expensive to build a data science team, so it’s no surprise that most companies task these teams only with “data science work.” But engaging data scientists in all stages of the design thinking process will pay off in incalculable ways. Interdisciplinary collaboration that pulls data scientists away from their screens and out into the world produces powerful results. It transforms data from a crude tool to measure your business into a sophisticated tool that helps your business grow.
В список 15 крупнейших рекламодателей на рынке онлайн-видео по итогам 2017 года вошел интернет-ресурс Azino777, продвигавшийся роликом с участием популярного рэпера Вити АК-47. По количеству просмотров он обогнал рекламу «Яндекса», Coca-Cola и Tele2. При этом сайт Azino777 входит в черный список Роскомнадзора, а размещающееся на нем онлайн-казино работает через «зеркала».Онлайн-казино Azino777, известное как «Azino три топора», заняло по итогам 2017 года 14-ю позицию в списке 20 рекламодателей по количеству просмотров видеорекламы, обогнав таких рекламодателей, как «Яндекс», Coca-Cola и Tele2, следует из данных Mediascope. Всего топ-20 рекламодателей обеспечили больше трети просмотров видеорекламы. Десять из них — крупнейшие рекламодатели и на ТВ: это Pepsi, Mars, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Reckitt Benckiser и т. д. Только четыре участника топа — интернет-компании: кроме Azino777, это Mail.ru Group, Google и «Яндекс». Azino777 известно рекламным роликом с песней Вити АК-47: «Azino три топора, началась игра». В нем рэпер выигрывает крупную сумму в онлайн-казино, вызывая восхищение окружающих, которым также советует начать «играть онлайн». При этом адрес Azino777.com содержится в реестре сайтов с запрещенной информацией Роскомнадзора. Кроме того, закон «О рекламе» не допускает в интернете рекламу азартных игр под угрозой штрафов до 500 тыс. руб. для юридических лиц. В Azino777 на запрос «Ъ» не ответили.
Онлайн-казино Azino777, известное как «Азино три топора», по итогам 2017 года заняло 14-е место в списке крупнейших рекламодателей по количеству просмотров видеорекламы, обогнав рекламу «Яндекса», Coca-Cola и Tele2. Об этом «Коммерсантъ» пишет со ссылкой на данные Mediascope.
Media companies have been waiting for the other shoe to drop since Facebook announced changes to its all-important newsfeed algorithm that (at least on paper) were designed to stop posts from businesses, brands and media from "crowding out" personalized content. Now, barely six weeks after the changes were first announced, Facebook's decision to deprive publishers from a crucial stream of user traffic has claimed its first casualty: A four-year-old publisher called LittleThings. The change, according to LittleThings' COO Gretchen Tibbits, had a "material" impact on the site's traffic, killing 75% of its organic reach, according to DigiDay. LittleThings’ comScore traffic declined to 40 million this month from 58 million last May. The closure will leave the company's 100 employees without jobs. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg unveiled the changes in a blog post published early last month, claiming that Facebook's internal research had determined that its users are happier when their feeds are filled with personalized content - like photos from their neice's graduation - while news and paid advertising typically lead to feelings of malaise. Of course, anybody who's been following the monthslong battle between Facebook and Democratic lawmakers over its "failure" to stop a Russian troll farm that has since been indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller from distributing $100,000 worth of paid political content on Facebook's platform. Unfortunately for the media industry, the fallout from this decision has only just begun to be felt. Facebook's algorithm change will probably do lasting harm to dozens - if not hundreds - of publishers who depend on the company's algorithm to drive traffic to their content. But LittleThings' aversion to taking outside money (the site was self-funded) meant there was little in the bank to tide the company over during a downturn. The site was in the middle of a pivot away from programmatic advertising toward more lucrative direct sales, as giant American consumer brands felt LittleThings' inspirational content would be an important counterpoint to the often dreary news cycle. Because it will also de-prioritize paid ads, the decision is expected to harm the company's bottom line. Unsurprisingly, its shares tanked after Zuckerberg announced the changes. LittleThings had other factors working against it. Unlike a lot of distributed media upstarts that chased audiences on platforms using VC money, LittleThings was self-funded, which meant there wasn’t a big cushion when things went south. It largely built its business on programmatic advertising, but then pivoted to more lucrative direct sales. LittleThings’ inspirational stories were a safe haven for advertisers that were increasingly getting spooked by the contentious news climate, but there was a downside there, too. “The brand safety was a huge selling point for us, but the flip is, our audience is women over 30 in middle America, and they’re not sexy,” Tibbits said. The company made some inroads, getting buys from blue-chip advertisers including Procter & Gamble and eBay, but it wasn’t enough, and the first quarter of the year is typically slow for advertising. Other publishers are looking to Google and Twitter to make up for what they’re losing from Facebook, but for LittleThings, there was nowhere else to go. LittleThings’ comScore traffic had declined to 40 million from 58 million last May, according to Tibbits. "For our audience, there’s not another platform right now," she said. "There are 100 great, talented people who were here and doing content that resonated with an audience that’s just harder to find right now." As LittleThings crumbles, other publishers are hoping Google and Twitter will help them compensate for Facebook's retrenchment. But whether these strategies will ultimately pan out remains to be seen. Though perhaps an even more important question would be: Is this also Putin's fault?
Аналитики Berenberg присвоили акциям Procter & Gamble (PG) рейтинг Sell; целевая стоимость $78.50 ------------------------------------------------------------- Воспользоваться сервисом "Рейтинги акций" TeleTrade можно, заполнив форму на одноименной странице нашего сайта или в Личном кабинете трейдера в разделе "Аналитика" (для подключения услуги необходимо связаться со своим менеджером).Источник: FxTeam
Doritos отказывается от запуска линейки «женских чипсов» после обвинений в дискриминации. Можно ли производить продукты специально для женщин, при этом не приводя их в ярость
Is tax reform a true tailwind to buyback and dividend ETFs or is it an over-hyped bet?
Procter & Gamble (PG) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues.
Исламские активисты индийского города Хайдарабада подняли скандал из-за котенка, который нарисован на детских подгузниках. Они усмотрели в нем оскорбление пророка Мухаммеда. Сам котенок ни в чем не виноват, скандал возник из-за его нарисованных усов. Если посмотреть под определенным углом, фрагмент графического изображения кошачьей морды в районе носа имеет некоторое сходство с арабской вязью. При известной доле фантазии в этом можно изыскать намек на имя пророка Мухаммеда, священное для всех мусульман. «Производитель специально напечатал это на каждом памперсе, чтобы оскорбить мусульманскую общину», – заявил Шахнур Хан, который входит в местную инициативную группу. Активисты подали жалобу в полицию, где указали на недопустимость подобного оскорбления чувств верующих, а также потребовали «арестовать и наказать» виновников. Исключительно цивилизованными методами протест активистов не ограничился. Наряду с заявлением в полицию была инициирована волна уличных протестов. Центральным смысловым актом подобных собраний становится публичное сжигание оскорбительных памперсов. Пока что никто, кроме подгузников, не пострадал, но страсти накаляются. Возмущение полыхает и в социальных сетях: оскорбленные мусульмане требуют подвергнуть бойкоту торговую марку Pampers, которая принадлежит международной компании Procter & Gamble. «Попросите, пожалуйста, всех исламских братьев и сестер бойкотировать этот продукт. Только так мы можем показать свою силу и любовь к Пророку», – пишет один из разгневанных блогеров. Западная публика реагирует в среднем скептически. Читатель британской газеты Daily Mail не побоялся оскорбить чувства мусульман еще сильнее, намекнув на то, что Пророк в свое время взял в жены несовершеннолетнюю: «Но ведь жена Мухаммеда носила памперсы, когда он на ней женился». Если же говорить о сугубо религиозной традиции, феномен «знамений Аллаха» широко распространен в исламской культуре. Правоверные мусульмане любят усматривать в окружающем мире любые намеки на имя Бога или Пророка. Это могут быть облака или ветви деревьев, рисунок на рыбьей чешуе или в сотах меда. Один из самых парадоксальных случаев такого рода произошел в России. В дагестанском селе родился мальчик с гематомой на подбородке. Когда пятно исчезло, по всему телу ребенка стали возникать пространные цитаты из Корана. Фотографии этого чуда поражают глаз. И, кстати сказать, этот малыш носит памперс. Комментариев от компании Procter & Gamble по поводу этого феномена, равно как и в отношении событий в Индии, пока не поступало.
На пресс-конференции, посвященной сделке, основатель «Магнита» с трудом сдерживал слезы. Попрощаться с ним в головной офис торговой сети в Краснодаре пришли сотни человек. Forbes вспоминает, как миллиардер создавал свое детище