The Hobson & Holtz Report - Podcast #117: March 6, 2006

The Hobson & Holtz Report - Podcast #117: March 6, 2006

Content summary: An introduction from our “sponsors”; popular podcasts begin charging in the UK; podcasting growth in Australia; a head start on the podcasting book; charitable blogging and Operation Link Love; Lee Hopkins reports; meeting Sallie Goetsch; Jeremy Wright shouts out; review of the New Communications Forum; the grand tour of Bay area tech stores; Neville’s and Shel’s podcasting book; listeners’ comments discussion (congrats on the book deal; advice for LinkedIn; value opportunities for PR); the music.

Show notes for March 6, 2006

download For Immediate Release podcast

Welcome to For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report, a 69-minute podcast recorded live from San Francisco, California, USA.

Download the file here (MP3, 32MB), or sign up for the RSS feed to get it and future shows automatically. (For automatic synchronization with your iPod or other digital player, you’ll also need a podcatcher such as the free Juice, DopplerRadio, iTunes or Yahoo! Podcasts, or an RSS aggregator that supports podcasts such as FeedDemon).

Listen to this podcast now:

In This Edition:

Intro:

  • 00:28 A special introduction from “the sponsors”
  • 01:07 Neville introduces the show; what the show’s about; how to give your feedback; show notes

News and Commentary:

  • 04:21 Some podcasts in the UK begin charging - if the content is compelling, is there a business model?
  • 06:58 Australian broadcaster sees significant podcasting growth - a natural extension for public broadcasters
  • 09:54 Getting a head start on the podcasting book deal with McGraw-Hill, and thanks to everyone who has commented
  • 12:22 Some actions on charitable blogging - stimulating Operation Link Love
  • 14:32 From Our Correspondent Down Under: Lee Hopkins - Heidi Miller, Apple, a broken iBook G4 and a $300 broken hard drive;
    colour as a useful cognitive shortcut for political parties; “babbliography”
  • 25:14 Meeting Sallie Goetsch
  • 25:44 Jeremy Wright shouts out!
  • 26:33 Neville’s and Shel‘s Saturday conversation
  • 28:08 About the New Communications Forum - workshops, sessions, people, keynotes - terrific!
  • 38:22 Doing show #116 live from the conference and the FIR mashup
  • 40:51 The grand tour of Fry’s, CompUSA, and other cool places and the temptations we encountered with dual-core processor laptops (in particular)
  • 43:47 The podcasting book
  • 49:10 Neville wraps up his US trip on Monday
  • 49:57 Vote for FIR at Podcast Alley!
  • 51:14 Shel and Neville live together for Thursday’s show
  • 51:40 A bit more on the mashups

Listeners’ Comments Discussion:

  • 52:24 Sebastian Keil and Lee Hopkins says congrats on the McGraw-Hill book deal
  • 53:34 Lee Hopkins (again) says the FIR mashup was great!
  • 54:05 Craig Jolley offers LinkedIn some advice on email outreach to customers
  • 56:33 Judy Jones is thrilled to hear the news about the podcasting book
  • 59:37 David Phillips on meeting up and the New Communications Forum, and value opportunities for PR with social media

Outro:

  • 61:52 Neville wraps the show; let us know your views about today’s discussions; how and where to send your comments; where to find the show notes
  • 63:43 Podsafe music redux - I Heard It On A Podcast (MP3) by Cruisebox

FIR Show Notes links
Links for the blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show are posted to the FIR Show Links pages at The New PR Wiki. You can contribute - see the home page for info. If you have comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for our future shows, email us at fircomments@gmail.com, or call the Comment Line at +1 206 222 2803. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 3 minutes / 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

So, until Thursday March 9…

Posted by neville on 03/06 at 10:06 AM

  1. The best intro to FIR ever!  Well done Mrs H *and* Mrs H!

    Posted by Stephen Davies  on  03/06  at  11:02 AM

  2. You liked that, eh, Stephen? Stand by; we’ve got two more!

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  03/07  at  05:05 AM

  3. Don’t encourage them, Stephen, please!

    Posted by Neville Hobson  on  03/07  at  05:35 AM

  4. You’ve got two more wives? Do tell!

    BTW, love the word “babbliography.” (I’m a fan of both puns and clever neologisms.) But do the people who pass information on without checking it actually cite the sources of their rumors?

    Cheers,
    Sallie

    Posted by Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch")  on  03/07  at  06:03 AM

  5. Two more *intros*, Sallie, but you knew that, didn’t you?

    Posted by Shel Holtz  on  03/07  at  11:57 AM

  6. Normally, I like Lee Hopkins’s reports but his rant about Apple turned me off.

    Claiming Apple’s repair service policies are the reason why most people buy PCs is a fallacious argument called “Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc” (with this, therefore because of this). It had too much emotional indignation and too many facts wrong. As a result, the real and valid argument waiting to be made was lost.

    Could Apple’s market share versus various PC manufactures be caused by:
    * hardware cost?
    * familiarity with PCs from work?
    * desire for specific PC only software?
    * previous investment in peripherals and other PC accessories?

    How many PC users bother to research repairing Macs much less let it drive their purchasing decision?

    Bad service can make current Apple customers go somewhere else for their computers. Some day that could affect Apple’s marketshare. Except. Maybe people buy Macs and not PCs because:
    * they like the cool hardware?
    * familiarity with Macs from school?
    * desire for specific Mac only software?
    * previous investment in peripherals and other Mac accessories?
    * better security?

    The coincidence of a smaller marketshare and, for argument’s sake, an objectionable repair policy hardly stands up as a compelling case for causation of the first by the second. I suppose Lee’s argument was not handling disgruntled customers (whether they’re right or wrong to be upset) is potentially bad for Apple’s business. He failed to convince on that point.

    Lee also made some factually incorrect assertions about the availability of parts and service for Macs. Mac owners aren’t locked into “one company”.

    One reason to get your computer serviced by Apple is because it’s under warranty. Another is because you value their product expertise. If it’s not under warranty there’s nothing stopping you from buying a competitively priced new hard disk and replacing it yourself or hiring someone else to do it.

    Apple uses the same major brands of IDE/ATA hard disks as PC manufacturers. Currently they’re stocking disks made by IBM, Toshiba, and Fujitsu. I just searched a reputable Mac parts vendor and found a Seagate 60gb (same GB as the largest OEM disk on an iBook G4) for $117.99 along with other smaller and larger iBook G4 replacement disks from other manufacturers. http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/hard-drives/2.5-Notebook

    That’s not the only after market hard disk vendor. And Yahoo Yellow Pages for Chicago (where the iBook in question needed repair) shows 379 Macintosh repair shops. http://yp.yahoo.com/py/ypResults.py?Pyt=Typ`&city=Chicago&state=IL&uzip=60608&country=us&msa=1600&cs=4&ed=5jQ1b61o2TzGvsKxgY5Tz2l83rtZ4jenv4nYvUtZ4.ve&tab=B2C&stx=8104646&stp=y&desc=Computer+Service+and+Repair&qtx=Macintosh+computer+repair&offset=0&FBoffset=23&allbiz=1

    And there’s at least 2 do it yourself directions on the web.
    http://www.ifixit.com/cart/catalog/
    http://www.faqintosh.com/risorse/en/guides/hw/ibook/g4hd/

    Apple doesn’t “own your hard disk”. If however, you choose to have Apple repair your computer they will keep the replaced part, or charge you for its return. This repair policy is spelled out in paragraph 4 of the “Repair Terms and Services” printed on the back of the “Genius Bar Work Authorization” where it is also printed in larger bold letters above the place you sign: “Notice to Consumer: Please read important information on back.”

    On the back is:
    “4. If repairing your product under warranty or extended service contract, Apple may use new, used or reconditioned parts, if permitted by the terms. If repairing parts outside of warranty or extended service contract, Apple may use new, used or reconditioned parts. Apple will retain the replaced part that is exchanged under repair service as its property, and the replacement part will become your property. Replaced parts are generally repairable and are exchanged or repaired by Apple for value. If applicable law requires Apple to return a replaced part to you, you agree to pay Apple the additional cost of the replacement items.”

    See that unambiguous 3rd sentence in paragraph 4? Clearly, Apple didn’t try to hide it’s policy. Caveat emptor. If you want your disk back you will have to pay for it under the terms of the repair contract. Or you can repair it yourself. Or you can pay someone else to repair it who doesn’t have the same terms. You can dislike the policy, but one party’s failure to read the terms of their contract is not the other party’s fault. Getting all huffy won’t change that and turns people off to the real complaint: the policy.

    [to be continued in second comment because of 5000 character limit…]

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/08  at  07:25 AM

  7. [continued from previous comment…]

    Also, the reason the repair number is needed is because Apple tracks all repair work in detail. Looking up a repair number can show who worked on it, when, and what was done, i.e. what was specifically replaced. Go back to paragraph 4. It doesn’t say all parts can be repaired, but in general that they may be. If Apple can’t look up the specific repair how should they know if the customer’s specific part was repairable? Apple can locate the repair number if the customer doesn’t have it. A sales slip isn’t needed.

    Further, I suspect all of this drama is because there was no recent backup of the failed disk.

    No. I’m not an Apple employee. I’m a long time Mac user who’s had several hard disks die. Apple replaced one in the last month. I don’t know if I should blame the Mac-and-PC-supplying-hard-disk-manufacturer or Apple. I do know the first time one of my disks failed, the Apple Genius looked up the “disposal” policy and assured me the disk would be turned into smithereens and not to worry about my data being illicitly recovered. I’m glad Apple saves me the expense and trouble of destroying my dead disk. The last time Apple turned the repair around for me in 1 day.

    Regardless, you have to pay me to use a PC. I hate Windows.

    Apple deserves criticism on some things. I criticize them. Paragraph 4 of the repair terms may be deserving of criticism. I’d like to see Apple communicate better with customers. On the other hand, Lee’s report angered me. It gave me a bad impression of him. To be redundant, it didn’t persuade.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/08  at  07:26 AM

  8. While it makes sense that Apple would keep a part that they replaced sans charge under warranty, I find it preposterous that they would claim ownership of a part for which a replacement was paid for in full.

    Puts me in mind of back when the ipod battery issue first arose. http://www.ipodsdirtysecret.com/  You can now sign up for the battery replacement program for $59 but at the time your only option was to pay Apple a $200+ repair bill or essentially buy a whole new ipod.

    Hopefully word will spread and Apple will be forced to change their policy.

    Posted by Rob Clark  on  03/09  at  11:23 AM

  9. Rob,

    In most cases what’s a customer going to do with a defective part even if it’s not under warranty? I’m glad to have Apple take care of it with all the hazardous materials in computers. We shouldn’t just be tossing computers in the garbage and proper disposal can be expensive.

    If people object to the terms in their contracts and take their business elsewhere Apple will get the message. Maybe. Or you can submit your opinion through their feedback pages. Apple says they read all feedback. This is the site to submit general comments. http://www.apple.com/contact/feedback.html

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  03/09  at  04:40 PM

  10. Hi Macfan,

    Oh, no disagreement that having Apple provide proper disposal is a valuable service.  But it should be the customer’s choice as to whether they wish to make use of the service or not.  A transfer of ownership shouldn’t be hidden in paragraph four of a work authorization.  And clearly, in Heidi’s case, the old part still held value for her.

    Had they simply charged Heidi the amount of the rebate the store recieve, I’d likely agree with you that this is a case of caveat emptor.  But they charged her full price to take back a damaged device.  They sold her back her own device at full retail. 

    Looking at paragraph four, the final sentence “If applicable law requires Apple to return a replaced part to you, you agree to pay Apple the additional cost of the replacement items.”  The additional cost.  Not full cost.  Which comes back to Heidi’s question of how do they justify charging her $300?

    Heidi’s questions seemed pretty straightforward to me.  For the media relations person to refuse answering them is puzzling.  And given that Heidi’s replacement drive has now gone belly up, I suspect this isn’t the last we’ll hear of the story.

    Posted by Rob Clark  on  03/09  at  06:49 PM

  11. A huge and tardy congrats on your book deal with McGraw-Hill! Can’t wait to read it. It sounds like exactly the book we need for business podcasting.

    Posted by Debbie Weil  on  03/10  at  05:48 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: The Hobson & Holtz Report - Podcast #118: March 9, 2006

Previous entry: McGraw-Hill will publish our podcasting book

<< Back to main