Foursquare’s new deal with American Express will allow AMEX cardholders to save money on purchases at select retailers including Sports Authority and H&M. As important as the deal is, I think the technology is more important.
We’ve heard a lot about NFC lately. Products like Google Wallet can talk to the payments network and transmit your credit card, loyalty program and promotion information.
I’m sure it will happen over time, but the benefits are marginal at best. Yawn.
What’s really exciting is what you could do if you flipped the model and had the payment networks talk to your phone. That’s exactly what foursquare is doing. When you redeem an offer, American Express sends a confirmation to your phone.
The payment network can reach out and touch your phone. That’s huge. That enables a lot of possibilities:
Risk reduction and increased convenience. If you’ve ever been traveling and had a card rejected because it was flagged as suspicious, you know how frustrating this can be. Instead of declining the transaction, it would be routed to your phone where you could authorize it. This also saves a phone call to unblock your account. Fraud reduction, more transaction volume and operations cost reduction. A credit card company’s trifecta.
Online transaction authorization. Similar to above, a notification to your phone could be used as secondary verification of online transactions.
Parental authorization. Parents could provide a restricted prepaid card to children. On every transaction, they could remotely approve or deny it. Some merchants could be automatically authorized. This would be a great addition to American Express’s PASS product line.
Promotions. Offers based on your recent purchases and location could be sent while you’re in a shopping mood. If you just made a purchase at mall, you might get an offer for discounts on dinner and a movie.
Access for the blind. A text-to-speech engine on the phone could provide an overview of the merchant and amount to help the blind.
An application like this also eliminates the two-sided market problem that NFC has. As much as Google would like to have NFC terminals everywhere, that will take a long, long time. Merchants don’t have to do anything to the installed terminal infrastructure to make this happen. It’s all between the backend and your phone. It also works with a much broader base of phones than NFC.
This type of integration also eliminates the need for training retail employees and doing POS integration. These are both significant hurdles to running promotions.
I stopped in at Radio Shack last week to take advantage of foursquare’s 20% off newbie special on an iPod Touch. (It’s a great deal. 20% off a current generation Apple product is tough to find.)
The clerk I talked to had no idea what I was talking about. He reluctantly brought over the manager. She had no idea what I was talking about. She stared at the offer on the screen and couldn’t figure it out. She tried calling another store. Again, no idea what was going on. Then she called Radio Shack’s POS support line and was on hold for about 20 minutes.
If I were an ordinary customer, I would have been fed up and left. But I like to see how these things play out and consider it market research, so I let it go on. I amused myself as the manager spent her time on hold trying to sell me batteries, extended warranties, screen protectors, armbands and pretty much anything else that was within reach.
I asked if she could just override the system and add the discount. No, store managers don’t have that discount. Finally, she randomly entered promotion codes and figured it out.
Thirty minutes after I entered the store I left with my iPod. During that time she couldn’t help other customers. It was’t a great experience for me, the other customers, the store or foursquare.
Clearly the offer code was not a single use code or she wouldn’t have been able to guess it. Either Radio Shack needs to get much better at training or they need to put POS instructions right on the foursquare offer. (They also need to better staff their POS support desk. No one ever picked up.)
This isn’t limited to foursquare or Radio Shack. I run into this all of the time when trying to redeem mobile offers. My default expectation is that it won’t go smoothly.
That’s one thing that appeals to me about Square’s Card Case and Register. Because the POS system is integrated with loyalty rewards and promotions, here shouldn’t be a disconnect between the offer that I see on my screen and what the merchant sees on hers.
I remember seeing Dennis Crowley at SXSW in 2009 shortly after he had finished a panel on location services. He was on the phone and giddy that they had just reached 3,000 users. Two years and more than 7 million users later, foursquare’s latest pivot is its most important.
Foursquare 3.0 is the most efficient way to get recommendations for places to go in a city. The new release hits many of the themes that I’ve covered in my series on local search, especially user and merchant engagement and the importance of recommendations. (See How the battle for local search will be won for an overview.)
Lately, foursquare has been afflicted by a form of reverse network effects. It’s become so popular among some segments that the game elements of foursquare weren’t appealing to many users. Most people don’t want to play games that they will suck at. When you check in somewhere and see that you’ll need 28 more visits to become mayor, there’s less incentive to participate. (See this discussion of two-sided markets.) In my research, I found that the average number of check ins per unique user at businesses was 1.56. Given that some places require 12 or more checkins in 60 days to become mayor, that’s a clear indicator that repeat checkin activity is being driven by a very small number of people.
Foursquare added a new “Explore” tab that provides recommendations of nearby businesses. Recommendations provide a real incentive to use foursquare even if you have no shot at becoming mayor. Foursquare will filter through thousands of local businesses to identify those that you might be interested in. (See my post on recommendation engines.) Much like Google’s Hotpot, recommendations come from a number of different sources:
Your friends. If you have friends on foursquare, you’ll see tips that they’ve left at businesses. Because you can friend or follow organizations, this can also show you “expert” recommendations.
A place graph. Places will be suggested based on other places that you’ve been.
Popular places on foursquare.
Time of day.
It is really easy to scroll through the recommendations. Unlike Yelp and Hotpot, you don’t have to flip back and forth among pages. Unlike Hotpot, non-recommended places aren’t mixed into this list.
Are the recommendations perfect? No. Recommendations never are. I’ve gotten plenty of bad recommendations when talking to friends or hotel concierges. But they sure beat scrolling through an undifferentiated list with no guidance at all.
With the new recommendations, foursquare would benefit from a much broader social graph. Many people are stricter about who they will become friends with in foursquare because of its real-time nature. But they really don’t care if other friends, co-workers and acquaintances see tips from visits in the past. In my case, I’ve only friended half of the potential Facebook friends on foursquare. These additional people would dramatically improve coverage of social recommendations.
Four new deal structures allow for better serving both end user and business needs:
Flash specials. These are the equivalent of door busters. Once activated, the first X people who check in can claim the deal. These are also especially well suited for use as yield management tools. Slow night at the bar? Offer a special for one night only.
Friends specials. Check in with a set number of friends to get the deal. These promote behaviors that are important for foursquare’s growth. They serve as both user acquisition tools and product improvement tools. The more friends that you have actively using the platform, the more useful the recommendations become.
Swarm specials. These kick in after a certain number of foursquare users check in at a place. These could be important for future friend discovery tools.
Newbie specials. These specials allow businesses to incent trial by new customers. Because they are tied to a relatively persistent identity, they can be much more generous than paper coupons (which might be abused by unscrupulous customers).
As important as a deal platform is, having actual deals is critical. Foursquare is launching the new platform with deals from Barnes & Noble, H&M, Toys R Us, Arby’s, Coffee Bean, H&M, Sports Authority, Whole Foods, Chili’s and Radio Shack.
There’s no word on notification regarding specials. Foursquare currently requires users to actively seek them out within the app. Being able to get alerts of new specials (especially flash specials) will be important.
As much as I like foursquare 3.0, there is a lot of opportunity left. The biggest of this is collecting more data to make better, more intelligent recommendations. Foursquare will be launching a new partnership with American Express at SXSW. The initial scope is limited to special offers for AMEX cardholders.
AMEX has the absolute best data of any company in America on where a large portion of the population transacts. Consider these pieces:
Many businesses set up a merchant account ahead of time, so they know when a business is going to open.
They can estimate hours of operation with reasonable accuracy. (Based on swipe data.)
They know the average purchase amount.
They know the mix of locals vs. out-of-towners.
They know the mix of personal cards vs. corporate cards.
They know if a business goes out of business. (The swipes stop happening.)
They know which businesses people return to and which they don’t. (Implicit quality rating.)
All of this data could be fed into a recommendation engine like foursquare’s.
With the way AMEX issues secondary cards, it would be possible to create a card that would automatically check you in on foursquare when you swipe your card. (While protecting your privacy on other purchases.)
At the extreme, you could have a co-branded foursquare card designed around social features. These could include automatic check ins, cardmember specials and a rewards program based on purchase and check in activity.
Sound crazy? Maybe. But back in the mid 2000s, AMEX launched city-centric cards for New York (IN:NYC) and Los Angeles (IN:LA) in a bid to attract younger customers. These cards weren’t successful and are no longer available.
Earlier in this series, I talked about the importance of business and consumer engagement in the success of local search. Here are some statistics based on research I conducted in the Portland market.
Staking out a presence online is the most basic step, and it seems that most businesses are taking this step. With the exception of foursquare, all of these numbers are substantially higher than I expected.
86% of businesses I looked at had a Web site. The quality of the Web sites varied tremendously, but generally included business location, contact information and hours. Some included sample menus. Most weren’t regularly updated. For businesses that had Twitter and Facebook presences, links to those sites were usually provided. A few embedded Twitter feed widgets right on the home page.
Claiming presence on Google, Yelp, Facebook and foursquare
“Claiming” a page on local search sites that consumers use provides a number of benefits that vary by site, including the ability to edit your map position, enter information such as hours of operation, post special offers, see metrics about visitors to your page and respond to reader reviews. Perhaps the most important benefit is to keep competitors and malicious users from messing with your page. Claiming is a relatively low-effort activity.
Foursquare lagged with only 5% of businesses claiming their foursquare page.
Twitter does not provide a default presence for businesses, yet 55% of businesses I looked at had a Twitter presence. Many of these were regularly updated with information on specials, events, industry news and closings. Several food carts used their Twitter presences in place of Web sites. See my earlier post, Twittering up some dosas. Several businesses had abandoned their Twitter accounts and were not included in the charts.
44% of businesses I looked at had a presence on Facebook. “Presence” varied, because Facebook has offered various tools over time and businesses have adopted Facebook in various ways. I’ve linked to examples of each:
Profile page – Businesses set themselves as if they were people and were friended as if they were people.
Group – Businesses created a group. Customers joined these groups.
Page – Businesses created a “Page” which customers could originally “Fan” and now “Like”.
Places page – Businesses in theory automatically have a Places page which people can check into. In practice, finding these businesses can be difficult because Facebook’s search tools don’t deliver consistent search results.
Combined page – Businesses can merge their Page with their Places page. The combined page is the fullest featured one.
Twitter and Facebook combined
35% of businesses had both a Twitter and Facebook presence. For businesses on both platforms, the median followers was 424 on Facebook and 323 on Twitter. Some of these businesses used tools, such as Facebook’s Twitter sync, to feed the same information to both platforms.
Consumers are engaging with local businesses online.
This chart shows the range of followers on Twitter and Facebook. (These numbers are directly comparable.) The chart also shows the number of unique users who had checked into venues on foursquare. The ranges are quite wide: foursquare (1 to 2385), Facebook (9 to 4998) and Twitter (6 to 14027).
There was no clear pattern to the outliers; I expected this to be correlated to the size of the business, but it didn’t seem to be. The outliers also varied by platform.
The medians from the above chart are summarized below. I also added the median number of Yelp reviews.
Although the numbers may not seem large in the absolute sense, they represent a highly targeted list of consumers who have expressed interest in a business and are likely to be repeat customers.
Checkins are still an emerging behavior. Here is the distribution of check ins on foursquare and Facebook:
The range on foursquare was 1 to 3695; on Facebook, it was 0 to 1587. The medians were 192 for foursquare and 63 for Facebook.
In every case, foursquare checkins were higher than Facebook checkins. Part of this can be attributed to the fact that foursquare has been around longer. Mostly, I’d attribute it to the selection bias of foursquare users and its game mechanics.
The range of checkins per unique user for Facebook was 1 to 4.06. The median ratio (on a venue basis) was 1.56; the median on a user basis is likely lower. Given that many venues require 5 or more checkins to get to mayor, this indicates that checkins are driven by a small proportion of users.
The above charts are based on a review of 100 local businesses in the Portland area, focused on high consumer value and frequency categories such as restaurants, bars and cafes. National chains were excluded from the sample. The sample included a mix of new and old businesses and businesses that ranged in size from food carts to large restaurants and brewpubs.
Google’s initial goal seems to be to get as many ratings as possible. To that end, it has made giving your opinion very easy. While Yelp encourages long-form reviews with a lot of detail, Google encourages basic star ratings. It’s primary Web interface makes it easy to quickly rate many places. Animations when you’ve completed a rating add a touch of fun to the process; once you’ve rated a business, the card flip over to allow you to write a review. The box is sized for about four sentences. Restaurants can also be sub-rated on Food, Service, Atmosphere and Value with a smiley face or frowny face.
On Android devices, a widget makes rating possible without launching the Google Places app.
Hotpot integrates with your search history on Google. This serves as a reminder to rate places you may have recently visited. Given Google’s vast query volume, this is another important differentiator.
Hotpot also shows ratings and reviews. While Google builds up its ratings and review corpus, the page focuses on aggregated reviews from other local sites, including Yelp, insiderpages, CitySearch and others. This has been a bone of contention for Yelp’s CEO, Jeremy Stoppelman.
Google hopes to make intelligent recommendations with all of your ratings data. Instead of having users sift through mounds of data to find the right business, Google does the lifting for you.
Recommendations come in two forms:
Recommendations based on your previous ratings. These span venue types. For example, Ikea was recommended for me because I rated Voodoo Donuts highly.
Recommendations based on the ratings of your friends.
The quality of recommendations seems to be hit-and-miss so far. Some seem entirely logical; others, like the Ikea recommendation were baffling.
A few examples to allow you to judge for yourself:
Recommendations don’t currently span metro areas. For example, if you rate places in San Francisco and then visit Chicago, the San Francisco data don’t seem to be used to make recommendations in Chicago. Google could use data like cuisine and price preferences to make at least a first cut at recommendations.
Recommendations are surfaced in a variety of places, such at the Google Places app, Google Maps and most importantly, Google search. In the screenshot above, you can see a recommendation embedded right in the search results.
This placement and personalization is an important differentiator that may drive users to Google Hotpot over Yelp and other competitors. Here, you can see a review from my friend Adam embedded in the search results:
Local is the perfect place for social search: It reflects how we do things In Real Life. Friends and family are often the first places we look for advice on restaurants and nightlife. Even reviews from people whose tastes we disagree with are helpful.
Google’s big challenge with social recommendations is the lack of a good social graph. I have exactly one friend feeding into my Hotpot recommendations. Other players such as Yelp and foursquare have piggy backed on Facebook’s social graph. Google can’t. And after last year’s Buzz privacy issues, Google is likely being more cautious in using other Google-collected data for a social graph.
A significant problem with the recommendations is that they aren’t used as a filter. This is especially important in mobile, where screen sizes are smaller and patience is usually shorter. In one search, the top results was a recommended place. The next results that were recommended were in positions 14 and 30. In between were places that were farther away and even some places that were closed.
When I searched for a restaurant in downtown San Francisco from my Android phone, the first personalized result was Adam’s Osha Thai restaurant, in position 16.
The stated purpose of Hotpot is a ratings and recommendations tool; the recommended places should be at the top of the list.
Google’s mobile search app (called Google Places) is in some ways comparable to Yelp, but Yelp’s mobile app is overall still a stronger experience.
Google Places provides a number of filters, including distance, rating, currently open, price and neighborhood. Additional filters (hidden behind the >>) allow you to search by cuisine or ambiance.
The “Open now” filter is especially important on mobile devices, where the focus is often on the here and now. In the listings, you can see annotations such as “Open until 10:00 pm” and “Opens at 4:30 pm” for places where Google has such data. Yelp’s hours data seems to be much more comprehensive.
There’s also a filter to see just the places that have been rated by friends. Oddly, there’s no way to see just the places that are recommended by Hotpot.
Places shows offers from the few businesses who are using Google Offers. There’s no way to show only businesses with offers.
Like Yelp, Facebook and foursquare, the Places app allows users to check in to a business.
The Places app doesn’t allow users to add new businesses or upload photos.
A digital to-do list
Hotpot allows you to “Save for later”, which is a great way to keep a list of places that you may want to visit later. These are integrated with Google Maps (on the desktop and in mobile) and shown as stars whenever you render a Google Map. It can be helpful when planning trips — you may discover that a shopping trip takes you near a restaurant that you’ve been meaning to visit.
I have been using Yelp’s bookmark feature (and Google My Maps before that) to track restaurants I want to visit; the integration with Google Maps may have me switch to Hotpot for that. It would be nice if Hotpot let you record why you saved it for later (e.g. recommended by Epicurious, have Groupon).
The biggest problem with Hotpot right now is that the overall experience doesn’t hold together. There are numerous brands being used, including Hotpot, Google, Maps and Places. In some places, clicking takes you to a map-based page, other places take you to a listings-based page. Icons and terminology are all over the board. The mobile app is similar. Maps, Latitude and Places all seem to point into similar experiences.
Listing freshness. Having up-to-date listings is an important part of the local search experience. Here, Google lags both Yelp and foursquare, especially when it comes to new businesses and non-standard places such as food carts. Hotpot doesn’t seem to be designed to address this problem. There isn’t an obvious way to add new listings. Hypothetically, Google could algorithmically find new businesses by looking at search patterns and traffic to sites like Yelp.
Engaged consumers. Yelp and foursquare have highly engaged users who significantly enhance the quality of the data.
Engaged businesses. Facebook and Twitter have engaged businesses who regularly update content about their businesses. Apparently Google offers a similar feature, but in more than a year since its launch, I’ve only seen one business use it. I found that while doing research for this post.
Tighter integration with Android. There are opportunities to improve the local experience by integrating better with the phone experience. For example, sending a message with location information could be more seamless.
Google definitely doesn’t have the most features or the most engaged audiences. It’s not (as far as I can tell) trying to build local communities centered around reviewing places.
But Google has three things that are hard to match: incredible distribution from Google search, deep pockets for promotions and Android. Facebook is the only company that can really come close to Google when it comes to distribution.
Google can surely solve the branding and consistency issues that make the current product experience frustrating. The bigger question is whether Google can develop a social graph that will really drive home the benefits of Hotpot.
Thanks to Mike Blumenthal for the pointer to Google’s business status updates.
Disclosure: I have several good friends who work at Google and went to high school with co-founder and CEO Larry Page. I’ve benefited from free drinks and other Google schwag at various Google promotions in Portland.
Local search has changed dramatically in the last decade. Gone are the days when you could buy a generic database from a mailing list provider, slap maps on it and have a local search solution. Social networks, mobile phones and businesses themselves are changing and enriching local search.
These are the key factors that will define success in local search going forward:
User generated content and engagement
The best local search databases are content rich. They include attributes such as hours of operation, friendliness of the place to kids and pets, whether there is outdoor seating, etc. Many of these attributes are collected by users themselves. Increasingly, this is being done on mobile phones — people can update data before they’ve even left the place.
Users also help to maintain the quality of the databases. In my research, there wasn’t a single case where Yelp or foursquare didn’t have a place I was looking for. There were quite a few that I couldn’t find in Google Places and Facebook. For the U.S., the best database of restaurants and bars is at Yelp. New places are often in Yelp’s database as soon as the place opens. (Sometimes even before the official open, as people participate in friends and family dinners and soft launches.) Foursquare’s data are also comprehensive, but are cluttered by users who try to exploit the service’s game mechanics by creating extraneous venues.
Users can also report businesses that have closed, helping alleviate the frustration of driving to a business only to find out that it is no longer around. Check in data on foursquare and Yelp can also identify anomalies. (e.g. a check in stream that suddenly stops can indicate that a business has closed.)
Photos are key components of some of these databases. The growth of smartphones will only further this trend. Some venues on Yelp have a hundred or more photos. Yelp reports that its users are uploading a photo on average once every 30 seconds. Foursquare recently introduced photos. Google is sending professional photographers out to take pictures of top places. Specialized applications like foodspotting have small but loyal audiences who upload pictures of specific dishes at restauranst.
When it comes to mobile data collection, Google’s Hotpot is weak. New places can’t be added and photos can’t be uploaded. It supports ratings, reviews and identifying problems such as closed businesses and duplicate venues.
But providing tools isn’t enough; it’s important to provide the right incentives.
Yelp has done a great job of providing ordinary users incentives to contribute to the maintenance of its database. It uses both social reinforcement and more tangible rewards. Yelp makes it easy for members to thank and compliment each other for reviews. Selected reviews are featured in weekly newsletters. Review often enough and you become a Yelp elite and have a badge on your profile.
Yelp employs community managers in its markets to help reinforce the community. Frequent events (including Yelp-hosted parties) provide more incentives to review and create adhesion among the community. Only a small proportion of the Yelp user base does any of these things. But you only need 1 person to provide value to millions. Yelp’s dedicated, engaged user base will be a significant barrier to other competitors in the space.
Businesses are using these tools to communicate specials, announce closings (e.g. for private events), run promotions, have contests and just engage with their customers. I’ve even seen businesses helping businesses; one business had electrical problems and another business offered her electrician’s number in response. Here is a snippet from a Twitter list I created of restaurants in Portland:
This sort of real-time information can help sway a decision or prompt users to go out on a night when they would otherwise have stayed in. Radio Room in Portland does a great job of this with their Twitter feed.
The image to the right is an image from the Hops Cam at Beachwood BBQ in Seal Beach, Calif. It allows users to instantly see what’s on tap now. What spot now?, an iPhone app, allows users to see real-time cameras from various restaurants.
Although Google, Yelp and foursquare allow businesses the opportunity to claim their page, there is no mechanism to communicate with customers through their platform.
Businesses are claiming pages and providing enhanced attribute information. Nearly 2/3 of businesses I looked at have claimed their Google and Yelp pages.
To date, no one has done a great job of making recommendations based on a user’s preferences or social network. Local search has required users to sift through mounds of data or just go for serendipity (like in UrbanSpoon). Yelp and foursquare have had some form of social recommendations. Both will highlight recommendations from friends, but their social graphs haven’t been large or relevant enough.
This is a key focus area for Google Hotpot.
When you do a search, you might see recommendations based on other places you’ve rated.
Or you might see that a friend has rated the place. Unlike recommendations from strangers, this provides immediate context. I know some friends whose tastes are similar. If they like a place, I know the chances are good that I will like a place. Negative affinity can be helpful, too. There are a few people whose tastes are so divergent that I know not to go someplace they rate highly.
Pictures also play a big part in decision making. Local search has long relied on textual data because it’s been easy and available. But visuals are a key part of the experience when it comes to dining and nightlife. They can answer questions like “Is this place fancy or a dive?” and “Would this place be a great place for an anniversary dinner?” much quicker than text reviews can. See Picturing a new vision for local search. Pictures are also much easier to go through on a mobile device.
Making intelligent recommendations requires having a lot of data. The easier you can make it, the more participation you will have. Few people will go through the trouble of writing detailed reviews, but 1-click ratings can provide important signals and will have a higher participation rate. See more on recommendation engines for local search.
No matter how good your content is, it doesn’t matter if you can’t get it in front of people. Here, Google has an indisputable advantage. Google sites serve 170 million people in the U.S. Yelp reaches 26 million. (Many of these come through the help of Google’s search results.) Foursquare claims several million downloads. The difference in scale is enormous.
Google’s distribution advantage extends to mobile with prominent applications on iPhone and deep integration within the Android OS. Facebook is also a large player here, with more than 150 million unique mobile users worldwide. When they set their eyes to local, they will be a big player to watch.
Local search often involves a shared experience. Plans are made and coordinated. So far, no one has really provided a great solution for this. Here’s a simplified version of how the process often works:
Step 1: Person A looks up a place on a local search site.
Step 2: Person A sends the place name via SMS to Person B (and C, D…).
Step 3: Person B gets the text message and looks it up in a local search site to find the address and look up information.
Step 4: Person B responds to Person A that it’s acceptable. (Or not, back to Step 1.)
Step 5: Person B then uses the site to generate driving directions.
This could be greatly simplified. Again, Google’s deep integration into Android provides an advantage. Person A could find and text the place information. The receiving phone would identify that the link is specially formatted and instead of presenting it at as an SMS, would present a Places page with pictures and reviews and an accept/reject button. Such sharing could also help Google build out a social graph.
I was walking down the street the other day and did a search on Facebook Places. Up popped up a deal for Boyd’s Coffee: get 10 punches and get a free drink. As a potentially new customer, this was not the least bit attractive. I had no idea what their coffee tasted like. In order to get a deal, I’d have to visit at least 10 times. It may work as a retention tool, but not as an acquisition tool. A better offer for new customers would be 50 cents or a dollar off a drink.
Likewise, many of the mayor offers on foursquare aren’t appealing to the casual user. As foursquare has gotten more popular, it may take visiting nearly every day to win a mayorship at popular venues.
Most traditional marketing tools have focused on either acquisition or retention. Coupons (including Valpak and Groupons) get people in the door. Loyalty programs (like punch cards) entice existing customers to come back.
Facebook, Foursquare and the like offer the promise of doing both — if offers can be adapted for the user. As long as I haven’t checked into the venue before, I get a $1 off coffee coupon. Once I’ve redeemed that, it becomes the punch card.
Because Facebook and foursquare use persistent identity, they are less susceptible to abuse than paper coupons. This allows merchants to make richer introductory offers if they choose: the merchant could offer a free coffee the first time.
The platforms could also be adapted to support refer-a-friend promotions. For example, Tristan Walker recently tweeted about an incredible banana beignet dessert at Tamarine. I added that to my to-do list. Businesses could use these data to recognize and reward key influencers.
While the existing platforms are somewhat limited, they could quickly evolve into tools that give small businesses CRM tools that the big guys have.
Facebook’s much awaited Places product finally launched this week. It’s the first step toward bringing friend finding to the masses.
People have been using Facebook to do this for years; posting their location in freeform status updates that their friends can read and comment on. (e.g. “heading to Cambridge for dinner.”) By turning that freeform text into structured location data, Facebook can make that data more useful.
From an iPhone or HTML5-capable mobile device, you can check in to a place, such as a restaurant, bar, movie theater, airport. You can also leave a message with the check in. The check in is posted to your wall and may appears in friends’ news feeds. On the mobile side, you can see a list of your friends and where they’ve checked in. Clicking on a place will show you details of the place, including a map and who has checked in.
The initial release is fairly simple. In fact, it’s not that much more useful than the freeform status updates.
Facebook is entering a very crowded space with competitors such as foursquare, Gowalla, Loopt, Google Latitude, Whrrl and Twitter. Many of those products are much more robust. Facebook’s key advantage is the size of its social graph: within the past 24 hours, 18 of my friends have checked in.
There are many opportunities for improvement to Facebook Places:
Basic UI. Check ins are sorted by time, not distance. A friend checking in 2,000 miles away 2 minutes ago is less relevant than someone checking in 2 miles away 5 minutes ago. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the city isn’t shown. Considering that many people use Facebook to keep track of friends all around the world, this is a significant issue. Foursquare has a separate bucket of “Friends in other cities.” Update: Facebook now has a separate grouping of nearby friends.
Map view. Often, visualizing your friends on a map is much easier than scanning a list. Foursquare already offers this.
Visiting friends. Out of town friends who are in town aren’t indicated. One of the big potential values of social friend finding is discovering when friends are in town. If a friend from far away is visiting, I’m more inclined to want to get together than someone who lives in town.
Pictures. There is no way to associate a picture with a check in. Given the difficulty in typing on mobile devices, often a picture gives a lot more information. These pictures could also be used to build a much more robust Place page.
Pushing location. Sending people your location via SMS is tedious. You have to address the message, type out where you are. If they don’t know where it is, they have to pull up a map or text you back for directions. With Places, it would be easy to push a notification to friends with where you are, complete with map. This could be sent as a push notification on iPhones or as an SMS with a URL for other phones.
As with most Facebook product launches, questions of privacy come up. In general, I think Facebook has done a good job with the default privacy settings on Places. You must explicitly check in; there is no background tracking.
With the increasing use of mobile applications such as Yelp and foursquare, it’s becoming possible to pull ideas from thin air. Users of these apps can leave tips for others to find that are linked to a specific location.
In most places there aren’t enough tips yet to make filtering an issue. San Francisco International Airport, with more than 57,000 checkins on foursquare, is an exception. It offers a glimpse of what we can expect as these services become more popular. The airport is the perfect petri dish for tips: it serves a technically savvy audience and people often find themselves there with plenty of time on their hands.
The SFO tips page contains dozens of notes including places to eat, complaints, ground transportation, wifi and power availability. Mixed in to all of this are ads, other spam and random observations. Some examples:
have a corned beef sandwich at max’s if you’re flying southwest. the best! well, really good
When you enter short term parking do it as far to the right as you can (lvl 2) & then immediately head to lvl 1. There is always parking next to gate and that is the lvl that connects to the terminal
Free wifi at the Continental lounge in Terminal 1- be warned, it’s located outside Security
Smoking hot brunette woman at gate 20. Stop by and smile at her. She is so lovely!
Bart to Millbrae gets you within 1 block of an in n out burger. Great for 3+ hour layover!
Heading to wine country? Take a moment to stop by St. Supery in the heart of Napa on Hwy 29. Mention this to get a 2 for 1 tasting.
Sorting through the volume of tips can be overwhelming. As the volume increases, we’ll need ways to filter them. Among the ways to filter:
Social network. Among the tips were tips from people I follow on Twitter, including Danny Sullivan and Adam Lasnik. Being able to surface these would increase relevance.
Ads vs. not ads. Sometimes people want ads, especially if it can save them money.
Places like airports are especially complex because they’re really collections of places, sometimes with other groupings and physical restrictions. Being able to filter tips by terminal would also be useful. But then maybe that’s best left to GateGuru.