Viva la revolución

Change is never easy. The rights we take for granted today were once born from the hearts of radicals who believed in a cause so passionately that they would huddle under the shimmer of moonlight to build support for change, moving under cloak from town to town through the night. Of course, things have come a long way since then. First there was email, then blogs and now micro blogs.

I've been on email since 1997 and written this blog since 2006, but I have to admit that I've never quite felt as empowered to build support for change as I have since I began tweeting earlier this month. If you don't believe me, start by asking yourself a simple question - how many times have you wanted to drop an anvil on your computer in frustration or go out on to the streets in protest, but just couldn't convince yourself or couldn't, period?

Those are the exact questions the people of Iran and the Email Standards Project asked themselves this month - and they did something about it. By encouraging people to voice their opinions on twitter, these two campaigns successfully built support for change. In fact, you too can join the revolution by simply tweeting about something you're passionate about. For example, you can start by telling Microsoft to fix Outlook 2010 before it's too late or wake up to find all those great looking emails charred in your mailbox in 2011.

Viva la revolución.

The Hilton Family

Dubai's been abuzz with news of Paris Hilton these last few days, all the way from when she stepped off the ramp at the airport through to where she wines and dines. Now although I personally couldn't give two hoots about Paris Hilton herself, it's no secret that Barron Hilton himself doesn't approve of her antics, which is why I couldn't help but share the invitation I received from a friend on Facebook last evening which The Hilton Family unknowingly sponsored.

Lock, stock and two hundred and fifty thousand dollars

When wine.com and business.com sold for a record-breaking $2.9 and $7.5 million, respectively, at the height of the dot-com bubble, a growing number of people saw an investment opportunity which we've come to know as cybersquatting. In fact, a brand-jacking report released by MarkMonitor this spring shows that the practice has grown by approximately 40% in the last year alone into a multi-million dollar industry.

Despite the apparent lawlessness, a legal framework does exist to protect genuine trademark owners. However, the opportunity cost involved in pursuing a domain name dispute often outweighs what most businesses are willing to invest in their presence on the Internet, let alone the risk of losing a dispute to a legal loophole. Some famous disputes that have made the news in recent years include nissan.com and PETA.org.

Prevalent as it may have been in the rest of the world, cybersquatting hadn't quite made it to the Middle East until word of Dubai's growing prosperity began to make the headlines in 2003. For example, Sama Dubai - a leading real estate company and television channel in the UAE have their domain name held to ransom with a rumored seven figure US$ asking price. One among the fortunate few who got away with a bargain is Dubai's first low cost carrier - Fly Dubai, whose domain name appears to have been sold for two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

Rollover to explode the world

I normally don't revel in other people's goof-ups, but (cross my heart and hope to die) this advertisement really did appear on Windows Live for MSN Arabia's travel service this morning. Hats off for reaching out to an untapped target audience.

Fare and square

In the face of skyrocketing oil prices over the last five years, airlines have had a tough time trying to convince the average Joe that they're better off flying than taking the train or not traveling at all.

The first and simplest model is that of the base fare, which most low cost carriers have adopted. They believe that if you can attract a prospect with a $10 base fare, that they can then be convinced to purchase a ticket at its actual fare of $200. After all, once you've trimmed away your last olive, why take the blame for the mile-high list of airport, bank, fuel company, insurance and government surcharges.

The surprising thing about this model is that it works - or will at least work until everyone else follows suit. For example, imagine picking up a pack of crisps for 5 cents, only to have the cashier hand out an itemized bill with an additional $1.95 in display, storage, transportation, municipality, cleaning and government surcharges. FMCG arguably isn't the best example, but you get the picture. The restaurant industry reacted in a similar manner when they faced rising taxes a few years ago, only to fall back to all-inclusive prices in due course. Distancing yourself from the reality of an industry to maintain sales targets only breeds commoditization and is at best a short-term solution.

Then there's the value model, which is by far the most demanding. Instead of competing or justifying price, most premium airlines create value by investing in long-term solutions such as service differentiation, improving brand perception and encouraging travel. This option is particularly difficult for small airlines to adopt because it requires substantial short-term investment. The advantage however, is that the airline and its customers won't be held ransom to market fluctuations.

Last on the list is the transparent cost model, which airlines usually adopt after either exhausting or forgoing the value creation model. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one - the airline's fares fluctuate in proportion to its costs. While it may pinch sales in the short term, you can at least rest in the consolation that the airline isn't compromising its standards. Airlines in this model tend to either shelve all non-essential services or offer it at a significantly higher premium. The key word here is brutal honesty; anything less and it's back to the base fare model.

Although the value and transparent cost models may seem worlds apart, they're actually not that different. The difference lies quite simply in whom the models benefit. While the former benefits the airline industry, the latter benefits passengers. In fact, most airlines choose a balanced mix of the two.

Family name etymology

In most parts of North India, you'll come across some interesting family names which have roots dating back to their first ancestors' professions, such as Screwvala, which literally means screw vendor. However, back down in South India, I was content with the fact that our names didn't mean much; or at least that's what I thought until earlier this week, when I stumbled across my family name's etymology.

What would you do

Last Monday, a father inadvertently left his 23-month-old son in Vancouver airport; a story which should remind you of Home Alone 2. No, the son didn't thwart a midnight heist of Duncan's Toy Chest, but nonetheless, Air Canada generously offered to fly the father all the way back from Winnipeg and to Vancouver again, which, given the minimum $438 round-trip fare, is something they weren't obligated to do, let alone in 2008.

The question I was recently asked of a similar situation was how I, as a shareholder of the company, would have reacted to the news. Even if you put aside the warm fuzziness and consider the chip off the company's bottom-line, the answer's still obvious - I'd be proud. As a customer, you'd be silly to expect them to do it again, but at least you'll know that they have a heart, which in turn builds brand empathy.

It goes against everything you may have learnt in B-school, but it works. For example, while most airlines throw in bonus reward miles and levy second bag surcharges, Air Canada offers its customers an alternate $22 discount for forgoing reward miles, checked baggage and date flexibility. Honest.

I can't quite put my finger on it, but for some odd reason the only thing that comes to mind when I hear the word PR is Prentiss McCabe. Air Canada has shown that by focusing on genuine customer satisfaction, that they've spent a fraction of what they would've paid their PR agency and achieved so much more.