//Add a feed link back to category level page
function feed_link($content) { global $post;

foreach((get_the_category()) as $category) {

if ($category->category_parent == 0) {
$cat_name = $category->name;
$cat_ID = $category->cat_ID;
$link = get_category_link( $cat_ID );

break;
}
}
$content = $content.'<br /><a href="'.$link.'">More '.$cat_name.'  posts</a>';

return $content;
}
add_filter('the_excerpt_rss','feed_link');
add_filter('the_content_rss','feed_link');

- Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics

Is this a reason to be optimistic or sign of a bubble forming?

Via: Paul Kedrosky Via Steve Jurvetson Via Ray Kurzweil

In the third quarter, and this was with the benefit of a 3.6% lift in property taxes (amazing), tax receipts at the lower levels of government fell 7% in Q3 from a year ago. Sales taxes are down 9% (seems just a bit at odds with the retail sales data, no?) and income taxes off 12%. If that is what a recovery does to fiscal finances, imagine what the backdrop will look like if the economy actually does pull a ‘double dip’.”

Via Business Insider

The New Paradigm: Put end-users first and profits will follow. (Google).

Much can be said about the corporate cultures (particularly Google’s) which have in part enabled this brand of user-centric thinking, but that is a topic for another discussion.

Time and time again Google has put the best interests of their users AHEAD of their own share-holders and short-term bottom line.  This isn’t to say that they are profit agnostic in the slightest, they happen to make very healthy profits, rather they believe that doing right by their customers will earn them more loyalty (read: money) in the long run.

To phrase it another way: Google is not successful in-spite of putting users interests first, to the contrary, they are successful BECAUSE they put users’ interests first.

Ok, so what are some examples of this seemingly “altruistic” behavior?

Example 1 (2007): Google get’s serious about ad quality by implementing a “quality score” for all of it’s search ads.

Example 2 (2010):  Google’s recent entrance into the mobile phone market, providing more openness and choice in a stagnant and typically user-unfriendly industry.

What remains to be seen is how long this type of user-centric behavior can last.  The danger is that with time, pressure to increase profit will lead to cost-cutting measures that affect their products, but in the mean-time it seems like Google and it’s management are still eating the “don’t be evil” dogfood.

You can paste the following code into you’re browser toolbar after clicking through an ad to you’re site to see if (any) referrer was passed. If it’s empty than Google Analytics will count it towards direct traffic if you don’t pass any campaign tracking parameters.

javascript:alert(document.referrer)

How do I fix this?

1. Realize that a chunk of the traffic that shows up in your “direct” bucket ~(10-15%) could be attributed to some other source e.g (ppc,display,link). This could be from click-through traffic or type-in traffic (where people see you’re ad and type in you’re url instead of clicking on it.) The latter case is essentially free advertising and while hard to measure directly should be considered into the ROI calculation for advertising. This is why it’s always important to display a url in you’re advertisement.

2. Always use tracking parameters in your urls when possible. http://www.google.com/support/googleanalytics

Case and point: Grilled Cheese Sandwiches have a whopping 212,686 fans who are willing to self-identify as Grilled Cheese Sandwich lovers on Facebook!

If most people are not willing to “self-identify” as being a fan or user of your product than you are not alone. It is the rare exception where a product is so fantastic or speaks to a certain demographic in such a way that the users feel compelled to broadcast their affinity to others in their social spheres.

A great example of a product that people self-identify with is the Apple iPod, not only is it an incredibly sexy product but it is made by a company with tremendous customer affinity and good will.

The iPod has 341,820 fans on Facebook.

By comparison Viagra has a flaccid (yes i said flaccid) 368 fans on Facebook.

While I picked an especially un-sexy (or sexy, depending on how you look at it) product to make the point, the same is true of countless other products and services. If people are not willing to self-identify as users of your product than you are going to have a tougher time promoting your product organically.

But don’t be dismayed if you are selling an unsexy product. The silver lining here of course is that there is usually a negative correlation between the propensity of people to self-identify with your product and the actual profitability or value being delivered. Products like the iPod, again, being the rare exception.

While few are willing to admit their affiliation with online dating sites like Match.com, 789 fans on Facebook.

A whopping 1,255,505 are fans of Mojitos!

I’m willing to guess that there is a strong correlation between people who have tried Match.com and are ALSO fans of Mojitos….but these numbers shed some light on the discrepancy in the willingness of people to self-identify with each product.