Visa went and did it.  They created a Facebook application for small businesses as part of their pushback against American Express and their successful Plum Card launch.  Cool.  I'm seeing and hearing their commercials everywhere, and while it lacks the coolness of the barrista asking me where I got the card, Visa is a big part of our business as well, and I'm definitely going to see what they're up to. 

This is also great for Facebook, as it's a step towards professional networking and away from strictly a social platform.  Millions of people are on Facebook hoping to use it for business purposes, and this seems like a step in the right direction.

There's just one problem.  It's yet another example of a company assuming that having a destination is the same as giving value.  It takes time to get value out of a social network.  Time spent on Facebook is not time spent selling, managing, marketing, or doing your accounting.  And time spent on Facebook's Visa application is time spent away from your own social networks.

It's a fine resource, but there are already thousands of great resource out there for small businesses.  It seems like all they are really doing is taking advice from Entrepreneur, the Wall Street Journal, and other already available resources.  In other words, they're replicating services and content from other places on Facebook.  That's great, but did it need a big budget and a campaign?  I'm dying to know how much it cost and who did it, and the measure of effectiveness after a bunch of people download the app.

The site says that you can Grow, Manage, and Connect.  You may get good information, but it's highly doubtful you'll be able to make any money from joining this club.

Here's what you should do if you want to make money on Facebook.

1) Start your own group and manage your own network.
2) Provide value to your readers, and determine if they would rather read a blog, an e-mail, or your Facebook account.
3) Track results.
4) Download the Visa App, but make sure your work is pointing to a site you control where you can measure and analyze results.

I was really excited when I read the Relevant Mind post about the Visa network, but in the end, it was not what I was looking for. Let's check back in six months.

I'd be wildly interested to see what Vias

Even while TiVo'ing past commercials, this one caught my eye. Sour Patch Kids - of all products - rolls out with this nervy spot on basic cable. The spot itself is memorable - if only for its weirdness. But it has a deliciously synthetic look to the whole commercial. A very Dr. Seuss-like quality to it. I suppose in reality it was the only way to introduce a Chucky doll sized candy that scares and then comforts the girl.

Honestly this is one of those candies I haven't eaten or thought of in years. So if the brand needed to revitalize sales and rekindle old flames - it required a pretty remarkable campaign. I'm not claiming thisis remarkable, but it did warrant me getting Jim in the room to see it on replay.

Funnier still, if you go to sourpatchkids.com it will redirect you to soursweetgone.com - which is unavailable and throwing up exception errors.

This one goes in my weird but good category.

The ad may be a joke, but the point is well made. The full microsite is here, brought to you by GyroWorld. Fabulous.

Thanks for finding this, Pret!   

This is A great play on words. Beautiful ad. Great idea. Clever.

Blogging Is Good For Business, at least that's what the Chicago Tribune is reporting, in a piece that alternates between a good focus on how to blog and some terrible suggestions for the right software.

Referencing Liz Strauss of Successful-Blog and Derrick Sorles of Business Blog Consultants, this article in the Tribune reflects a kind of wild-eyed wonder that blogs are good for business, and while it's always positive to read coverage of business blogging, the article is basically a profile piece of blogging consultants. That's great for Liz and Derrick, but it does make for some very funny moments.

The Bad:

1) Links to ads for Chicago cities and Google, but not for Business Blog Consultants or Successful-Blog.
2) GoDaddy Templates suggested as a good alternative (Adding on a "blog" from your hosting company is a bad idea.  Build a Typepad or Wordpress or even Blogger blog to get into the search engines quickly).

The Good:

1) They focus on the effort it takes to craft a message and publish it via the blog
2) They stress this is not a full-time gig, but one that does take 10 hours a week.

As I said, I'm glad to see the press, but wondering why the bigger successes aren't being showcased.  If you have blog case studies, be sure to contact me and we'll post them on blogcasestudies.com.  The more successes we have as an industry, the better off we'll be as individual companies.

I went to Blockbuster this weekend.  The wife and I canceled our movie package because we were tired of bad movies, and we were jonesing for a little film action.

We've spent maybe $50 at Blockbuster in the last year, well down from the $200 or so we spent in years past.  As Blockbuster goes through its financial problems, it's instructive to understand the true reasons behind their fall.

I'm not so sure it was technology.  Any tech guru will tell you that Charter OnDemand, NetFlix, Amazon, TiVo and downloadable movies killed off Blockbuster.  I don't think it's true.  I think Blockbuster is in a death spiral because movies have gotten so bad that no one wants to rent them anymore.

Here's why:

My wife and I discovered that we could rent free movies from the library, so we started doing so, and were surprised at all the titles we could get.  When we watched the movie, if it were really bad, we'd  turn it off and insert another.  We learned to do this with TiVo, as it didn't make sense that we should waste our most valuable resource, time, when the cost of the movie was zero. 

When you pay for a movie, even when it's just a few dollars, you tend to watch it.  Most people do, at least.  It's some ingrained quality that we hate wasting money, and not watching a movie is an admittance that we're going to lose that money.  Even though it costs us more in time to watch it, there's hope that something in the movie is worthwhile (there's a lesson in there about opportunity versus transactional costs). 

The fact that we still go to Blockbuster is a triumph of hope over experience.  In the last few years, just about every movie we get from Blockbuster is horrible.  These are all new releases, and we're constantly disappointed.  Action flicks, with all of their CGI, really need to be seen on the big screen, and when you watch them on a smaller screen (If 40" can be considered small), the effect is you lose the effects and have to watch the horrible acting.  I still cry for what might have been when Phantom Menace comes on, a movie I saw 7 times in the theater.

So is it Blockbuster, or is the tripe that Hollywood sends us?  I went to Blockbuster, and wanted to rent a new release.  It's fun to go through the aisles, in a way that RedBox, Netflix, or that painful interface Charter makes me sit through can't compete with.  But if my choice is going to be $3.99 for a movie I fear is going to be bad, then the excitement of being entertained is nullified.

I want to feel good about my purchases, even if they are just a few dollars.  It's why I don't watch many movies at the theater anymore.  Same problem, five times the price.   Ultimately, I think Hollywood forgot what business they were in.  They think they're in the movie business.  They're not.  They're in the entertainment business, and the occasional good flick isn't enough to convince me to prop up their distributors anymore.