"If I'm meeting (PBL CEO John Alexander) I'm certainly not pulling on the skinny-leg jeans and Topshop loafers."
We did enjoy our summer board shorts without supervised management in a serviced office in the Como South Yarra @ ninemsn must be almost a decade ago (famously chosen by the Microsoft International HR $14m day spa guy Canizales - who selected an office 30 metres from his hotel room so he could "enjoy" Melbourne...)
Now sometimes "JJ" Johanna Jackman, the founding HR Manager - would come down from Sydney and ask me about the whole "surfie" thing and my underlying career aspirations - nudge, nudge. Fun times etc.
So Dot com and Web 2.0 have quite similar cultures - the difference comes in the "grown up" Web 1.0 companies who arent really web 2 and run large headcount, revenue and overhead businesses; Not cool enough to be a record label or movie studio, more modern/geeky than a ad agency. Probably most similar to a mid-high range Accenture consulting, and even traits of the law/investment bank 'what tie are you wearing' mentality with the related Patrick Bateman moments.
As much I hate praising them and I dont think they have it right (too decentralised/cell based not enough glue, but getting better) Google have the right weighting between engineering/product, new releases/deals, back end infrastructure, legal aggressiveness, hiring best people. Free Food. I've totally digressed here.
Mr Schmidt quoted on the transcript which is always a great read for google's last quarter - can anyone imagine a traditional media company reporting/delivering or more specifically "viewing" their business in this way ? (via SeekingAlpha): "The complementary strategies, things like offline ads, some of the new ad initiatives, YouTube again complements our core search and ads business. There are other examples, obviously our enterprise business. They are working, too. I'm personally impressed with the way in which the management team and employees of the company have managed the growth from an operations perspective. You can imagine the dials and everything else that has to be tuned here, and yet we have been able to take advantage of the opportunity before us, and I believe we will be able to do that for the foreseeable future."
Um, I've gone off on a google tangent, oops I think I may have spent 2 years too long in front of my computer (combined with not living in cement metropolis) so when I read this piece in The Australian (which somehow this long pre-amble is supposed to set the scene for), about Prada's recruitment of male focus group candidates, incl an "advertising" representative from ninemsn. I sorta couldn't believe what I was reading.
(Although I think it may be the journalists' Georgina's Safe predisposition to the topic which caused that. how many shoes do you really have georgina ? Is it just me, its Friday, I watched all of series 2 or whatever was on alluc.org last night of the wire, so I havent slept much at all...)
Suffice to say I won't mention the lack of Real R+D going on in Australian media. There are much more important things to discuss in The Australian : "If I'm meeting (PBL chief executive and managing director) John Alexander I'm certainly not pulling on the skinny-leg jeans and Topshop loafers, although I'll do that if I'm going out with web developers," Curtis says. "Professionally it's very much a suiting rotation of about 14 or 16 suits, although I can complement them with something like a Fendi belt or a Gucci shoe."
JA on a (PE)ople tip - "One of the key reasons CVC decided to invest was the quality of our people. You are our biggest asset." (The Age)
Now sometimes "JJ" Johanna Jackman, the founding HR Manager - would come down from Sydney and ask me about the whole "surfie" thing and my underlying career aspirations - nudge, nudge. Fun times etc.
So Dot com and Web 2.0 have quite similar cultures - the difference comes in the "grown up" Web 1.0 companies who arent really web 2 and run large headcount, revenue and overhead businesses; Not cool enough to be a record label or movie studio, more modern/geeky than a ad agency. Probably most similar to a mid-high range Accenture consulting, and even traits of the law/investment bank 'what tie are you wearing' mentality with the related Patrick Bateman moments.
FT.com : "Until internet television, Hollywood never faced genuine competition. The enduring success of the leading entertainment companies has been largely due to their stranglehold on distribution. Without access to thousands of screens, few outsiders stood a chance. The emergence of DVD technology did little to loosen this grip on distribution. Video readily downloaded over the internet has cracked the cartel. The death of the Hollywood distribution model could be vividly seen when, a year ago, DreamWorks, once the most talked-about Hollywood studio, was quietly sold for $1.6bn. Within a few months, that same $1.6bn is what it cost Google to buy YouTube."
As much I hate praising them and I dont think they have it right (too decentralised/cell based not enough glue, but getting better) Google have the right weighting between engineering/product, new releases/deals, back end infrastructure, legal aggressiveness, hiring best people. Free Food. I've totally digressed here.
Mr Schmidt quoted on the transcript which is always a great read for google's last quarter - can anyone imagine a traditional media company reporting/delivering or more specifically "viewing" their business in this way ? (via SeekingAlpha): "The complementary strategies, things like offline ads, some of the new ad initiatives, YouTube again complements our core search and ads business. There are other examples, obviously our enterprise business. They are working, too. I'm personally impressed with the way in which the management team and employees of the company have managed the growth from an operations perspective. You can imagine the dials and everything else that has to be tuned here, and yet we have been able to take advantage of the opportunity before us, and I believe we will be able to do that for the foreseeable future."
Um, I've gone off on a google tangent, oops I think I may have spent 2 years too long in front of my computer (combined with not living in cement metropolis) so when I read this piece in The Australian (which somehow this long pre-amble is supposed to set the scene for), about Prada's recruitment of male focus group candidates, incl an "advertising" representative from ninemsn. I sorta couldn't believe what I was reading.
(Although I think it may be the journalists' Georgina's Safe predisposition to the topic which caused that. how many shoes do you really have georgina ? Is it just me, its Friday, I watched all of series 2 or whatever was on alluc.org last night of the wire, so I havent slept much at all...)
Suffice to say I won't mention the lack of Real R+D going on in Australian media. There are much more important things to discuss in The Australian : "If I'm meeting (PBL chief executive and managing director) John Alexander I'm certainly not pulling on the skinny-leg jeans and Topshop loafers, although I'll do that if I'm going out with web developers," Curtis says. "Professionally it's very much a suiting rotation of about 14 or 16 suits, although I can complement them with something like a Fendi belt or a Gucci shoe."
JA on a (PE)ople tip - "One of the key reasons CVC decided to invest was the quality of our people. You are our biggest asset." (The Age)
posted by redbarren at 5:28 PM
<< Home