Tracks of 2013

As we all face an overload of "best of 2013" lists, I thought I would add to the noise by listing some of my favourite songs of 2013.  I doubt many artists have been eagerly awaiting the publication of this list after last years, but I like the exercise of documenting my year in music.  

Predictably, I have failed almost as soon as I started as a year is quite a long time and I struggle to remember the things I liked at the start of the year.  (Resolution for next year, to keep a running list).  So whilst the list is weighted to my short-term memory, those tracks from earlier in the year deserve extra praise for keeping themselves planted.

What surprised me most about 2014 was the way my consumption of music changed.  I probably listened to more music, but I bought less than I have since I was 12 years old.  On train journeys, I open Deezer rather than iTunes.  Streaming helps me be more promiscuous and exploratory with my music.  But I have suffered in that there have only been a few albums that I have worshiped this year.  That's a shame, I love listening over and over to the same album.

Anyway, my favourite songs of 2013 (in no particular order):

Ezra Furman - My Zero

A standout album of 2013 for me.  Recalls bits of Bruce Springsteen (with the sax) and lots of fun.  Deserves to be massive next year.

Foxygen - San Francisco 

Such a great pop song.  Bit of a shame they had their meltdowns, but there is something really clever about this band.  Takes balls to rewrite the melody for the line "I left my heart in San Francisco"

Laura Marling - Where Can I Go?

A great song, but also represents the album which was exceptional.  It is ridiculous how her albums continue to improve.  She is a talent to be cherished.

David Bowie - Where Are We Now?

The perfect comeback?  No hype, just a release and what a song to do it with.  I love the intimacy of this track and the video complements it perfectly.

Sweet Baboo - Motoring Home

A favourite on the Marc Riley show that I listen to on my drive home.  It has never failed to draw a smile from me.  I find it really evocative - even though we never had a motorhome, I remembered painfully long drives with my family as a kid

Euros Child - Tete a Tete

Another one from the Marc Riley show, but so much fun in this song.  Pop sensibilities with a large portion of weird.  Love it.

Milo Greene - What's The Matter

Saw this band at Latitude on the tiniest of stages and they were brilliant.  Fleetwood Mac comparisons are obvious, but more than that it is just enchanting.

Vampire Weekend - Step

Modern Vampires of the City was a real step forward for Vampire Weekend.  Always a favourite they seem to have matured whilst keeping their energy.  This song got stuck in my head and has to make this list.

Cate Le Bon - I Can't Help You

The opening riff alone has soundtracked the last few months of my life.  I love the hooks and vocals. She has an incredible voice. Disappointed to learn she isn't related to Simon Le Bon though...

Stephen Malkmus and the Licks - Lariat

I think technically this is released in Jan '14, but I've heard it lots over the last few weeks.  Pavement always a favourite of mine, but this song has formed an immediate emotional connection.  Just a great example of a great pop song.

Staves - Window Facing West

Whilst there is no particular order to this list, this song is my favourite of the year.  It melted into my soul as soon as I heard it.  So simple and beautiful.  The album is great, but this song always makes me stop to listen to it properly.  I've murdered it on the ukulele many times since, shame on me.  

There you have it.  That's about all I can remember for 2013 which is a dreadful shame as I'm sure there was lots of great music.  In 2014 I plan to listen to more and to remember what I listened too.  

Happy holidays.

Playing for Man Utd

As a Norwich City fan, I had a shock this week when I saw that Phil Jones had scored for Man Utd against the Canaries.  Obviously I've known about the "other" Phil Jones and Norwich's defensive frailty.  However, the truth is I have secretly enjoyed having a namesake and thinking that it I could be the professional footballer.  This fantasy has been stoked by Twitter, and it's been quite fun.

My Twitter handle is @PhillJones and the "real" Phil Jones' handle is @Ph1lj0nes .  Therefore, it is not surprising that people occasionally get us confused.  However, it is quite a lazy mistake, not forgetting the small (but irrationally important to me) fact that I have two L's in my name. 

When Phil first signed for Man Utd and I received my first wrong tweet, I thought that I was going to get showered with adulation.  I even thought that I could masquerade as a professional - it's always been a dream, and I think I would be better at social media than most footballers.

This idea was quickly killed when it became apparent that the only people who made the mistakes were mostly bonkers.  They were often violent, graphic in language and provided an insight into the abuse that celebrities must encounter on a daily basis.  

Part of me can understand the thrill of tweeting a celebrity and getting some form of reaction (a post-modern ding-door-dash if you will), but trolling or sending abuse is frankly disgusting.  I believe that the direct access we get to celebrities and sportsmen through Twitter is a privilege.  It is great hearing views from people direct and avoiding the spin/bias of a newspaper article.  Michael Owen has used it particularly well a couple of times when he predicted he would be misquoted.  A number of stories that would have previously been front page on the News of the World have been quashed immediately by the person in question providing their side of the story and castrating any sordid headline.  (it's also great to watch them get it wrong, or tweet whilst drunk or grumpy).

But that's all a bit boring.  Here's the fun bit, some of my favourite tweets that I've received in my time as defender for Manchester United (kind of):

@Adhieanggoro8 Apr

Fuck you @philljones

@D_Aspinall28 Apr

@NiallDoherty1 @benproctor123 @philljones ewwww I'll smack phill jones

‏@RogerJackman17 Aug

What an effort by @philljones for @ManUtd

@Fuckoffsport19 Oct

@philljones78 @philljones @philljones79 @philljones_j congratulations to 78. You have won my best cum face photo. Pic to follow.....#mufc

@adamfeldy4 Jan 12

Sometimes you've got to feel bad for a mistake like that but that was fucking hilarious #welldone @PhillJones

@bellafiqram178 Apr

Take a rest guys! Kalian Luar Biasa! Good Night @Persie_Official @WayneRooney @philljones @CH14_ @D_DeGea @7AntoV @rioferdy5 EvraDKK! Sukses

The last one is my favourite.  It's great to be considered in the same company as those guys.  Deep down, I'll always hope that it was really meant for me.

Car Buyer's Remorse (and it's all my own fault)

In February I bought a new car.  I talked about it here and I still feel passionate about the lack of support I was offered during the process.  Even though I researched lots, I was overcome by the same fears that affect almost every car buyer out there.

A few months on, I have noticed a new trend - a half life to the car buying search.  Once you've bought a car, it is easy to engage in a period of continued searching to help ratify your purchase.

I'm a nervous shopper at the best of times.  Combined with my instinctive skin-flint'ness I am regularly overcome by shopper's remorse.  But the amount I spent on our car has forced me to go through a period of making sure I got a good deal.

Being rational, I know I got a good deal.  I bought it from CarShop, a good quality supermarket who price their cars very well.  The car was an ex-fleet car which meant it had full service history, and it had relatively low (but not too low) mileage for it's age.  I had done lots of research in advance, and even in the dealership I was checking prices on Motors.co.uk.  

But actually the bigger doubt I had was whether this was the right car for my family.  My previous blog talked about how I quickly got myself to the make, model and spec I wanted but I was not guided at the point of purchase about whether my decision was the right one.  To be fair, I probably wouldn't have even entertained the sales person suggesting an alternative, I was ready to do battle on my A4.

The disappointment, particularly given I work for Motors.co.uk, is that I didn't take advantage of the tools available online.  "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" and I used that to throw myself straight into the intricacies of the different styles the A4 came in.  I should have used the bounty of lifestyle searches and buying guides that are out there. 

As a car, the A4 we've got is great.  It's quick.  It's got good space for a car of it's size and it feels luxury compared to our old Golf.  But I was probably hasty in determining my needs: it's a bit too low to the ground; it's dreadful in the snow (even though it's front wheel drive); and it only fits 2 car seats in the back.  To have future proofed myself, I should have given into Cotswold pressure and gotten a larger 4WD.  The pressure to conform with a Land Rover is enormous.  I will not give in to it!

The upside of all this, is that I enjoy every moment that I get to play on Motors.co.uk's new website (currently in testing at beta.motors.co.uk).  It is making me a better car buyer and am convinced it will help others too.  The internet is an unbelievably useful tool for car buying.  Just don't be arrogant like me, and let it help you. 

iTunes: How Can I Fight The Beast I Created?

Last night I did something I haven't done in a few months, I went onto iTunes and I bought an album.  I've not slowed in my appetite for music, but I've not been buying music like I used to.  But recently, I've found myself nostalgic for it.  A pathetic recreation of the sentiment often felt for record stores.

I've been using Deezer (a Spotify equivalent - but with better recommendations IMHO) to stream music at work and downloading the albums I want to listen to offline onto mobile.  This still seems a bit strange to me.  For £10 a month, I can have as many albums on my phone as I want?  I initially wondered if I was contributing to the decline of the music industry.  And then I got used to doing it.  It's so easy.  

But it doesn't feel like it's mine.  I'm trapped between ecosystems.  I want to take tracks from albums I've found on Deezer and integrate into my iTunes playlist but I can't.  Initially I was angry at Apple for getting me hooked on their product, but now I'm starting to work out why the service is only £10pm.  I never actually own the music.  (note to self, iTunes only licenses you the music...)

So I find myself going back to iTunes, why?  I wanted the new Vampire Weekend album.  I knew enough about it that I wanted to own it.  I can commit that I want to use it on various devices, in various playlists and when I'm dead and buried, I want it to be in my belongings that my grandchildren go through, get inspired and bring back their style in the 22nd century.

I then realised that I actually want the old iTunes.  The new version is simply something I can't understand.  I feel 30 years older when trying to find where everything is.  The old version wasn't particularly clever, but it was intuitive.  I clicked and dragged files in random places to see if they'd appear on my phone.  Luck rather than skill helped me here.

The anger returned.  Why should I continue this commitment to Apple when every download further commits me to their platform?  I don't particularly hark for the physical format.  I don't want to wait for music to arrive, I don't have time/inclination to goto shops and I don't want to get into the argument about "you've got too many CDs".  But why must I feel that I'm contributing to some evil empire when I buy?

What I want is an independent record store feel online.  I want to be able to find a site that has the depth of Rough Trade, but the ability to buy and download all albums, not just a handful.  I want to have people dedicated to the music making intelligent suggestions, not iTunes suggesting I might like the new Kasabian album or grinding my computer to a halt with Genius.  Twitter Music sounded exciting, but has ultimately revealed that as much as they may think it, musical tastes should not be predicted via an algorithm (or based on people who you have a small overlap of interest with).  The player we use should then be agnostic, files then sync seamlessly across all devices.

This is where I should announce the revolutionary new music service that I'm launching.  But I'm not, I fear that the barriers to entry are too high (I'm too lazy).  In the meantime, I find myself compelled to a situation where I can't fully trust the service providers I use, and yet can't bring myself to move back to physical music.

But perhaps if I move to vinyl...

(ps - perhaps I'm incredibly dim, but I've been trying to download iTunes on a Windows 8 computer and it NEVER works.  Perhaps this is the way to be brave enough to move away)

Giving Up Google

"Today, Google would not make a search engine that looks like Google"

This year's lent sacrifice was Google search.  It's not seemingly as addictive as chocolate and alcohol or even the BBC website as I did last year, but it is frightening how reliant I had become on Google search.  Above this, I wanted to  check  whether it was still the superior way to search.  Just because it's the biggest, have we become lazy in assuming it is the best?

I must caveat a couple of things:

1) I am a big fan of Google products.  They are one of the few suppliers to motors.co.uk who I regularly argue to spend more with. But that's because the product works.  However, our relationship of late has become strained as the algorithm's frenetic updates are throwing up bizarre (and sometimes dangerous) alterations which makes me just as keen to ratify whether Google always knows best (it doesn't);

2) I did not give up all Google products.  This might be like giving up white chocolate but not dark chocolate, but I think Chrome and Google Maps are as important to me as chocolate! Plus, it didn't serve to encourage me into new worlds of search. (Weirdly I did use Google Plus, unfortunately no one else did ...)

Chrome helped me with my sacrifice, making Bing as my default search engine.  "That's nice of Google" I thought, assuming that a Google product would only allow Google search.    It took me a couple of weeks to realise the subtlety of evilness as  I noted the prevalence of US results, I had been given Bing.com rather than .co.uk results.

Even a Google.co.uk search for "Bing" shows the US site. Google's fault or Bing's?

This highlighted one of the major UX differences for Bing v Google, the lack of regionalised (and personalised) results.  Fundamentally, the money that Google reinvests in search allows it to always be ahead of the curve.  Bing comes from a point of imitation which means Google started ahead and they continue to spend more.  Therefore for touches like this, Google is streets ahead.  

Our SEO manager at Motors.co.uk intrigued me a few months ago by stating that he preferred Bing results.  Aghast at his crisis of faith, he explained they were more reflective  of Google results before the bout of Panda updates which shook our world.  Many of these updates were right, rewarding sites rich in unique, high quality websites - but if you weren't in the top 10 of such sites, your rankings were subject to a roller coaster which continues today.

In terms of product, the results from Bing were highly relevant (once I was in the right territory setting) and if branded as Google, I wouldn't have known the difference.  The home page is really beautifully presented.  But ultimately my biggest disappointment was that the search results presentation is a shameless copy of Google.

And this is another frustration.  Today, Google would not make a search engine that looks like Google if it wasn't already in search.  I admire that their principle is to not copy - moonshots are not achieved through imitation.  Microsoft (or any other entrants) could do well to take note.

Maybe the barriers to search are just too great.  I naively entered this hoping to find the farmer's market equivalent of search engines, but i didn't.  There are other sites, but more often than not they simply run a Google search for you. I tried Quora, but the locked community and guessed replies on some questions made me quickly exit.  Worryingly for Facebook shareholders, at no point in my "search" search did I think to use Facebook.

The one place I did search (and search differently) was YouTube.  Another Google product!  Video results can be so much richer and valuable - though only for a subset.

Come Easter I didn't feel relief at going back to Google, just disappointment and an underlying hope that someone is brave enough to think differently.  Google fears it's greatest threats are Amazon and eBay as they disintermediate search in retail, but this feels too narrow.  Try searching for something on Google on your phone when walking down the street and you'll quickly realise the opportunity that exists.  Google Glass is a moonshot, but it might be a  cannier person who provides the "answer engine" which search needs to become.  I fear that the barriers are too great, but  beg for an underdog to appear.

I've got my hopes for the future, but today I'm compelled as an an advertiser to use Google because it has the largest audience, and as a user it's the easiest.  Perhaps I should have just given up chocolate... 

Viral Videos for Brands? Careful!

The Holy grail for many marketers these days seems to be creating a viral video that becomes (to quote the Daily Mail) an "internet sensation".  The reality though is that enormous budgets have been sunk into some of these projects with minimal success.  This must be particularly humbling for creative types when amateur videos like "Charlie Bit Me" and "Fenton" become, er, internet sensations. 

The intent is actually one I like - trying to convey a brand message through content that is engaging and interesting.  However, almost everyone gets it wrong.  At Motors.co.uk, we are keen to do something similar and convinced that we are creative enough.  But whenever we think about it, we over think it and it gets too big, too complex and, worse of all, not that interesting.  One day I hope that the moons will align, we will have our Eureka moment and, in a moment of madness, I will commit budget to creating something that even my Mum has heard of.

In an attempt to make this event a little less serendipitous, I have considered some of the main lessons that brands should learn when creating their next "viral hit".  

1) People aren't actually that interested

People will click through on the potential of something being interesting.  That doesn't mean they are interested.  They are hopeful of being entertained.  But they are also ruthless in switching off.  

If what you show them isn't interesting and interesting immediately, they will stop watching and they will discount your brand as an unfunny, unimaginative brand trying to invade their beloved Internet.

If you can survive it, watch this video.  What does it tell you?  How does it entertain?  If you have a weird fetish for Alfa Romeo's and running, it might be interesting.  But ultimately someone has just asked you to watch a 7 minute car advert.  Top Gear did this with an entire marathon 5 years before and even that wasn't that interesting.

The only thing you learn is that a decent budget was allocated to it.  Shame as the MiTo is a lovely car

If you don't engage immediately, the whole thing is a complete waste.

2) A second on YouTube is equivalent to a minute on TV

The Internet has almost everything you could ever want to know or see, and all within a few clicks.  YouTube shows 20 other videos that are all teasing you whilst you watch something.  The next time YouTube runs a pre-roll advert, make a note how much time is on the "you can skip in ... seconds", you'll be ready to skip in less than one and I guarantee that you won't even know the brand that is advertising.

Asking anyone to commit more than 2 minutes of their time to a video is highly arrogant.  Even if you use teaser videos, consider why someone would watch the full thing if they can get enjoyment from the teaser.  Remember, no one will find your video as interesting as you do.

Embarrassingly, I discount videos on FunnyorDie that are more than 2 minutes.  Even with professional comics, they do not have the right to more of your time than this.

I adore Billy Crystal, but in this video you have to persevere for 40 seconds.  40 seconds?!  I could read 100s of tweets in that time.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0247468f28/when-harry-met-sally-2-with-billy-crystal-helen-mirren

For true art, it is worth devoting this time and there's some great stuff online.  But for a corporate brand to convey its message?  Not a chance.

3) Imagination is greater than budget

I love the democratisation of the Internet, allowing anyone to publish and become an "internet sensation".   Brands have exacerbated this, and I believe there to be a negative correlation between budget and quality of idea.  I'm sure the really good brand virals have fortunes spent with creative agencies, but the Internet demands that things feel real.

This is a video where AutoTrader are trying to give away a car.  That's a really good competition.  Upon digging out this link there has only been 125 views though...

It's primarily made for the trade, but even though I'm in the space, my ADHD kicks in and I'm off.

4) Is it funny?  Really?

"Make an amusing video that people share and create advocacy for our brand" is a statement that should score highly on b*llshit bingo.  Nothing makes life less funny than a censoring ideas through a corporate marketing team who willingly sacrifice the spark of a joke for the value of the message.

I'm sure that running through a script or an idea hundreds of times can cloud anyones judgement of what is funny.  This is why amateur content succeeds.  It is not over thought.  That is the anathema of brand marketing.  Brands need to take risks, cut corners and keep the flame of the idea burning bright.

I have watched this a couple of times and I have no idea what's going on.  I know it's not funny though:

5) Who actually chooses to watch adverts?

Viral videos are completely different to adverts.  With enough money, you can force people to see your advert by putting it in a commercially paid for slot.  When watching TV, we understand the rules and we tolerate them.  Sometimes the adverts are quite amusing.  But there are no rules online.  You can try and seed the video through MPUs and pre-rolls, but consumers have ad-blindness.  You are almost invisible.

Therefore, you have to make the video highly engaging and entertaining (see points 1-4 above for how difficult this is).  But even if you make the best video, you are in the lap of the gods as to whether anyone watches it.  PR can help,  but journalists are even more sceptical than consumers.  Seeding as pre-roll on YouTube will help, but you've got just 5 seconds to make it worthwhile and still expect the consumer to share it.

The great thing is that there is so much traffic on YouTube and the Internet in general, that good content will rise to the top. Brands can support this, but it is hard work.  I find low view counts on brand videos painfully embarrassing.  

Remember, this is what you are competing against:

The first 17 seconds are all about Fosters, but I am compelled to watch this video.  Yes it has cheated by having a big budget, but I maintain that the imagination behind the concept is greater than the budget.

Why bother?

Good point.  Unless you are confident that you are creating something that, if you didn't work for the company, even in your most depressed or bored moments you would still find interesting then don't.  But if you are able to think of something that will engage and entertain in a superficially short period of time, then do it - it could be great.  

To misquote JFK - we do things not because they are easy, but because they are difficult.

Hug a Car Buyer

Given my role at Motors.co.uk, you might presume that I would be well placed in searching for and buying a car.  But the truth is that I was absolutely petrified going through the process.  It highlights to me the massive opportunity that awaits Motors.co.uk to go beyond the traditional classified offering and provide real confidence to the consumer.

Even though I run a used car website, I am not a natural car enthusiast.  I have a reasonable knowledge, but nowhere near a natural interest in the variety of cars.  This has always left me emasculated amongst friends and family who have an encyclopaedic knoweledge of cars (my brother could identify makes of cars by their headlights by the age of 3) - another thing to put on my growing list of insecurities.  In short, I consider myself a typical (scared) customer.  

It's dangerous to think of yourself as the market, but I was intrigued by my approach, my fears and behaviours.  A couple of points marked my car search process, months of research online and a single retail site visit because I couldn't be bothered to go further.  I'm not sure if this was because I felt sufficiently empowered (I had done a LOT of research) or because on balance I knew that I had found a car that pretty much met my requirements and I was at a retailer who I felt I could trust.   Whilst I don't consider myself normal, my behaviour was normal - consumers are visiting more and more websites in their research whilst making fewer visits to the dealer themselves. 

Obviously the internet was key in my research process, it was also invaluable in the purchase too.  As I was walked into buying the car, I regularly took time out to look at similar prices of cars on the Motors.co.uk iPhone app.  This gave me confidence that i) the car was priced in-line with others so the convenience of buying on first visit could be justified; and ii) that the salesperson might view me as a "knowledgeable" buyer and not try to sell me a dud. 

However, the fact I felt obliged to do that shows just how scared I was face-to-face with a sales professional.  Paranoid about being sold a dud is a fallacy as I was buying from a reputable retailer who I know has a longer-term business model than ripping off one poor mug.  But my fear was there nonetheless and I am sure it is there with almost every other consumer.  This needs to change.

There are two major routes that I see.  Firstly, consumers will become increasingly comfortable buying online.  Even with a non-homogenous product that is a used car, I had a very good basis for believing that this car was right for me.  My retail experience could have been made much more enjoyable had I been offered the option to test drive the car at home.  I am convinced that I would have happily bought the car rather than the nervous twitches I had at the dealership as I was walked into a purchase.  For new car sales, this is a no brainer.

The second route is for retailers to provide a great level of customer service.  There will always be some differences between volume and prestige brands, but good customer service with sales people who want to build a long-term relationship should be a united aim.  I experienced buyers remorse when I got the car home, wondering why the sales person was so happy to have me buy the car, rather than being grown up enough to accept that a mutually beneficial transaction had taken place.  To overcome this, the consumer will use the internet to arm themselves when going "into battle".  Take myself, not only did I know the make and model, but I knew the trim, mileage range and price that I wanted.  At no point was I asked, "why do you think that's the right thing for you?".  There may well have been better alternatives for me, but I had gone in with such a game face that it being about getting in and out as quick as possible.  I dearly wanted someone to say, "I understand, you've made the right choice" and then give me a hug.

There are many dealers who are making real strides at improving the consistency of their sales process and investing in long-term customer retention, but I do believe that there is a real opportunity for the industry to find ways to better increase overall confidence with consumers.  If we can do this, I believe that we will make car buying an enjoyable process and not just one that is entered into when life circumstances dictate that we need to change our car.  The number of transactions in the UK is stifled by this nervousness.  

At Motors.co.uk, we are having great fun brainstorming ways to be part of this.  The next time I buy a used car, I want to drive away not praying that the car won't fall to pieces.  My recent purchase didn't, and it won't, but I never got the hug that I needed.  What if all or part of that hug came online?