Old Spice’s viral video marketing campaign first aired during 2010’s Superbowl weekend. It went on to increase the company’s revenue by 107%. The campaign had 40 million views. It increased Old Spice’s Twitter followers by 2,700%. It lifted Facebook interaction by 800%. All these viewers turned the Old Spice YouTube channel into the all-time most viewed channel.003
The campaign became viral because it could connect to the audience emotionally. People could relate to the concept of the video. The idea was original, and the content was enticing without pushing the products. The ad encouraged social conversation and sensitivity around the beauty of a woman. It empowered women, evoking feelings of warmth, joy, and confidence. Empowerment is a powerful tool, which can enhance the brand image of your company. So build an uplifting relationship with your audience.
In 2005, I invested in a company called Tabblo (acquired by HP in 2007), and had the good fortune to work with an outstanding entrepreneur, Antonio Rodriguez. Tabblo did manage to achieve good viral growth, but around the same time YouTube was launched and managed to achieve explosive viral growth. In the process of looking at these two companies, we learnt several important things about virality. This post digs deeper into what it takes to achieve viral growth, and examines the key variables that drive viral growth.
Facebook’s algorithm determines the types of content that an individual user sees, and according to Facebook, the goal in 2018 is to give users “…less public content like posts from businesses, brands, and media.” This typically results in less trending content from businesses, but rather content from publications and individuals. Of course, when a product gets featured in trending content on Facebook, it gets a lot of attention.
इकनॉमिक टाइम्स| ઈકોનોમિક ટાઈમ્સ | Pune Mirror | Bangalore Mirror | Ahmedabad Mirror | ItsMyAscent | Education Times | Brand Capital | Mumbai Mirror | Times Now | Indiatimes | नवभारत टाइम्स | महाराष्ट्र टाइम्स | ವಿಜಯ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ | Go Green | AdAge India | Eisamay | IGN India | NavGujarat Samay | Times of India | Samayam Tamil | Samayam Telugu | Miss Kyra | Bombay Times | Filmipop | Games App | MX Player
Thanks for your ideas I love them, also agriculture investment can be nice like tomato hothouse with half the produce for the grower and the sales profit for the grower The genocide against the international Japanese community some 2 million in the European Union at least can break the world economy and leave the One Sunrise War for True Japanese Survival the only alternative
Question: You mention receiving $200k of passive income a year, but your chart shows half of that coming from real estate holdings, and reading between the lines it appears that you hold mortgages against those holdings. Then you conclude that $200k/yr of passive income should be enough to live comfortably anywhere in the world. So are you subtracting your real estate expenses (taxes, insurance, mortgage payments, maintenance, remote property management company fees, etc.) when you report your passive income from those properties? Really I think it’s the net (after taxes and everything) that tells us what is left over to “spend” on living, right? When I set up my spreadsheet to retire early at age 47, I calculated the after-tax income I would need to live. Then I compared that to my income streams (estimating tax on the taxable income streams) to measure the surplus/shortfall. Also some good advice from GoCurryCracker: If you can minimize your taxes so you’re in the 15% tax bracket, you can possibly receive tax-free long term capital gains. I agree with your philosophy that time is more important than money as we age. I am not sure I agree with a philosophy that is fixated on needing such a large income, and would rather minimize taxes if it’s all the same on the happiness meter. Furthermore, having 20 plus income sources in the name of diversification adds stress and requires more management (TIME!). I think this is fine for those of us while young, as we have the energy to work hard. But as time becomes more important, the extra headache of managing, planning, and buying/selling our assets becomes a resented hindrance on par with the resentment we felt when working for an employer and fighting traffic each day to go to a job we hated. Every thing we own in actuality owns us, by virtue of its demands on our time and affections, and that includes investments. It also includes our home, and is a good reason for downsizing. As long as we have food on our table, a roof over our heads, and clothes on our bodies, what more do we need? I think we need to consider freeing ourselves from the weight of the chains of managing too many ventures. Personally, I plan on investing in no more than 5 simultaneous ventures ever, with the exception of some IRAs that I just plan to let sit for the next 20 years (and therefore no thought or anxiety required).
Logan is a CPA with a Masters Degree in Taxation from the University of Southern California. He has been featured in publications such as LendingTree, Debt.com, and CreditCards.com on topics ranging from paying down debt to using credit card points to saving money on taxes. After spending nearly 10 years in public accounting, including 5 with professional services firm Ernst & Young where he consulted with multinational companies and high net worth individuals on their tax situations, he launched Money Done Right in 2017 to communicate modern ideas on earning, saving, and investing money.
Hi, it’s probably been brought up before, but the statement “you can’t touch pre-tax retirement accounts without a penalty until 59.5” is incorrect. You can touch the traditional 401k accounts with a SEPP (substantially equal payment plan), and not pay the 10 percent penalty. You can also touch a Roth without the 10 penalty using the same strategy, although I understand you will pay taxes so you lose the Roth’s advantage. When I found this out, I stopped contributing to Roths because I wanted to retire early. Who knows if they will even live to age 59.5? So many people don’t!
On-demand: More than a decade after “The Blair Witch Project” and its viral-before-viral-was-a-thing campaign, the producers of “Paranormal Activity,” who made their 2007 film for about $15,000, invited those interested in the film to demand their local theaters show the movie. The result? A wide, nationwide release and more than $107 million in box office revenue in the U.S. alone. (2, 3)