Whatever you’re looking for on the Internet—entertainment, a product to purchase, a connection to a community—in most cases, you’re likely to receive an overwhelming amount of results to choose from. These relevant search results are valuable to you… Or are they?

Published on : http://method.com/

More and more commentators are wondering if the tools we create to give us more choices—such as search engines—are delivering less variety, ultimately limiting chance discoveries and exposure to new ideas.

On the BBC’s The Culture Show, Aleks Krotoski recently examined the role of serendipity as an online commodity, questioning whether the Internet is as innovative as we think. She points out that computers have the unique ability to make valuable, unseen connections for us. Instead of maximizing that potential, our search filters keep us focused on only the most relevant information.

Alex explains, “We will never have the opportunity to bump into something truly new, because the machines are predicting our futures based on our past preferences, creating an infinite loop of cultural homogenization.”

The concern over the consequences of homogenized choice is not entirely new. David Byrne noted in his book Bicycle Diaries, that in many urban developments gentrification leads to separation, rather than integration, of different social and cultural groups. This separation leads to less collisions between ideas and the stifling of creativity.

David describes, “I think online communities tend to group like with like, which is fine for some tasks, but sometimes inspiration comes from accidental meetings and encounters with people outside one’s own demographic, and is less likely if you only communicate with your ‘friends’…”

Other commentators also question if recommendations based on a combination of one’s preferences, social profile, and history of consumption really offers new opportunities. In an article for Design Week,Steve Price discussed how the role of media retailers is changing in the age of the “Filter Bubble.”

“Google, as amazing as it is, can only answer the questions you ask it,” he states. “It cannot tell you which questions you should be asking. Search results and news feeds are all now influenced by engines that take as a point of entry all that they know about you and spit back the information they think you’ll want. What is on the screen when you open Spotify? Recommendations on new music based on its knowledge of you. What happens if you visit Rough Trade Records? You often leave with albums and music from artists you’ve never heard of, having heard it played in the store, or from talking to one of the employees who clearly live and breathe music.”

Concerns aside, the tech community seems to be moving in the direction of “smarter” recommendation engines. For example, The Filter founded by Peter Gabriel. These developments suggest we might soon see recommendations for vacuum cleaners based on one’s music tastes. For example, a robotic system called HyperActive Bob has been developed to anticipate customer behaviors in fast food restaurants. This includes correlating a customer’s type of car with what he or she might order, but this particular filter has failed to prove successful so far.

When the self-referential nature of media increases the speed of recycling ideas in film, design, music, fashion and global culture as a whole, what will it take to receive truly original recommendations? What can we design into user experiences that will allow for the unexpected?

Imagine the possibilities of using “dumber” algorithms that will allow us to be pleasantly surprised by serendipity wherever we are…and whenever we “don’t” expect it.

If you liked this article we recommend: http://youtu.be/9ZlBUglE6Hc

Alexander Grünsteidl & Nikki Roddy @ Method

Barcode and location based price comparison services, including augmented reality applications which overlay information on top of the physical world, are about to become mainstream. This will have a profound impact on business models in retail, will in the long run affect the way we conduct transactions in public space and will impact urban planning …

going shopping with a camera

Lets cast our imagination a few, lets say ten years forward. You walk by your local deli and your GPS enabled mobile phone, or some other piece of location aware wearable technology vibrates. A few days ago you agreed to dinner with friends and set a reminder on a service like reQall, to pick up a bottle of wine in the case you are in the vicinity of the shop. You walk into the shop and pick up a nice looking bottle. You scan the barcode  with Redlaser and confirm that this is indeed a variety you might like based on previous purchases. Whilst you are glancing at an expert review of the bottle and compare the rating with an trustworthy online forum, you notice an alert that shows the prices and locations of nearby shops offering the same bottle of wine. It turns out that another shop down the road offers a three-for-two deal and you decide it is worth to walk the couple of minutes.

T-Mobile G1 Shop Savvy Demo

In this scenario the retailer who made the effort to inspire you to consider this particular bottle of wine, loses out on the deal. You’ve been to his store before, it’s in a convenient location, the store has a great ambience and on previous visits the staff seemed knowledgeable, but in the end the deal offered at the box selling warehouse merchant around the corner is too good to let go. For various reasons the deli on the high-street has to calculate higher margins to be able to offer the level of service that attracts customers, but is unable to compete once information on price is available freely. In German there’s even a term for this: “Beratungsddiebstahl”. Loosely translated as “Customer Advice Theft”.

This scenario can be played out with a variety of products in different markets. Retailers will consistently loose out on sales and have their customers pulled away, even if they offer better services, as soon as any unfavorable price differences exist. It’s not long before the shop offering additional service will have to close. Sounds familiar?  In fact over centuries, changing availability and access to information, together with increasing mobility have been the major forces to alter the functional lay-out of our cities.

Actually this scenario is about to become reality much sooner. Most underlying technologies have been around for a while and many similar applications are expected to appear on iPhone, Android, Nokia and other platforms within the coming year.

More interestingly … I believe the above scenario will never become common place in the form described, as it becomes obsolete as soon as it is realized.

The resulting closure of shops in this scenario has unintended effects for the winemaker, affecting distribution and in succession the availability of his wine. This effect is already noticeable on the UK high street where a variety of stores are squeezed out of existence. (Sure the winemaker has the opportunity to sell his wine online, but that is a different story)

A BBC Click recently reported in an interview with a German games developer, as the amount of independent stores on the high street is shrinking, that smaller computer and console game manufacturers have diminishing opportunities to reach out to customers. According to the report less than 50 independent buyers for computer and console games are left in the UK. Smaller manufacturers find less and less outlets, few are able to set up their own branded shops and find it increasingly difficult to compete with large global brands both on and off-line.

One common strategy is to make products incomparable in retail. Companies will revert to old tricks, differentiating virtually the same product, lets say a compact camera called Gotak CS-y03 and the similar Gotak BS-09 to offer exclusive deals to different retailers. The cameras are virtually the same whilst the BS-09 includes a seldom used auto-smile-detection software feature, added on firmware level, allowing to price this product with a slightly different margin to remain competitive. A variety of similar strategies are deployed by manufacturers that produce multiple brands on top of the same product platforms to diversify margins for their retailers.

Drive by advertising

Lets look at a similar scenario, but from a slightly different perspective. Instead of the proactive case, having intentionally set a location based reminder to buy wine, we now have a more passive approach; contextual advertisements based on your location, time of day, weather, social context, your diary, mood and any other measurable patterns.

In a recent discussion amongst friends, we were talking about the soon to emerge widespread application of location based services, especially the common scenarios of GPS type location tracking together with geo-coded data. This will allow for example menus of restaurants to pop up on your mobile phone as you drive through the city, receiving alerts in the form of vouchers as you pass hotspots in synch with the preferences set in your profile. This will include time and location limited deals, offering selective access through coupons, to content and products available in your proximity. You can expect every few hundred meters yet another attempt to sell you some perfume or wet your appetite  for the latest lunchtime pizza deal. You can easily picture yourself driving down your local high-street or approaching a shopping mall from the highway, being bombarded by the same Starbucks, Pizza Express, H&M, Footlocker ect messages on your phone.

We realized that many of these location aware scenarios anticipate a variety of choices from a diversity of retailers situated in brick and mortar locations, vying for our attention. Instead we will be seeing the same messages appear repeatedly on our mobile devices whilst we traverse our homogenized public environments.

Starbuck locations in central London

Or am I wrong and these technologies will enable retailers to compete again on a local level; shops can now be “discovered” away from the well trodden paths of the high-street pavements, disperse footfall to side alleys by pointing potential customers to walk “around the corner”. This might diminish the value of “location, location, location” and level the real estate prices, so independent shops can manage their margins on a more competitive level with out of town online warehouses? The high-street will increasingly become a proxy to the online world and we expect new types of retail hospitality type of environments to start populating the the spaces vacated by retailers relying on traditional transactions.

from Flickr group

Augmented reality applications

This is not an argument against the development and commercialization of these technologies. To the contrary we are excited about for example  Augmented Reality applications, which currently start appearing on consumer level devices. for example Layar Wikitude by  Mobilizy and Delicious Monster using registration barcodes on books. cds and dvds creates a seemless link between books owned on your bookshelf and online recommendations from Amazon. These technologies and affiliated services emerge as part of the evolving nature of our networked society. Many of these applications are being realized on a “can do” basis. Relatively cheap and computationally powerful mobile platforms are now sufficiently distributed in the population. Online access to rich geo-tagged databases is rapidly growing. The time is ripe for services to come out of labs and offer opportunities for many start-ups to grab a piece of a potentially huge market.

What will happen?

It’s not surprising that retailers wont be too happy with people holding their mobiles too close to products on shelves and will want to prevent taking pictures inside their shops. Currently many places forbid photography, citing the right to “privacy” of fellow customers. But how will shops be able to enforce this? “Checking” your phone whilst taking a picture and running a price comparison app is hardly detectable by security staff. It’s a lost game similar to the early days of digital cameras, when concert visitors were told to leave their camera’s by the entrance because of possible copyright infringement. Now, a few years later, we are instead encouraged to take as many pictures as we like and upload them as soon as possible to a Facebook fan page. In the long run we will need a way of dealing with a situation were many products, including digital spectacles and brooches, will have camera type technology build-in and continuously store and compare image data online. This will lead to a situation where brand outlets will be inviting people to publish as many pictures as they want, to demonstrate brand loyalty , whilst department type stores who aggregate products through buyers who negotiate purchase and sales prices with the manufacturers and suppliers, will want to avoid people comparing prices.

Price aggregator sites serve a self defeating purpose. Once a site emerges the price differences between comparable products will run down to bare minimum levels, just about covering margins to sustain the cost of warehousing and delivery. A situation only maintainable by companies operating on sheer volume . At some point most prices will become almost similar and the reason to exist, the very purpose of the site, makes itself obsolete.

What’s next?

Location based price comparison technologies, if applied straight out of the lab to the current retail environment, are plain naive from a business point of view. We can and will not be able to run them successfully for any length of time unless we develop radically different business models that take into account how products are introduced and exposed across all communication channels and customer touch-points.

The emergence of these technologies is is unstoppable. The effect of these will be different, in different geographic locations, none the less the impact will be profound. We need to reconsider business models considering new forms of pricing, sales strategies, haggling, financing and distribution. We will need to understand the role of up- and especially cross-selling in these new sales environments. It will affect how we will encounter public spaces in the near future and we better prepare for it. Already now many traditional retail typologies are vanishing from the high street e.g. The Bookstores, Music-stores, travel agents, electric retailers are all becoming extinct. I don’t believe we should keep these types artificially alive in a wave of nostalgia. Instead we should actively encourage projects that consider how pubic space will be affected by new technologies and how we can take this massive opportunity to design appropriate solutions around innovative business models. We should not make yet again the mistake of watching and condemning something like music piracy, in the mean time ignoring to develop alternative business and experience models that match the sign of the times. Whilst these technologies will have considerable impact on the way communities interact in the near future, politicians are probably still ignorant of what is emerging. Once we planned cities for cars, now we might require complete new approaches to urban planning, based on integrating brick and mortar with an overlay of the virtual.

further reading:

ShopSavvy by Big in Japan for Google Android

The Future of Retail: Instant Price Match, Ad Lab

Stores Clueless About Mobile Barcode Scanning Applications?, Read Write Web

Barcode Shopping – The Future Of mCommerce?, Lester Madden

The guru of retail, Paco Underhill, has presented a verdict on the current state of digital signage in shopping environments at the Digital Signage Expo in February 2009. His critique was pretty rigorous. His proposals for improving the application of digital signage are very much in line with our own observations and the conclusions we’ve drawn.The title of Paco Underhill’s talk was Good digital signage is not ‘cool’   It was for the first time that there was critique in an other wise self-congratulating industry. As the industry speaks about all the successful implementations and its rapid growth, most”signs” on the high street point to the contrary. Few hyped implementations of digital signage, beyond the massive billboards on Piccadilly Circus in London or Times Square in New York, survive beyond the first year. One company after another promises yet another revolutionary display technology with increased light output and therefore attracting more views on the high street or inside malls. Smaller in-shelf pop-up displays come and go. The list of failed examples in recent years is long. I keep documenting bad examples popping up in regular intervals on the streets of London, especially Oxford Street. It doesn’t take much to witness this yourself. Just position yourself near a digital signage display and observe people passing by… what do you see happening?

The intentions are correct, the choice of technologies mostly adequate, but unfortunately it is the implementation, the attention to detail, which is done so often wrong. It’s like visiting a restaurant with the most promising menu, but if either, or both the service and the quality of the actually served food does not live up the promise, the experience will be broken and the customer will not return.

As a friend mentioned in recent discussion, this industry (like many others by the way) is based on justification by powerpoint; eg. X million walk each year on Oxford street, that gives Y amount of potential eyeballs, will lead to Z amount of follow ups and hopefully initiate N conversions, which allows us to price this service at M Pounds Sterling … really? The only reasonably accurate figures in this equation is the number of people walking the street and the cost of the equipment included in M, the cost of the service.

Paco Underhill’s key insights:

• Too high-tech means its easily broken - We have witnessed many examples, including the Prada dressing room, fail under the burden of technology maintenance. We have heard of plenty recent examples at well known retailers -
• The customer is easily bored - Cool interactive video installations in public spaces seldomly attract repeat visitors-
• Poor placement because of no understanding of sightlines - who will stand still in the high street, twist their head sideways, to watch a video clip of something they otherwise can watch on TV. Who looks upwards to a monitor fixed to the ceiling when the products yoru are searching for are presented below eye level?-
• Budgets blown on hardware, software forgotten – How often do design companies receive last minute requests to fix up an installation that has been months in the making?- 
• Not enough customization for the local market
• Audio can induce employee sabotage - Most audio we have seen in public spaces, even when using hi-tech through the window loudspeakers is at a useful barely audible level to the passerby’s -
• Digital signage attracts and is within reach of “evil nine-year-olds” – An old saying in product development; if you want to test resistance to breakage and level of vandal proof just take your product to a primary school.

some of our insights:

• cost of long term maintenance is seldomly calculated into the overall service development of a digital signage installation.
• few designers understand the real implications to design for digital signage. It’s very different from designing for TV ads or banner ads on the web, where the user is at least partly engaged with an activity already in front of her. Digital signage designers need to have the senses of an architect to understand placement and relationships in space, and the sensibilities of a composer to understand timing, rhythm and  timbre.
• apart from understanding sight lines, few developers and in-house merchandising teams seem to understand that the placement of digital signage is part of an overal user experience, The signage is not just an add-on but an integral part of the shop floor lay-out.

Paco Underhill’s key recommendations – with some of our notes:

1. Our visual language is evolving faster than our spoken word. ”Our ability to process images has never been better, but our eyes have never been more tired.”

2. A lot of digital signage is still technology in search of an application. ”The problem with anything cool is that it is directly linked to ‘uncool,’”. “What may be cool to someone the first or second time may not be on the fifth or sixth visit.” ”There is a fascination with hardware, while the attention to messaging is misconstrued.” – A lot of interactive installations in public spaces, unless really well designed and engaging, turn out to be “one-trick-ponies” similar to the ubiquitous  projected water ripples which are triggered by your footsteps, which now can be found in random locations all around the world. - 

 3. We are now more time poor than we are money poor.“Those who design in-store media have a lack of understanding of the clock that is inside our heads,” - A typical 30 seconds TV ad is completely out of place in an environment where a message needs to succeed in a fraction of a second. In fact we are becoming increasingly adept to filtering surplus messages out of our environment and shield ourselves from unwanted information.

4. People are looking for universal applications. Instead, they should be more sensitive to the local issue. Content that may be relevant in one area of the country may be completely ineffective elsewhere.

5. Good digital signage should “create placemaking” and serve as a gathering point. - This is at the foundation of the type of new “retail” environments we, at dwb, are developing. Well positioned (interactive) displays can facilitate social interactions and become excellent places to present relevant messages in the most appropriate context. One of the recent examples we have described in an earlier post are the way finding kiosks scattered around the Westfield shopping centre in London. We need to create social interactions around digital signage, instead of providing just background noise. 

In the next post we will investigate recent examples of two of the largest retailers, Karstadt in Germany and Tesco in the UK, having problems with their pioneering digital signage networks. They could have saved a lot of investment had they listened to Paco Underhill in the first place.

In recent months two large European retailers announced that they were to close down extensive digital signage networks across hundreds of shops. What has happened to this much anticipated technology and what was the outcome of the initial marketing drive?We put together 2 use cases of Karstadt in Germany and Tesco in the UK:

Use case Karstadt Instore TV

September 2007: Karstadt press release  and   Karstadt Does Digital Signage

The German retailer Karstadt is to install an average of 45 flat screens in 52 of their top stores. If that is the case then 1 million customers could be reached daily…. The retailer plans to invest tens of millions in an “Instore TV” system. All 52 subsidiaries will be equipped with up to 45 big-screen LCD displays on which company products and commercials by partners will be broadcast. Wolf anticipates that the constant stream of multimedia will attract more customers to his stores. He also expects they will stay longer and, naturally, buy more.

March 2008: Karstadt Instore-TV mit konzeptionellen Schwächen   (Karstadt Instore-TV with conceptual weak-points) 

In this article the writer describes how a lack of follow through on the promise, breaks the whole experience. Instead of having dedicated messages, based on monthly changing themes, attached to specific location related to a particular product, video clips seem to pop up in random places, or all places simultaneously, eg an ad for Philips LED lamps shows up in the Jeans department. Another example is the lousy placement and integration of the displays in the overall concept of the stores. There is usually some broken monitors somewhere. The length and type of messages contained in the clips. Lack of opportunity to sit down and “consume” some of the messages. In fact he notes, he seems to be the only one watching. 

September 2008: Karstadt legt Instore-TV auf Eis (Karstadt puts Instore-TV on ice)

The article notes that the Instore-TV had aimed to promote lifestyle messages directly at the Point of Sale. The idea was to combine information produced by the brands related to the products on display and combine these with regularly changing in-house themes. 8 million Euro had been invested so far with an estimated return of 40 million Euro.

resume: from the outside it looks like a case of bad management communication across different layers within the organisation that led to not getting buy in from all parties involved and resulted in a confused implementation.

… and another use case Tesco:  Tesco TV later renamed Tesco Screens

March 2004 : Tesco TV launches adverts as you shop (source: independent.co.uk)

… Tesco TV will be available in 300 of the company’s 850 stores by the end of this year. Around 50 screens will be fitted in each of these shops in a move that will cost about £20m … A whole new channel, called Tesco TV, will provide consumers with the company’s own promotional material, as well as advertising from third parties, such as shampoo or petfood suppliers … The channel will also offer shoppers “helpful hints” on things like foods recipes and babycare, as well as news and weather updates. The television sets in a particular aisle will show material of relevance to the products available in that part of the store …

March 2004 : Small screen, big profits? Tesco leads the in-store revolution  (source brandrepublic.com)

… With the roll-out of its in-store television system this month, Tesco is hoping to circumvent the time lag and memory lapse problem by hitting up consumers right at point of sale…

… The screens will be in “zoned areas”: a power aisle (the central aisle from which all other aisles are accessed); the grocery aisle; health and beauty; beer, wine and spirits; home entertainment; counters (for instance the delicatessen); and the café. Each TV will show information that is directly related to the products in its area…

At  the time, the first sceptical voices were noticed: … you simply can’t just put up a screen anywhere and expect consumers to engage or advertisers to advertise … “You have to have a very well thought- out client strategy … “I’m very worried when I see new companies within the market putting up screens and not thinking if they are reaching the right target audience.” …

January 2006 : Tesco in-store TV falters over lack of advertisers (source brandrepublic.com )

… Major advertisers are understood to be unhappy about the network and have cited the placement and intrusive nature of screens as problems to be addressed … The original intention was for Tesco TV to divert revenue from TV advertising. But its sales house, JCDecaux, was forced to slash its rate card by 30% in early 2005 following poor take-up…

January 2006 : Tesco’s digital signage advertising network may be struggling (source: wirespring)

An excellent article analysing the Brand Republic notes.

The key points are yet again poor implementation on detail level;

Placement:  … Tesco analyzed their store traffic patterns when deciding where to place their digital signs, but traffic patterns can only tell you so much.  They might give you an idea of where shoppers tend to walk and where they frequently linger, but they won’t tell you which direction they tend to look (you can speculate to some degree, of course), or what other visual clutter is in the area.  Maybe the screen placement interfered with the shopper’s march through the store or their ability to search for products.  It’s also possible that there are simply too many screens in place and the overall effect is more harassment than promotion.  After all, Tesco TV’s 40+ screens per store is quite a bit more than most retail media networks employ…

Content: ...Bright colors and blinking messages might be attention-grabbing, but it can also grate the nerves after a while.  JCDecaux’s own content guidelines recommend creating spots that are 10 seconds long, with sound.  The cacophony of multiple screens running different clips combined with the rapid visual changes of several 10 second ads swapping out might have overwhelmed some customers…With regard to content, there are virtually limitless ways to make attractive, eye-catching segments that soothe and suggest, not chafe and coerce. 

The article concludes that Tesco should not give up, face the challenge, learn from its lessons and conduct some “solid” experiments, implement changes, before hopefully launching some successful digital signage applications in the future.

May 2006: Signs of the times: digital signage industry    (source : canadianbusiness.com)

 U.K. grocery chain Tesco, however, is a great example of a digital signage screw-up. Tesco installed screens in half its 100 stores. But the program has been temporarily suspended: “Too many screens, in less than optimal locations,” … Research indicates shoppers look at digital in-store screens for an average of 2.5 seconds. The medium may be the message, but it better be clearly on display…

This is the most significant business analysis i’ve read so far;

Mr Spicer, DW + Partners, suggests digital signage’s power has nothing to do with ad revenue. Instead, he thinks retailers should use this strategic tool “to drive consumers into purchasing categories they weren’t going to consider, like higher-margin private-label products.”

July 2007: Tesco TV to become Tesco Screens   (source: digital signage news)

… management group’s realization that digital signage isn’t like TV, it’s like POP displays, and their changes in relation to this have yielded spots that have driven advertised products an extra 5-25% … (dooh :- ) )... “You can forget about the idea that the audience is going to put anything like the cognitive effort they put into a 30-second TV spot when they’re in-store,” though he did note that “referencing a pre-existing TV spot is fine.” …

…Too many others would have simply pulled the plug and written off the network as a giant capital loss, but Tesco recognized that while the potential of the thing was still good, there was a problem with its execution and management. From the looks of it, the significant steps they’ve taken to try and fix them are starting to pay off…

… And then, half a year later, news came that Tesco was about to remove the Tesco Screens from their stores.

February 2009 : Kinetic View: Tesco TV To Close: The End Of An Era?  (source: dailydooh.com)

… It didn’t matter about the location; the concept of screens above head height, running TV-style content, with sound, to people on the move in focused ‘shopping mode’ in the busy, distracting, crowded supermarket environment is flawed” … However much Tesco may have been able to leverage big brands to spend, ultimately the effect on sales was going to be measured. If the brands that trialled the network had got the sales uplifts they wanted, they would have invested in numbers … The costs of the network infrastructure and the need for bespoke programming made the service uneconomic for Tesco…

Interesting is that this article is written from within the industry and still advocates digital signage networks without offering concrete examples of services that have created a measurable ROI. I believe there must be successful examples and I am looking forward to experience them myself.

March 2009 : Dunnhumby says Tesco screens were getting old (source : screens.tv)

As reason for removing Tesco Screens from the stores Dunnhumby (the content management group for the screens) was quoted: “The decision has been taken as much of the equipment is reaching the end of its operational life”

March 2009 : The failed strategy that drove Tesco TV  (source: marketingmagazine.co.uk)

… Five years on, and Tesco has finally pulled the plug on the service, subsequently renamed Tesco Screens, leaving its stated ambition of attracting 5% of TV ad revenue seem rather hubristic …Tesco [launched] Tesco TV in 100 stores and invested in 5000 widescreen TVs that were suspended from the ceilings of the aisles – or retail zones – showing a mixture of relevant editorial and advertising. The network’s selling point was that it had a reach of 27% of all supermarket shoppers, equating to 200m shopping trips a year…

quotes: 

…’If you put a screen where people don’t look at it, showing content that requires people to be still, it doesn’t work’ …

…Another downfall was the assumption that advertisers would run the same ads in-store as on TV. This seemed to be predicated on a misconception that consumers had the same level of engagement when shopping as they did in front of the TV at home…

…Sound was also a major problem – early anecdotal evidence suggested that some shoppers and Tesco staff found the ads an irritation, perhaps not helped by the frequency with which they were shown…

…Given that Tesco Screens was trying to attract brands’ TV budgets despite in effect being an outdoor retail medium, there was also confusion over which pot its sales agent, JCDecaux, should target…

… the real issue was that consumers weren’t interested in the first place. ‘If consumers had really liked the service and it had driven sales, agencies would have found a way to make it work.’ …

The conclusion is that Tesco hastily developed the in store TV network without having fully understood, nor experimented sufficiently with prototypes to learn from customer behaviours before rolling out the service. 

It seems there are plenty of companies out there still selling the same digital signage approach to unassuming marketing managers at different companies, that have not learned, or are not familiar with these examples. It’s interesting to see that the digital signage industry’s reports on the failing of these cases is rather meager, compared to the announcement of yet another grand marketing scheme, when it all initially kicked off.

And now we are going to look out for successful implementations based on measurable ROI’s … Who and What has been watched Where? Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Post Scriptum : Freeview porn appears on Tesco TV screens