I’ve watched you write articles with a certain viewpoint then later change that viewpoint, so you seem objective. That said, what are you biases? We all have them.
We take issue with people and companies that are closed-minded. We don’t like hubris. We’re borderline offended by proclamations that someone can build everything. We hate subterfuge, obfuscation, walled gardens, and a lack of transparency.
The world evolves and you must evolve with it to stay relevant.
In our world we believe we’re really good at predicting trends and using data to make things better. We think we have enough external experience to connect the dots and create a lot of value for our partners.
Accordingly we partner with POS companies and serve as their data R&D strategy group. All we do is focus on data. We don’t have to worry about POS features or PCI compliance shifts. This gives us a single target on which to hone our craft. When we can’t partner with a company, we logically ask why considering there’s a great history of walled garden failures.
So we’re biased towards people and companies that don’t behave this way.
Can I buy advertising on your site? What about paying to place content?
We don’t accept advertising dollars which is why we have subscriptions. Maybe that changes but today we feel the action of paying should save you from seeing blatant and likely irrelevant ads.
We do syndicate or republish content we think is good and relevant to our readers at no charge. That means the content is objective, backed with some form of data, and not a complete sales pitch. We don’t believe we hold a monopoly on good ideas and thus welcome differing opinions if they’re rationally explained and lead to good, honest debate.
You partner with POS companies and presumably payments companies that have bought the POS companies. Yet you dish on them. What gives?
First, we always extend an offer of first review to any company we write about. Not only does this help us correct any misinformation, it can also bring new information to light. Some companies we write about stop replying, so they’ve forfeited their chance for input. Sorry, there’s only so much patience we have. If someone from their company wants to reestablish dialogue we’ll gladly consider their request, but we won’t go out of our way to make this happen.
Second, it may surprise you to learn that there are people inside of these POS and payments organizations that want us to write these critical – yet honest – appraisals. They see our articles as a way to provide a wake up call to colleagues that are asleep at the switch. Sadly, they also see us as a way to objectively answer their questions when their employer won’t give them the truth.
Third, we aim to be constructive in our articles. Yes, we don’t hold back our opinions, but we also give constructive measures a company might take to improve. For example, anyone who has read our articles over the past year should be able to list the things we believe NCR could immediately undertake to improve its business:
- Open APIs and stop charging for integrations
- Be open and honest about problems in your business model
- Focus R&D on improving your core POS products instead of chasing bolt-ons through a walled garden “strategy”
- Treat your channel with respect and be honest with them on where the business is going
What more can you ask for?
Catch you next time.
