On my door step today is the "current" edition of the Qwest phone book. I find it interesting that this is even printed anymore.

Oh, I know that people use it. I know that some people actually don’t have the internet. Not those in the circle I roll with, mind you, but I know they exist.

But still, I question the relevance of a phone book. I especially question the relevance of a phone book from one company.

You see, I have been so unhappy with Qwest, that I haven’t been a customer of theirs in three years. I know many people who have phones that aren’t Qwest customers. With wireless providers offering unlimited minutes, Cable getting in to VoIP (at a ridiculously high price, mind you) and all of the real VoIP providers like Packet8, Vonage, Phone.com and VoIP.com the percentage of customers that companies, like Qwest, have to put in the phone book is dwindling.

Because I haven’t been all that happy with VoIP providers, I have opted to use my cell phone with unlimited minutes for my communication. (I have to admit that my home phone is still a VoIP provider… no plugs because they aren’t great).

Here is what I am getting at. More and more customers are leaving traditional phone companies for other forms of communication. Not only that, phone numbers change. As fast the book gets printed, there are already changes.

I thought, maybe, the online form of the "phone book" at http://www.dexknows.com would have more data than just for Qwest. I am not listed because I am not their customer. So, I thought that I would check at http://www.yellowpages.com/ but, the same Corey Smiths show up on their list for Idaho. I thought that I would try out http://www.yellowbook.com/… they have two more listings for Corey Smith, but I am still not on the list. I wonder if, for the most part, they are just using the same database… could be.

At least I am on the first page at Google.

So, the phone book becomes obsolete the moment it is printed and even their online services don’t contain the phone number for people that aren’t their customer (not to mention people that opt out).

So, what is the purpose? Why does it exist? Why do people still use it?

At least I have some free fire kindling now.

I wanted a quick bite for lunch, so I drove down the street to go through the drive through at the local Taco Bell. As I was waiting for my order to be taken, I noticed this "brilliant" piece of advertising and pricing.

Now, the quality isn’t very good because I only had my phone camera with me.

They have the traditional combo menu and now the "New, Why Pay More!" menu.

(I noticed it wasn’t a question - type-o or intentional?   
         That should have been my first clue there was something afoot.)

You can get a soft taco or a crunchy taco for $.89. Great.

You can get a large drink for $1.69. Sounds reasonable.

You can get a hard taco combo for $4.59 or a soft taco combo for $4.89.

I sat there puzzled for a moment. Why is the soft taco combo more money by $.10 per taco when you can buy them individually for the same price?

A little math and here is what you get.

Buy them separate and you get 3 tacos (soft or crunchy) + a large Pepsi

        $4.36.

So, you buy the combo and you pay an additional $.20 for crunchy tacos and an additional $.50 for soft tacos.

So, people pay more because of the stupid pricing structure… or because they just don’t pay attention to a business trying to take them for a ride.

How many people do you think actually take the time to note that if they buy the combo they are actually paying more? I bet it is the same people that buy the big can of soup because they think it is a better value when if they would just do the math, two smaller cans actually cost less.

Of course, I spent $2.23 in gas to get there and back, so what’s another $.50! (notice I didn’t use a question mark… Seinfeld would be proud!!)

I have chronic heart burn and I have to take medication for that heart burn. The best drug that works for me is Nexium. But, I don’t take that because my insurance co-pay is too expensive. If I did take that, I would only have to take one per day.

Because Nexium isn’t a preferred drug on the insurance policy, I have to take two per day of Priolsec (or its generic equivalent). So, instead of 30 pills per month, I take 60 pills per month. If I miss a pill, I have a horrible few hours until the next pill kicks in.

I thought I would do a little research on what the real cost is.  

The total cost per month for my prescription is $153.99. Because I have a reasonable insurance plan, my co pay for that drug is $10.00 and the pharmacy is proud to say that I “saved” $143.99.

I decided to look at Amazon.com for comparisons.

Here is what I found.

I can buy my drugs over the counter, with no prescription, - the brand name version Prilosec OTC for $38.96 per month. But, the insurance company doesn’t pay anything; I am responsible for the full price.

I can also buy a generic version of the drug for $28.56 per month.

Again, the insurance company is not willing to pay anything, so I have to pick up the full tab.

I choose, like most people do, to have the insurance company pick up the cost. I figure the economic choice is simple.

I can pay $10.00, $28.56 or $38.96 per month. I figure I pay $600 per month for my plan, I am going to use it to it’s fullest. Why should I pay 3 or 4 times the cost when I already am paying my insurance company so much to do that for me.

Which would you choose?

I find this fascinating because they are the exact same drug. Exact same dosage. Different package and different marketing route.

I think my head will explode if I hear one more politician say that we need health insurance for everyone. I am at the edge of dumping mine because of stupid pricing schemes like this one.

Hey, insurance company… I’ll give you a $30 co-pay for a six month supply if you let me buy the generic over the counter stuff…

I’ll save $60 per year and you’ll save $1,445.16.

Oh… they really didn’t save me $143.99… they saved me $18.56.

I was looking at some cell phone plans today. What is wrong with this?

I love the line that says, “Whether you have one employee or thousands, T-Mobile as plans that suit your business needs.”

Still don’t see the problem?

They only have three choices. What if I have an employee that only needs 100 minutes? What if I have an employee that needs 1000 minutes?

More than that, why wouldn’t I just just choose the unlimited individual plan for $99.99?

Here’s a clue… if you boast that you have a plan for any need, you better have more than three… you better be flexible in your offerings.

I am often at a boiling point thinking about the laws we have. We have so many laws that infringe upon our personal rights. Laws as simple as a requirement to wear a seatbelt to as critical as the laws that protect one against violence from another.

I heard on the radio today that more and more businesses are putting into place no gun policies. As if telling someone, that wants to bring a gun, that it is wrong will magically stop that person from bringing a gun. It is the same with any law that we have. Making a law requiring seatbelts, speed limits, shoplifting, larceny, theft, drugs, etc does not, nor ever will prevent a "thing" from happening.

Congress can pass laws till they are blue in the face. Businesses can have policies that affect customers and, more specifically, employees, but it doesn’t make a difference. People do not follow a law or a policy simply because it exists.

It is the enforcement of those laws and policies (and fear of the consequences thereof) that make law make a difference. People may follow the law out of a sense of right versus wrong… assuming they agree with it. But, even the most OCD of people (you know who you are) won’t agree with all laws and won’t do everything perfect simply out of a sense of right and wrong.

The primary reason people obey the law or policy is because of fear of reprisal of some sort. They are afraid of the consequence. Think about that when you are driving the speed limit when you are in a hurry. Why do you stay within or at least kind of close to the speed limit and not just drive as fast as you can? What do you do when you see a cop?

Consider this when you try to put a policy or practice in place in your business. If you aren’t willing to follow through on that policy or practice it won’t matter. If you don’t enforce, you might as well not make the policy or practice in the first place.

I had an appointment at the doctor’s today for my little girl. The appointment was set for 3:15pm. I arrived at 3:14pm. After a minute or two at the check-in desk, I was told to go in the waiting room.

After waiting for 15 minutes, I went to the desk to get an idea of how long I would have to wait… if you know me, I am not a patient person, but I am far more accommodating if I am armed with information.

First, I was told that I was waiting in the wrong waiting area.

I didn’t know there was more than one. I just went where I thought the receptionist told me to wait.

I was then informed that this particular doctor is routinely 15 - 30 minutes behind schedule.

That doesn’t make sense. Why schedule an appointment for a time when you know you will never make it?

To this person’s credit, she went to check specifically for me. She told me they would be another 30-45 minutes.

30 minutes later (45 minutes after my appointment) I finally went to the secondary waiting room (that is the room you wait in that the doctors comes to see you in… some call it the exam room, but I usually am waiting there longer than I am being examined). After 10 minutes, the nurse came in to do a little investigative work. About 10 minutes later, the doctor finally showed up.

In 10 minutes time, my girl was examined and a prescription was written and we were on our way.

The total bill - $82.

If you are doing the math, $82 for 10 minutes works out to $492 per hour.

If you take into consideration the time that I spent… the opportunity costs, the gas it took me to get there and the fact that I sat and did nothing for better than an hour, that works out to be a doctor’s visit that cost me a small fortune.

How long do you think that you would be in business if you made your customers wait for you for over an hour then billed them an extremely high fee…?

Time for a little rant…

In an effort not to offend anyone, people more and more are trying to use more  political correctness in language. Calling someone an African-American because his skin is black even if that person doesn’t have any ties to Africa. Calling someone special, differently-abled or handicapable when handicap is probably the right word for it.

Not being able to use a word because someone somewhere might be offended… even if it is the right word for the job is just plain stupid.

It just dumbs down our language and our ability to communicate.

What drives me most nuts is the use of pronouns.

For example. When I am talking about one person, the proper pronoun is "he" or "she"… not "they."

Wrong: "I was talking to a friend the other day and they were saying…"

Right: "I was talking to a friend the other day and he was saying…"

Okay, so what if we don’t know the proper pronoun? What if you want to apply the pronoun to both mail and female? Using he or she is far more appropriate.

Right: "When talking to a customer you should be aware that he or she may…"

Use the right language for the right conversation and you won’t sound so wrong.

Well, according to the MPAA, it is terrible. According to local governments in Los Angeles (after following New York’s lead), not only is piracy bad, but it "substantially interferes with the interest of the public in the quality of life and community peace, lawful commerce in the county, property values, and is detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the county’s citizens, its businesses and its visitors." (I added the emphasis)

I think they have gone a little far in this depiction of how bad piracy is. I mean… really, causes health, safety and welfare concerns?

I agree that it is, and should be illegal, to violate copyright laws. I make my living on writing and designing and want my content to be mine. I am building a business on custom software applications and I don’t want someone to distribute that without me getting my cut. I don’t care if someone uses my content as long as I get credit, but I would never say that you are causing health concerns by stealing my content.

What really confuses me is on sites that are centered around file sharing (those that are accused of aiding and abetting the crime of piracy) still get plenty of advertisements. You might think that most of the advertisements come from fringe or illicit material websites… but you would be wrong. Notice the Verizon and the Netflix ads I found on one such site. I won’t take you there via a link because I don’t want to be accused of perpetuating the problem. But, I wonder, does advertising on a site that has been under fire for years of providing these sharing services actually legitimize the act of piracy? What’s more is that I even saw an ad from NBC on the same site but I refreshed too fast to get a screen shot.

You might ask, "What is the real business case for this discussion?"

Well, I am glad you asked. The real issue is that file sharing is here to stay. You aren’t going to change that. Sharing a book, a cassette tape, a CD or DVD has been around for a long time, but what is different now is the ability for someone to proliferate it more quickly than ever before.

Many TV shows are now available online after they air. So, many of the networks get it. If you can provide your content in a medium that people want it, you can likely monetize that it other ways. Until the MPAA understands that people don’t want to spend $20 on a DVD that cost them $.20 to produce, they will always be at odds with their customers. Here’s a thought… Provide it on-line to view for $1. Or provide the ability to download an burn to your DVD for $3. Make it affordable and people will stop stealing.

Now, this isn’t a rant on copyright protection. It is a discussion of not being at odds with your customer. As long as you don’t provide your product or service in a way that your customers want to receive it, they will find other venues to obtain it. That is called competition… get used to it.

So often, in a store, you will notice a sign that says, "Please don’t take unpaid merchandise in the restroom."

The word "don’t" is a very negative approach and you can find that "don’t" will cause people to shy away… even if that is not intended. Try to take a positive approach to things you would hope your customers would understand.

Last month when I was in Hawaii, I went shopping at Hilo Hattie. I noticed this sign:

It is amazing that you can say the same thing but be far more friendly when saying it.

When you have to make the choice between proprietary and open standards for a product you are offering, you have to consider the long term implications of that.

A few years ago, Microsoft launched a new type of DRM. It was called "PlaysForSure." Their thought was that it should be a new standard that all the online music stores and digital music players would be able to use. The intent was that if everyone used the same DRM format, everyone would be much happier. The fact is that DRM is designed to take features away and not to enhance the listener experience.

So, there are two concepts that I am talking about here.

The first is providing a service that is unique to you. We all want to "lock" our customers in to using our technology. We hope that if we "lock" them in to our service or product using proprietary technology that we’ll have a greater chance at customer retention. More often than not, we want to "lock" them in because we know that we are terrible at customer support and the customer experience, so we have to trick them in to sticking with us.

The second concept I am talking about is that when you have proprietary technology that you use, you run the risk of not being able to support it. Microsoft’s DRM was such a problem child that they didn’t even use it on their own Zune digital media device, have canceled it for their music store (the store failed), and now are saying they will cancel all the authentication servers for the DRM. That means that people who bought into the service and have music under that service will not get what they paid for because of lack of authentication.

Of course, one could say, "Well, it’s Microsoft, what did you expect?"

But, I don’t think it is that easy. Many companies have tried a proprietary technology they hoped would one day be the standard. They have "locked" their customers into their service. When it failed, all the customers were just out of luck. Think about the BlueRay and HD DVD format. Looks like BlueRay will stay and HD will not.

When you have a new thing you are offering, you may not have an open standard to use, but, if you have the option, stick with open standards. Don’t make it hard for people to leave… after all, if you have to "lock" your customers in because your customer service stinks or you really aren’t that good, then you will end up with a failed online music store, dwindling profits and a new Vista operating systems that is riddled with problems product or service.