MTB130 - Reflective Journal Topic 4

I believe RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) is the next big wave of technology to impact the way we do business.

RFID tags (like bar codes) consists of a microchip attached to a radio antenna which is then mounted on to a substrate. Chips can store up to 2KB of data which can be read by RFID readers.

RFID reader is a device with one or more antennae that emits radio signals and receives feedback from the RFID tags. Once data is read from the tags, the reader then passes this information in the digital format to other systems. Since the radio frequency is used to read the tags, there is no need for the stock to be in a dedicated area such as when scanning bar codes.


The advantages of using RFID applies to many industries. Supply chain management is one of the areas that can benefit immensely. When transporting large stock piles, use of RFID tags eliminates the need of scanning (bar codes) which involves human intervention. For example Company ABC which manufactures clothing can attach RFID tags to its clothing items either individually or on to pallets. As the stock leaves the warehouse RFID tags are read and data captured in to the Supply Chain Management System, which automatically lets the Company XYZ that the stock has left the Company ABC. When ABC receives the shipment and as it enters the warehouse, its RFID readers will read the tags and confirm its validity, and send information back to Supply Chain Management System, which will notify Company ABC that the goods have arrived.

During the entire process of tag identification and updates to Supply Chain Management System, there is no human intervention required.

In my personal experience, my Company together with a partner organisation and Victorian Racing Club (VRC) embarked on RFID tagging on horses. Tiny RFID tags were attached to horses and the VRC were able to instantly identify the location of the horse which includes it breed, age, owners, trainers, VET records and many more information. This information has enhanced VRC's horse handling work much efficient, especially during race meets.

However, my interest in RFID spans beyond these projects. IBM retail systems together with some smaller players are introducing RFID tagging in to supermarkets. Just imagine a situation where a 'would be' thief enters in to a supermarket and stuffs his jacket with some smaller items such as razors, perfume, shampoo and couple of bottles of beer. The unsuspecting thief, decides to leave the shop, walks through the checkout counters. At the exit door, a security guard stops the 'would be' thief and gives him a shopping docket and asks him to pay at the counter saying 'sir/madam..you forgot to pay for these items..'

Even though it's controversial, I also believe RFID tagging could be used to monitor human movement in a myriad of scenarios. For example fire fighters fighting blazes across wide terrain could be supplied with RFID tagged clothing. In scenarios such as recent bush fires, the fire department will be able to locate its members and if in extreme threat areas they can be evacuated.

Therefore applications and their benefits of RFID tags are 'enormous'. Costs have come down to 20 -40c per tag depending on features, however the aim is to produce them at a 5c or less per tag. To achieve this, the World should consume 30 Billion tags each year. The RFID tag industry believe this will be possible one day. However unless more companies use the technology the costs will remain high,and while the cost remain high, only a few companies would adopt it. This is a typical scenario of which come out first...the chicken or the egg!

To overcome the 'chicken or the egg' situation in someway, Walmart in USA made it compulsory for its top 100 suppliers to use RFID tagging in supplies. Today, increasing number of industries are rapidly adopting RFID technology.

The day we will be wearing a tagged clothing item at work, or driving a tagged vehicle or farms tagging their cattle or correctional departments tagging prisoners, weather controversial or not would not be too far away.

For further comprehensive reference, http://www.rfidjournal.com/.

Case Study: Has 'Video killed the web promotion star'

1. Advertising on YouTube

In my view as a casual user of YouTube, acceptance of advertising while watching videos on YouTube depends on the quality and relevance of content being viewed.

I believe a content portal should maintain financial stability to continually provide services and deliver content. In this case I see two possibilities YouTube can adopt. A subscription based membership model, where members pay a reasonable amount on agreed terms. The other would be a ‘fee free’ based membership model as YouTube currently operate.

Content delivered to ‘paid’ members could contain little yet targeted advertising content – similar to Pay TV advertising model.

There is no doubt, overtime consumers will agree that they need to pay for the value created by quality content delivered in quick time.

From YouTube’s point of view, they can place more emphasis to content’s appropriateness to a user’s profile. Maintaining the quality of the advertising content as well as of Videos available for view is extremely important.

An example site that has lost its initial ‘charm’ due to commercialisation that I’m aware of is www.dnsreport.com, which used to provide free network analysis tools, and now charging a subscription based model.

However losing the ‘charm’ does not necessarily mean loss of visitors and 'death' of the site. After the subscription model was introduced I have noticed a considerable improvement in the quality of the services. On the downside, you can see on blogs such as these (http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=606200) where some users looking for alternative free solutions.


2. Copyrighted Materials

From a commercial point of view, I believe YouTube’s decision to adopt the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, is a smart one. However as a key player in the digital content broadcasting, I feel more should be done to protect intellectual rights of the content creators and owners.

Digital Millenium Copyright Act is a good solution for YouTube for obvious reasons. Imagine having to filter around 200,000 uploads on daily basis, essentially meaning a massive workforce screening content 24x7 basis.

Not only this option would be financially viable for YouTube and Google but also will have a direct impact on its shareholders. It will also will arguably limit the number of users browsing the content on YouTube if up to 50% of copyright infringed content is removed.

Adaptation of Digital Millenium Copyright Act would be a poor solution for content creators and owners, because onus falls on to them to ‘police’ the copyright infringements on YouTube, which can be time consuming and costly. It is a fact that most start-up creative talent would have neither the time nor the money to take such measures to protect their copyrights.


3. YouTube for Brand Establishment ?

Major concerns I would have would be exposing my customised designs on the YouTube. Since I would look at to gaining a competitive advantage in the market place by providing innovative sporting goods, I will certainly have concerns about the protection of my product differentiators from the rest of the market.

Of course I would not like to see a container load of ‘look alkies’’ being sold over the Internet for a fraction of the cost! I would also have doubts if I’m reaching the target audience with YouTube.

How many of the viewers will be in the ‘mood’ to watch a video on sporting goods (unless they are watching really 'boring' content and find my advertisement is more appealing - which would be a positive)?

I will definitely consider other methods of brand building methods before considering YouTube.


4. Google Response Rates & Long Term Sustainability

I agree that there would be a higher rate of responses (clicks) on its Flash animation on the bottom of the video screen, however find it hard to believe it is 10 times likely. After all, these are claims made by Google and not verified by independent research.

Long term sustainability depends on multiple variables. Since adaptation of broadband is definitely set to increase every year it is likely more and more people will be entertained/ educated (or even humiliated) by the ever increasing content o YouTube.

However the quality and appropriateness of content are fundamental items that will dictate the long term sustainability. YouTube operates in an open playing field and therefore inherently at the risk from fierce competition.

It is very clear with today’s share prices of Google that it has lost more than 50% of its ‘paper’ value from its peaks in 2007. In order to ascertain the long term viability of a business, we also have to ask other questions such as what is the ‘true’ value of a portal such as Google/ YouTube and how do we measure it?

While companies such as Google have not directly contributed to the current Global financial crisis, we see that they are not immune to setbacks. Therefore, personally, I will measure the sustainability of such organisations in shorter terms rather than 5+ years periods.

Therefore I believe the sustainability over 5+ years is extremely hard to predict. Depends on what values we measure sustainability; for example is it the share value, users’ satisfaction, revenue from advertising, revenue from possible memberships etc