The Dutch parliament supports the proposed adjustments of the so called ‘koopzondagen’, literally translated that would be ‘shopping Sundays’. The Dutch ‘Shop times law’ (‘winkeltijdenwet’) currently states that shop opening hours are prohibited on:
- Sundays
- New Years, Good Friday (after 19:00h), Easter Monday, Ascension, Whit Monday, Christmas Eve (after 19:00h), Christmas (2 days) and May 4 (commemoration of the fallen in WW2 – after 19:00h)
- On workdays before 6:00h and after 22:00h.

As you can see, the law is not very happy with the term ‘koopzondag’….

There are however a few exemptions:
- The commune counsel can select 12 Sundays or holidays a year on which shop openings are allowed
- The commune counsel can allow shop openings if the commune (or part of it) is focussed on tourism.

That last part is currently subject to severe political discussions, and as we learned today, the parliament is willing to follow the minister of Economic Affairs’ proposal for adjusting the law, implicating limitations to the amount of ‘shopping Sundays’.

‘It is said that Sunday rest is obsolete in modern times. However, people have a natural need for rest’ is one of the arguments handled by politicians. On the other hand the argument is mentioned that this is a stupid proposal in a crisis time. This would lead to the loss of approximately 2000 jobs.

In my view politicians are outdated… On several levels…
First of all, apparantly we (read: the Dutch) wánt ‘koopzondagen’. If you have ever visited the main shopping street in Amsterdam (the Kalverstraat) on a Sunday, you must agree with me that it’s probably just as busy on a Sunday as on a Saturday.

Further to that the people can have Sunday rest if they want, since they don’t have to go shopping…. And with regard to the employees of the shops, the minister should better propose to adjust the law by stating that ‘employees should be allowed to refuse to work on a Sunday (e.g. on religious grounds) or to be compensated for working on a Sunday’. I haven’t looked into that law (it’s a bit longer than the shop times law), however by heart I would say that something like that is already included…

Perhaps we should also place this in a broader perspective: what does ‘shopping’  actually mean to us? It is functional (you need a shirt, jeans, shoes, groceries, dyoxigen, or whatever…), it is a way to spend your spare time (what else should I do on a boring Sunday afternoon?) and it can even be a social event (shopping with the girls [or boys - however less common]).

Ow, and let’s not forget the pure economical effects – people spend money! And people earn money – which can be spend again! And from a more personal perspective: on an average Sunday I only buy crap, or at least stuff I don’t really need… So I wouldn’t buy it on any other day, but it does help to keep the big economic wheel turning! And when I go shopping, I will have a sandwhich on the way, or a beer at the end to let go of all ‘shopping crowd’-frustrations. Dear mrs. Van der Hoeven (our minister of Economic Affairs): this is pure CASH! This is what our economy needs. I have it (at least a small bit), and apparantly I want to spend it on a Sunday. And I’m not the only one… Perhaps that’s a useful arguement when we are in the middle of some financials difficulties?

So what are the downsides then? Frankly, I wouldn’t know. Of course there is a religious perspective involved, however in my opinion every one should be free to follow their believes. So if you don’t want to have your Sunday rest to be effected, you don’t go to the Kalverstraat. But on the other hand… you don’t want to go the Kalverstraat (or any other shopping street) anyway if all the shops are closed, so you won’t be there on a Sunday anyhow…

And looking at it from another perspective: the Jews have a sabat on Saturday… So how would they regard this new Dutch “melting pot friendly” law?

Yet another perspective: all the people that are working on Saturday… when would they have to shop? Or all the people with evening / night jobs, who are asleep all day?

In my humble opinion the best approach for the government would be to let go of the ‘winkeltijdenwet’ (shop time law) at all. If you like it or not, the world is growing towards a 24-hours economy. That can be in between walls or on the digital highway, but eventually there is a niche everywhere.

If the government will go through with this law it might cost us 2000 shop jobs, but it will probably also create a lot of new jobs: internet entrepreneurs will start an online all day service, where you can order a new shirt for work tomorrow if you turned all your white shirts pink with that red ski-sock. And where you can order the grocery basics, which will even be delivered within the hour!

When I’m thinking about it… that would be great! It’s currently two-ish at night and I’m craving for an oven pizza! Man hungry… ding dong!

Monday the Telegraaf (NL’s biggest newspaper) announced that they are seriously considering paid access to their news site. According to the CEO, not the entire site will consist of paid content, however some parts of the site will be. “It must be possible to have people pay some way or another, because our products add value”, the CEO stated.

I admire the attempt to find new business opportunities in the press business, however in my opinion this is a useless and maybe even foolish attempt. Why? Because it might scare the current users away to other (free) news providers, which has a negative effect on (online) advertisement income. And that’s where this whole idea started – because the Telegraaf is encountering difficulties in advertisement income (-/- 20%, mainly relating to the decrease in personnel ads). But we have seen so many examples already, e.g. the NY Times which generated 10 million USD a year out of 227.000 paying online customers, according to Jeff Jarvis in WWGD. The Times stopped paid content in 2007, however Rupert Murdoch announced recently that the Times and WS Journal will soon be behind the online pay wall again. “Quality journalism has to be paid for.” Do we pay to watch the News on TV? Aren’t those quality journalists? Does a free internet magazine / newspaper not have quality journalists?

The question is not about journalism – it’s about business model. Apparently the Telegraaf and Rupert Murdoch can’t figure out a news paper business model which fits modern day business… (I don’t believe in paid content as you can see – unless you apply it to an ultra small niche market, then it might work, for now…).
Let’s just help ‘em a bit, just some wild ideas:

1) Include advertorials on your site, where the company which the story is about will pay. Of course you will have to ensure that you don’t shame the papers good reputation. Therefore you don’t want to use any welll known journalist for these advertorials. Further, you will have to ensure that the reader knows it’s an advertorial right away. But does that mean that the article will be less interesting? It’s the content in combination with the writers pen which makes a good article.

2) A newspaper as big as the Telegraaf (on average a daily 695k hardcopy papers in 2008 – ok, for us Dutchies it’s big…) has the power to generate hits without significant efforts. Everybody knows the paper AND the website. And most of the internet news readers will visit the Telegraaf site now and then, and for a specific reason/subject. So if that’s a given, why don’t you turn this into your advantage in intelligent advertising. If a visitor from Amsterdam visits your site at 12:30, it’s most likely his lunch break – show an ad from a popular lunch place in Amsterdam – show an option that if it is not in his area, he can further select something that is in his area. If a visitor from Zwolle is interested in an article on FC Zwolle, show an ad that provides 10% discount on tickets for the next game. If a vistor from New York visits your site, show an ad that offers cheap plane tickets to Amsterdam… Make advertising more than just linked to contents, make it personal.

3) About that last part… LINK ads to contents… There is currently an article on beer on the Telegraaf site. Right next to it is an ad about family notifications, the railway service and a mobile phone shop… If I was marketing manager for the Telegraaf, I would ensure to have contracts with all big advertisers in NL, and make sure it would be (automatically) linked to a beer commercial. Why not make the TV commercial appear online as well. That’s added value for your customer (i.e. the advertising company) as well as your readers (who are interested in beer, otherwise they wouldn’t go to this article…).

Another small give away for Rupert and his Dutch counterparts: why do we call it news as it is old already when it’s published… Apparently we’re interested in old news, but we don’t want to pay for it! If you publish it online, even with a pay wall, there will always be someone who will pick it up, twitter, blog or podcast it, which will then be available through Google News in no time, where we can find it for free.

If you think ‘free’ is history, you will be history in no time…

Already in 1995 the term ‘new economy’ was introduced. But when you look at it, nothing really changed… All the economic principles still apply, the only thing that changed, or I should say evolved, is the level of transparancy. Whereas in the ‘old’ economy, the information advantage was on of the biggest advantages a company could have. Nowdays, in the ‘new’ economy information spreads more rapidly (mainly as a result of the internet(users) making things transparent).

As a result, the information advantage is deminishing. And although most companies don’t yet (want to) realise this, the only thing to ensure long term profits is to include transparancy in your business model. No matter what kind of company you own. Take the example of a bar; if clients would not look at the atmosphere, the only thing they would look at would be the price of a Freddy (Heineken). Then it would be difficult for a bar owner to charge EUR 2,20 for a beer if all other bars charge EUR 2,00. By being transparant about the pricing, the bar owner can turn this price difference to his advantage, e.g. by disclosing that the premium is used for hiring a band every sunday (and that way attracting new customers on sunday).

Another economic evolution relates to transaction costs. By using the internet platform, consumers and customers can decrease their transaction costs. You no longer have to drive from supermarket A to B to see where the Coke is the cheapest. Just check online. As a result, markets are becoming more effectively, which basically ensures the ‘old economy’-rules are working better and better, since these are based on effective markets.

So basically:

In March 2003 I finalized my master thesis at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen where I studied economics. I wrote a thesis (sorry for the non-Dutchies – it’s in Dutch…) about XBRL - eXtensible Business Reporting Languate – see it as the financial version of XML or HTML.

Today I stumbled into an interesting 2009 master thesis (again… only Dutch) by Sander Gubbels on XBRL. Although I have not actively been involved in XBRL related topics since I graduated in 2003, I have always followed the latest news and developments with regard to XBRL. A remarkable observation:

XBRL is still considered to be new – FYI: XBRL development started in 1998(!). Google started in 1998 as well, and look at where it is now. XBRL ‘only’ generates 1.4 million search results on the web. How many companies whould there be for which XBRL would be (very) useful?

One of the conclusions of Sanders thesis is: XBRL is coming! However we still don’t know how fast and in which way. For audit firms it is important to realise the impact of this change. This conclusion is pretty much in line with my own conclusion in 2003. That’s six (!) years ago!

In my opinion there are several reasons for the slow success (or should I say potential upcoming success) of XBRL:
1) the various stakeholders involved – the XBRL consortium is built up by governments, audit firms and some large public companies. Usually not the fastest of all (except for Google, but they still consider themselves to be the small, young and flexible company they were 10 years ago – call it young at heart ).
2) Although anyone can become a member, people/companies should knów XBRL to see the benefits. Who should inform them? How about their audit firm or accountant? Or how about governments, e.g. by enforcing the use of XBRL to submit tax filings?
3) Why should the technology be proven to go ‘online’? Think and act like Google. Or as Jeff Jarvis mentions: life is a beta. Even in reporting we are allowed to make errors, just ensure you can explain what went wrong, and be able to fix it… That speeds up technological development, and trust at the user-side.

If you already know XBRL I can hear you thinking: ‘this is a bit short sighted’, or ‘you don’t know how far we are’, or ‘don’t you realize the complexity’. To counter that in advance: a) it is, but then again, I only spent 400 words to give some observations, whereas complete books have been written about it…, b) I do, c) I do. But then again, feel free to share your comments, and have an open discussion. That’s how we learn, that’s how we share, that’s how we bring XBRL to a next level.

As you will probably have noticed in the news lately, Amazon has made a stupid mistake by deleting several e-books from Kindles (Amazon’s e-book reader).
A Kindle has a 3G wireless connection, and can therefore be automatically updated. Amazon did this by deleting the e-books 1984 and Animal Farm (both George Orwell).
Not the smartest thing to do (and not only because this action could have been described in both books – at least if Orwell would have foreseen the internet and if the pigs on the animal farm would have been interested in the internet…)

But more interesting is the way Jeff Bezos (Amazon’s big brother aka founder / CEO) handled the commotion. First of all the buyers of these specific books were offered a refund of the money they spent on the e-book(s). That’s the least he could do. However… that wasn’t enough. A 17-year old high school student is now sueing the company because he lost his homework. The kid used the Kindle to read the books as a homework assignment, and used the Kindle to make notes on the book. By deleting the book from his Kindle, Amazon also deleted his notes, thereby ruining his assignment.

When you analyze the entire process we can see that Amazon took several actions where your organization can potentially learn from as well:

1) The company swiftly offered a refund – this is the least they can do, however for the majority of the customers this will be satisfactorily. As a company however you should keep in mind the negative image these customers might retain from this action. Alright, I did receive my money back, however how can I trust that Amazon won’t delete the next e-book I buy?
2) Jeff Bezos offered his apoligies on the Amazon helpdesk site. A strong signal, although this came after some negative press articles… In Dutch we would say: “als het kalf verdronken is dempt men the put” – or in proper English: “when the steed is stolen, the stable-door is locked”. Although it’s a very good pro-active approach to offer apologies broadly (and this is also picked up by the press), a lot of damage has already been done.
3) What were they thinking in the first place… Why would Amazon delete the e-books from the buyers devices at all? If I was Jeff the person who came up with this marvelous idea would have been fired on the stand. Was it a one man show? Or was there an entire team involved?

Apparantly the reason behind this DEL action was the publishers decision that it was not a very good idea to make the Orwell books available as e-books. A typical old-school publisher probably, since e-books are becoming more and more popular, however as a publisher you might run the risk that it is copied (as if a good old Xerox can’t pull that trick…). So that is lesson number four in this case:

4) Ensure your network (clients / suppliers / personnel / other) supports your e-strategy. If (in this case Amazon) you decide to offer products electronically, ensure this is supported by the stakeholders in your company.

As Pogue’s Post mentions:

“…it’s like Barnes & Noble sneaking into our homes in the middle of the night, taking some books that we’ve been reading off our nightstands, and leaving us a check on the coffee table.”

Take your stakeholders serious… and especially your clients!

Goed nieuws: het taskforce mobiliteitsmanagement is eruit! Volgens voorzitter Lodewijk de Waal wordt het rustiger op de weg! “Taskforce hoe??” hoor ik je denken… De taskforce mobiliteitsmanagement is een coalitie van bedrijven, overheden en vakbonden, en deze heeft vandaag een nieuw rapport over de fileaanpak aan minister Eurlings van Verkeer aangeboden.

Continue Reading »

De ultieme test… Een onaangekondigd experiment…. Eén jaar niet bloggen. Precies een jaar wel te verstaan… En het resultaat? Hier een korte samenvatting:

a) Ik heb eindelijk tijd gehad om m’n scriptie af te ronden!
b) Er waren slechts 3 spam-posts door m’n filter gesijpeld (!)
c) Er zaten slechts 1967 spam-mailtjes in m’n mailbox
d) Van deze mailtjes bleek ik 18 zelf verzonden te hebben…
e) 60 pillen Viagra blijken slechts USD 59,95 te kosten…. (ik krijg privé gelukkig geen spam, dus je komt nog eens ergens achter…)
f) De Viagra wordt aangeboden door Tracey Chapman en Bill Cosby…..
g) Het eerste spam-mailtje is verstuurd op 1 januari 1970…. Ik weet dat de post soms langzaam is, maar dit slaat alles…
g) Ik heb vermoedelijk geen lezers meer… Mocht het anders zijn dan lees ik het graag van je

Ah, ik kom nog achter veel meer…
h) Ik kan geen artikelen meer posten… Uiteindelijk wel, anders kon je dit niet lezen, maar dat kost dan ook een dag… Software opnieuw installeren helpt .
i) M’n database is corrupt… Gelukkig is er nog een backup…
j) Als ik toch bezig ben… Dan maar een geheel ge-restylde site!!

Jay El’s back!

Een margharita onder handbereik, zomers muziekje op de achtergrond, de zachte deining van m’n hangmat. Grote donkere glazen om toch nog iets op m’n beeldscherm te kunnen lezen in een heerlijk zonnetje.

Gejoel van wat kids die even verderop softbal spelen. Een bootje tourt langzaam voorbij en veroorzaakt een rimpeling waardoor het erop gereflecteerde zonlicht mij ondanks de donkere glazen verblindt. In de verte zijn de duinen zichtbaar. Ik volg het actieve spel van de kids een ogenblik en sluit dan m’n ogen, laat de zon z’n werkdoen en dommel langzaam in.

Vakantie op eigen balkon. Heel vervelend…

Heerlijk weer, heldere lucht en Heineken op het terras. Not a bad way to spend your Thursday afternoon. Aangezien m’n bierbuddy uit West moet komen strijk ik vast neer op het Marie Heinekenplein. Uitzicht op het plein, verscholen achter een goudgele pretcilinder en donkere glazen. Blik gericht op alles wat voorbij slentert, oren gespitst op de tafeltjes rondom de mijne.

Continue Reading »

Daar istie weer… Sherlock doet weer van zich spreken! Een ver familielid heeft namelijk een interessante waarneming gedaan. Gordon Holmes heeft Nessie gespot! Het Monster van Loch Ness. Uiteraard vindt Sherlock het schandalig dat over “monster” wordt gesproken, aangezien er geen (recente) meldingen van geweldadige aanvallen zijn, maar dat terzijde…

Continue Reading »