What Is An Entrepreneurial Mindset, And What Isn’t?

Over a decade ago it was pretty difficult for the average person to create a marketable product or a viable business, but nowadays there are more than enough resources for someone to turn a relevant idea into a salable product or productive business.

 

A person with an entrepreneurial mindset will see a product in existence that lacks a relevant function, and set out to create a new and improved version of such a product… And the same holds true with such individual’s ability to see voids in established business models, and having the drive to fill such voids.

 

Individuals who lack an entrepreneurial drive will see a product that lacks a function and/or a business model that has a void, and they will kill such a seed of innovation.

 

Sometimes I wonder how much the world would change if every relevant seed of innovative thought were to be nurtured, and brought into fruition. Then I wonder whether the positive impacts from such innovations would outweigh the negative impacts.

 

I am led to believe that there are two words that separate an entrepreneurial and a non-entrepreneurial mindset, and such words are belief and doubt.

 

Belief gives rise to the actions that are necessary to transform a mental concept into something that is tangible. On the contrary, doubt breeds in action and ultimately brings upon death to ideas.

 

With all the above being said, I guess the difference between entrepreneurial mindset and a non-entrepreneurial mindset can be summed up in two words (belief and doubt). Blessed are those who believe, and cursed are those who doubt.

 

Maybe the best question would be: “What does it take for a doubter to believe?”

 

Advertising Via Fireworks

I was reading an article titled:” How Fireworks Inscribed The Sky,” that was in the July ’14 issue of Popular Science. And such an article talked about simulation software that allows designers to draw almost anything on the sky by coordinating the flight of dozens of lights at once. And I came to conclude that the night sky is the perfect medium to display advertisements.

Now I know a lot of people would cringe at the thought of the night sky being potentially littered with advertisements. But since the technology that is behind the ability of “inscribing the sky” is pretty much in its infancy, there’s only but so much that could be depicted in the sky. Therefore, I don’t think that advertisements would be overbearing, especially since most people love fireworks.

Firework displays would definitely be appealing if the firework depictions were more of an entertaining experience than a branding experience, i.e., Nintendo could advertise Mario running across the sky jumping over depictions of mobile phones, and at the end the words “coming to mobile – – – – 14” would appear.

With all of the old, annoying, intrusive, and so ad schemes that are taking place nowadays; it would be refreshing to see creative and explosive works of art in the night sky.

If the advertisements were depicted after a short opening show, I’m pretty sure that enough people would see such live, and via the Internet by way of smart phone video feeds, that such a form of advertising (#Adsparks) would be more than worth it – especially if a company is the first depicted in a major ad campaign using fireworks.

I can’t think of many things that are more appealing in the night sky than fireworks. Stars are beautiful and so is the moon, especially a full moon, but such sites aren’t exciting to the average individual. On the contrary, fireworks are in their very essence expressions of celebration, and I do not think that properly executed Adsparks would tarnish the celebratory nature of fireworks.

 

 

Magazine Cover Ads Are…?

Not too long ago I received a Time Magazine and a Sports Illustrated Magazine that featured a small, almost unnoticeable, ad right beneath the address label. And since it noted the page in the magazine where a” full ad” could be located I would label such an ad a “pre-ad.” And even though the ad was occupying such a small area of the face of the magazines, such ad still attracted criticism.

I was always under the impression the magazine butt ads (back cover ads) parentheses were the worst ads in regards to magazine ad placements, but now I’m convinced that pre-ads are the current clear winner for the worst magazine ad.

I’m the first to state the obvious fact that such a tiny ad is almost invisible to the average subscriber, and had I not ran across an article published in the Wall Street Journal giving me a heads up regarding such an ad, I would’ve more than likely never even noticed such an ad.

I could understand if magazines would affix visually appealing sticker ads to the front of magazines, especially if such stickers had potential prizes etc. on their underside.

I just wonder how many people actually paid attention to those pre-ads that underlined address labels, because how many people actually view their magazines address label percentage wise?

With all the polls that currently exist nowadays I would love to know the percentage of magazine readers that actually view magazine butt ads on any relevant basis, and I definitely would like to know how many individuals viewed the pre-ads that were featured on Time and Sports Illustrated, especially the subscribers who didn’t receive before hand notice.

If a company is willing to pay for a butt ad and/or pre-ad that’s really noticeable, does it really matter how often such ads are viewed?