Business can be a lot simpler than the consultants and MBAs claim. Craigslist, for example, just listens to its customers, then gives them what they want. No wonder they’ve been profitable since day one.

Wait, that can’t be all there is to it, can it? It must be more complicated than that. Nope, not according to Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster. In a recent Marketplace interview, he said:

“Like a lot of stuff we do, we’ve found it to be very effective and basically fool-proof to just prioritize our activities according to what users are asking for.”

Ryssdal: Seems bizarre in this economy to be so democratic.

Buckmaster: Well, it certainly makes our lives simpler since we just have the one criterion to go on. We don’t have to sit in rooms trying to figure out how to conquer the world because basically we are not trying to achieve any particular market share or world dominance. We’re just trying to follow up on requests that we get from users.

Ryssdal: And yet you have enormous market share and very nearly world dominance.

Buckmaster: … what better way to operate is there than to just follow up on what your customers or users are asking for, and to just block out everything else.”

Via The Consumerist

Well, duh. Porn, of course. Well, at least it costs more if you want it as your Web domain.

Yahoo’s Christopher Null reports that domain name pizza.com just sold for a cool $2.6 million — a lot of dough. (Sorry.)

But it didn’t even crack the top ten most expensive domain names ever sold. The uh, “winners” and their selling prices, according to Null:

1. Sex.com, $12.5 million
2. Porn.com, $9.5 million
3. Diamond.com, $7.5 million
4. Business.com, $7.5 million
5. Casino.com, $5.5 million
6. Asseenontv.com, $5 million
7. Korea.com, $5 million
8. Wine.com, $3.3 million
9. Creditcheck.com, $3 million
10. Vodka.com, $3 million

Wait — somebody actually spent $5 million on #7, “Asseenontv.com?” It took me a couple of minutes to suss out what it meant. (Ass… eeno… wha?) That’s one domain that might actually be better (or clearer, at least) hyphenated: “as-seen-on-tv.com.” Hmmm…

No, too late. It’s already taken. I just checked.

Am I the only one who gets mesmerized by those ultra-simple UPS commercials? Apparently not, according to Slate’s Seth Stephenson, who gives a great behind-the-scenes look at those ads here. (You can watch the whole series of UPS spots here.)
You can’t take your eyes off them. There’s something about all that white space, and the guy’s mastery of the dry erase marker, and the quick, simple stories he tells. It’s hard to look away. (The long-haired guy, by the way, is not an actor, but Andy Azula, the creative director of the ad campaign. Bravo, Andy.)

Other companies are trying a similar approach. “Companies are increasingly using simple pictures to distill complicated concepts into easily shared, easily remembered nuggets,” says Fast Company in a piece called The Napkin Sketch. FC quotes Tuft’s Neil Cohn, a researcher in cognitive psychology and linguistics at Tufts University:

“Graphic expression and visual thinking are a central part of human cognition… These ideas are spreading from how companies sell what they do — as in UPS’s “Whiteboard” ad campaign — to plotting strategy.”

Just for laughs, my wife, who’s a talented artist, did a quick sketch of me when I first hung out my shingle as a freelance copywriter in March, 2001. I was amazed. It was quick and funny — the T-shirt reads “Will Write for $.” It’s also probably closer to the “real me” than anything a brand artist could come up with.

I’ve never shown it publicly before, but if quick and simple sketches are the latest thing in branding, maybe now it’s time.

What do you think? Is it too silly and frivolous for an (ahem) “professional” like myself? Or should I start using it as part of my identity and brand? Tell me in the comments. I really would appreciate your input.

Yes, an Australian newspaper is giving away at an all-expenses-paid divorce.

The lucky ex-couple also gets a TV and a Playstation — which I suppose could result in a custody battle.

Only one guy in the world has the gall to dish out $50 million for PR and publicity: yep, Uncle Sam.

It turns out a $50 million public relations contract — to promote the Thunderbirds, the Air Force aerial stunt team — was tainted by improper influence and preferential treatment. Nothing blatantly criminal enough for anyone to go to jail, apparently. Just semi-corrupt business as usual. Details here.

But what really galls me is the idea that our military is shelling out that kind of money just to promote the T-birds. Typical government waste. Now just imagine how many more of your tax dollars are squandered on the team’s jet fuel, aircraft maintenance, pilots’ and mechanics’ salaries, etc. (Did you know that an Air Force pilot earns $75,000+ ?)

The total budget for this foolishness must be in the hundreds of millions of dollars — double if the Navy’s Blue Angels are still flying. All for something that adds zilch to our national security, and does nothing to help win the two wars this nation is fighting.

Finally, as a 20-year media veteran, I have to question how difficult it is to publicize the Thunderbirds’ appearances? A diamond-shaped squadron of jet fighters screaming overhead is pretty hard to ignore, folks. The media will be there anyway, $50 million or no $50 million.

Promoting the squadron’s appearances is a public relations slam-dunk. I’m sure other PR specialists — like me — could do the job for, say, a measly $25 million. Whatever happened to awarding the job to the low bidder?

Part of me wonders why my firm never wins fat contracts like that. Then I remember — oh yeah, it’s because I have a conscience.

What do you think? Am I all wet? Should our military be spending hundreds of millions to promote unnecessary fluff like the Thunderbirds? Or should Uncle Sam use that money for more important things — like bailing out the poor millionaires at Bear Sterns? Or do the Thunderbirds serve some useful purpose?