The Customer Service Survey
VocaLabs' weblog providing news and commentary on the challenges of providing good customer service.
Would You Buy MYXPLQ?
Thursday - June 01, 2006 01:17 PM in
I'm a member of an Internet chat board for designers of speech recognition systems, which are seeing ever increasing applications in the customer care arena (Voice User Interface Designers, or VUIDS). And I received an interesting note this AM from the VUIDS group referencing a New York Times Article from today's paper:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/30/health/30stoc.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/30/health/30stoc.html
It seems that the National Academy of Science has just issued a report suggesting that stocks with ticker symbols that are easy to pronounce are likely to be perceived as more valuable, and so sell for higher prices that stocks with hard to pronounce symbols.
A lab test rated fictional stocks as well as observing how researchers rated future performance estimates and "fluently named" companies were predicted to outperform hard-to-pronounce ones by a significant margin.
The researchers than tested the theory on real IPOs finding the easy names outperformed the difficult named companies.
The article stresses that the disparity disappears over time, as actual company performance becomes known and cites other research that people simply are more confident and trusting of easily processed information than more complex data, and that this supports the easy named stock's comparative success.
I've no idea how, but somebody will figure out how to make money in the market out of this information, and it has implications well beyond what we name our company all the way to the impact of the monikers some people stick on their kids.
Rick
A lab test rated fictional stocks as well as observing how researchers rated future performance estimates and "fluently named" companies were predicted to outperform hard-to-pronounce ones by a significant margin.
The researchers than tested the theory on real IPOs finding the easy names outperformed the difficult named companies.
The article stresses that the disparity disappears over time, as actual company performance becomes known and cites other research that people simply are more confident and trusting of easily processed information than more complex data, and that this supports the easy named stock's comparative success.
I've no idea how, but somebody will figure out how to make money in the market out of this information, and it has implications well beyond what we name our company all the way to the impact of the monikers some people stick on their kids.
Rick
Posted at 01:17 PM by | | | |