I’ve got mixed feelings on QR codes. I’m really conflicted. On one hand, I feel like they are a totally reasonable way to move consumers from an offline point of sale piece, display, or other print ad, to some deeper interactive experience. On the other hand, too many buffoon marketers are just treating these codes like they do with every new shiny technology, and slapping it on everything, never giving thought to what the experience should be, or if the experience actually enhances the value of the message or product.

If you’ve seen the new IFC show Portlandia, there is a great sketch called “Put A Bird On It!”, which is all I can think of every time someone mentions QR codes. These damn codes are the quick knee-jerk reaction, anytime a marketer is tasked with doing something even vaguely innovative – “PUT A QR CODE ON IT!”. The clip is hilarious, and just imagine “QR codes” instead of “birds”.

One of the things that doesn’t sit well with me, is that there really isn’t much out there in the way of good, concrete usage statistics that support the case for spending money on the deployment of QR code based campaigns. Most of what you’ll find in the way of case-study and statistics, lean heavily on broad metrics around the number of smartphones shipped and in use; and then based on these numbers, an inference is made that QR codes are therefore totally scanned…like all the time. It’s flimsy support at best, and frankly the best data (not surprisingly) comes from companies that stand to benefit from the use of this technology.

You’ll also see lots of support for QR codes, based on the fact that some big brands have used, or do use them. Like “hey, Pepsi and Starbucks do it, so it has to be awesome and work!”. Just because brands do something, doesn’t mean that it is well-thought out, makes sense, or is good practice. As a brand (or any marketer), you should always be asking one question before you put a QR code on something. ANd that question is “does this make the interaction/experience materially better for the user?”. If the answer is no, don’t do it. And if the answer is that it actually makes the experience WORSE (which is more common than not), then DEFINITELY don’t do it.

I actually got a mailer from Banana Republic a while back, that had a QR code on it, and the execution was infuriatingly poor. The mailer had two coupons in it (which I tore out immediately) and then was four or five pages of shots from their spring collection catalog shoot. At the end of the brochure, was a QR code, which upon scan, merely launched a Banana Republic commercial. Literally just a moving version of the brochure. It was a great example in my opinion, of an opportunity to more deeply engage me, gone to waste. Rather than show me something useful and substantive (how about a little video on how to mix and match the items in the collection?), they just made me irritated and added no value to the experience. In fact, they lessened the experience by setting the expectation of something interesting, only to double-cross me with a useless video that took 20 seconds to load up, and then totally disappointed.

I applaud the brands that take initiative and experiment with or test new technologies, but I REALLY admire the ones that are smart enough to realize when these experiments and tests yield poor results, and then make adjustments or direction changes. So maybe next time around, Banana Republic will provide something more useful and intriguing for its audience.

This summer, I’ve actually got some QR driven campaigns that will be out in the real-world. I’m really anxious to get the data back after they run (both quantitative and qualitative), and curious to see what the numbers look like, and how these were (or weren’t) actually used.

While walking to Starbucks this morning, I was thinking about beer and about location-based services. Two things I tend to think of often. The specific thought was that while so many startups, services, and web-apps try to clumsily back location-based features, or check-in mechanics into whatever they are doing, there are really very few instances where this is done elegantly and with a real benefit to the user.

Foursquare obviously sits atop this chain, and has done a good job (as the segment leader/creator should) of setting the general standard for how the user benefits of these apps are defined. In their case, the benefits are broad – find your friends, explore the city, earn badges and unlock specials. But once you drill down into the more niche apps, often times the inclusion of location and check-ins, seems somewhat forced at best, and totally annoying/useless at worst.

Which takes me to Untappd, an example (in my opinion) of an app that really leverages location-based features and check-in mechanics in a beautifully simple and effective way.

In case you aren’t familiar with this app, Untappd is part beer diary, part game, part social network, and in largest part, a beer-discovery-engine. In their own words:

Untappd is a new way to socially share the brew you’re currently enjoying, as well as where you’re enjoying it, with your friends! Curious what your friends are drinking or where they’re hanging out? Just check out their Untappd profile and comment on their share and find out! It’s a great way to spread your favorite brews and hang outs with your friends.

Beer geeks are all about discovery. They are always asking “what new beers are out there?”, “who is drinking them?”, and most importantly, “where can I find these beers?”. Untappd facilitates this discovery process in such a simple way, and from each of these three directions. It hits squarely on (and only on) the things that matter to their core users, and serves up this information remarkably efficiently and well.

• See which beers are on tap at a particular location, based on check-in activity.
• If you’ve got friends with similar tastes, see what they are drinking, and where they are drinking it.
• Search for a beer you’ve been wanting to try, and use check-in activity to see where it’s being poured.

And for what it’s worth, I don’t have any formal business relationship with these guys, save for a little badge tinkering we did back last year. I just happen to have used the app, and had the chance to talk with Greg and Tim, and really like what these guys are up to.

There are also some other similar apps out there, which I haven’t had the chance to try. Such as RedPint (because it’s iPhone only), and Beerby (installed, but haven’t used yet).

But unlike the 1,000+ other nitwits on launch day, I chose not to stand in a 3 hour long line (on a Friday night) to get my hands on one. I instead chose to hang at my favorite dive bar, tossing back beers with friends. I do not regret this decision.

In fact, I haven’t waited in line for much of anything, since some friends and I camped out overnight for a Playstation 2 back when I was in college. But to be fair, we were young, we were probably intoxicated, and let’s face it…we didn’t have anything else to do. These days, the only things I really tolerate waiting in line for, are grocery checkout and airport security. Neither of which I like. I just have no choice.

Right, so iPad2. I want one.

I’ve decided that there are three things that are pulling me towards this device. First, I find myself constantly fiddling with my phone, whenever I am sitting on the couch watching sports. Looking up stats, matchups, scores, whatever. I currently do it on my Android device, which is workable, but not great. iPad would be WAY better for this. And I do this A LOT, so right there, tons of use. Second, I don’t read as much good stuff online as I used to. I just don’t have the time anymore, and frankly since Bloglines committed suicide (I know it has since come back), my mechanisms for reading long form stuff changed in a way that just threw off my rhythm. The iPad will be a good before-bed magazine-style reading device. I think. And then lastly, with the HDMI out, the ability to hookup to any tv easily, is a big selling point for me.

The problem is, you can’t get one of these things unless you are willing to get up at 5am to wait in the aforementioned lines, or pay some ungodly sum to someone who DID wait in line, via the secondary market.

But at what point does the seemingly intentional squeeze on the supply side, take those on the demand side from sense-of-urgency excitement, to flat out annoyance and aggravation? I am no economist (I only half-heatedly and occasionally play someone who is sort of interested in basic microeconomics), but I imagine there is some graph/curve/theory here of how to properly balance this control of supply to fuel demand without alienating potential buyers.

I suppose it’s a somewhat messy thing to accurately measure, since it really combines quantitative and qualitative data in sort of a goofy way. But still…at this point, I am starting to get annoyed.