James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

You may have noticed that every second Thursday, over the last few months, I have posted a blog on a topic that explores entrepreneurship. I hope that these aren’t coming too frequently (if they are, I’m sure you’ll let me know).

Over this same period of time, there is one topic that has dominated the media.

You know what it is. I’m talking about the big ‘D’.

No…

Not Depression.

The big ‘D’ I’m talking about stands for…

Distraction!

In a recent interview with BusinessWeek, Google CEO Eric Schmidt was asked whether Google’s strategy would change as the US economy heads into a likely recession.

He replied, “What recession?”

And then went on to say…

Innovation has nothing to do with downturns. A hot product will sell just as well in a recession as it will in a non-recession. Let’s imagine that we invented a better advertising product for television.

What would our revenue growth be for that? Well, you’re into a $50 billion market, so it will be driven not by whether there’s a television ad recession but by what degree we can get people to substitute [our product] for the other.

The strong companies understand this, and during a recession, they invest.

Or take a moment to reflect on the words of Bill Gates:

Even though we’re in an economic downturn, we’re in an innovation upturn.

I’ve been watching the general behaviour and attitude of our readers pretty closely for the last six months, and I get the impression that they (I mean, you) tend to agree.

If you have a hot idea, the economy is unlikely to deter you.

If you’re a young venture, you just might need to bootstrap a little harder (like all quality startups, including Google and Microsoft in their early days). If you’re a more established venture, you’d be mad to not start working on your next big thing now (because innovation takes time and you want to be ready for the next upturn).

A venture associated with Anthill, called (re)innovate challenge, is inviting Australian organisations to form teams and undergo six months of training.

The goal for each team is to develop ideas worthy of spin-off, from wild new products to processes and operational efficiencies.

The program costs $1,650 per team and has already attracted 220 registrations of interest! This one example demonstrates that 220 companies already understand the value of innovation, irrespective of the economic climate.

(BTW - If you’re the CEO or HR manager, get your company behind this initiative. It’s a program designed to make innovation accessible to as many businesses as possible. The goal is to make innovation just a natural part of the employee development mix and make Australia’s innovation capacity absolutely explode! Click here.)

But I digress.

It seems to this not-so-humble commentator that the most harmful effect of this economic downturn on the state of the Australian economy, so far, appears to not be its impact on our hip pockets but on our hearts and minds.

So, if you are feeling stressed (spitting out beads of sweat, rather than gems of wisdom) just remember that many of the world’s most successful companies hit their stride at the height of recession. Just ask Eric, Bill or even Kellogs!

Thems my two cents for the fortnight (otherwise known as my dwindling share portfolio).

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

As you all well know, Anthill Magazine is committed to building a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship in Australia.

Our readers probably know better than most that the majority of Australian businesses don’t get innovation. As a nation we are facing new challenges. New ideas are needed.

But only 34 percent of Australian businesses pursue innovation. There’s no doubt about it, for Australia to remain competitive more businesses must innovate.

That’s why Anthill is backing a new initiative called (re)innovate challenge.

(re)innovate challenge is a national business planning challenge developed to inspire businesses and teach them how to innovate. Over five months, these teams will receive extensive training to turn their ideas into viable business plans.

To spice things up (re)innovate challenge culminates in state-level awards and national-level prizes in the middle of 2009.

In short, (re)innovate challenge is a five month program designed to…

• Teach companies “how to” innovate.
• Over this time, ideas will be developed into business plans, creating spin-offs, efficiencies and a ‘can do’ culture in participating organisations.
• At a cost of $1,650 per team, (re)innovate offers on online program, concluding with state and industry prizes and awards.

Throughout the five months, each team will have access to forums, training manuals and video lessons to assist in every stage of bringing an innovative idea into reality – all this is done via the internet so becoming a part of (re)innovate challenge enables teams to work on this in their own time. 

Go to http://www.reinnovate.com.au/information/timeline for the (re)innovate challenge timeline. If you’re the CEO or HR manager, get your company behind this initiative. The goal is to make innovation just a natural part of the employee development mix and make Australia’s innovation capacity absolutely explode!

Plus, your employees might just develop the next big thing.

Teams representing Australian businesses are currently entering their ideas. 

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

When you run your own business, some days are sooooo much better than others.

Most of us business owners seem to spend such an inordinate amount of time putting out spot fires, resolving unforeseen dilemmas and chasing forever imminent deadlines that it’s sometimes hard to remember the reasons we went into business in the first place.

That’s why, when something good and unexpected happens, life’s all the sweeter for it.

Today is one of those ’sweet’ days.

I am pleased to announce two developments that make me smile; firstly, at the ingenuity of a company that epitomises innovation and, secondly, at the growing reputation and influence of our own Anthill (and you, our proverbial tenants).

Development number one… Google ingenuity taps Australia.

Google understands that Australian business owners think differently from their friends over the pond.

We are tech-savvy but cynical. We are ambitious but largely risk averse (sadly). We rely perhaps too heavily on personal connections and because of that we build most our businesses using word-of-mouth as our primary marketing channel.

Whether this is good news or not, it nevertheless places Australian business owners in an unusual position. A unique position, in fact.

We offer the perfect commercial landscape for a ‘road test’. As Frank Sinatra once declared, “If I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere.”

Could this mean that Australia is the new New York?

Either way, Google has developed a new e-learning tool, specifically for the Australian market, called ‘10 Steps to Promote your Business Online’.

And guess what? Anthill readers are getting the chance to road test it before anywhere else!

Development number two… Anthill’s readers are spreadin’ the news.

If Australia is the new New York, I can only assume that Anthill readers must be the new ‘Mad Men’, Madison Avenue’s famous (and infamous) marketing elite, known to ignite a global inferno of jibber-jabber at the drop of a designer cigarette.

Why? Because Anthill readers are erudite, articulate, educated, genuinely curious and driven by the process of creation (and hopefully not immune to flattery).

Seriously, you guys and gals represent Australia’s forward-thinking elite.

As such, we invite you to click here and test this new tool before anyone else.

The really good news is that this new tool was designed to help SMEs wrap their heads around online marketing and get started with a marketing plan, which first and foremost starts with search marketing.

It was developed by Google with an educational aim of helping SMEs understand the online space, whomever they might use to manage their online marketing and wherever they decide to implement their pay-per-click strategy.

By testing this tool, we also hope that you might just learn a thing or two about your business and its online marketing strategy in the process.

If, like ol’ blue eyes, you ‘want to be a part of it’ and shape a new business tool that has been missing in the Australian SME population for years (including the option to provide comments and constructive feedback to Google), click here.

First chance to trial. A new tool from Google for Australian businesses. And the opportunity to reward our loyal readers.

Now that’s what I call a good day in business.

Once you’ve ‘road-tested’ this new online learning tool, you can provide your feedback by completing our three-question survey (click here).

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

The following blog post was first published as the Editor’s Note of Anthill Magazine Aug/Sep 2008 (AA29)

Why do people keep asking me to be reasonable?

It was George Bernard Shaw who gave us the maxim, ‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’

As you know, we like to question common assumptions at Anthill, fight conventional wisdom, rally together to combat commercial stupidity.

We particularly enjoy it when we’re able to rattle some cages in partnership with our readers, because if progress depends on the unreasonable man (and woman), just imagine what an unreasonable army of Anthillians can achieve.

And we’ve been busy lately, joining our readers to collectively protest the surprise closure of Commercial Ready, inviting Anthillian blog readers to contribute to our Magazine 2.0 experiment and, in this edition, we contradict some basic assumptions of business and test the boundaries of ‘freeconomics’.

A recent highlight of Anthill activism, and the first of the examples above, took place on 19 June when ‘up to one hundred’ annoyed constituents, according to one of Minister Lindsay Tanner’s media spokespersons, called the offices of the Federal Minister for Finance and Deregulation to voice their collective concern over the Federal Government’s decision to cut Commercial Ready (CR).

The decision to cut CR, one of Australia’s most successful grant programs to support innovation, was made in reference to a report completed by the Productivity Commission, part of Minister Tanner’s portfolio, which found that the program supported too many projects that would have gone ahead without public support.

Of course, that’s easy to say once a project has raised development finance elsewhere, enhanced by the endorsement implicit in a government grant, and, only then, proven commercially successful. The scrapping raised the ire of our readers and almost anyone dedicated to the development of Australian innovative, new-to-world technologies and the companies that support them.

A stream of angry comments communicating the frustration, disappointment and general dismay of many Australian entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, scientists, technologists and innovation professionals began to appear on the Anthill blog, accompanied by a swelling ant hill of emails and letters to the editor.

And then, with a bit of help from Anthill, this general ire began to manifest itself into action, a ‘flash protest’, a mass ‘call-in’ to the Minister’s parliamentary office in Canberra with a simple message:

“My name is [insert name here] and I’m calling to voice my concern at the closure of Commercial Ready. Can you please make sure that the Minister gets my message?”

Normally an uninspiring and fairly bland sentiment such as this would go unnoticed, particularly if the 30 word message was presented by just one, lone and often lonely recalcitrant (as is generally the case). However, when delivered by ‘up to one hundred’ people, over a six hour period, orchestrated by email and SMS, the impression created becomes hard to ignore, representing one call every 3.6 minutes, relaying the same repetitive message.

Surprisingly (at least to me), all this ‘rabble rousing’ (without the rabble) has caused some of our observers (and even supporters) to criticise this editor because, by providing the technology and guidance to coordinate this flash protest, we complicated the jobs of our elected officials.

What the!?

To set the record straight, I am a proponent of positive change. (That’s how I ‘lean’.) However, change for the sake of change is just plain dangerous. And it’s the responsibility of every unreasonable man and woman to exclaim vigorously, “Hey! There’s a baby in that bathwater!” whenever the need arises, irrespective of their political persuasion or slant.

As I post this blog, Federal Innovation Minister Kim Carr has yet to make any decision on the matter, after declining to do so until the outcomes of the National Innovation Review, chaired by the respected Dr Terry Cutler, are released. (However, he did contribute his thoughts on Australian innovation in an Op-Ed column for the current edition.)

I, for one, without the benefit of hindsight, am excited. Like Anthill’s editorial ethos, the recommendations won’t please everyone. But that’s fine, so long as Australia keeps producing unreasonable people, progress will prevail.

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

I was part of an ‘intimate’ and ‘confidential’ dinner with Innovation Minister Kim Carr last Wednesday night.

The topic was innovation (of course). And it was held for a small group of innovation experts, mostly academics and policy makers. The discussion initially focused on the role of government (as we await the outcomes of Dr Terry Cutler’s National Innovation Review) and was held ‘off the record’ (I was bound to secrecy).

However, I can tell you this…

Innovation is fast becoming the most boring topic on the planet.

At least, that’s my ‘educated’ view.

I sometimes think of myself as an ‘addict’ (addicted to innovation) and that I’ve been told to talk through my addiction as part of my therapy.

Unfortunately, I’ve talked so much and listened to so much talk (call it group therapy) that I fear my addiction might soon be cured. This would be sad, indeed.

The confidential discussion that triggered this rant (I do have an eventual point, if you bear with me) was held as part of a book launch, Measured Success, edited by Peter Cebon of the Melbourne Business School.

The book itself is very informed and successfully highlights the main problems associated with innovation in Australia through case studies and commentary from experts.

In particular (pay close attention now), it makes the critical observation that innovative companies tend to focus either on the technology (the solution to the problem they’re trying to solve) or the market (what the market actually wants and how to reach that market).

It won’t come as a surprise that of the companies profiled those that focused on the market were more likely to be successful than those fixated on the technology.

So, here’s my question?

Why can’t the innovation community heed this observation?

I’m talking about the academics, the policy makers, the advisers and the consultants who have a greater need to generate passion for innovation than anyone else - because it’s their job to feed innovation (or feed off it).

Yet, time and time again the discussion rages on without true private-sector engagement, in a language that the private sector doesn’t use, in a way that would put the most afflicted insomniac into a blissful coma.

Are we too busy talking about the problem to think about the market (let alone engage with it)?

Am I alone on this? Five years ago, the cover story of Anthill’s launch edition asked the question, “Who’s carrying innovation?” Has anything changed? Are we making progress or or are we doomed to spend another five years engaged in verbal masturbation (speaking for our own gratification)?

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

I think that the next step in this fun form of activism should be for Anthill to send the nice receptionist in Minister Tanner’s office a big, fat bunch of flowers. She deserves it!

According to independent online media service Scopical, the Minister’s media advisers were quick to downplay the phone-in: “I wouldn’t say it was particularly large… it’s probably under one hundred.”

Wait a minute!

Our team of bespectacled mathematicians at the ‘Anthill Institute’ (imagine pristine white laboratories and multiple security passes… or me, in convalescing state, with calculator in hand) has done the numbers and…

That’s up to 16 calls every hour.

Or…

One call every four minutes!

The tight-lipped nature of the response (a pre-prepared comment, at the ready) and obvious awareness of ‘the cause’ suggest to me that an impression was made. I too would be doing me best to avoid media follow-up.

According to the same spokesperson…

“The caller’s names have all been recorded and they will be sent to the Minister, and he will review it.”

That’s a good start.

But, while organising our big, bouquet for the Minister’s lovely and ever-courteous receptionist, I also plan to find a company that delivers nuts. Not cashews. Not almonds. No, I’ll be sending a package that says:

“The scrapping of Commercial Ready was JUST PLAIN NUTS!”

I have prepared a letter that I invite readers to download, stick on company letter head and send to the Minister. If you’re feeling really adventurous, also send some nuts. (Heh heh.)

If you don’t have a lot of time, I have set up an easy email link with a pre-drafted email.

Click the link and a pre-drafted letter/email will appear.

Make sure that you take advantage of this easy tool we’ve set up before you go home today. Follow-up is important.

Lastly… Did we make a difference? Honestly, I don’t know.

My natural belief is that activism is good. It’s a necessary part of our system (because elected officials and their staff aren’t always right). And for those who took part yesterday, you’ll also know… it feels good too!

While some of you might be tiring of ‘Anthill Activism’ (Antivism?), others are just getting revved up. As such, I’ve decided to create the ‘Anthill Army’. (This brand of ours knows no bounds!)

If you want to take part further or be invited to join us in other activities with political purpose, click here and fill out the form.

And, of course, please post your experiences, thoughts and suggestions about yesterday and the future below.

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

Rumours of my spinal injury have been greatly exaggerated.

Well…. Not really.

When you see the words ‘potential impotence’ among the risks of surgery, you know that things are about to get serious (a state of mind I’ve never been fond of).

Fortunately, the risks have passed. And in my convalescent state, I’ve had plenty of time to brood. It will still be some weeks before I’m no longer home-bound but that won’t prevent me from finishing what we (you and me, my friends) have started.

At the end of this month, the extended period of the Innovation Review will come to its conclusion. That doesn’t leave much time to get a clear and helpful message across.

Below are just some of the interesting comments left in response to my post two weeks ago:

Allan Aaron said:
“It’s imperative that anyone with an interest in seeing this situation redressed makes a strenuous argument to the national innovation review at innovationreview@innovation.gov.au and, of course, to their government representatives.”

Tim said:
“Perhaps James or Chris could offer a place where participants could contribute their thoughts.”

Paul Cheever said:
“I now want to prepare and distribute across the governments and the Panel a profile of active venture interests stories.”

Liesl asked:
“If we want to take an active role in lobbying government, and show quantifiable national benefit of the grants, and the loss to the country of CR dying, where should we make a noise?”

After reading these blog comments, while stuck at the Epworth, I had a number of epiphanies. (Thank the good soul who invented Morphine. Hopefully, not another Commercial Ready casualty).

Epiphany #1… Hassle the Hasslers

Anthill’s proactive stance would not have take shape unless our readers had hassled us first. Of course, we were naturally dismayed at the scrapping of CR. We have encouraged and promoted many, many CR success stories in our brief history.

But it was not until you, our readers, asked us to take a stand that we began to review our options.

So… it seems sensible to bring this matter to the people and outlets (other media) that can further emphasise the need for CR or a CR alternative to the decision makers and the broader public.

Here’s my first test suggestion…

Text Q&A en masse.

Q&A is an ABC Television program that brings together political leaders and asks viewers to text their questions. We now have over 200 people who have registered to use SMS as a tool for a ‘flash protest’. Why not unleash the power of 200 on the ABC and see what happens?

If successful, I propose that we hit Sunrise (K Rudd has a weekly spot), then talk-back radio. Maybe even The Seven-Thirty Report?

Readers, I’ll need your help.

Please tell me if you think this is a good idea (or have I simply exceeded my prescribed dose of painkillers for the day?). If so, I’ll SMS the number to text and a sample message. (Perhaps you can let me know what you think a helpful question might be?) Also, what radio and television programs feature our political leaders in your neck of the woods? (I hung up my PR hat many moons ago.)

In short…

1. Is this a good idea?
2. What’s a good message or question?
3. What other outlets should we take our message to?

Epiphany #2… Make our anxiety known to the political decision makers

On this issue, many a buck has been passed.

I don’t want to name names, but… Oh heck…

According to various newspaper reports and comments made publicly during speeches (and a virtual sack of email messages to Anthill), the following two political representatives have voiced disappointment at the scrapping of Commercial Ready.

• Senator Kim Carr, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research
• Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy

However, if you ask who is to ‘blame’, it seems that the trail invariably leads back to a bunch of faceless number-crunchers in Finance (Lindsay Tanner’s portfolio).

• The Hon Lindsay Tanner MP, Minister for Finance and Deregulation.

But! I personally elect my officials to make decisions. Yet, I cannot find an official happy to concede that this decision was made under his/her mandate of responsibility.

Here’s my second test suggestion…

Phone or mail each of the leaders’ branch offices.

Once again, en masse, on a prescribed day (announced by SMS). If you deem this suggestion a good one, we’ll text the numbers. All we’ll need from you is to open the text and hit the call button twice. Most mobile phones will do the rest. We can also send a sample message (or, once again, please make any suggestions you like below).

Unfortunately, this second suggestion requires that we make a pest of ourselves, which can be counter-productive. That’s why I’m suggesting branch offices. Each branch office takes a log of calls, which carry through to the elected representative and their advisers. A call is more powerful than an email (email lost its currency as a political tool when it became too easy to tap and send).

It’s easy to imagine that 200 phone calls in one eight-hour day (that’s 25 calls an hour) would be enough to make an impression without forcing the cogs of political branch-office politics to grind to a halt.

But if anyone has a better idea, we’re all eyes and ears. Maybe a template Letter that can be downloaded and sent via snail mail would be a more effective idea? After all, they say a letter is worth 10,000 constituents.

In short…

1. Is this a good idea?
2. What’s a good message or question?
3. Are there others that we should be contacting as well or instead?

Epiphany #3… Make all this count

The sad truth is that cancelled programs rarely, if ever, get reinstated. They are more likely to be resurrected in a different form or not at all.

This is partly because politicians are extremely reluctant to ‘back-flip’ on a decision (as any opposition will describe a public change in position, no matter how sensible, as just that: a back-flip).

So… while all these activities will demonstrate that a CR alternative is necessary (and that the electorate is unhappy and watching), positive suggestions are required, preferably ideas that are not simply opportunistic (like many of the 630 submissions to the Review already received).

Applications for the Innovation Review officially ended in May, but ‘unofficially’ the Review has indicated that it is prepared to accept late submissions of high importance.

Please do as Allan Aaron suggests above and mail ideas and suggestions to the National Innovation Review at innovationreview@innovation.gov.au and, of course, to your government representatives.

At Anthill, we will be packaging up all your comments from my previous post and submitting them to the PTBs (powers-that-be). We also recommend that you visit the Review website to check out the suggestions of others.

Last words…

If CR is unlikely to get a reprieve, why should we do this?

Firstly, because despite the ‘efforts’ at engagement (Forums, Submissions etc), which were based on genuinely good intentions by a group of smart and well-meaning people, the whole process, nevertheless, still stinks of an innovation system that is no longer innovative (in my humble opinion).

Forums and Submissions attract opportunism of the worst kind. Who else wants to spend hours in a town hall? Or weeks devising a submission except people with something to gain? This is something that I’ve climbed on my old soapbox about before (“Did you get your say at Senator Carr’s Innovation Review?”).

Secondly, while the Panel is made up of some of the smartest innovation experts Australia has produced, the members also only represent representatives of the baby-boom generation.

Yet, the technologies now available to drive real collaboration and engagement are largely created, driven and preferred by the people who have the most vested interest in a nation with robust innovation capabilities – Gen X and Gen Y.

Finally, not everyone has the luxury of being able to lie at home, writing blog posts and making cracks about prescription medicines (or fighting for innovation in Australia). And it would burn my soul not to use this opportunity (the scrapping of CR) to rouse interest in this debate and put innovation in the hands of the innovators.

If you think any suggestions seem too demanding, off-track or unlikely to engender an appropriate response (or your involvement), please let me know. In return, I’ll try to keep things as simple as possible (via SMS).

What say you, Anthillians? Is this the way forward or am I quietly turning into a crack-pot recalcitrant, going insane with only soft-toys, Tremazapan and my laptop for company?

Posted by Paul Ryan, Editor, Anthill Magazine

Thanks to everyone who emailed, posted comments on this blog and volunteered to participate in Anthill’s imminent ‘flash’ protest against the federal government’s axing of the Commercial Ready programmes. Your response was, quite simply, overwhelming. (Literally. It melted this blog for a few hours.)

A clear and vocal majority of you obviously share our dismay regarding the abolition of one of the government’s most effective initiatives supporting start-ups in Australia. Plans for appropriate Anthillian activism are in development, but have been delayed briefly due to the hospitalisation of Anthill founder/publisher James Tuckerman for back surgery (perhaps brought on by his recent bouts of revolutionary fervour). James went under the knife at 2pm yesterday afternoon. The operation was a complete success and he’ll be back in the trenches before you can say “people power”.

So sit tight, comrades. Action is at hand. James will return (with even more spine) ready and raring to defend the interests of innovative Aussie start-ups.

If you’d like to pass on your best wishes for James during his convalescence, please leave a comment below. And if you want to help save Commercial Ready (or have it replaced by an even better programme), there’s still time to do your bit and get involved. Sign up here.

Cheers,

Paul Ryan
Editor
Anthill Magazine

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

It’s often said that entrepreneurs see the world differently.

It has been observed that entrepreneurs have a higher tolerance for risk. They are also able to see opportunity where others might only see peril. Or, at least, that’s the common wisdom.

They are said to be creative, right-brain thinkers, big-picture people.

This is an assumption I’d like to test.

When we interview a new prospective employee at Anthill we ask the following question…

Q1: If a turtle loses his shell, is he naked or homeless?

Of course, there is no correct answer. But the thought process behind the answer can tell you a lot about a person. Ask a friend what they think the answer is and how they reached their conclusion.

You’ll see what I mean.

We also have a simple way to test honesty. (Entrepreneurs are often said to be inherently flexible on matters of honesty, a vastly erroneous claim in our experience.)

Here’s a factual scenario: My sister lost her purse eight times between the ages of 12 and 18 (true story).

Q2: How many times do you think the purse was returned?

Q3: Of the times the purse was returned, how many times do you think it still contained her money?

The answer will depend on your level of trust and distrust, which is usually a reflection of your own capacity for honesty (the degree to which you might have been tempted to do the wrong thing if you had found the purse).

For example, ask a child under 10 this question and then ask a gentleman of eighty. You’ll get a vastly different answer. Ask a priest, then a criminal and you’ll find a similar disparity.

So, how did you rate? How many times did my big sis’ get her purse back?

Eight out of eight.

How many times did the purse still contain her money?

Eight of eight (again).

So, here’s my final test. And I’m seeking your participation (through an online poll).

Below you’ll see an image of a girl turning.

But is she turning clockwise or anti-clockwise?

If clockwise is your answer, then you use more of the right side of your brain (the creative side). If she is turning anti-clockwise, then you use more of the left side of your brain (the analytical side). Most people see the dancer turning anti-clockwise.

But what is the natural reaction of the Australian innovator and entrepreneur?

Help us find out by taking part in our online poll. Are entrepreneurs left brain or right brain thinkers? Is the girl turning clockwise or anti-clockwise? To join us in our not-so-scientific experiment, click here.

James Tuckerman, Editor-In-Chief, Anthill Magazine

If you haven’t guessed already, we love to write about cheeky and provocative companies. But we rarely get the opportunity to talk about our own corporate shenanigans, successful or otherwise.

Today is one of those rare, self-indulgent occasions.

In early February, with news that Australia’s oldest circulating business magazine would be closing after 127 years, we released an email with the eyeball-grabbing title, ‘Who wants to help Anthill buy The Bulletin?’

And wowee! Did we get people talking.

The flood of emails, blog comments and phone calls generated by our rally-to-arms not only opened our eyes to the hidden popularity of The Bulletin (gotta love the loyalty of magazine readers). But it only showed us the faith you, our readers, have in Anthill. To check out the blog comments, click here (bless you all).

So, was it really our intention to buy The Bulletin?

Not in our wildest dreams. (Although, our ‘play’ did give rise to some pretty vivid dreams in the months following.)

The purpose of the email was to grab the collective collar of the Australian magazine industry, give it a good, hardy shake and make known the obvious: We are here and we are here to stay (cue Eye of the Tiger on your cassette tape now).

And what were the outcomes of this chest-beating exercise?

Firstly, the story was picked up by the daily papers and then the industry rags. To read our favourite (’tongue-in-cheek’) item of media coverage, click here. The story was circulated through various blogs and electronic channels, including the prestigious Walkley Awards membership newsletter. It also generated record traffic levels on our website (always good for our number crunchers).

But did all the kerfuffle motivate the powers that be at ACP, owners of this now defunct magazine institution, to pick up the blower and give us a call?

At this point, I’ll defer to my circumspect response when approached by Australia’s leading source of political gossip and corporate skulduggery, Crikey.com.

“No comment.”

Am I averting a dangerous breach of some carefully crafted non-disclosure agreement or am I simply adding fuel to the fire of controversy? (Heh heh.) Only time will tell.

In the short-term, we hope our subscribers got a giggle (at least a surprise) when they received our current edition and that we didn’t confuse too many news agency proprietors with our own little attempt to ‘revive The Bulletin’.

The image below is currently available as the reverse cover of our Apr/May edition…

…The Bullantin (Australia’s leading source of Ant-related news).

Click here (or the image) to read the headlines.