I will be speaking on July 26 and 27 at the JA Jewelry Show at the Javits Center in two sessions entitled “Social Networking – Best Practices”.
Click here for the press release from National Jeweler.
Look forward to seeing you there!
I will be speaking on July 26 and 27 at the JA Jewelry Show at the Javits Center in two sessions entitled “Social Networking – Best Practices”.
Click here for the press release from National Jeweler.
Look forward to seeing you there!
We had an exciting show in Vegas this year, not just trading diamonds and jewelry, but educating and networking. We also rolled out a new product, The Social Jeweler, which was received very well.
Some highlights included being on a panel about Social Media in the jewelry industry that was featured in JCK Online:
Ron Samuelson, of Samuelson Diamonds in Baltimore, said he’s seen a big spike in traffic as a result of his presence on social networks. “The other day I had two customers come in that I knew from Twitter and nowhere else,” he said. “I believe it’s helped me very much.”
It certainly has been useful for getting publicity. Samuelson notes that he’s been written up in the Wall Street Journal and Baltimore magazine.
“Every single reporter is on Twitter,” he said. “Before, you needed a PR agency to get press. Now all you need to do is hit an ‘at reply’ and you can get the attention of a New York Times reporter.”
The full article: JCK Las Vegas: Social Media Can Help Jewelers, Panel Agrees
I also spoke at the Couture Show that was featured in National Jeweler in this article: ABJ Panelists Help Solve Social Networking Issues
Then on Sunday I was interviewed by Engagement 101 magazine for a video that will be out in a few weeks. Here’s the writeup on the shoot:
And of course, we were buying (and selling) some great jewelry! Below is a stunning bridal set from Lieberfarb, a Michele Diamond Deco Watch and a BIG yellow cushion cut diamond ring. Come by and check them out!
To check out my Vegas blog post for some more personal stuff please click here: JCK Las Vegas
JUNE 2, 2010: Samuelson’s Diamonds, Baltimore’s Downtown Diamond Destination, was featured in the June 1st Edition of JCK Online in the article titled ‘Social Climbing’:

Technically, this isn’t social media, but it’s essential to have a hub on your website that you can quickly update on your own without the aid of a programmer. When it comes to search-engine rankings, Google loves fresh content, and a blog is an easy way to add keyword-rich new stuff to your site. Use your blog to reach out to your customers. Offer them resources to aid them in decision-making; share the expertise you and your staff have worked so hard to acquire. Schechter suggests checking out Verragio (verragio.com) and Samuelson’s Diamonds (baltimorediamonds.com)—two sites that do it right.
Samuelson’s is continuing its focus on being a leader in the jewelry industry in social media and cutting edge technology.
The original article, “Social Climbing”, can be found here. A special thanks to our friend Michael Schechter of Honora Pearls for writing this informative piece.
MAY 6 2010: Third generation Baltimore jeweler Ron Samuelson of Samuelson’s Diamonds, Baltimore’s downtown diamond destination, will be speaking in the America’s Best Jewelers breakfast education series during the 2010 Couture jewelry show in Las Vegas, June 3-7 2010. The topic will be Social Media Best Practices.
Details about Ron’s appearance:
Saturday, June 5
7:30 a.m. to 8 a.m.–Breakfast
8 a.m. to 9 a.m. -”Peer Panel 3: Social Networking 2–Best Practices.” Join your fellow jewelers to continue the social networking discussion, concerning maximize return from social networking. What are realistic expectations? What tools do you need to get started? How do you gain customers?
The presenter for this session will be Ron Samuelson, chief executive officer of Samuelson’s Diamonds, an 87-year-old, family-owned business. The retailer’s Facebook fan page, titled simply “Diamonds,” boasts more than 300,000 fans.
We hope to see you there!
The original article is available here: National Jeweler – America’s Best Jewelers announces speaker lineup.
Given that we’ve recently had a run in with Yelp and their way of handling business to business relations, I’ve had this post in my thoughts for some time. Understand that despite the fact I work for Samuelson’s, I am sympathetic to Yelp’s position. I am, however, not an idealist; nor do I strictly believe that Yelp’s founders or operators are idealists either. Given some of the news that has come out lately – allegations of misconduct on Yelp’s part regarding advertisement plans and quid-quo-pro arrangements – I decided I’d finally give my opinion.
First, it’s helpful to understand that Yelp is not a scam. Or rather, Yelp was not created to be a scam (perhaps a lightweight cult, but not a scam…) but that the ways which it seems to guys in our position that Yelp is a scam, is because of what Yelp has to do to make their model work.
The idea as I understand it is to be a form of free yellow pages with a social network built into it, which connects people via interests, places they visit, and regular social connections (friendships, etc.) The goal is to become the REAL source of independent reviews of restaurants and other businesses (primarily restaurants – more on that in a moment.) In order to do this, Yelp!, unlike Google or WeddingWire or others, actually takes it upon themselves to help weed out reviews that are fake.
But what constitutes a fake review? That’s a non-trivial problem, and given that, the simplest solution is to allow all reviews to stand and let the normal non-trivial processor (the human being) figure it out using old-fashioned judgment. Most people do not take one or two five-star reviews at face value; but they also may have a good first impression even if they read and doubt.
But Yelp, as I have already stated, has a bit of idealism in them: They want to actually be the Real Reviews by Real People service, and not just in press releases.
So they take it on themselves to figure out what a ‘real’ review is. In doing so they send conflicting messages: they don’t want to you send people who had a good experience to them, since obviously this can skew results. But why would a business let anyone know Yelp exists if they don’t have some chance of benefiting from it? (And the more popular Yelp is, the more crucial this becomes!)
Additionally, restaurants are something people tend to want to make reviews on, whereas other experiences (a grocery store for instance?) do not share this impetus; therefore the ability to get ‘real‘ reviews of anything other than restaurants, maybe spas, resorts and other service industries of that type – is limited.
If you are in a place where Yelp is big, you may have some recourse; there should be enough Yelpers to get a good perspective on your business without you doing any seeding on your own. But for the cities which Yelp has as of yet neglected – you will be stuck fighting getting reviews from first-time Yelpers who may have no credit, even if they are truly Real Reviews. (Yelp has recently tried some measures to reduce the effect of this.) Because Yelp has left this decision to an algorithm, therefore the judgment is guaranteed to be poor. Like with Wikipedia, articles that are not viewed or edited much will have poor quality. You might think it’s the other way around, but it’s not. (hint: the more something is edited, the more the editors pay attention to it.)
Enter the practical side of Yelp. They need to make money somehow. This I think is why they enter cities one at a time only – only the largest and most potentially profitable markets. If they don’t do this, they will probably tank.
Now, consider the pragmatic side’s logic: It makes sense to offer benefits to paying customers – and a great benefit to businesses on a site like this would be to have more control over how you appear. Advertising makes sense, but the pragmatist might even say, we should let the businesses challenge reviews and have them removed if they are a paying customer. Why should they not? Do they pay to get punished by irate customers?
Now this would be fine if Yelp’s idealistic side had not dictated already that they were to be the site for Real Reviews – meaning, they want to project the image of being a complete listing of businesses – and to allow, as per social media / web 2.0 standards, people to add their own content, including letting Yelp know about businesses that are not on their map.
So what happens? Businesses get ‘opted in’ without their consent: Therefore the idea of offering benefits to paying customers, which in one case would seem like a benefit, now to some businesses seems like extortion. (And again, the more successful Yelp is, the worse the extortion will seem!) If I voluntarily enter into Yelp for free with knowledge that I may receive bad reviews and not be able to remove them – but such is the risk I take – there would be no problem. Then I could pay and have more control. That makes a lot of sense.
This is (still) not the case, however! And that brings us to our inevitable news.
Of all the news – the only bit of which I find interesting is this:
Lawyers representing plaintiffs dismiss an assertion Mr. Stoppelman has made on Yelp’s blog that they’re just going after the start-up’s money. …
It is an interesting accusation, and it tells me that probably the following has occurred: (These are not accusations, but pure conjecture!)
Yelp has recently taken action to try to appease small business owners, but it amounts to allowing people to view the filtered reviews after filling out a captcha (they couldn’t before!) – this is to prevent bots and search engines from indexing these reviews.
In conclusion, I do not have a solution for Yelp (or for us, really) except for one idea. To allow businesses to opt-out of Yelp would be a great step in the right direction. Businesses who do not have a good experience with Yelp because of the inherent randomness should not be punished unduly. And indeed, the experience model with different businesses varies extremely.
Yelp, like Microsoft, will find that its success punishes it: The more successful Yelp is, the more pressure there will be on businesses who did not ask to be listed to deal with Yelp – and the more pressure there will be on Yelp to offer some kind of real reconciliation between irate businesses and irate customers, and to deliver a satisfactory experience to two groups who historically hate each other in our society: ‘consumers’ and ‘corporations’.
And indeed, more pressure to find ‘real reviews’ – with an algorithm? Good luck with that one, fellas.
For the umpteenth time since last year Facebook has changed its interface. (actually, it’s the second, I think) It seems a kind of petty thing to comment on, but given that 400 million people use Facebook, it is more interesting that you don’t see commentary on this kind of thing in the mainstream.
Facebook is free. Additionally, as a part of web 2.0, it is in a real sense ‘permanently broken’ or incomplete. Nobody really knows what we’re doing, and so things change and adapt quickly. However, a real question arises – if it is true that for instance Facebook will be launching a gmail clone – will people begin to actually rely on it for vital communications? If this is so, what will a fairly moderate interface change mean? Given that people on the web are about as vocal every day as strikers are on the day of the ‘general strike’, can a service like Facebook ignore comments? What are they to do if a change removes key functionality (such as in this case, viewing updates from a specific application or status updates alone)?
It can easily be argued that Facebook is free, and therefore, you pay for what you get. But Facebook itself does not have that attitude; that’s a ’screw you’ attitude that they’d never be caught uttering. Therefore we can assume that despite being free (on the front end, anyhow) Facebook wants to give its users the best experience possible, as though they were being paid for all of this. (They are, but not directly by us.)
What is interesting in all of this is that when I spoke to Ron, he mentioned that his iPhone app still had the same functionality. In other words, the same Facebook ‘data’ is sitting there, there is just a new ‘terminal’ we who are using the Web need to use. It makes me think that going forward we will see Facebook clients, much the way we see clients for Twitter. The difference is of course that Facebook is many times more complex! Imagine though, if you could get a Facebook client for 1.99 – Facebook gets a cut of that – over a possible group of 400 million folks?
And what about how widely used (and despised?) it is… I am reminded of everyone carping about Microsoft whenever they try to change something. Difference is, we have to accept the change on Facebook. With Microsoft at least there is a few years for us to adapt. And yet we keep using it!
Free, rich communication is valuable; just like a very generic & flexible operating system is. Maybe Facebook will give up trying to play nice and annoy us until we pay to stop the annoyance. I’ll bet they won’t lose people – where else will they go? Twitter?
Or maybe the value is like that of a huge fan page – everyone is there! How can you take credit for that?
If you are not familiar with INSTORE magazine (if you don’t work in retail you might
not be) it’s the fastest growing jewelry trade magazine, and the Smart Jewelry Show is its super-sized progeny. Featuring some of the biggest names in the biz such as Matt Stuller, the show ranges from topics that interest retailers, owners and vendors, to those focused on people who make jewelry by hand.
All of this is to let you know that our own Ron Samuelson will be speaking at the Monday Pre-Show Conference in an exciting session called “Social Media – Myth or Miracle?“. Smart Jewelry Show is scheduled for four days from the 23rd of April to the 26th, and Ron will be speaking the morning of the 26th.
More details to come!

No formal connections to Twitter (as far as we know.)
I like to pay attention (with one eye at least) to the happenings in the social media world, since it is likely our success on the web going forward will involve more and more of it.
It is somewhat amusing to see the ‘new media’s equivalent of the Oscars, the Pulitzer and so forth – as it more often than not serves as a promotional tool for itself! As an outsider of course I find this intriguing, but it also makes sense from their perspective to do so.
So on to the meat here. We have the ‘most influential people on Twitter’ – and the irony of the day is Mashable reporting that their own Pete Cashmore is regarded as #1:
Along those lines, INQ Mobile has just released their 2009 Twitter (Twitter) influence study, determining the most influential Twitter users in both the UK and the world. The winner? Not Oprah, not Ashton and not Diddy, but Mashable (Mashable)’s founder and CEO Pete Cashmore!
I’d offer congrats, but then, the way social media works he has probably seen too many congratulations already to read them.
An interesting fact here is that I was not surprised in the least by this, and not because of a kind of general theory about being a media person on Twitter and thus producing a lot of tweetable content, but on this simple fact. I actually follow Cashmore.
Generally speaking, I do not follow people who have a lot of followers or who follow a lot of people (10000+) as I have no interest in shouting for attention among thousands, and I certainly have little interest in gossip or self-help. Social climbing is not for me either (you can see I have few that I follow!)
But I followed Cashmore, mostly because of three things (that I can recall.) 1. He seemed like he was really there using the account. 2. He was active. 3. He offered things I was interested in, that were if not completely unique or original represented some kind of genuine work; a collection of stories and opinions which reflect Mashable’s take on things.
Many who are out there for ‘twitter success’ seem more like they’ve randomly grabbed stuff to put up; there’s no story to the stories. All chatter, no thought.
And I tend to think that this difference itself is Cashmore’s X-factor.
Here’s a funny and informative post by our friend Bridget Forney titled “Which Social Media “Expert” Are You?”. You can read more of Bridget on her blog http://www.numbersnotinvited.com or follow her on twitter @BridgetForney.
These days, it’s not hard to find an expert on social media. Well, to rephrase, it’s not hard to find a self-proclaimed expert on social media. With the semi-recent craze for all things Twitter, Facebook and web 2.0, everyone seems to be coming out of the woodworks announcing their know-it-all status when it comes to online marketing and poking around the deep dark corners of networking websites. But how knowledgeable are these “experts”? What makes a social media expert to begin with? Which social media expert are you?
There are a few types of “experts” on the web that you may run into when looking for a professional in the social media world. Heck, you may very well be one of these social media experts. Read on to investigate the inner workings of online “specialists”…
The Twitter Expert
The Twitter Expert is one who has a Twitter account, and is probably an obsessive tweeter. They probably follow people in the thousands in an effort to increase their “follower” numbers. The people they’re following most likely will exceed their followers by a number in the hundreds at the least. This expert thinks they specialize in all things Twitter, but they’re likely the type of “I am clipping my toenails right now”-tweeter that you try to avoid. Follower quantity means more to them than follower quality and to credit their expertise, they’ll often boast about the number of followers they have – even though 80% of them are likely spammers. If you don’t follow the Twitter Expert back, they might shamelessly DM you to say, “Will you follow me back!?”
The Business Expert
The Business Expert is one who has an online presence for their business, either on Twitter, Facebook, both or other networking websites. This expert thinks their knowledge of social media is credible due to the fact that they use it for their business. This expert is about as much a social media connoisseur as the person who hands out teriyaki chicken samples in the food court at the mall is an expert at marketing Thai food. Just because you play the game, doesn’t mean you should be a coach.
The Local Expert
The Local Expert is a native to the area and may or may not be a shameless self-promoter. This expert promotes their credibility through the fact that they know the city, the town and what’s going on with the local culture, thus they probably tweet useful information often and may have a substantial and legitimate following. The only problem is, this expert probably learned everything they know from someone else. All of the information they give you is likely second hand knowledge and they may or may not take the credit for it. There is no disputing the fact that The Local Expert is experienced and familiar with using social media applications, but by no means are they social media specialists or should be offering their “services” to others.
The Unemployed Expert
The Unemployed Expert, it goes without saying, does not have a job. For this reason, they can spend unparalleled amounts of time online perfecting their social media expertise. They’re the people you see flooding your update column with useful, and sometimes controversial thoughts…ALL the time. Sparking a controversial conversation with an A-lister is probably the highlight of their jobless day. It’s okay though, because due to those particular conversations, they’re seen and virally heard by hundreds, sometimes millions. At the end of the day, sometimes it’s their social media presence that ends up getting them hired. The Unemployed Expert will likely know social media pretty well, but may or may not know the inner workings of strategic communications specifically for businesses. Ancient Chinese Proverb: He who can market himself, may not necessarily be capable of marketing others.
The Public Relations Expert
The Public Relations Expert is usually a professional in the marketing industry who first stumbled upon the beautiful world of social media in an effort to promote or advertise a client. These professionals were probably the first people online who immediately recognized the power of social media, harnessed its raging potential and used it to their advantage. Whether or not they do it effectively, however, is open to interpretation. The Public Relations, or PR, Expert accredits their expertise to the fact that they use social media for their client(s). This lucky expert has the ability to transfer their authoritative status in the marketing industry over to the world of social media. Some PR Experts can talk the talk, but not all can walk the walk.
The Salesman Expert
The Salesman Expert is generally someone who isn’t at all interested in joining a social conversation, and doesn’t really care about social media at all. This selfish social savant is only interested in selling their own product or service, and their updates will generally reflect that. These Internet marketers will sometimes boast about having the secret juice, the magic dust that will bring you followers. Don’t fall for it. Like a fat person trying to lose weight, the only way to gain followers is by doing it the good old-fashioned way: hard work and (metaphorical) exercise.
If you think your expertise has been questioned here, it probably has. Don’t get your panties in a bundle; it’s for good reason. Step back and ask yourself which social media expert are you? Are you a mixture of a few classifications? Should you REALLY be offering “services” to others on social media? The definition of a social media “expert” should not be open for interpretation. It’s not a grey issue. You either are or you aren’t.
If you’re not sure, a good rule of thumb is to wait until someone ELSE says you are. Otherwise, you’ve just been self-diagnosed. Where’s the credibility? You can tweet about being an expert and others can too; you may even have your own website, blog and newsletter, but the only thing that can qualify you as a REAL social media expert is a PROVEN track record of success. That means results.
I’ll leave you with this ancient Chinese proverb: Keep your broken arm inside your sleeve.
Go forth and tweet,
Bridget Marie
P.s. If you know of an Expert I didn’t list here, please leave me a comment and I’ll add it to the list!
I’ve often written here regarding social media, and the ‘world’ it inhabits, one of interaction, where instead of carefully choosing interactions with a mind for secrecy,
we carefully choose secrets with a mind for interaction. Obviously not everything can be ‘open’ (to do so would in many cases be more confusing than helpful, as twitter or facebook can often show us) but then the old fortress mentality is both unattractive to public opinion and in this time of rapid advance, often harmful in its effects on business practice itself.
Enough from me, though, check this out:
A FEW MONTHS AGO, I wrote an article expressing my displeasure with American Airlines‘ hideous online presence. I also spent some time mocking up a redesigned version of their website. To my surprise, a user experience designer at AA.com emailed me an amazing response describing some of the design problems faced in large corporations.
…
An hour after I posted the response, American Airlines fired Mr. X.
Read the whole thing (it isn’t long.) It is sad, perhaps, to have a non-disclosure agreement which prevents what the author suggests is a needed innovation. Sometimes business reality prevents much being done as a result of even helpful commentary from customers, and often for large corporations a comments box is open so that ‘cranks’ (people who are irate) have some place to vent.
But when things are genuinely wrong, or could be better, it is not unreasonable to interact with customers. Granted sometimes this conversation can be harmful rather than helpful – anyone who has seen an order messed up by mistake at say, McDonald’s, can recall how temper mostly just serves to cause the problem to be resolved slower. Especially this is true when the person who receives the criticism has no power to act on it. It would be rather pointless to take the cashier to task in McDonalds for the poor quality of their ketchup.
It is our sincere hope – and we think it is for many other companies – that Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and other venues can be a place for conversations like the one Mr. X got fired for.
Of course, to be fair, the size of the company matters (as bureaucracy tends to scatter power rather than delegate it) and a large company, like AA often has little choice but to keep following its present policies. Internal politics, arcane rules, and just plain human limitation all play roles.
All in all, the new landscape is difficult for those who have the most power in it – in mass media, and in money, it is large corporations. But their method is largely impersonal, and even when their icons work, it still feels like puppetry.
Powered by WordPress

