Avail is often classified as a software vendor, and that always makes me cringe a bit. Yes, there is definitely a large industry of software vendors out there - but we are definitely not one of them.

So if Avail is not a software vendor, then what are we?

We sell what our customers - retailers - need: sales, or in more general terms, commercial success in the form of return-on-investment. You could have the best software in the world, but if you do not use it properly, it is nothing but a cost. It happens to everyone including Avail: costly software that is purchased but never used. It is sometimes called the "Flashing 12s" phenomenon, after all those VCRs that people bought but failed to set up, leaving them blinking.

Redefining ourselves as "success vendors" has been very important for Avail, e.g. in that we

1) Measure ourselves on the basis of success delivered (i.e. documented sales generated - in fact, every employee at Avail is evaluated to some degree on their contribution to our customers' uplift in sales)

2) Prioritize our roadmap in terms of success added, not number of features

3) Put just as much effort into developing our services as our software

Our recommendations engine is just part of how we accomplish it. What we really provide is a package of software, support, advice and partnerships that we call "Success-as-a-Service", a play on the popular phrase "Software-as-a-Service", to maximize our customers' merchandising returns. (By the way - Avail customers, don't miss to sign up for the April 15 Client Success event!)

I think the retail industry, and many industries with them, would be well served to stop buying software. For every piece of software that you currently use, ask yourself "What do I really need?", and pick a vendor who delivers that. Force the software industry to change for the better."

Being a serial-entrepreneur myself, I love seeing companies who dare to be the first to go after a new market. Companies who will take the shot and risk failure - or make it big.

And mobile is a new market, by all means. Outside of Japan, commercial transaction volumes using a mobile for anything but ringtones and wallpapers are more or less negligible. In fact, I think one of the key reasons why m-commerce is still considered a new market - despite having been technically viable for at least 10 years - while e-commerce has prospered, is that people have insisted on treating mobile as "just another web browser".

But mobile is different. There is the obvious case of the significantly smaller screen, which makes it important to prioritize harder which content to display. There is also the lack of quick text input methods which makes any kind of forms a sure conversion rate killer. And don't forget the camera, or the ability to call or text anyone you want.

Finally, there is the difference in context. Web usage is often planned - you are sitting down to perform a task - while mobile usage is driven by the moment - you are bored, or you have an impulse urge. Computers are sometimes shared, mobiles are very much personal. By releasing mobile stores that are just mobile browser-enabled versions of their standard web stores, many retailers may be missing out on the opportunities that mobile offers.

However, that does not mean everything is new. Some old tricks still work just fine. In fact, as the case of Bokus' mobile store project shows, they are even more valuable in a mobile context.

Such as strong merchandising: delivering a shopping experience with excellent support for product discovery, up-selling and cross-selling. Because the screen is so small, because adding another product and checking out takes effort, mobile is where displaying the right product at the right time - and nothing else - is the most essential.

After all, the mobile phone is a personal tool, so why shouldn't you expect a personal shop in it?