Open up your mind and say, ahh...

I’ve come up with seven ideas on how I think the future of media will turn out. I shot a video, and I invite you to participate further by creating your own ideas and potentially linking back to this post at http://chrisbrogan.com/futureofmedia. You might see it differently, and/or you might want some extrapolation on my points. That’s why we’re here. Let’s talk about the future and see what we think is coming out. I shot this video to go with the story:

Media Will Be Multi Touch

By this, I mean to say that we will have text, video, audio, games, and several other interaction types as part of media. It will almost never be a standalone kind of product any more. Magazines won’t just be in print. Everything will blend between the visual and the textual and back again. I think that this already shows in things like Richard Branson’s Project magazine, or Wired, and there are more and more examples of this coming every day. By “multi-touch,” I mean that we’ll have multiple touchpoints from which to consume this.

Media Will Be Mobile

We already consume more and more from our mobile device, but the way we create media right now is still primarily as if we’re imagining a laptop. We’re going to move into making media that is primarily consumed by mobile devices (phones, iPads, and several other in-between sized devices). This means that bandwidth will become an issue, that we’ll have to think about different ways to package information, and that we’ll have to think about the various ways that information will be used in different physical contexts as well as by different people.

Media Will Be Serial

Because media will be mobile and have multiple touchpoints, I believe media will be serial. We’re already seeing “first news” and “full news” when something happens. Breaking news is often made up of uncorroborated information, and we’ll see this trend expand even more out onto an edge.

Media Will Be Two-Way

We’ll rely on people to help tell the stories with us. It will be a conversation (even more so than the cliche is used today).

Media Will Be Rich Data Minded

It won’t be static data. We’ll have stories, fiction and otherwise, that pull elements from the world around us. I got this idea from Liza Daly, a smart person I met on a train ride recently.

Media Will Be Subscription-Based

I think we won’t buy a book, but instead, a subscription to a book, such that it updates and that parts change over time. I think that we’ll have relationships via “books as a platform” instead of just dead tree experiences.

Media Will Be Faster With Longer Burn

We’ll have a lot more connection with media hitting us the moment something happens, but then it’ll have a longer time line to getting completely explained.

What’s Your Take?

How do you see media changing over time?

While I’m in the throes of writing the next chapter, I wanted to share a recent interview I did with BroadVision‘s Andrew Gori. Following this discussion, the interview was reenacted live at BroadVision’s headquarters in Redwood City, CA as part of its Clearvale SecondFloor speaker series hosted by CEO, Dr. Pehong Chen.

The conversation tackles subjects facing businesses of all shapes and sizes ranging from social media adoption and planning to collaboration and brand management online to organizational transformation and change management.

How can companies with no social media experience identify a good or bad social media plan?

Even companies with social media experience can have trouble identifying a good social media plan.

With social media, it’s like the starter’s pistol went off and everyone started running, and not a lot of us stayed behind to question: “Why am I in this race to begin with? Who is going to run it and why?” The important aspect of social media is the ability to define your desired outcomes before you even design a program.

Distinguishing a good and bad social media plan is all about design, purpose and outcome. Businesses tend not to consider these three things when developing social media programs. Much of social media is free or inexpensive, but there is also time and resources that need to be considered. A company can create a Facebook page for free, but what happens when someone asks a question on that page’s wall?

In a recent blog post, you discussed Dell’s baptism by fire and how Dell Hell forced them to “listen, engage and adapt”, and ultimately create a very successful social media plan. Do you think it is necessary for a company to have to go through some sort of baptism by fire before it can adopt an effective social media plan?

Baptism by fire certainly is a way that some companies learn. I call it the “ah ha” versus the “uh oh”. There are companies that get it. Starbucks gets it; they’ve been very proactive from the beginning. Dell gets it, but they had to go through the “uh oh” first. People say that Dell is a tired example, but I’ll tell you why I love Dell as a social media case study: they learned the hard way and CEO Michael Dell cares. When you have those two things together, you’re essentially working the ends to the middle. Dell ended up realizing that Dell Hell can’t happen again, so they put in protocols to deal with flare ups before they burn too hot or too bright. What you see today is their social media command center, which feeds every aspect of Dell, from technical support to development to customer service to sales, and even human resources and finance. Each one of those departments has adopted a social extension, which is huge. Dell realized they needed to collaborate internally before it could collaborate externally, and it must be both proactive and reactive.

So if a company is having difficulty being social internally, if departments within a company are not being transparent with one another, should that company hold off on adopting a social media plan?

I don’t think they should hold off, but they do need to think about what they want to accomplish first. They should have the infrastructure in place and be ready to deal with a crisis. Every big company has some sort of crisis communications or crisis contingency plan in place, and this isn’t unlike that. So companies need to have a contingency plan in place in case they do need to collaborate with one another. What would that look like? Who are the point people? These are things that should be defined up front.

Everything a business does should have a plan around it, but many don’t when it comes to social media. Social media came to the organization from the outside in, and from the bottom up. It came from you and me, and everyone who uses Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter. There’s no IT department to set everything up, so amateurs are trying to get their arms around it and put some processes in place. There’s a lot of chaos and social anarchy going on, so we need to think through scenarios, even if it’s just for marketing, just in case.

What kind of climate are you encountering when working with executives who are interested in learning about social media? Do they embrace it or are they nervous?

It’s all over the board. I work with a lot of executives and try to help them design their organization around social media. I also work on the management side, and one thing I’ve learned is it’s different every time.

I don’t know of any businesses that are saying, “Social media is our future,” and I don’t know that any business should. Social media should be a focus, not the focal point. It’s not about making the business social; it’s about making it more adaptive.

The lessons that social media teaches us has benefits for the entire organization. Good service oriented businesses have existed forever. Nordstrom came before Zappos, and before Nordstrom there was probably the local shoe store. There are always some elements that remain consistent; culture, communication, compassion, service. Social media amplified these things.

The thing that consultants and internal champions need to realize is the executive might not be as into social media as they are, and that’s ok. Your job is not to talk about the need for Facebook or Twitter. Your job is to figure out the need for your business to be on Facebook or Twitter, and the impact it will have on the bottom line. Connecting those dots changes the game, and that happens when you stop reading Mashable and start looking at click paths and running analytic reports, and other things that are unique to your business and don’t exist in blog posts or books.

Does an established brand, like Nordstrom, run the risk of diluting their own brand if they adopt social media plans?

To some extent; even though Apple doesn’t have a social media presence, they are paying close attention. At a minimum, intelligence is critical. If a company wants to move beyond intelligence and actually be engaging on a social network, it has to do two things. The first is to define what value it can put into and get out of the network. The second is it has to develop a plan that that brings the brand to life in a way that embellishes rather than dilutes is.

One thing that needs to be discussed, and I’m surprised that this doesn’t come up more: what is the persona of the company? If you’re going to have a presence on the web, your persona is something that needs to be defined. Companies often use a style guide; what the logo looks like, how it should be presented and under what circumstances. If it’s so important to have that guide for a brand’s logo, why not have it for a company’s social media presence? If Judy and Bob start Tweeting and interacting on behalf of a company, they’re diluting that company’s brand with the personal identity of Judy and Bob. When you do that, you lose the luster and mystique of the brand. The brand style guide has to include social media elements.

On a more personal level, what do you enjoy about helping companies become more social?

I really enjoy helping companies develop a new sense of purpose. By the time I’m done working with a company, it’s less about social media and more about helping them reinvent an aspect of their business and helping them become relevant again. That’s my personal mission as well. I don’t see myself as much as a social media strategist as I do a business strategist. A lot of what I focus on is change-management and organizational transformation, which for me is personally fulfilling and exciting.

Hop into this Ego Compact Semi Submarine, and without any extensive training you can be on your way to exploring the deep blue sea in no time.

Why is this called a semi-submarine? The entire boat is not submerged, but it’s more like a pontoon boat with a transparent waterproof compartment hanging from its middle.

That means James Cameron is not going to be using one of these subs for that deep-water shoot for his Avatar sequel, but it’s still suitable for giving you an eye-popping view of the undersea world. Think of it as more akin to snorkeling than scuba diving.

The little boat cruises along at a leisurely sightseeing pace that’s unspecified by its maker, which will only say that its batteries will last eight hours at cruising speed or four hours at top speed.

It’s built by South Korean company Raonhaje, which plans to sell fleets of these Ego Semi-Submarines to resorts, and single units to individuals and yacht owners. The company offers to build custom moorings for the craft, as well as hoists for yachts.

We’re thinking super-safe leisure subs like these would be a huge hit at a resort, especially seaside marinas near coral reefs, with their colorful and bustling underwater wildlife. Just think, even people who can’t swim can enjoy the spectacular view.

Hot on the heels of two recent device launches from INQ and HTC, with both companies adding Facebook integration and (in case of HTC’s Salsa and ChaCha) a physical Facebook button to their smartphones, Facebook promises many more devices to bring similar functionality this year.

“In addition to these new phones from INQ and HTC,” writes Facebook’s Charles Wu in an official blog post, “you’ll also be seeing similar deep Facebook integration on dozens of other devices over the course of this year. Some manufacturers will be highlighting Facebook as a part of their phones’ on-screen interfaces, and others will use our brand as an element of the device hardware itself.”

We’ve seen both approaches in the past, and Facebook – while shunning the thought of an official “Facebook phone” – seems to be intent on helping device manufacturers integrate Facebook with their phone’s software.

Facebook’s approach to this integration is a bit more high-key than Twitter’s, whose CEO Dick Costolo recently said that Twitter is “like water” and that “Twitter already works on every device you’re going to hear about this week.” We’re fine with either approach; we’re not sold on the concept of the “Facebook button,” but we definitely believe that the smartphones of the future must have deep social network integration.

“We believe almost anything is better when it’s social, and this year we’ll continue to invest in new technologies so you have a great Facebook experience no matter where you go,” concludes Wu.

The Spark of Genius Series highlights a unique feature of startups and is made possible by Microsoft BizSpark. If you would like to have your startup considered for inclusion, please see the details here.

Name: My Major Company

Quick Pitch: This online, fan-funded record label — which recently launched in the UK — mixes traditional A&R and crowdfunding.

Genius Idea: You know how your one friend in that kind of terrible synth band raised a ton of money on Kickstarter to go on “tour” (a.k.a. a road trip to Jersey, Maryland and maybe New York)? That was a wash, huh? Well, My Major Company adheres to the Kickstarter model in some respects, but diverges in ways that contribute to quality control and reward fans for their loyalty and money.

The first iteration of My Major Company launched in France in 2008. The premise was basically that fans and artists could join the service — fans as investors, because they were called upon to contribute money to an artist in order to get his career off the ground. According to CEO Paul-Rene Albertini — ex-CEO of Warner Music International — the model was very successful, launching 10 bands. Albertini counts Gregoire — a popular musician in France — as the service’s most exemplary artist.

My Major Company — which plans to expand to more countries come summer — just recently launched in the UK, where the model has changed slightly. In the UK so far, the service has mixed in a little more traditional A&R, selecting around 12 musicians to feature that fans can invest in.

Unlike services like Sellaband — where fans can help bands tour or buy a van, etc — MMC has a more overarching goal: to launch the career of an artist.

An artist must raise 100,000 pounds (around $161,200.12) in order to reap the benefits of funds raised. With that money they can release an album, go on tour and market their music. Fans can also interact with the bands, who can ask investors for advice with regard to the production and release of the album.

Fans, in turn, receive 40% of all revenue their bands raise, bands get 20%, and MMC gets 40%. Still, the 40% that MMC rakes in can also be allotted to the band if they need more cash for another project.

Albertini sees a need for MMC due to the shrinking music industry. “This generation needs professional support to monetize,” he says. “Record labels cannot sign the 10 artists that they used to sign, now they sign two. So we offer a solution whereby we can take on more artists, but we put the same muscle behind them to break them into the market professionally.”

He adds that the time is right for such a movement, given the nature of this new crop of artists. “There’s a new generation of artists out there, the DIY generation,” he says. “I personally think that the new generation of artists is savvier than it has ever been in the past. They have access to all possible information and all sources of information through the web. They know how to position themselves out in the world.”

Right now, the UK service is more of a closed society — think Crowdbands, which chooses which artists fans can interact with — this means artists can’t just apply to be featured on the site. Two such artists have already been funded (more info on those bands here). Still, Albertini says that MMC will open up to the wider community soon.

What do you think of this investment model? Would you dish out cash to a promising band if you got a piece of the pie in the end?

Image courtesy of iStockphoto, shulz

---

Sponsored by Microsoft BizSpark

---

BizSpark is a startup program that gives you three-year access to the latest Microsoft development tools, as well as connecting you to a nationwide network of investors and incubators. There are no upfront costs, so if your business is privately owned, less than three years old, and generates less than U.S.$1 million in annual revenue, you can sign up today.

Dissension against Apple’s new in-app subscription policies is growing, with streaming music service Rhapsody openly opposing the new policy while publishers mull potential courses of action, including litigation.

Earlier today, Apple launched its long-rumored subscription service, giving iOS application developers the ability to integrate recurring monthly subscriptions within their apps. The caveat though is that Apple will require a 30% revenue cut for in-app subscriptions and sign-ups.

Workarounds aren’t allowed, either; if a publisher offers a digital subscription outside of its iOS app, it must offer the same subscription offer at the same price or less to customers who wish to subscribe within the apps. Developers also are no longer allowed to provide links that prompt customers to purchase content outside of the app.

The changes are not sitting well with some developers, though. A representative for the Online Publishers Association, which represents Time, Bloomberg and other media outlets, expressed reservations about Apple’s new policies. A Sony exec recently said Apple is holding publishers ransom. The policy changes are a hot topic of conversation on popular developer community Hacker News. And finally, WSJ reports that Apple could face antitrust scrutiny for exerting “anticompetitive pressures on price.”

None of that compares to the statement Rhapsody President John Irwin made today, though. In no uncertain terms, he called Apple’s plan “economically untenable” and even hinted at a potential lawsuit.

From his statement:

“Our philosophy is simple too – an Apple-imposed arrangement that requires us to pay 30 percent of our revenue to Apple, in addition to content fees that we pay to the music labels, publishers and artists, is economically untenable. The bottom line is we would not be able to offer our service through the iTunes store if subjected to Apple’s 30 percent monthly fee vs. a typical 2.5 percent credit card fee.”

However, it’s the last line that’s the most ominous:

“We will be collaborating with our market peers in determining an appropriate legal and business response to this latest development.”

Will developer ire die down or escalate as the June deadline approaches for developers to update their apps? Our guess is this is probably just the beginning.

Image via Flickr, fPat

Christopher S Penn wrote a great post about marketing and how it starts with audience. What’s great about it is that it’s exactly what was on my mind since yesterday. I’ve been thinking about who my audience is at chrisbrogan.com and furthermore, I’ve been looking around at other people’s blogs and wondering who they’re hoping to attract with their writing. Do you know the answer about your blog? My guess is it might be different than you think.

Who Are You Writing For?

This part, you should at least think you know. When I write, I’m writing for professionals who want to understand how social tools change business. Sometimes, I’m writing for larger companies to read and consider. Most times, I’m writing for smaller companies and solo business types. Heck, plenty of non-business types read and take things away from here. It’s fine by me. That’s who I’m writing for, in my mind. How about you?

But Who is Reading?

When I look at the comments, the people who are reading are a mix of people. Most of the comments come from people I believe who represent small or solo businesses. Lots of you are from smaller agencies. So many of you are lurkers that I have no idea who you are, where you’re from, or what matters or doesn’t to you.

Why It Matters

Are you writing for your colleagues or your buyers? I’m going to tell you right now that I suspect I’m writing more for my colleagues than my buyers. This is generally okay. I like having conversations with my colleagues. However, I’m in business, and part of my efforts revolve around creating useful information that will encourage buyers to consider me in their solution set, depending on the product. With that in mind, you should be thinking about this for your own site. Are you writing for your colleagues or your buyers, and what effects does this have for how you write?

A Little Survey

I’m genuinely curious about these answers. I’d love your thoughts on this very little survey I’ve put together. I promise to share the data once I’ve pulled it all together. Please take a moment and fill this out.

And thanks! I’d love to hear from you.

Super Bowl XLV is now in the history books. 2011 is the year that the Green Bay Packers reclaimed the NFL Championship. And, it is also the year that now holds the record for the most viewed television broadcast of any kind in U.S. history, attracting an audience of over 111 million viewers.

While many watched the game, it is the advertisements that spark conversations online and offline. Going back to Apple’s 1984 commercial directed by Ridley Scott that introduced the Macintosh, the Super Bowl is now as much about football as it is about the ads that support it.

At $3 million per 30 second commercial, many question the value and ROI of such an elite form of advertising. To others however, $3 million is an investment in word of mouth and legacy branding. Not only did 111 million people potentially view the ads during the big game, Web views, articles, blog posts, polls and studies keep each ad alive for the months ahead. Crowd favorites on the other hand, live on for years. Those commercials that design social hooks into the campaign can trigger conversations that extend ads across screens from TV to laptop to mobile as well as across social graphs. Progressive brands that track this activity will identify its core advocates and better understand how to convert social graphs into brand graphs as we demonstrated with Starbucks recently.

Following the Super Bowl, the big question at the center of almost every conversation is who really won the 2011 Brand Bowl. The answer is largely based on opinion and volume, but examining the activity under a social microscope is as telling as it is fascinating.

Working with the PeopleBrowsr Research.ly team, we tapped the Twitter firehose to analyze the worldwide conversations around each commercial. As you’ll see, in the Brand Bowl, armchair quarterbacks and sofa referees define the big game for advertisers; an expensive game where some win and many lose.

Report Highlights:

- Brand Bowl Tweets increased 271-percent between 2010 and 2011

- Doritos received the highest number of mentions in 2010 and the third highest in 2011.

- The auto industry also represented the most social activity of all commercials in 2011 led by Chrysler, VW, and Chevrolet.

- Ads placed in the second quarter captured the most online viewing attention than other spots.

- VW’s “The Force” commercial earned the most positive sentiment.

- Groupon ads received the most negative response.

2011 Brand Bowl Highlight Reel

Between 2010 and 2011, Tweets about the advertisers in the big game spiked by 271-percent. Of course Twitter also experienced tremendous growth between the games, now accounting for ~200 million users who publish 110 million Tweets per day.

This year, the top commercial dominated the field earning 64-percent more Tweets than its closest competitor. The honor for the most mentioned brand in this year’s Brand Bowl goes to Doritos with 77.8k mentions. The Transformers 3 trailer followed with an impressive 49.6k Tweets, and drafting close behind was Chrysler with 49k Tweets.

The 2011 Top 11 Commercials by Volume:

1. Doritos – 77,799 mentions
2. Transformers 3 – 49,559
3. Chrysler – 49,079
4. Coca-Cola/Coke – 33,082
5. Volkswagen/VW – 30,050
6. Groupon – 30,011
7. Chevrolet/Chevy – 25,743
8. Captain America – 25,315
9. Sketchers – 23,859
10. Thor – 23,096
11. Pepsi Max – 18,849

If we were to measure the top ads by velocity, the Transformers 3 preview would lead the game spiking at 40,000 mentions. Chrysler’s inspirational “Imported from Detroit” spot featuring rapper Eminem ranked a close second hitting a crescendo at just under 39,000 mentions. Doritos crunched in the third spot at over 34,000 Tweets. The distance between third and fourth place is as great as the span between the second and third quarter in the big game. Sketchers ShapeUps commercial featured Kim Kardashian, which helped it peak at just over 21,000 Tweets.

The 2011 Top 10 Commercials by Velocity:

1. Transformers 3
2. Chrysler
3. Doritos
4. Sketchers
5. Thor
6. Captain America
7. Volkswagen/VW
8. Coca-Cola/Coke
9. Groupon
10. Chevrolet/Chevy
11. Pepsi Max

2010 Brand Bowl Highlights

Compared to the top 2010 ads by volume, you’ll notice that Doritos remains in the top 3 between the two years, winning the Bowl in 2010, at least where mentions are concerned. Of all the ads between 2010 and 2011 only Doritos and Coca-Cola/Coke make the top 10 lists consecutively.

The Top 10 Brands by Volume:
1. Doritos – 41,748
2. Bud Light – 15,555
3. Google AD – 12,120
4. CocaCola – 9,299
5. Budweiser – 8,067
6. Snickers – 6,945
7. GoDaddy – 5,993
8. Kia – 3,873
9. Hyundai – 2,793
10. Focus on the Family – 2,024

The 2010 Top 10 ads by Velocity:
1. Doritos
2. Bud Light
3. Budweiser
4. Google
5. Snickers
6. GoDaddy
7. Kia
8. Hyundai
9. Coca-Cola
10. Focus (on the family)

Brand Bowl 2011 vs. 2010

As mentioned earlier, the volume between the years is remarkable. The active audience is this year’s Brand Bowl was indeed engaged, representing a surge in Tweets to 387,162 total ad mentions in 2011 and 99,124 in 2010.

To put things in perspective however, if we assumed that each of the 111 million estimated viewers Tweeted once, it would represent a .035 participation level. As such, we analyzed the top 11 brands and of those mentioned, 90-percent of the Tweets were published by 44-percent of the engaged community.

The top four players in 2011 outplayed the top performers in 2010. Doritos’ 2011 appearance ranked third in overall volume of Tweets between the two years with its 2010 showing also ranking fifth. Doritos is the only 2010 representative appearing in the Top 10 comparison between the two years, with Bud Light finishing 11th.

2011 vs. 2010 Player Stats

Comparing the 2010 to 2011 year to date changes, most players experienced positive growth. Ranking based on YTD % changes, Coca-Cola is the clear winner, with conversations increasing by over 263.5-percent. Doritos led the pack in overall conversations with just under 80,000 mentions in 2011 and just over half that in 2010, growing by 88.3-percent. Kia Tweets jumped by 200-percent, reaching over 10,000 Tweets in 2011. Snickers followed in fourth growing by 79-percent. Bud Light saw a 24-percent drop in Tweets falling from 15,000 Tweets to just over 12,000.

2011 Player Sentiment

Sentiment is an elusive metric. To quantify attitudes accurately, it takes a human touch. To do so, we employed a human turked sentiment sample of 2,000 random Tweets for the Top 11 brands.

Of the top brands in 2011, Volkswagen/VW’s “The Force” campaign earned the most love reaching almost 90-percent positive reactions. Transformers 3 earned a second place standing with 77-percent positive sentiment. Movies will account for three of the top five with Captain America closely following Transformers with 74-percent positive Tweets. And, right behind Captain America is another hero, Thor hammers fourth 72-percent positive reactions. Not surprisingly, Chrysler drives into fifth place with 71-percent.

Not all Tweets are positive however. Several commercials this year earned greater negative reactions than some of the top brands earned in terms of positive sentiment. The leader here, which may come as no surprise, is Groupon with a 75-percent negative response. The ads were controversial in nature, but according to the Tweets and all intentions aside, they were also in poor taste. These ads have since been pulled from television circulation. At 47-percent, it seems that the Sketchers spots featuring Kim Kardashian stuck a sour note with viewers. Coca-Cola and Pepsi Max, while mostly positive or neutral, also realized a notable negative response.

Overall however, viewers responded positively to the 2011 Brand Bowl. An interesting observation however, 2011 negative sentiment is almost equal to the positive sentiment shared in 2010.

That about wraps our post-game analysis. We’ll see you in 2012 for the next Brand Bowl, where you define the winners and the losers just by Tweeting your honest reactions.

The PeopleBrowsr presentation is available on Slideshare

Watch the Super Bowl XLV commercials here

Image Rights: NFL

BMW has officially gone electric.

When BMW released the Concept ActiveE last year, the debut of a production model was almost certain. That day has come, and 1,000 lucky drivers in the US, Europe and China are about to get their hands on electrified L-series coupes.

Like the Mini E before it, the BMW ActiveE is a consumer-driven field test that allows BMW to work out the kinks in short-term production models and get real-world feedback for future vehicles. In this case, both the BMW and the Mini are testing the waters for the eventual Megacity Vehicle (MCV), which BMW says they will launch as part of a brand new sub-brand in 2013.

BMW developed all of the technology behind the ActiveE in-house, fitting an entire electric drivetrain into the space freed up on an existing 1-series design after pulling out the gas-powered drivetrain. Modular liquid-cooled Lithium-ion cells from SB LiMotive are hidden where the gas tank and transmission once were and under the front cowl, and BMW says they can power the vehicle up to 100 miles. EPA estimates are more optimistic, and peg the range at up to 150 miles.

Impressive, especially considering that this is a test bed based on an existing car.

Recharging takes 16-20 hours from a standard 110-volt socket, while plugging into a 240-volt socket tops off the batteries in under 5 hours. Drivers can get an extra 40 miles if they plug in for just an hour.

According to BMW, with a 50/50 weight balance the car offers the same driving dynamics as a standard L-series, except with a 125-kilowatt electric motor in the rear, 0 to 60 comes in around nine seconds and top speed is limited to 90 mph. It’s no Tesla, but we repeat, this is a testbed based on an existing car.

In addition to the in-house drivetrain, the ActiveE features a complete EV-friendly rewrite of stability control software, and may just teach a new style of driving to electric BMW owners. Unlike the Mini E, the ActiveE’s “gas” pedal has been designed to immediately disengage the electric motor when the driver slightly lets up on the accelerator, allowing the car to glide and save battery life.

When the driver takes his or her foot off the pedal completely, regenerative braking starts and the ActiveE begins to slow down. BMW claims that 75 percent of urban driving can be accomplished with only the accelerator, leaving the brakes for emergency stops.

The circuit board paint job serves as a rolling billboard for BMW’s EV development.  That aside, there are very few visual cues to distinguish the ActiveE from an internal combustion engine-powered 1-series. “ActiveE” badges are visible, as is the silver blue trim that encloses the rear apron where the tailpipes have been omitted. The hood features a prominent bulge that provides more room for the electric drivetrain, and low rolling-resistance tires are fitted to lightweight 16-inch alloys. Inside, blue stitching contrasts against a gray interior.

Like with the Nissan Leaf, the car can be “preconditioned” — cooled or heated while plugged in — through an iPad or other device using BMW ConnectedDrive software. ConnectedDrive also estimates battery life and range, allows comparisons with ranges achieved by other ActiveE drivers and — most importantly for BMW — sends vehicle information back to the engineers in Munich.

All photos: BMW