Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

rjmoore — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:02:24 -0000

Ballmer must step down!

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

rjmoore — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:01:40 -0000

For the sake of all Microsoft stock holders Steve Ballmer must step down!

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

gamesawy — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:48:15 -0000

thanks for this nice article

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Martijn Brouns — Wed, 20 May 2009 04:02:18 -0000

"2 years later... go see the doctorrrrr"

From a usage perspective the above is ALL correct.. From a business perspective (and Steve IS a business man) this is crap. We now all know that YouTube is bleeding .5 billon anually and that even Facebook is loosing millions every month.

The fundament of Web 2.0 is an open, free environment that relies on advertising. Trouble is that the last years have shown that the market value of social networks IS perishable (as everything is), meaning that investors need to invest continuously in creating and marketing new online brands to keep the longtail going. The cost of this investment cannot (to date) be earned back.

It may seem that big brands such as YouTube and Facebook are the winners with millons egaged users, but in fact they are in the 'autumn' of their life cycle... In the end: the bigger the brand, the bigger the stakes and the bigger the growth expectations. But also, the broader the audience, the lesser the the social context, the lesser the user is known, the lesser advertisers are willing to spend per dialogue,...

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Martijn Brouns — Wed, 20 May 2009 04:02:18 -0000

"2 years later... go see the doctorrrrr"

From a usage perspective the above is ALL correct.. From a business perspective (and Steve IS a business man) this is crap. We now all know that YouTube is bleeding .5 billon anually and that even Facebook is loosing millions every month.

The fundament of Web 2.0 is an open, free environment that relies on advertising. Trouble is that the last years have shown that the market value of social networks IS perishable (as everything is), meaning that investors need to invest continuously in creating and marketing new online brands to keep the longtail going. The cost of this investment cannot (to date) be earned back.

It may seem that big brands such as YouTube and Facebook are the winners with millons egaged users, but in fact they are in the 'autumn' of their life cycle... In the end: the bigger the brand, the bigger the stakes and the bigger the growth expectations. But also, the broader the audience, the lesser the the social context, the lesser the user is known, the lesser advertisers are willing to spend per dialogue,...

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

sleeping disorders — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:46:31 -0000

very interesting post, thanks for sharing.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Social Bookmarks — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:24:36 -0000

I don\'t normally leave comments... but I really enjoyed your post! I will be leaving a link back here in my blogroll! Thanks!

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Michael — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:40:39 -0000

Very good article. Thanks for the good information!.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Muriel Mae Day — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:01:11 -0000

It gets more confusing day by day. I don't know what a blog is, so I search for answers. Once I figure out the purpose of blogging, will I be blogging because everyone else is doing it? I don't need to keep up with the Joneses' to be savvy about technology. If we really want to do social networking, shut off your computer, and go out and visit a nursing home, children's cancer centers, join a club, visit an old friend, but visit people "in person", not on the internet. This social networking you are talking about is not even close to being social. It is just black text on a white background, and the new buzz word, I think they are called bloggers, are all coming up with a clever line, but is it coming from the blogger's heart or his brain with no roots. These are fads, and will fade. Keep in mind, there are more frauds, scams, spams, identity thefts, hacking, porn, you name it, since the internet was introduced. A lot of people have fun with it, a lot of people learn from it, and a lot of children and grownups have been hurt by it. As John Selden, Table-Talk preached, "Rhetoric without logic is like a tree with leaves and blossoms, but no roots.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Abhinaba Basu — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:03:23 -0000

You are the answer (or rather your age is :) )

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Tim Almond — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:23:10 -0000

"When I worked at Microsoft I heard this over and over and over again from various engineers and program managers who STILL haven’t competed effectively with WordPress, Flickr, Skype, YouTube, or any of the other things over the years I’ve heard this “we can build that in a few weeks” kind of arrogant attitude attached to."

Even us engineers understand that sometimes the fact that you can build something doesn't mean you should.

Which of those are making money?

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

SCKD — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 09:27:04 -0000

My bad, that comment was on another entry...

Today I was browsing my cousin's wife's profile on Facebook and I saw a post by her father on her wall (he's obviously also "hardly young"). Translated directly from Dutch, this is what he wrote:

"I am trying out Facebook because 'Scobleizer" basically says you are an idiot if you aren't on it"

Thought you might enjoy!

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Jim Tobin at Ignite Social Med — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:56:45 -0000

You right a ton of stuff, Robert. This one was dead on. But it's bigger than MSFT and social networking. I think it pervades big companies as they deal with disruptive technologies.

More on that thought at: http://tinyurl.com/3bvupt

~Jim

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

toddsieling — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 20:50:59 -0000

Great post, Robert. I'm not sure what world Mr. Ballmer lives in, but I believe it involves an unsinkable ship and an iceberg.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Eshwar — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:41:59 -0000

I think Steve Ballmer is right and I have to disagree with you on this. The hype about social networking is huge because of its large user base. Unfortunately, that doesn't alone generate revenue (ask eBay about it). These social networking sites today are overly priced and Microsoft will end up losing money if they purchase any of them. You can sing all the praise about Facebook but I can guarantee you that its definitely not worth 10 billion dollars or even close to that.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Blackthir13en — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:19:34 -0000

Saying Facebook is a fad is the same as saying iPods and MP3s are a fad. Neither will be permanent, they will shift and change. But the social impacts that they leave on our culture are indisputable. Steve Ballmer just doesn't get it.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Tom B — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 13:14:25 -0000

The unspoken assumption is that MSFT needs to be in EVERY business. Robert, perhaps, reveals his years of incubation within the Death Star. Of course, MSFT doesn't "need" to "get" "the social". Last I checked, they were still making a ton of money per quarter, in spite of Vista. And Office is selling, despite free alternatives of equal quality and cheaper, superior alternatives.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Ryan M. — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:27:55 -0000

Microsoft has as much a clue about relating to today's consumer and providing valuable products and services as much as does Phillip Morris, which has consistently tried and failed at horizontally widening its product offerings. Moral of the story: cigarette companies and Microsoft were great at defending their monopoly position, but terrible at creating substantial customer value.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

bencankle — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 09:14:21 -0000

I don't like being in the minority, but as a concerned citizen I cannot fathom the prices being passed around for facebook.

If there is no business model now (business model = making money), theres not going to be one in the future. Skype proved that, build it and they will come, but they might not pay.

Facebook is not a fad for many reasons - mostly the network effect as you have said. Valuations of a business HAVE to be on future earnings potential. Problem is, by releasing the "platform" facebook have essentially conceded they don't know how to make money.

When will people learn - when you aren't making money, as cool as it is, its a HOBBY.

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Sid — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:34:13 -0000

You are bang on target!!! Not only has Ballmer demonstrated his ineptness at understanding the huge value of Facebook's advertising and media potential but he's also blind folding himself to Facebook's capability/potential role in a social search ecosystem!!!!

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Dan Kasun — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:24:42 -0000

Good comments, Robert. I believe that most people over 25 have trouble relating to the Social computing generation. You, other 40-somethings like you, are an anomaly - there's no arguing that. However, not understanding this space will be a huge handicap in business - and those who understand that will be better poised to compete.

I don't think you're being quite fair to Ballmer, however... especially since you seem to agree with him on most points.

Ballmer's claim that social networking sites aren't technically complex is true - we all know this. I'm not sure why you complain about this. IMO, he was underscoring that you cannot "buy" community... again, something I think you agree with.

In addition, you mock him for not hyping the value of Facebook... but what do you expect him to do? Talk up Facebook until any investment is completely inviable? You need to think about this from a business standpoint as well as a Social computing standpoint.

Ballmer will incur ire no matter what he says on the topic - if he says that Microsoft is investing they'll say that you can't "buy" community... if he doesn't talk about investment they'll say that Microsoft isn't focusing here. In addition, he needs to walk a fine line not putting business at risk... something most in the social computing world understand as little as those in the business computing world understand about social networking.

If you want to hold some people to task on Web 2.0 and Social Networking - focus on Ray Ozzie and Scott Guthrie. Getting the platforms, technology, and strategy in place for this is their job.

Gotta give SteveB credit for hiring them.

-Dan

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

SCKD — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:30:08 -0000

Robert, I had a monster comment to this article that was pretty relevant and totally legit (or wasn't it?). It seems to have disappeared??

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

angus — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:23:03 -0000

I agree that the exit barrier of facebook is very high. But this happened in ICQ. Why can't another start-up provide fantastic features that people join both, and gradually fade out facebook?

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Amit — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:24:50 -0000

A great post hitting directly the bull's eye. The comments from Steve looks more of a frustrated blabbering as he finds Microsoft way behind others in the advertising-driven business :)

Re: Steve Ballmer still doesn’t understand social networking

Gene Chuang — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:53:21 -0000

The concept of Social networking is not a fad, but social network instances are. Why?

usenet -> bbs -> email -> compuserv/prodigy forums -> geocities -> friendster -> myspace -> facebook/linkedin -> mash/ning/???

Because history, technological evolution and the inherent fickleness of trendsetters tells me why. Balmer isn't totally out of his gourd, he may just be unintentionally right.