-
Website
http://www.scobleizer.com/ -
Original page
http://scobleizer.com/2008/12/16/tumblrs-ceo-brainstorms-microblog-monetization/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
We're working on the enterprise side of things where we're offering the base service under Apache open source so that people can play with the capabilities and then we see what they really need to do in the context of their business. You can argue this makes ESME a feature but then I look at how wikis are evolving to become much richer and think the same can happen with micromessaging. But let's be clear - this isn't freemium. This is try before you pay for the real stuff. Call it proof of concept at zero direct acquisition cost.
It's a little bit of a chicken and an egg, but for FF, Twiter, Tumblr that already positioned themselves as market leaders, it is probably a valid business proposition.
When the free is good enough for most, only a select few will upgrade. But make it too basic on the free and not enough honey to attract. You have to be MAGNITUDES of levels better or pose some sort of sharewareish limitation to force people to upgrade. The shareware model won't work here (people don't like being nagged or given a broke product), and since it be an "addition to" service, instead of a full-fledged offering, people won't be motivated (or ego-headed) enough to upgrade. And even the "full" offerings end up having tons of competition, the net tends towards the oligarchy, one service wins, all others die.
Really what they need to be, is a service that instead of "addition to", is an "attach to"(an ISV of sorts), but that model needs a real internet social-networking ecosystem that doesn't and won't ever exist. But some sort of service partnership might work, custom molded internal-only system, taking the same web infrastructure back to a real Enterprise vendor concept. But all these Web 2.0 snow-globe fluffs, don't have the underlining architecture to even dare approach. So no hope really.
And oh that the College Humor site hasn't been updated in a month. College Humor is popular well because of College Humor, Tumblr is irrelevant here. And, this might come as a surprise, to people still Angel-Dust-hooked on 1997 eyeball economics, but popularity doesn't mean monetary.
People pass along Ben and Jerrys stuff, because they already know and like the brand. You end up talking to yourself -- gerbil-wheel activity, all that running and not going anyplace. Dean and 'Snakes on a Plane' phenom, internet blog kiddies talking to their own kind, circulant and redundant mirrored echo reflections.
And furthermore who cares what 'service' they were on, content is king. Saying "College Humor" 'became' popular means nothing in terms of the 'service'. A good movie is still going to work, big screen or small screen, the medium is not the message. In fact, if the message doesn't work (i.e. the movie sucks), then the bigger the medium, the worse it be.
Umm, why is Northstar in this loop?
This problem is that your ex-boss sent his query to people when he should have been able to query the data produced by folks who he trusts.
Unless, of course, the point of the query is not information but signalling.
If they can create intelligent links that animate differently each time you click them you'll see many more PPC ads become popular.
Remember... be a servant,
Cory Boatright
Loss Mitigation Specialist
http://www.ShortSaleFundamentals.com
http://www.1DayFunds.com
http://www.ShortSaleology.com
twitter: debontherocks
This is such an exciting potential!
Steve Dodd
www.sysomos.com
1. get a quick distraction
2. See what industry leaders are thinking
3. Do some adhoc market research via search
So far twitter is winning out for me with a combo of network size, relevancy, and just enough features to be helpful.
How to monetize this? That's tricky, but I like the ideas of subtle, unobtrusive ads. And knowing about what my friends are up to. But I really hope that these sites can help companies connect with their audience, and monetize that. Salesforce's Appexchange is a great example of how "api" access leads to more revenue, I am sure one of these microblogging sites will be able to do the same.
Thanks again,
--z--
Thus the revenue of the applications should pay a license fee to Twitter.
What facebook does is provide the platform to enable social traffic, but facebook on it's own does not provide the social traffic. It is nothing more than a technology enabler. As long as people believe that Google Adsense works and pay to have their ad shown, then facebook and the down stream platform enablers will continue to be funded by naive businesses. And this allows us, the bloggers, tweeters and social media hounds to continue to enjoy the free for all.
To really make this work, the marketeers need to be motivated by a personal need to by authentic and passionate about what they do. This is almost impossible to do if you are 'working for someone else', because you are dictated the Business Values by your boss. If your own personal values are misaligned with the business values (usually are), then it is doomed.
The only way to make this work, is to give business units self autonomy, and allow them to work independently, but share the common business process, and not the business values. I can't see this happening without a large shift in global thinking..
Here is hoping.
Navdeep
http://www.cityguyyoga.com
So one thing is clear - the monetization is not going to be easy.
And yet, the traction, the loyalty, the growth and repeat usage, all have to be worth something. And in such loud thinking inside and outside of Twitter (or any other Social Media entity), the answer will emerge after all.
Two specific thoughts:
1. We are looking currently at known methods of monetization. The answer will more likely emerge from methods that are unknown today. The monetization of search that Google did, was a thought out of the box. Amazon Cloud Computing is also a different direction from known methods. Twitter and others may also discover a model which will only become a new method and a new standard, thereafter.
2. I try to relate web models with similar offline businesses / models. The social media online is most similar to a social club offline. My understanding of these clubs are:
a. They are cheap - which is how large numbers find it easy to congregate there,
b. There are few expensive and more exclusive types, but they offer significant value in terms of ambience, luxury and services, and for which the elite are willing to pay the price,
c. Social clubs do not meet out their costs, from the members' contributions; there have to be other ways to supplement their incomes,
d. What they end up doing is to run a good restaurant and give out the contract for the same, to someone who pays them a good chunk of money; or they give out the space that they have built, every once in a while, for others to use as a banquet location; or they charge a decent sum for a one time membership fee, which is usually a lifetime fee then.
Mapping some of these observations to the online social media, it might indicate that:
a. Social media sites will not be able to charge the members, especially if they are going after the mass markets,
b. A few exclusive ones, with seriously high value added offerings, might manage to keep exclusive usage, and charge a good fee for the same,
c. The typical social media property, might be able to contract their platform to the "restaurant" (some paid service equivalent, that is reasonably universally required by the users), and charge them a good fee for giving that exclusive access, for the particular vertical ("food" in case of the offline restaurants); such engagements can be for a period of time, just like the restaurant contract in an offline social club would be say, for a period of 2 years at a time,
d. Then there is the equivalent of the social club giving out its space for a one-day banquet event. The analogy here could be banner advertising on all Twitter screens, for example.
e. Finally there is the one-time fee from members, that a social club can charge. I am not sure if the analogy can be pulled off on the online social networks. But seeing that users spend $1 to send virtual gifts on Facebook, there could be an option to ask members to pay say, $10 (or $50 or whatever that makes sense) as a one-time fee for being members at Twitter. I am not sure, but its an idea again..
- Sanjay Mehta
http://rdfan.wordpress.com