Since Facebook started giving out customized Web addresses like facebook.com/yourname last Friday, some 9.5 million people have rushed to grab their top choice.
On Twitter, public fights have broken out over so-called impostor accounts, like those that should probably be in the hands of Kanye West or Bank of America.
And somewhere out there on the Web, another new service or social network is on the rise, threatening to start yet another online land grab.
Celebrities, companies and even regular people can be excused for feeling a bit of déjà vu. Staking out and protecting their names and trademarks on the Internet has become a seemingly never-ending battle. With the rise of social networks, registering a simple Web address like pepsi.com or mileycyrus .com is no longer enough to plant one’s flag firmly in the virtual terra firma.
When domain names first became hot properties in the ’90s, it was mostly companies that worried about claiming the right addresses. But in this more narcissistic Internet era, people who were once happily anonymous view themselves as online minicelebrities with their own brands to promote.
Those whose names are not unique may run into problems in trying to manage those brands. Chris Hardwick, a stand-up comedian and host on the tech-focused cable network G4, had no trouble registering chrishardwick.com a few years ago and securing the appropriate Gmail address. But he missed out on claiming his name on MySpace to a Chris Hardwick in Ohio. Last weekend, Mr. Hardwick got home from a performance too late to get his address of choice on Facebook; he said a high school student in England appeared to have grabbed it.
“It’s like a Wild West town full of Chris Hardwicks with their hands on their mouses getting ready to draw on each other,” he said.
To some, the rules of this new game are frustratingly hazy. Facebook has invited trademark holders and celebrities who find their names are taken to fill out a complaint form on the site. It says it will resolve disputes on a case-by-case basis. While Facebook’s social network has room for many people with the same name, the new vanity addresses are being distributed on a first-come-first-served basis.
Twitter has begun verifying the identities of well-known users, giving them a badge on their pages that serves to confirm that they are who they say they are. But it has revealed little about how that process works. A Twitter spokeswoman, Jenna Sampson, said the program was a small-scale test at this point.
Tony LaRussa, manager of the St. Louis Cardinals baseball team, recently sued Twitter, saying it did not do enough to prevent someone from tweeting under his name. Twitter has called the lawsuit “frivolous” and says the network shuts down accounts used by known impersonators.
Another problem is that no one knows whether any of this online terrain has any lasting value — only that accounts on sites like Twitter and Facebook tend to show up at the top of the list when people search the Web. So many people are plunging in — including so-called cybersquatters who hope to profit, financially or otherwise, from Web addresses and accounts.
Larry Winget, the author of four popular books on personal finance, has been quick over the years to get control of his name on the Web and on sites like MySpace. But last weekend, a professed fan beat him to facebook.com/larrywinget and then said he would turn it over in exchange for a face-to-face dinner.
“It’s this constant effort, this sprint, to stay ahead of the technology,” Mr. Winget said. “You’ve got to hire a person just to stay on top of it.”
Companies are feeling just as much anxiety over the online name game. RCN, a cable and telephone service based in Herndon, Va., submitted a request last week to Facebook to secure facebook.com/rcn. But then Facebook said companies would need to have more than 1,000 fans on their pages to be eligible for the custom address program. RCN’s recently created page had 527 fans as of Wednesday.
RCN executives say they are frustrated with Facebook’s rules and are worried that they could lose what they suspect could be valuable real estate. Possible competitors for the address include people and organizations with those initials, along with the dreaded squatters.
“This is a new world that we are having to step into in order to protect our brand, and they did not give us a huge window of time to prepare for it,” said Ashlie Ellison, a Web producer for RCN.
Social media sites give companies new ways to promote their brands, said Howard H. Weller, a trademark lawyer at Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp in New York. But he added that “these are all new avenues for abuse, and it’s more resources trademark owners need to devote to policing and enforcement.”
The Facebook Web addresses in particular could be worth nothing — Facebook has said they will not be transferable, although users could quietly hand over the passwords to their accounts.
But digital squatters are still trying, creating potential headaches for companies. For example, Dell grabbed facebook.com/dell, but Jeremy Fancher, a student at Washington University in St. Louis, registered facebook.com/dellcomputer and plans to try to sell it. A Dell spokesman declined to comment.
“I think it would be sort of funny if another computer company buys it,” Mr. Fancher said. “It all illustrates how murky the water is when signing up for these accounts.”
[the article was originally published at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/technology/internet/18name.html]
Showing posts with label facebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label facebook. Show all posts
Friday, June 19, 2009
How MySpace fell off the pace
MySpace is looking to do an about-face.
The once-red-hot social networking site acquired three years ago by septuagenarian mogul Rupert Murdoch, which landed him on the cover of Wired magazine and won News Corp. praise for embracing the Internet ahead of its old-media rivals, has cooled considerably.
New statistics released this week show MySpace has been surpassed by rival Facebook in the U.S. market, where it once dominated, and ad revenue for the site is projected to decline.
Signaling the depth of its problems, MySpace on Tuesday said it was laying off 420 people -- nearly one out of every three employees -- as part of an aggressive restructuring that seeks to make the company smaller and more agile. The action follows a management shake-up in April, in which MySpace founder Chris DeWolfe was replaced as chief executive by Facebook's former chief operating officer, Owen Van Natta.
"Simply put, our staffing levels were bloated and hindered our ability to be an efficient and nimble team-oriented company," Van Natta said in a statement. "I understand that these changes are painful for many. They are also necessary for the long-term health and culture of MySpace."
Van Natta's comments underscore just how troubled Murdoch's big Internet gamble has become in the rapidly changing world of social media. Highly touted initiatives, such as MySpace Music, failed to live up to expectations, even as the site's developers constantly play catch-up to the technological innovations of others.
"MySpace ended up not being the leader that it wanted to be in the social-networking realm, on the tech front, on the ad front -- and now on the usage front," said Debra Aho Williamson, an analyst with researcher eMarketer.
The perceived missteps are numerous. Some observers say it clung too long to a "portal strategy," in which it sought to amass an audience around entertainment content. By contrast, Facebook maintained its focus on features that enhance the social-networking experience, such as the "News Feed" that matches the immediacy of Twitter's staccato updates.
"The speed with which a company like Facebook is able to innovate and keep things fresh is the key to survival in this space," said Charlene Li, founder of Altimeter Group, a research firm specializing in social networking. "There are new things like Twitter that come along. What does Facebook do? It does Twitter . . . and it does it better."
MySpace's miscalculations have cost it ground in its competition against Facebook.
Online audience measurement firm ComScore reported MySpace attracted 70.25 million users in May -- a loss of 3.4 million people from the same period a year earlier. Meanwhile, Facebook nearly doubled the number of users over the same period and overtook MySpace in the U.S., with 70.28 million users.
Still, as Microsoft Research ethnographer Danah Boyd points out, with 70 million users, MySpace has hardly disappeared. "They are still as large as they were a year ago. And a year ago we were in awe of their size."
As the number of MySpace users declines, so does advertising revenue. EMarketer projects that U.S. revenue will fall 15% to $495 million in 2009 from $585 million last year.
Although News Corp. doesn't break out financial details for MySpace, revenue for the media giant's Fox Interactive Media division was down 11% in the most recent quarter from a year earlier, reflecting a double-digit drop in advertising. FIM also includes IGN Entertainment and the movie review site Rotten Tomatoes, although contributions from those businesses are modest compared with those from MySpace.
Murdoch tried to reassure investors about MySpace's direction during the company's earnings call last month, declaring that the management changes at MySpace "will help it regain its momentum."
That task may be harder than it looks. The history of social networks suggests that these sites have the fleeting popularity of a trendy nightclub. The site that's recognized as the birthplace of online communities, the Well, gave way to the more broadly available America Online, which was eclipsed by Friendster -- which itself became passe.
"Each of these services supplants the one before. It takes the golden ring and everyone loves that, and they forget about the last one," said Roger L. Kay, president of research firm Endpoint Technologies Associates. "MySpace made sense at a particular date, that might have been 2003. At that moment, it was the place to be. . . . Now, they have to do some major spade work on the quality of the site if they want to maintain the eyeballs."
[the article was oroginally published at http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-myspace17-2009jun17,0,6726077.story]
The once-red-hot social networking site acquired three years ago by septuagenarian mogul Rupert Murdoch, which landed him on the cover of Wired magazine and won News Corp. praise for embracing the Internet ahead of its old-media rivals, has cooled considerably.
New statistics released this week show MySpace has been surpassed by rival Facebook in the U.S. market, where it once dominated, and ad revenue for the site is projected to decline.
Signaling the depth of its problems, MySpace on Tuesday said it was laying off 420 people -- nearly one out of every three employees -- as part of an aggressive restructuring that seeks to make the company smaller and more agile. The action follows a management shake-up in April, in which MySpace founder Chris DeWolfe was replaced as chief executive by Facebook's former chief operating officer, Owen Van Natta.
"Simply put, our staffing levels were bloated and hindered our ability to be an efficient and nimble team-oriented company," Van Natta said in a statement. "I understand that these changes are painful for many. They are also necessary for the long-term health and culture of MySpace."
Van Natta's comments underscore just how troubled Murdoch's big Internet gamble has become in the rapidly changing world of social media. Highly touted initiatives, such as MySpace Music, failed to live up to expectations, even as the site's developers constantly play catch-up to the technological innovations of others.
"MySpace ended up not being the leader that it wanted to be in the social-networking realm, on the tech front, on the ad front -- and now on the usage front," said Debra Aho Williamson, an analyst with researcher eMarketer.
The perceived missteps are numerous. Some observers say it clung too long to a "portal strategy," in which it sought to amass an audience around entertainment content. By contrast, Facebook maintained its focus on features that enhance the social-networking experience, such as the "News Feed" that matches the immediacy of Twitter's staccato updates.
"The speed with which a company like Facebook is able to innovate and keep things fresh is the key to survival in this space," said Charlene Li, founder of Altimeter Group, a research firm specializing in social networking. "There are new things like Twitter that come along. What does Facebook do? It does Twitter . . . and it does it better."
MySpace's miscalculations have cost it ground in its competition against Facebook.
Online audience measurement firm ComScore reported MySpace attracted 70.25 million users in May -- a loss of 3.4 million people from the same period a year earlier. Meanwhile, Facebook nearly doubled the number of users over the same period and overtook MySpace in the U.S., with 70.28 million users.
Still, as Microsoft Research ethnographer Danah Boyd points out, with 70 million users, MySpace has hardly disappeared. "They are still as large as they were a year ago. And a year ago we were in awe of their size."
As the number of MySpace users declines, so does advertising revenue. EMarketer projects that U.S. revenue will fall 15% to $495 million in 2009 from $585 million last year.
Although News Corp. doesn't break out financial details for MySpace, revenue for the media giant's Fox Interactive Media division was down 11% in the most recent quarter from a year earlier, reflecting a double-digit drop in advertising. FIM also includes IGN Entertainment and the movie review site Rotten Tomatoes, although contributions from those businesses are modest compared with those from MySpace.
Murdoch tried to reassure investors about MySpace's direction during the company's earnings call last month, declaring that the management changes at MySpace "will help it regain its momentum."
That task may be harder than it looks. The history of social networks suggests that these sites have the fleeting popularity of a trendy nightclub. The site that's recognized as the birthplace of online communities, the Well, gave way to the more broadly available America Online, which was eclipsed by Friendster -- which itself became passe.
"Each of these services supplants the one before. It takes the golden ring and everyone loves that, and they forget about the last one," said Roger L. Kay, president of research firm Endpoint Technologies Associates. "MySpace made sense at a particular date, that might have been 2003. At that moment, it was the place to be. . . . Now, they have to do some major spade work on the quality of the site if they want to maintain the eyeballs."
[the article was oroginally published at http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-myspace17-2009jun17,0,6726077.story]
Check it Out : Wearing the Pants in a Social Media Setting
Think you can't make any real money marketing on social networks? Think they're really only branding tools? Think again.
I recently learned about a pretty cool online retailer and manufacturer of men's clothing that's gaining real marketing ROI from targeted ads on Facebook.
The company is called Bonobos, and it sells fashionable men's pants, shorts, swimsuits and shirts that cost less than most high-end brands.
The two-year-old company began using Facebook's online sales system in March 2008 to create ads targeted to demographic groups that were likely to be interested in its product lines. The Facebook presence works "incredibly well and is very easy to use," says Dave Eisenberg, the New York City-based e-retailer/manufacturer's chief of staff and acting vice president of marketing. "We could quickly create ads and target them to different regions, age groups, college backgrounds and work environments. We basically tailor our pitch to everybody in a unique way."
Bonobos also did some super targeting: Last spring, it launched a pair of pants with a Chicago Cubs theme in royal blue and targeted it to the demo that fit Cubs fans. The result? A grand slam: Bonobos sold 100 pairs and sold out within a month.
"This was the highest sales rate compared to any other advertising campaign we'd run before," Eisenberg says.
Right Clicking
Because Facebook's ad inventory isn't particularly expensive, clicks are a lot less expensive than any other form of online advertising Eisenberg's seen.
"With Facebook, you can find cost-per-thousand impressions for less than $1 for a very targeted, highly educated clientele, and that's not easy to find around the Web," he says. The system also allows for easy tracking. When customers click on Facebook ads, for example, they're directed to Bonobos' homepage or a landing page created for the ad that has a coupon affiliated with it. Bonobos adds a tracking code to the ad as well.
This past March, the company launched several styles of pants that it believed would work well with specific schools' sports teams. A pair of light blue pants, for example, was targeted to University of North Carolina fans.
"These all performed very well," Eisenberg says, adding that Bonobos plans to create similar promotions for the fall college football season as well.
Selling Via Social Media? Go On!
What we have here is proof that social media and social networking really work, especially if you use traditional direct marketing techniques in tandem with them — and if you target your ads to the right people.
[you can read more at http://www.allaboutroimag.com/article/targeted-facebook-marketing-pays-off-upstart-mens-apparel-merchant-407580_1.html]
I recently learned about a pretty cool online retailer and manufacturer of men's clothing that's gaining real marketing ROI from targeted ads on Facebook.
The company is called Bonobos, and it sells fashionable men's pants, shorts, swimsuits and shirts that cost less than most high-end brands.
The two-year-old company began using Facebook's online sales system in March 2008 to create ads targeted to demographic groups that were likely to be interested in its product lines. The Facebook presence works "incredibly well and is very easy to use," says Dave Eisenberg, the New York City-based e-retailer/manufacturer's chief of staff and acting vice president of marketing. "We could quickly create ads and target them to different regions, age groups, college backgrounds and work environments. We basically tailor our pitch to everybody in a unique way."
Bonobos also did some super targeting: Last spring, it launched a pair of pants with a Chicago Cubs theme in royal blue and targeted it to the demo that fit Cubs fans. The result? A grand slam: Bonobos sold 100 pairs and sold out within a month.
"This was the highest sales rate compared to any other advertising campaign we'd run before," Eisenberg says.
Right Clicking
Because Facebook's ad inventory isn't particularly expensive, clicks are a lot less expensive than any other form of online advertising Eisenberg's seen.
"With Facebook, you can find cost-per-thousand impressions for less than $1 for a very targeted, highly educated clientele, and that's not easy to find around the Web," he says. The system also allows for easy tracking. When customers click on Facebook ads, for example, they're directed to Bonobos' homepage or a landing page created for the ad that has a coupon affiliated with it. Bonobos adds a tracking code to the ad as well.
This past March, the company launched several styles of pants that it believed would work well with specific schools' sports teams. A pair of light blue pants, for example, was targeted to University of North Carolina fans.
"These all performed very well," Eisenberg says, adding that Bonobos plans to create similar promotions for the fall college football season as well.
Selling Via Social Media? Go On!
What we have here is proof that social media and social networking really work, especially if you use traditional direct marketing techniques in tandem with them — and if you target your ads to the right people.
[you can read more at http://www.allaboutroimag.com/article/targeted-facebook-marketing-pays-off-upstart-mens-apparel-merchant-407580_1.html]
Facebook to Begin Mediating Intractable Web Name Disputes
As has been widely noted in the blogosphere this week, Friday night Facebook will begin allowing users to register their own plain-language Facebook domain names, like facebook.com/bits.
Until now, Facebook’s profile pages were delineated by an awkward string of letters and numbers (”http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=500019730&”), which isn’t handily printed on business cards and doesn’t play well in search engines like Google.
Anticipating a frenetic land rush for the best names, Facebook says it will assign the new addresses on a first-come, first-serve basis, starting Friday at midnight, Eastern time. It is allowing trademark holders to fill out forms protecting their marks and says it will internally mediate all disputes.
Which may not stop things from getting ugly.
Icann, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, has been in the thick of quarrels over Web site names for more than a decade and has watched companies and lawyers generate waves of lawsuits over coveted URLs. Things became so ugly that in 1999, it began requiring Web site registrants to agree to participate in binding arbitration if any third party asserted a claim over the Web address in question.
Discussing the challenges ahead for Facebook, Tim Cole, Icann’s chief registrar liaison, said that even careful mediation processes will not prevent skirmishes from breaking out, and wondered if Facebook knew what it was getting itself into.
“This sounds like the early days when Network Solutions started doing domain registrations, and they didn’t anticipate the nature of the trademark issues that started arising and weren’t prepared for the flurry of lawsuits they started receiving,” Mr. Cole said. “It wouldn’t surprise me if the same thing happened here.”
The creativity of Facebook users, said Mr. Cole (a member of Facebook himself), should not be underestimated. “When someone registers something like ‘Facebook.com/MicrosoftSucks,’ what happens then?” He added that Facebook itself could come under legal fire by an aggrieved party who is not interested in waiting for a perceived trademark infringement to be resolved.
“Unless they have a really distinctive way to prevent abuses from arising, I have to believe disputes will arise fairly quickly as soon as people start registering names,” he said.
(the article was oringinally published at http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/facebook-to-begin-mediating-intractable-web-name-disputes/)
Until now, Facebook’s profile pages were delineated by an awkward string of letters and numbers (”http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=500019730&”), which isn’t handily printed on business cards and doesn’t play well in search engines like Google.
Anticipating a frenetic land rush for the best names, Facebook says it will assign the new addresses on a first-come, first-serve basis, starting Friday at midnight, Eastern time. It is allowing trademark holders to fill out forms protecting their marks and says it will internally mediate all disputes.
Which may not stop things from getting ugly.
Icann, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, has been in the thick of quarrels over Web site names for more than a decade and has watched companies and lawyers generate waves of lawsuits over coveted URLs. Things became so ugly that in 1999, it began requiring Web site registrants to agree to participate in binding arbitration if any third party asserted a claim over the Web address in question.
Discussing the challenges ahead for Facebook, Tim Cole, Icann’s chief registrar liaison, said that even careful mediation processes will not prevent skirmishes from breaking out, and wondered if Facebook knew what it was getting itself into.
“This sounds like the early days when Network Solutions started doing domain registrations, and they didn’t anticipate the nature of the trademark issues that started arising and weren’t prepared for the flurry of lawsuits they started receiving,” Mr. Cole said. “It wouldn’t surprise me if the same thing happened here.”
The creativity of Facebook users, said Mr. Cole (a member of Facebook himself), should not be underestimated. “When someone registers something like ‘Facebook.com/MicrosoftSucks,’ what happens then?” He added that Facebook itself could come under legal fire by an aggrieved party who is not interested in waiting for a perceived trademark infringement to be resolved.
“Unless they have a really distinctive way to prevent abuses from arising, I have to believe disputes will arise fairly quickly as soon as people start registering names,” he said.
(the article was oringinally published at http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/facebook-to-begin-mediating-intractable-web-name-disputes/)
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
How Facebook Will Upend Advertising
The guessing games over Facebook's worth are back on again. They were reignited by the news on May 26 that Facebook has accepted a $200 million investment that values the company at $10 billion.
Much of the discussion centers on the ability, or lack thereof, of Facebook and other social networks to sell advertising and deliver advertising results. People get on Facebook to socialize, not hunt for products—or so the argument runs.
But that argument misses the point. The question isn't how advertising will work on Facebook but rather how Facebook and social networks like News Corp.'s (NWS) MySpace are changing advertising. I'm loath to affix the 2.0 moniker to yet another phrase, but if ever an industry needed to be 2.0-ized, it's advertising.
Almost a century ago, retailer John Wannamaker is reported to have said: "Half of all advertising works, I just don't know which half." Today the percentage may be far lower. On the Internet, click-through rates have fallen precipitously as clutter has replaced clarity. These days an ad has performed exceptionally well if at least 1 in 10 people who see it click on it. Much of the time click-through rates that once approached 3% are more like 0.3%.
The Holy Grail of ads: word of mouth
The good news is that we're on the verge of a major rethinking of advertising's fundamental premises. One of the biggest challenges facing advertisers is ad credibility. Consumers typically rate advertising as their least credible information channel. However, businesses have continued to invest in advertising because they could compensate for the lack of credibility through broad distribution and high-impact messaging.
Today that trade-off is being turned on its head. Word of mouth—peer opinion—has consistently been rated the most credible source of information. But traditionally there's been a limit as to how widely you could distribute a friend's point of view. Readers of a certain age will remember the Fabergé Organics commercial from the 1970s depicting a shampoo user who "told two friends," who in turn "told two friends, and so on, and so on." Three decades ago, telling a lot of friends wasn't nearly as easy as it is now.
Credibility now has a channel for mass distribution. It's called the Web and it particularly thrives in social networks. Such distribution will have profound implications for how we "advertise."
Obviously, we can use social networks to reach friends. But social tools woven into various sites can deliver the opinions and reviews of a group—"people like me"—whose views may be just as credible as those of my friends.
Say I'm a chief information officer. I may find the opinions of fellow CIOs I've never met every bit as credible as the ones I know—perhaps even more so, in that I'm less willing to denigrate the opinions of people I don't know. After all, I know the biases and shortcomings of the people in my friendship circle.
deploying social maps
These tools are showing up in a variety of online destinations. Facebook's Connect and other similar technologies let people bring their social map with them as they traverse the Internet. Businesses have to be thinking about how they might incorporate the social map into the way they deal with customers and prospects. This is going to be huge—and the opportunities are immediate.
I'm a big fan of Loomia's SeenThis application. While it was designed for Facebook, I actually "use" it elsewhere. You're probably familiar with the boxes on such newspapers sites as The Wall Street Journal that show what stories other readers have read. This "most read" designation rarely interests me. However, the Loomia tool gives me an additional box that shows me what stories my Facebook friends and groups have read. Generally I end up clicking through on most or all of those articles. The "recommendation" from my peer group is much more interesting and relevant to me than those of the general WSJ readership or editorial board.
In sum, social networks and related tools are transforming the way companies communicate with consumers and potential consumers in profoundly interesting ways. In this light, questions of Facebook's valuation are at best mildly amusing to me. If, as I suspect, Facebook is at the vanguard of transforming how companies reach consumers, $10 billion will some day seem laughably small.
Now it's up to the advertising industry to get its collective head out of the sand and exploit this transformation to its advantage.
(the article was originally published at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2009/tc20090527_635562.htm)
Much of the discussion centers on the ability, or lack thereof, of Facebook and other social networks to sell advertising and deliver advertising results. People get on Facebook to socialize, not hunt for products—or so the argument runs.
But that argument misses the point. The question isn't how advertising will work on Facebook but rather how Facebook and social networks like News Corp.'s (NWS) MySpace are changing advertising. I'm loath to affix the 2.0 moniker to yet another phrase, but if ever an industry needed to be 2.0-ized, it's advertising.
Almost a century ago, retailer John Wannamaker is reported to have said: "Half of all advertising works, I just don't know which half." Today the percentage may be far lower. On the Internet, click-through rates have fallen precipitously as clutter has replaced clarity. These days an ad has performed exceptionally well if at least 1 in 10 people who see it click on it. Much of the time click-through rates that once approached 3% are more like 0.3%.
The Holy Grail of ads: word of mouth
The good news is that we're on the verge of a major rethinking of advertising's fundamental premises. One of the biggest challenges facing advertisers is ad credibility. Consumers typically rate advertising as their least credible information channel. However, businesses have continued to invest in advertising because they could compensate for the lack of credibility through broad distribution and high-impact messaging.
Today that trade-off is being turned on its head. Word of mouth—peer opinion—has consistently been rated the most credible source of information. But traditionally there's been a limit as to how widely you could distribute a friend's point of view. Readers of a certain age will remember the Fabergé Organics commercial from the 1970s depicting a shampoo user who "told two friends," who in turn "told two friends, and so on, and so on." Three decades ago, telling a lot of friends wasn't nearly as easy as it is now.
Credibility now has a channel for mass distribution. It's called the Web and it particularly thrives in social networks. Such distribution will have profound implications for how we "advertise."
Obviously, we can use social networks to reach friends. But social tools woven into various sites can deliver the opinions and reviews of a group—"people like me"—whose views may be just as credible as those of my friends.
Say I'm a chief information officer. I may find the opinions of fellow CIOs I've never met every bit as credible as the ones I know—perhaps even more so, in that I'm less willing to denigrate the opinions of people I don't know. After all, I know the biases and shortcomings of the people in my friendship circle.
deploying social maps
These tools are showing up in a variety of online destinations. Facebook's Connect and other similar technologies let people bring their social map with them as they traverse the Internet. Businesses have to be thinking about how they might incorporate the social map into the way they deal with customers and prospects. This is going to be huge—and the opportunities are immediate.
I'm a big fan of Loomia's SeenThis application. While it was designed for Facebook, I actually "use" it elsewhere. You're probably familiar with the boxes on such newspapers sites as The Wall Street Journal that show what stories other readers have read. This "most read" designation rarely interests me. However, the Loomia tool gives me an additional box that shows me what stories my Facebook friends and groups have read. Generally I end up clicking through on most or all of those articles. The "recommendation" from my peer group is much more interesting and relevant to me than those of the general WSJ readership or editorial board.
In sum, social networks and related tools are transforming the way companies communicate with consumers and potential consumers in profoundly interesting ways. In this light, questions of Facebook's valuation are at best mildly amusing to me. If, as I suspect, Facebook is at the vanguard of transforming how companies reach consumers, $10 billion will some day seem laughably small.
Now it's up to the advertising industry to get its collective head out of the sand and exploit this transformation to its advantage.
(the article was originally published at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2009/tc20090527_635562.htm)
Facebook Lands $200 Million in Funding
Ending months of fevered speculation over whether it would raise more money, social network Facebook said on May 26 that it will take a $200 million investment from Russia's Digital Sky Technologies.
In return, DST is getting preferred stock worth 1.96% of Facebook, valuing the social network at $10 billion. This is the first time Facebook has raised major equity funding since late 2007, when Microsoft (MSFT) invested $240 million in exchange for a 1.6% stake that valued the site at $15 billion.
In a move that will help Facebook employees unlock some of the value of their shares before the company goes public or is sold, DST will purchase at least $100 million of Facebook common stock from current or former Facebook employees. DST co-founder Yuri Milner tells BusinessWeek that the agreement to buy common stock was not a precondition of the equity investment. "These are two separate transactions," Milner says in an interview. DST and Facebook say they will release details of the plan this summer.
Zuckerberg: No shift in strategy
Facebook considers the investment a "good buffer" and will use it for expansion, rather than to fund existing operations, CEO Mark Zuckerberg says in an interview. "It might come in handy if we want to expand," Zuckerberg says. "We felt the valuation was good. Having additional money will allow us to explore new things, such as building data centers or acquiring companies." Sales are rising, and the company has no concrete plans to spend the cash, he adds. Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg said as recently as April that the company did not need additional financing.
Over the past year, while most companies have grown cautious and cut back on expansion, the social networking Web site has pressed ahead with aggressive growth plans. However, Zuckerberg says, the investment does not portend a strategic change. "This doesn't signal any shift in strategy," he says.
Zuckerberg also reiterated that Facebook has no plans to sell shares to the public soon. "For a lot of start-ups, you get the feeling that the IPO is really the end goal," he says. "That's really not the case for us. We view that as one milestone along the way. We don't see it happening in the immediate horizon. It's not something we're rushing toward. We'll do it when it's the right thing for the company."
DST: dozens of Web investments
On a conference call following the announcement, Zuckerberg also reiterated the company's forecast for sales to rise 70% this year. Some analysts remain skeptical that the company can achieve such growth during a recession. For instance, eMarketer speculates that Facebook's main source of revenue—global advertising—will increase 20%, to $300 million, from $250 million. "Where is that [70%] going to come from?" says Debra Aho Williamson, eMarketer senior analyst. "I can't see it coming solely from advertising. Either he has some new revenue stream up his sleeve or he is crazy."
On the call, Zuckerberg said Facebook was drawn by DST's expertise in developing business models that help social networks make money. Based in London and Moscow, DST is a four-year-old investment group. According to its Web site, DST has raised and invested more than $1 billion in over 30 companies, including Russian Web portal Mail.ru, Russian social network Vkontakte.ru, and Forticom Group, which owns and operates other social networks in Russia and Eastern Europe.
While other private investors have offered to buy Facebook shares for valuations in the range of $4 billion to $6 billion, DST co-founder Yuri Milner expressed confidence in the company's ability to make money on its Facebook stake. Although Facebook and other U.S.-based social networks have had a hard time making money from their growing number of users, Milner said the social networks he has invested in are making much more money per user than Facebook is now. Milner said Facebook would be able to generate more money from advertising and forms of e-commerce, such as micropayments for virtual gifts given to a person's friends. "We see monetization patterns that will be very applicable to Facebook going forward," he said. "For us it was almost a no-brainer."
A Soviet at Wharton in 1990
Milner says he does not need to use only traditional metrics, such as price-to-earnings multiples, in valuing his Internet investments. "That's not how we look at it," said Milner. "We see things that others don't see."
Milner, who received part of his education in America, founded DST in 2005 along with fellow Russian businessman Gregory Finger. A 1990 article in the Daily Pennsylvanian, the newspaper of the University of Pennsylvania, said Milner was "the first Soviet citizen ever to study at Wharton," Penn's prestigious business school.
In the story, Milner said his goal was to return with his degree to the Soviet Union to take advantage of the developing free markets and serve as a bridge between his native country and the West. "My idea is to be in the most useful place in the proper time," Milner said.
Almost two decades later, Milner is hoping he has found that place in Facebook.
(the article was originally published at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2009/tc20090526_070168.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_top+story)
In return, DST is getting preferred stock worth 1.96% of Facebook, valuing the social network at $10 billion. This is the first time Facebook has raised major equity funding since late 2007, when Microsoft (MSFT) invested $240 million in exchange for a 1.6% stake that valued the site at $15 billion.
In a move that will help Facebook employees unlock some of the value of their shares before the company goes public or is sold, DST will purchase at least $100 million of Facebook common stock from current or former Facebook employees. DST co-founder Yuri Milner tells BusinessWeek that the agreement to buy common stock was not a precondition of the equity investment. "These are two separate transactions," Milner says in an interview. DST and Facebook say they will release details of the plan this summer.
Zuckerberg: No shift in strategy
Facebook considers the investment a "good buffer" and will use it for expansion, rather than to fund existing operations, CEO Mark Zuckerberg says in an interview. "It might come in handy if we want to expand," Zuckerberg says. "We felt the valuation was good. Having additional money will allow us to explore new things, such as building data centers or acquiring companies." Sales are rising, and the company has no concrete plans to spend the cash, he adds. Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg said as recently as April that the company did not need additional financing.
Over the past year, while most companies have grown cautious and cut back on expansion, the social networking Web site has pressed ahead with aggressive growth plans. However, Zuckerberg says, the investment does not portend a strategic change. "This doesn't signal any shift in strategy," he says.
Zuckerberg also reiterated that Facebook has no plans to sell shares to the public soon. "For a lot of start-ups, you get the feeling that the IPO is really the end goal," he says. "That's really not the case for us. We view that as one milestone along the way. We don't see it happening in the immediate horizon. It's not something we're rushing toward. We'll do it when it's the right thing for the company."
DST: dozens of Web investments
On a conference call following the announcement, Zuckerberg also reiterated the company's forecast for sales to rise 70% this year. Some analysts remain skeptical that the company can achieve such growth during a recession. For instance, eMarketer speculates that Facebook's main source of revenue—global advertising—will increase 20%, to $300 million, from $250 million. "Where is that [70%] going to come from?" says Debra Aho Williamson, eMarketer senior analyst. "I can't see it coming solely from advertising. Either he has some new revenue stream up his sleeve or he is crazy."
On the call, Zuckerberg said Facebook was drawn by DST's expertise in developing business models that help social networks make money. Based in London and Moscow, DST is a four-year-old investment group. According to its Web site, DST has raised and invested more than $1 billion in over 30 companies, including Russian Web portal Mail.ru, Russian social network Vkontakte.ru, and Forticom Group, which owns and operates other social networks in Russia and Eastern Europe.
While other private investors have offered to buy Facebook shares for valuations in the range of $4 billion to $6 billion, DST co-founder Yuri Milner expressed confidence in the company's ability to make money on its Facebook stake. Although Facebook and other U.S.-based social networks have had a hard time making money from their growing number of users, Milner said the social networks he has invested in are making much more money per user than Facebook is now. Milner said Facebook would be able to generate more money from advertising and forms of e-commerce, such as micropayments for virtual gifts given to a person's friends. "We see monetization patterns that will be very applicable to Facebook going forward," he said. "For us it was almost a no-brainer."
A Soviet at Wharton in 1990
Milner says he does not need to use only traditional metrics, such as price-to-earnings multiples, in valuing his Internet investments. "That's not how we look at it," said Milner. "We see things that others don't see."
Milner, who received part of his education in America, founded DST in 2005 along with fellow Russian businessman Gregory Finger. A 1990 article in the Daily Pennsylvanian, the newspaper of the University of Pennsylvania, said Milner was "the first Soviet citizen ever to study at Wharton," Penn's prestigious business school.
In the story, Milner said his goal was to return with his degree to the Soviet Union to take advantage of the developing free markets and serve as a bridge between his native country and the West. "My idea is to be in the most useful place in the proper time," Milner said.
Almost two decades later, Milner is hoping he has found that place in Facebook.
(the article was originally published at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2009/tc20090526_070168.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_top+story)
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Scribd borrows a page from iTunes
Scribd is proposing to do for books what iTunes did for music -- let readers buy only what they want to read.
Eight years ago, Apple Inc. turned the music industry upside down when it launched iTunes, an online music store that let listeners cherry-pick one or two songs instead of having to buy the whole album. Starting today, Scribd is giving readers the option of buying content, including paying a few dollars for a chapter or two from a travel guide or a how-to book.
That's just one example of the flexibility that digital book purveyors are experimenting with as printed content migrates to the digital format. Another is the pricing model. Paperbacks have largely been priced at about $10 to $15, while hardcovers are $25 to $30. With digital books, that price could be any amount. Scribd just takes 20% of whatever price publishers and authors set for their works. The rest goes to the writer or publisher. Some authors, for example, are releasing their books on Scribd for $2.
One of them is Kemble Scott, a 46-year-old San Francisco writer whose first book, "SoMa," was published as a trade paperback in 2007. For his second book, "The Sower," Scott eschewed print and decided to debut his novel on Scribd as a $2 digital book.
Scott chose the digital route for its immediacy. His thriller includes a number of contemporary references such as swine flu and Susan Boyle, a Scottish singer who rose to media stardom on the wings of YouTube, Twitter and Facebook. "Publishing a book the traditional way can take a year to 18 months from the time you find a publisher to the time it ends up on store shelves," Scott said. "Now I can publish a book instantly that makes the most contemporary pop culture references of the day."
As for the $2 price, Scott said he and several other authors on Scribd thought the amount would be low enough that readers partial to print would take a gander with books on a screen. (Readers can also purchase books in a format that can be printed.)
"We realized that if we want people to try something new, we had to price it appropriately," Scott said. "We felt $2 puts it in the realm of an impulse buy. Paperbacks were invented during the Great Depression as a low-cost option. Now we're in the Great Recession, so we decided to give people a price break."
Still, at $2, Scott will make more money per copy than he did with his first book, priced at $15. His contract for "SoMa" gave him 7.5% of the cover price for each copy sold, or roughly $1.12. His contract with Scribd for "The Sower" gives him 80% of $2, which is $1.60 per copy. The question is whether Scribd will be able to push the kind of volume on its website that a traditional publisher can through bookstores.
Scribd's chief executive and co-founder, Trip Adler, believes it can. The 2-year-old website already has 60 million unique readers a month, Adler said. Until today, the site has been primarily supported by ads. Writers have uploaded millions of documents for anyone to read, including family recipes, original music scores, academic research papers and doctoral dissertations and even original novels.
Until today, access to those works had been free. But Scribd, like other digital book players such as Google Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Sony Corp. and O'Reilly Media Inc. (which put their entire catalog on Scribd), is seeing how digital distribution can transform the publishing industry's business model.
Scott sees opportunity in digital publishing. "With print, my income was limited by the number of runs the publisher made," he said. "Online, it's limitless."
[the article was originally published at http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-scribd18-2009may18,0,6817936.story]
Eight years ago, Apple Inc. turned the music industry upside down when it launched iTunes, an online music store that let listeners cherry-pick one or two songs instead of having to buy the whole album. Starting today, Scribd is giving readers the option of buying content, including paying a few dollars for a chapter or two from a travel guide or a how-to book.
That's just one example of the flexibility that digital book purveyors are experimenting with as printed content migrates to the digital format. Another is the pricing model. Paperbacks have largely been priced at about $10 to $15, while hardcovers are $25 to $30. With digital books, that price could be any amount. Scribd just takes 20% of whatever price publishers and authors set for their works. The rest goes to the writer or publisher. Some authors, for example, are releasing their books on Scribd for $2.
One of them is Kemble Scott, a 46-year-old San Francisco writer whose first book, "SoMa," was published as a trade paperback in 2007. For his second book, "The Sower," Scott eschewed print and decided to debut his novel on Scribd as a $2 digital book.
Scott chose the digital route for its immediacy. His thriller includes a number of contemporary references such as swine flu and Susan Boyle, a Scottish singer who rose to media stardom on the wings of YouTube, Twitter and Facebook. "Publishing a book the traditional way can take a year to 18 months from the time you find a publisher to the time it ends up on store shelves," Scott said. "Now I can publish a book instantly that makes the most contemporary pop culture references of the day."
As for the $2 price, Scott said he and several other authors on Scribd thought the amount would be low enough that readers partial to print would take a gander with books on a screen. (Readers can also purchase books in a format that can be printed.)
"We realized that if we want people to try something new, we had to price it appropriately," Scott said. "We felt $2 puts it in the realm of an impulse buy. Paperbacks were invented during the Great Depression as a low-cost option. Now we're in the Great Recession, so we decided to give people a price break."
Still, at $2, Scott will make more money per copy than he did with his first book, priced at $15. His contract for "SoMa" gave him 7.5% of the cover price for each copy sold, or roughly $1.12. His contract with Scribd for "The Sower" gives him 80% of $2, which is $1.60 per copy. The question is whether Scribd will be able to push the kind of volume on its website that a traditional publisher can through bookstores.
Scribd's chief executive and co-founder, Trip Adler, believes it can. The 2-year-old website already has 60 million unique readers a month, Adler said. Until today, the site has been primarily supported by ads. Writers have uploaded millions of documents for anyone to read, including family recipes, original music scores, academic research papers and doctoral dissertations and even original novels.
Until today, access to those works had been free. But Scribd, like other digital book players such as Google Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Sony Corp. and O'Reilly Media Inc. (which put their entire catalog on Scribd), is seeing how digital distribution can transform the publishing industry's business model.
Scott sees opportunity in digital publishing. "With print, my income was limited by the number of runs the publisher made," he said. "Online, it's limitless."
[the article was originally published at http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-scribd18-2009may18,0,6817936.story]
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Facebook's virtual currency
Facebook will soon begin testing a system that would let members use its virtual currency to make purchases within applications in the social network, providing a potential new revenue stream for the company.
Until now, people have only been able to use Facebook "credits" ($1 buys 100 credits) to purchase items in the site's virtual gift store. But extending that virtual currency to the site's thousands of third-party applications could possibly bring in millions of dollars in additional revenue for the company.
The blogs Inside Facebook and VentureBeat estimate that developers this year will generate between $300 million and $500 million in revenue from transactions within Facebook applications that currently offer payment options via credit card, PayPal and other providers such as OfferPal and SuperRewards.
Through its own gift shop, which sells things like virtual birthday cakes and flowers, Inside Facebook estimates that Facebook will make $45 million to $55 million in 2009. That would amount to about 10% of a projected $500 million in total revenue for the company this year.
Going a step further by creating a "universal" virtual currency system for applications "could be a powerful revenue driver for the company, which to date has largely abstained from directly monetizing the sea of applications running on the Facebook Platform," wrote Inside Facebook's Justin Smith, in a post Tuesday about Facebook's plans to trial its virtual currency in apps.
Indeed, the company has come under criticism for not doing more to make money from its developer platform, while helping companies like Zynga, Rock You and Slide to flourish by distributing apps on Facebook.
A Facebook spokesperson Wednesday confirmed the test, but indicated that it was too premature to provide details. "We're starting a very small alpha test in a few weeks with a handful of developers that explores ways for users to use their Facebook credits with third-party applications on Facebook.com," he said.
Facebook initially announced plans to begin beta testing a payment system for application developers in December 2007, but the company appeared to put that effort on hold while it focused on growing its user base and other priorities.
But that has not stopped competitors from pushing ahead with their own e-commerce initiatives. Social network Hi5 in March launched a virtual currency system for developers, and MySpace is reportedly looking to develop its own payment system for third-party applications.
With Facebook and other social networks still struggling to monetize their vast amounts of inventory through advertising -- especially amid the economic downturn -- any supplemental e-commerce revenue they can produce is welcome.
But why should developers who already offer various payment options want to add another from Facebook? The company says it would give members more places to use Facebook credits and developers another avenue to monetize apps. Smith adds that Facebook's own currency would have the benefit of being more deeply integrated into the social network's ecosystem than a third-party service.
While no details have been disclosed, Smith speculates that developers who agreed to accept Facebook credits would be reimbursed by Facebook for currency spent in their apps, less a small percentage the company would take as a commission.
[the article was orginally published at http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=106016]
Until now, people have only been able to use Facebook "credits" ($1 buys 100 credits) to purchase items in the site's virtual gift store. But extending that virtual currency to the site's thousands of third-party applications could possibly bring in millions of dollars in additional revenue for the company.
The blogs Inside Facebook and VentureBeat estimate that developers this year will generate between $300 million and $500 million in revenue from transactions within Facebook applications that currently offer payment options via credit card, PayPal and other providers such as OfferPal and SuperRewards.
Through its own gift shop, which sells things like virtual birthday cakes and flowers, Inside Facebook estimates that Facebook will make $45 million to $55 million in 2009. That would amount to about 10% of a projected $500 million in total revenue for the company this year.
Going a step further by creating a "universal" virtual currency system for applications "could be a powerful revenue driver for the company, which to date has largely abstained from directly monetizing the sea of applications running on the Facebook Platform," wrote Inside Facebook's Justin Smith, in a post Tuesday about Facebook's plans to trial its virtual currency in apps.
Indeed, the company has come under criticism for not doing more to make money from its developer platform, while helping companies like Zynga, Rock You and Slide to flourish by distributing apps on Facebook.
A Facebook spokesperson Wednesday confirmed the test, but indicated that it was too premature to provide details. "We're starting a very small alpha test in a few weeks with a handful of developers that explores ways for users to use their Facebook credits with third-party applications on Facebook.com," he said.
Facebook initially announced plans to begin beta testing a payment system for application developers in December 2007, but the company appeared to put that effort on hold while it focused on growing its user base and other priorities.
But that has not stopped competitors from pushing ahead with their own e-commerce initiatives. Social network Hi5 in March launched a virtual currency system for developers, and MySpace is reportedly looking to develop its own payment system for third-party applications.
With Facebook and other social networks still struggling to monetize their vast amounts of inventory through advertising -- especially amid the economic downturn -- any supplemental e-commerce revenue they can produce is welcome.
But why should developers who already offer various payment options want to add another from Facebook? The company says it would give members more places to use Facebook credits and developers another avenue to monetize apps. Smith adds that Facebook's own currency would have the benefit of being more deeply integrated into the social network's ecosystem than a third-party service.
While no details have been disclosed, Smith speculates that developers who agreed to accept Facebook credits would be reimbursed by Facebook for currency spent in their apps, less a small percentage the company would take as a commission.
[the article was orginally published at http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=106016]
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Pentagon targets recruits on Facebook, Twitter
You don't often hear a three-star general using the word "friend" as a verb.
But for Lt. Gen. Benjamin Freakley and other Army brass, a new era has brought a new language — and new tools like online social networks Twitter and Facebook — for seeking out young recruits and spreading the military's message.
Freakley, who heads the Army command that oversees recruiting, says social networking sites offer another way to reach tomorrow's soldiers.
"They live in the virtual world," Freakley said. He cited Facebook as a key component in targeting 18-to 24-year-olds. "You could friend your recruiter, and then he could talk to your friends."
The Army isn't the only branch of the military with Facebook friends or that has a following on Twitter. The Air Force has also established a Facebook page, Twitter feeds and a blog, while the Marine Corps is using various networking sites mainly for recruiting purposes. The Navy is "experimenting" with several forms of online media, and some of its commands are using Twitter, a spokesman said. Even the Coast Guard commandant regularly updates his Facebook status while traveling.
The Army has also added to its Web site video games, a virtual recruiter and clips that answer commonly asked questions about life in uniform.
Showing off the videos during an interview at his office at Fort Monroe, Freakley said some of the questions were surprising: Can I have a dog in the Army? Can I buy a truck in the Army? Can I be married in the Army?
The Army, Freakley said, wants to answer those questions.
Earlier this year, the Army established an online and social media division within its public affairs office. The division's director, Lt. Col. Kevin Arata, said the search is on every day to find new avenues online to reach not only soldiers, but their families and the general public.
"We know that's where they are, and we need to go to them," Arata said.
[the article was originally published at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30513702]
But for Lt. Gen. Benjamin Freakley and other Army brass, a new era has brought a new language — and new tools like online social networks Twitter and Facebook — for seeking out young recruits and spreading the military's message.
Freakley, who heads the Army command that oversees recruiting, says social networking sites offer another way to reach tomorrow's soldiers.
"They live in the virtual world," Freakley said. He cited Facebook as a key component in targeting 18-to 24-year-olds. "You could friend your recruiter, and then he could talk to your friends."
The Army isn't the only branch of the military with Facebook friends or that has a following on Twitter. The Air Force has also established a Facebook page, Twitter feeds and a blog, while the Marine Corps is using various networking sites mainly for recruiting purposes. The Navy is "experimenting" with several forms of online media, and some of its commands are using Twitter, a spokesman said. Even the Coast Guard commandant regularly updates his Facebook status while traveling.
The Army has also added to its Web site video games, a virtual recruiter and clips that answer commonly asked questions about life in uniform.
Showing off the videos during an interview at his office at Fort Monroe, Freakley said some of the questions were surprising: Can I have a dog in the Army? Can I buy a truck in the Army? Can I be married in the Army?
The Army, Freakley said, wants to answer those questions.
Earlier this year, the Army established an online and social media division within its public affairs office. The division's director, Lt. Col. Kevin Arata, said the search is on every day to find new avenues online to reach not only soldiers, but their families and the general public.
"We know that's where they are, and we need to go to them," Arata said.
[the article was originally published at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30513702]
Social Gaming Scores in the Recession
Gaming goes gangbusters in a downturn. In 2001, the Nasdaq was plunging and such tech mainstays as telecom, e-commerce, and enterprise computing were in a tailspin. But gaming giants Electronic Arts (ERTS) and Activision (ATVI) soared. Titles including The Sims, Grand Theft Auto, Halo, and the Madden sports series became national big-budget obsessions.
In the current recession, amid declines in computing and online advertising, gaming again is on a tear. Only this time around, it takes more than producing a pricey console or a slick blockbuster in a shrink-wrapped box to win big at gaming. In a way, it takes a lot less.
Some of the most impressive growth of late is in technologically stripped-down games that offer players social, communal experiences. The most talked about are Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and several interactive titles associated with Nintendo's (7974.T) Wii. And the trend isn't confined to the living room. Less talked about is a surge in social games, played with friends on smartphone platforms such as Apple's (AAPL) iPhone and on mass-market sites such as Facebook and News Corp.'s (NWS) MySpace.
Many Games Are Free
Social gaming is less about killer graphics and quicksilver hand-eye coordination and more about connecting with friends. The best games aren't impressive in terms of technology, though they're quite adept at harnessing media that let players interact. For games on social networking sites, that means letting far-flung friends and families share an activity, rather than just photos and wall posts. On the iPhone, games utilize sophisticated multitouch technology that lets the screen respond to more than a single touch at a time. The number of people playing social games is expected to surge to 250 million in 2009, from 50 million in 2008, by some industry estimates. During recessions, people tend to look for low-cost entertainment, often staying at home. Many social games are free; often even power users pay less than $50 a month.
Despite the low costs associated with social games, many actually make money. That's where entrepreneur Mark Pincus comes in. Pincus missed the last countercyclical gaming surge. Unlike most Silicon Valley geeks, Pincus isn't into video games; and in the early part of the decade he was too busy starting a company called Tribe, an ultimately failed effort to merge local newspapers with the burgeoning social networking trend then made popular by Friendster.
Pincus doesn't intend to make the same mistake twice. So he started Zynga, a site that specializes in social gaming. He's raised almost $40 million from some of the most well-regarded names in venture investing, including über-angels Reid Hoffman and Peter Thiel. Other investors include Union Square Ventures' Fred Wilson, and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.
[you can read more at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2009/tc20090429_963394.htm]
In the current recession, amid declines in computing and online advertising, gaming again is on a tear. Only this time around, it takes more than producing a pricey console or a slick blockbuster in a shrink-wrapped box to win big at gaming. In a way, it takes a lot less.
Some of the most impressive growth of late is in technologically stripped-down games that offer players social, communal experiences. The most talked about are Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and several interactive titles associated with Nintendo's (7974.T) Wii. And the trend isn't confined to the living room. Less talked about is a surge in social games, played with friends on smartphone platforms such as Apple's (AAPL) iPhone and on mass-market sites such as Facebook and News Corp.'s (NWS) MySpace.
Many Games Are Free
Social gaming is less about killer graphics and quicksilver hand-eye coordination and more about connecting with friends. The best games aren't impressive in terms of technology, though they're quite adept at harnessing media that let players interact. For games on social networking sites, that means letting far-flung friends and families share an activity, rather than just photos and wall posts. On the iPhone, games utilize sophisticated multitouch technology that lets the screen respond to more than a single touch at a time. The number of people playing social games is expected to surge to 250 million in 2009, from 50 million in 2008, by some industry estimates. During recessions, people tend to look for low-cost entertainment, often staying at home. Many social games are free; often even power users pay less than $50 a month.
Despite the low costs associated with social games, many actually make money. That's where entrepreneur Mark Pincus comes in. Pincus missed the last countercyclical gaming surge. Unlike most Silicon Valley geeks, Pincus isn't into video games; and in the early part of the decade he was too busy starting a company called Tribe, an ultimately failed effort to merge local newspapers with the burgeoning social networking trend then made popular by Friendster.
Pincus doesn't intend to make the same mistake twice. So he started Zynga, a site that specializes in social gaming. He's raised almost $40 million from some of the most well-regarded names in venture investing, including über-angels Reid Hoffman and Peter Thiel. Other investors include Union Square Ventures' Fred Wilson, and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.
[you can read more at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2009/tc20090429_963394.htm]
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Despite tough advertising market, Facebook is expanding
SAN FRANCISCO - Facebook Inc. has plenty of money to overcome the economic slump and is adding new forms of interactive advertising that will boost sales 70 percent this year, Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer, said.
"We could not be doing better financially," Sandberg said in an interview last week. "We absolutely do not need to take money. We might take money - but it doesn't mean we need to."
Facebook is expanding amid the worst market for Internet advertising since the dot-com bust, and at a time when companies are still trying to figure out how to advertise on social-networking sites. While Facebook was "nervous" following the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. last year, its confidence for ad sales "grows every week," Sandberg said.
"We're on a path, a clear path, to be cash-flow positive next year," said Sandberg, who joined Facebook from Google Inc. last year. She had previously served as chief of staff for the Treasury Department under President Bill Clinton.
The challenge for Facebook, the most popular social-networking site, is that people aren't used to seeing ads on its pages, said Allen Weiner, an analyst at Gartner Inc. in Scottsdale, Ariz.
"It's a very, very tough and discriminating audience," Weiner said. "I also don't think they've totally sold the vast array of potential advertisers and marketers on the value of Facebook."
Founded in 2004, Facebook has raised more than $400 million in equity funding, including a $240 million investment from Microsoft Corp. Peter Thiel's Founders Fund and venture capital firms Accel Partners, Greylock Partners, and Meritech Capital Partners are among Facebook's other investors.
Although Facebook doesn't need more money, the company uses lease-financing for equipment purchases, Sandberg said.
Sandberg, 39, said the company has improved its advertising offerings in the past year so they more closely resemble how the site works. In February, Honda Motor Co. allowed users to exchange heart-shaped virtual gifts - complete with a Honda logo - around Valentine's Day. Four days after the campaign started, 1.5 million people had either given or received virtual gifts that promoted the Honda Fit.
"It raised awareness about the Honda Fit by bringing new fans to the Honda Fit fan page" on Facebook, said Chris Martin, a spokesman for the Tokyo-based automaker.
Facebook is also using information on users' profile pages to target ads, Tim Kendall, the company's director of monetization, said at a conference in San Francisco last week. Facebook helped an Asian airline promote airfares by identifying people who expressed an interest in Japan in their profile pages, he said.
Sandberg said Facebook is experimenting with targeting ads based on information on users' virtual walls - without revealing any personal data.
Clients are spending more on Facebook than they did before the financial crisis, which contrasts with industrywide declines reported by Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft, said Jordan Bitterman, a media buyer at Digitas, an online ad agency in New York.
Some companies have held off buying ads on Facebook because they worry about their brands being displayed next to pictures of scantily clad women or other questionable content, said Gaston Legorburu, chief creative officer at Boston-based Sapient Corp., which provides online advertising services to clients such as Coca-Cola Co.
"I still see a lot of hesitation from big brands to take that risk," Legorburu said. "They are still very shy around buying media next to user-generated content."
Sandberg said the increase in visitors to Facebook, as well as the site's growing popularity with older visitors, give advertisers more potential customers.
Facebook reached 200 million users this month, double the number from August last year. Much of the growth is coming from people ages 35 to 49. They accounted for about 34 percent of Facebook's US users in March, up from 27 percent a year earlier, according to researcher Nielsen Online. The percentage of users ages 18 to 24 was 7.6 percent, down from 17 percent a year earlier.
Facebook had 69.2 million US users in March, compared with 55.9 million for MySpace, its closest competitor.
One indication that 2009 is an important year: Mark Zuckerberg, the company's 24-year-old founder, has committed to wearing a tie every day to the office.
"This was a year where we were really, I think, going to have to execute," Sandberg said.
[the article was originally published at http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/29/despite_tough_advertising_market_facebook_is_expanding]
"We could not be doing better financially," Sandberg said in an interview last week. "We absolutely do not need to take money. We might take money - but it doesn't mean we need to."
Facebook is expanding amid the worst market for Internet advertising since the dot-com bust, and at a time when companies are still trying to figure out how to advertise on social-networking sites. While Facebook was "nervous" following the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. last year, its confidence for ad sales "grows every week," Sandberg said.
"We're on a path, a clear path, to be cash-flow positive next year," said Sandberg, who joined Facebook from Google Inc. last year. She had previously served as chief of staff for the Treasury Department under President Bill Clinton.
The challenge for Facebook, the most popular social-networking site, is that people aren't used to seeing ads on its pages, said Allen Weiner, an analyst at Gartner Inc. in Scottsdale, Ariz.
"It's a very, very tough and discriminating audience," Weiner said. "I also don't think they've totally sold the vast array of potential advertisers and marketers on the value of Facebook."
Founded in 2004, Facebook has raised more than $400 million in equity funding, including a $240 million investment from Microsoft Corp. Peter Thiel's Founders Fund and venture capital firms Accel Partners, Greylock Partners, and Meritech Capital Partners are among Facebook's other investors.
Although Facebook doesn't need more money, the company uses lease-financing for equipment purchases, Sandberg said.
Sandberg, 39, said the company has improved its advertising offerings in the past year so they more closely resemble how the site works. In February, Honda Motor Co. allowed users to exchange heart-shaped virtual gifts - complete with a Honda logo - around Valentine's Day. Four days after the campaign started, 1.5 million people had either given or received virtual gifts that promoted the Honda Fit.
"It raised awareness about the Honda Fit by bringing new fans to the Honda Fit fan page" on Facebook, said Chris Martin, a spokesman for the Tokyo-based automaker.
Facebook is also using information on users' profile pages to target ads, Tim Kendall, the company's director of monetization, said at a conference in San Francisco last week. Facebook helped an Asian airline promote airfares by identifying people who expressed an interest in Japan in their profile pages, he said.
Sandberg said Facebook is experimenting with targeting ads based on information on users' virtual walls - without revealing any personal data.
Clients are spending more on Facebook than they did before the financial crisis, which contrasts with industrywide declines reported by Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft, said Jordan Bitterman, a media buyer at Digitas, an online ad agency in New York.
Some companies have held off buying ads on Facebook because they worry about their brands being displayed next to pictures of scantily clad women or other questionable content, said Gaston Legorburu, chief creative officer at Boston-based Sapient Corp., which provides online advertising services to clients such as Coca-Cola Co.
"I still see a lot of hesitation from big brands to take that risk," Legorburu said. "They are still very shy around buying media next to user-generated content."
Sandberg said the increase in visitors to Facebook, as well as the site's growing popularity with older visitors, give advertisers more potential customers.
Facebook reached 200 million users this month, double the number from August last year. Much of the growth is coming from people ages 35 to 49. They accounted for about 34 percent of Facebook's US users in March, up from 27 percent a year earlier, according to researcher Nielsen Online. The percentage of users ages 18 to 24 was 7.6 percent, down from 17 percent a year earlier.
Facebook had 69.2 million US users in March, compared with 55.9 million for MySpace, its closest competitor.
One indication that 2009 is an important year: Mark Zuckerberg, the company's 24-year-old founder, has committed to wearing a tie every day to the office.
"This was a year where we were really, I think, going to have to execute," Sandberg said.
[the article was originally published at http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/04/29/despite_tough_advertising_market_facebook_is_expanding]
MySpace Hires Two Officers To Fill Ranks
News Corp. on Monday named a chief operating officer and chief product officer to fill out the executive ranks at MySpace, after naming former Facebook Inc. executive Owen Van Natta as CEO of its social-networking site last week.
Michael Jones, a former executive at Time Warner Inc.'s AOL, was named MySpace's chief operating officer. Most recently, he was founder and CEO of Tsavo Media, an online content publisher. MySpace's operating-chief position has been open since Amit Kapur left last month.
Former MTV Networks executive Jason Hirschhorn was named chief product officer, a new position at the company. Mr. Hirschhorn worked as chief digital officer at Viacom Inc.'s MTV Networks. Most recently, he was president of Sling Media Inc.'s Entertainment Group.
News Corp. also owns Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal.
The company has chosen two executives with experience in product development and the technology industry, both areas in which MySpace has faced criticism.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124085705936260201.html?mg=com-wsj]
Michael Jones, a former executive at Time Warner Inc.'s AOL, was named MySpace's chief operating officer. Most recently, he was founder and CEO of Tsavo Media, an online content publisher. MySpace's operating-chief position has been open since Amit Kapur left last month.
Former MTV Networks executive Jason Hirschhorn was named chief product officer, a new position at the company. Mr. Hirschhorn worked as chief digital officer at Viacom Inc.'s MTV Networks. Most recently, he was president of Sling Media Inc.'s Entertainment Group.
News Corp. also owns Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal.
The company has chosen two executives with experience in product development and the technology industry, both areas in which MySpace has faced criticism.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124085705936260201.html?mg=com-wsj]
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Facebook Opens Site To Developers Of Services
Facebook Inc. is expected to announce significant plans to open up core parts of its sites -- namely the information that appears in the stream of updates on users' homepages and profiles -- to third-party developers so that they can build new services on top of it, people familiar with the matter say.
The announcement, expected Monday, means developers can build services that access the photos, videos, notes and comments users upload to Facebook, with users' permission. That's a big change for the social-networking site, which has exercised tight control over the look and feel of its service and how developers can interact with it.
Facebook isn't charging for the feature, instead hoping that developing new ways to access the information it houses will build user loyalty and get people to engage more often with the site, say people familiar with the matter.
[facebook] Getty Images
Developers could build a Web site that aggregates just the articles certain friends upload to the site or build a service that associates the photos a user had uploaded to Facebook with their account on another Web site, like an email service. To take advantage of the new services, users would have to allow the companies to receive access to their Facebook data, according to people familiar with the matter, and users' privacy settings on Facebook will extend to any new services built.
In addition, the Palo Alto, Calif., company is expected to announce that developers can pull the Facebook data using an open technology standard that other Web sites can also use, a decision likely to broaden the service's appeal.
The plans are expected to be discussed at a developer event in Palo Alto on Monday.
The site, which was the first major social network to allow software developers to build services on top its platform, has seen some momentum around a service it built that allows people to connect with their Facebook friends on other Web sites.
Still, Facebook, which has around 200 million users world-wide, has been heavily criticized for not doing more and for requiring developers to write some services using a customized Facebook programming language. Other companies like micro-blogging service Twitter have generated buzz by opening up more of their core features to developers.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124078628311057281.html]
The announcement, expected Monday, means developers can build services that access the photos, videos, notes and comments users upload to Facebook, with users' permission. That's a big change for the social-networking site, which has exercised tight control over the look and feel of its service and how developers can interact with it.
Facebook isn't charging for the feature, instead hoping that developing new ways to access the information it houses will build user loyalty and get people to engage more often with the site, say people familiar with the matter.
[facebook] Getty Images
Developers could build a Web site that aggregates just the articles certain friends upload to the site or build a service that associates the photos a user had uploaded to Facebook with their account on another Web site, like an email service. To take advantage of the new services, users would have to allow the companies to receive access to their Facebook data, according to people familiar with the matter, and users' privacy settings on Facebook will extend to any new services built.
In addition, the Palo Alto, Calif., company is expected to announce that developers can pull the Facebook data using an open technology standard that other Web sites can also use, a decision likely to broaden the service's appeal.
The plans are expected to be discussed at a developer event in Palo Alto on Monday.
The site, which was the first major social network to allow software developers to build services on top its platform, has seen some momentum around a service it built that allows people to connect with their Facebook friends on other Web sites.
Still, Facebook, which has around 200 million users world-wide, has been heavily criticized for not doing more and for requiring developers to write some services using a customized Facebook programming language. Other companies like micro-blogging service Twitter have generated buzz by opening up more of their core features to developers.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124078628311057281.html]
Monday, April 27, 2009
Yahoo Set to Shutter GeoCities
Yahoo Inc. said it plans to shut down GeoCities -- the personal profile service it bought for more than $4 billion in 1999 -- the latest casualty in Chief Executive Carol Bartz's campaign to shutter duplicative and underperforming products.
The company posted a notice on the GeoCities site saying it is no longer giving out new accounts for the service, which hosts user-created Web pages. The company said it would close the site later this year and will notify customers about how to save data they have uploaded to it, encouraging customers to upgrade to Yahoo's subscription Web hosting service.
The news comes as Yahoo said it will lay off 675 workers in the coming weeks through cuts targeted at certain products.
Ms. Bartz, who joined Yahoo in January, has already begun to reduce Yahoo's sprawling portfolio to focus on flagship services. The company recently announced it was closing two start-ups it acquired and tried to integrate in recent years: Jumpcut, an online video-editing service, and FareChase, a travel Web site.
GeoCities allows users to create personal pages with photos and other information, and to associate them with particular communities or neighborhoods. But its technology, designed for slower Internet connections, is crude by today's standards. Later social-networking sites, such as Friendster, MySpace and Facebook, have attracted much larger audiences.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124052150483049791.html]
The company posted a notice on the GeoCities site saying it is no longer giving out new accounts for the service, which hosts user-created Web pages. The company said it would close the site later this year and will notify customers about how to save data they have uploaded to it, encouraging customers to upgrade to Yahoo's subscription Web hosting service.
The news comes as Yahoo said it will lay off 675 workers in the coming weeks through cuts targeted at certain products.
Ms. Bartz, who joined Yahoo in January, has already begun to reduce Yahoo's sprawling portfolio to focus on flagship services. The company recently announced it was closing two start-ups it acquired and tried to integrate in recent years: Jumpcut, an online video-editing service, and FareChase, a travel Web site.
GeoCities allows users to create personal pages with photos and other information, and to associate them with particular communities or neighborhoods. But its technology, designed for slower Internet connections, is crude by today's standards. Later social-networking sites, such as Friendster, MySpace and Facebook, have attracted much larger audiences.
[the article was originally published at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124052150483049791.html]
Friday, April 24, 2009
MySpace founders step aside
The founders of MySpace are leaving the helm of the pioneering Web site that made social-networking a mainstream phenomenon, as owner News Corp. seeks to reinvigorate the once-hot property it scooped up four years ago.
The pushing aside of Chris DeWolfe and Tom Anderson, whose contracts weren't due to expire until October, represents a pivotal test for the viability of social-networking sites. While social-networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook have exploded in popularity in recent years, they have struggled to generate the kind of revenue and earnings prospects that can sustain them as businesses over the long haul.
News Corp. now aims to show that a large conglomerate, with a portfolio that includes many old-media properties including newspapers, can succeed at that task.
People familiar with the situation said News Corp. was completing a deal to name former Facebook Chief Operating Officer Owen Van Natta as chief executive to succeed Mr. DeWolfe. He would report to Jon Miller, the former AOL chief executive who was recruited to join News Corp. this month in a newly created position of chief digital officer. Charged with all News Corp.'s stand-alone digital properties, he was particularly given the mission of shoring up MySpace.
Spokeswomen for News Corp. and MySpace both declined to comment beyond a news release. Messrs. DeWolfe, Anderson and Van Natta couldn't be reached for comment.
News Corp. sees MySpace as critical in its transformation from a conglomerate of traditional television, movie and newspaper businesses to a new-media titan. But while MySpace grew quickly following News Corp.'s purchase, last year its revenue fell short of executives' targets. News Corp. also owns Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal.
MySpace is still the dominant social-networking site in the U.S. But its U.S. audience has fallen this year. In March, MySpace attracted 70.1 million unique visitors, down 3.6% from a year ago, according to comScore Media Metrix. Meanwhile, Facebook is nipping at its heels. Facebook surpassed MySpace's world-wide audience a year ago, and is growing fast in the U.S., with 61.2 million unique visitors in March, up 72% from a year earlier.
More broadly, MySpace, like other social-networking sites, still must overcome doubts about the medium's viability. Advertisers, for one, remain leery. "Advertising doesn't fit so neatly into a conversation that people are having among themselves," says Tom Bedecarre, chief executive of independent digital-ad firm AKQA. "The interruptive model of advertising hasn't been successful."
MySpace was founded in 2003 by Messrs. DeWolfe and Anderson. Their email marketing division of a Los Angeles company called eUniverse, which later renamed itself Intermix, was floundering, so they imitated a popular site at the time, Friendster.
They made two key improvements on Friendster: They allowed users to customize their profile pages, and they allowed users to create any identity they liked. Friendster, like Facebook today, encouraged members to use their real names.
But just as MySpace was taking off, fueled in large part by its popularity with musicians, it was sold to News Corp. MySpace's parent company, Intermix, negotiated the $650 million deal directly with News Corp., leaving the MySpace founders out of the loop until the last minute.
News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch immediately sought to mollify the founders with lucrative two-year pay packages of $30 million each, but Messrs. DeWolfe and Anderson still chafed at the fact that MySpace ad sales were taken over by executives at Fox Interactive Media, according to people familiar with the situation.
The rank and file of MySpace were also angry that their stock options were canceled after the acquisition and that they were forced to move from Santa Monica, Calif., to Beverly Hills, the people said.
Relations fell apart further. Mr. DeWolfe ignored suggestions from Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn about ways to improve the site. Mr. DeWolfe sought to amend a $900 million advertising deal News Corp. cut with Google Inc. -- delaying its implementation, the people said. That deal is due to expire next year.
Mr. Levinsohn also clashed with Mr. Anderson, who is president of the site. Mr. Anderson controlled the product development and was criticized for not moving fast. In April 2006, MySpace bought the online karaoke service kSolo. MySpace launched the karaoke feature on its site in April 2008 -- two years later.
The tension between the MySpace founders and News Corp. eventually led to Mr. Levinsohn's dismissal in November 2006. He was succeeded by his distant cousin, Peter Levinsohn, who eventually gave Mr. DeWolfe control of the advertising sales at MySpace that he had sought.
All this time, Facebook was steadily gaining on MySpace. Founded by Silicon Valley computer programmers as a social network for Harvard students in 2004, Facebook expanded to other college campuses and opened to everybody in 2006.
Facebook focused on building innovative features and encouraging third-party software developers to write applications to run on Facebook.
Meanwhile, MySpace, with its marketing and music background, fought back with entertainment, such as a celebrity news site and an expensive music joint venture.
Three top MySpace executives, including Amit Kapur, former chief operating officer, left the company in March to work on a start-up. MySpace has yet to name successors for those positions.
Mr. Miller began discussing the job with potential candidates including Mr. Van Natta, but hadn't finalized anything when the news of the talks leaked, according to people familiar with the situation. Mr. Van Natta helped expand Facebook but stepped into a less prominent role as chief revenue officer as the site grew, ultimately leaving the company in February 2008. At MySpace, he could serve as a bridge between Silicon Valley and MySpace, which has struggled to match Facebook's technology prowess.
Hearing of the talks, Mr. DeWolfe called Mr. Miller to discuss his future, these people said.
In the statement News Corp. released Wednesday announcing the move, it said Mr. Anderson would take on a new role in the organization. It said Mr. DeWolfe will continue to serve on the board of MySpace China and will be a strategic adviser to the company.
[credit : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124043324710044929.html]
Friday, April 17, 2009
Top Social Media - Twitter, Blogs, LinkedIn, Facebook
An overwhelming majority (88%) of marketers say they are using some form of social media to market their business, though 72% of those using it say they have only been at it a few months or less, according to a social media study by Michael Stelzner, sponsored by the upcoming Social Media Success Summit 2009.
The study found that Twitter, blogs, LinkedIn and Facebook - in that order - are the top four social media tools used by marketers, writes Marketing Charts.
The research also included an analysis of nearly 700 open-ended responses, which revealed the top-three questions marketers are asking about social media:
What are the best tactics to use?
How to do I measure the effectiveness of social media?
Where do I start?
When asked if they used social media for marketing purposes, 88% said they are employing some form of it. Business owners are more likely to use social media marketing (90+%) than employees working for a company that is not their own (81%), and respondents ages 30-39 are most likely to use social media marketing (92.8%), the study found. 72% say they have either just started or have been using social media for a few months.
The survey found that there is a direct relationship between how long marketers have been using social media and their weekly time commitment. For people just beginning, the median weekly time commitment is two hours per week. For those who have been at it for months, the median jumps to 10 hours per week. For those who report social media marketing use for years, the median is 20+ hours each week.
Respondents report that the #1 benefit of social media marketing is gaining attention for the business, and 81% say their social media efforts have generated exposure for their businesses.
Improving traffic and growing marketing lists is the second major benefit, followed by building new partnerships. At least two in three participants found that increased traffic occurred with as little as 6 hours a week invested, while those who have been doing this for years reported better results. Owners of small businesses (2 - 100 employees) are more likely than others to report benefits.
[read more : http://www.mediabuyerplanner.com/2009/04/15/top-social-media-for-marketers-twitter-blogs-linkedin-facebook]
The study found that Twitter, blogs, LinkedIn and Facebook - in that order - are the top four social media tools used by marketers, writes Marketing Charts.
The research also included an analysis of nearly 700 open-ended responses, which revealed the top-three questions marketers are asking about social media:
What are the best tactics to use?
How to do I measure the effectiveness of social media?
Where do I start?
When asked if they used social media for marketing purposes, 88% said they are employing some form of it. Business owners are more likely to use social media marketing (90+%) than employees working for a company that is not their own (81%), and respondents ages 30-39 are most likely to use social media marketing (92.8%), the study found. 72% say they have either just started or have been using social media for a few months.
The survey found that there is a direct relationship between how long marketers have been using social media and their weekly time commitment. For people just beginning, the median weekly time commitment is two hours per week. For those who have been at it for months, the median jumps to 10 hours per week. For those who report social media marketing use for years, the median is 20+ hours each week.
Respondents report that the #1 benefit of social media marketing is gaining attention for the business, and 81% say their social media efforts have generated exposure for their businesses.
Improving traffic and growing marketing lists is the second major benefit, followed by building new partnerships. At least two in three participants found that increased traffic occurred with as little as 6 hours a week invested, while those who have been doing this for years reported better results. Owners of small businesses (2 - 100 employees) are more likely than others to report benefits.
[read more : http://www.mediabuyerplanner.com/2009/04/15/top-social-media-for-marketers-twitter-blogs-linkedin-facebook]
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Nielsen: Online Video Audience Bounces Back In March
After a fall-off in February, online video viewership last month bounced back in March, according to Nielsen Online's latest VideoCensus report. Total video streams increased almost 9% to 9.7 billion in March, while time per viewer rose 12.6% to 191 minutes. Unique viewers inched up 2% to 130 million.
YouTube accounted for nearly 5.5 billion streams, followed by Hulu, with 348.5 million and Yahoo, with 231.8 million. Fox Interactive Media surged ahead of Nickelodeon Kids and Family Network into fourth place, with 207.5 million streams -- up from 194.3 million in February.
Hulu -- now a solid if distant No. 2 to YouTube in online video -- continued its steady rise, increasing streams about 10% in March and adding about 600,000 unique viewers for a total of 9.5 million.
The March figures are a contrast to February, when total streams fell 15%, unique viewers declined 6%, and time per viewer dipped more than 5% to 169 minutes.
A seasonal surge in the online video audience tied to the NCAA Men's Basketball tournament likely helped boost overall viewership figures in March. CBS said unique visitors to its March Madness on Demand video service increased 60% over last year to 7.5 million, and total video and audio was up 75% to 8.6 million hours.
CBSSports.com alone generated 38.2 million streams last month and 3.3 unique video viewers -- up more than 1,200% and nearly 300%, respectively, from February. CBS also distributed its free March Madness offering across 200 sites including YouTube, Facebook and Yahoo.
Total video streams in March were up almost 40% from a year ago.
[credit : http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=104007]
YouTube accounted for nearly 5.5 billion streams, followed by Hulu, with 348.5 million and Yahoo, with 231.8 million. Fox Interactive Media surged ahead of Nickelodeon Kids and Family Network into fourth place, with 207.5 million streams -- up from 194.3 million in February.
Hulu -- now a solid if distant No. 2 to YouTube in online video -- continued its steady rise, increasing streams about 10% in March and adding about 600,000 unique viewers for a total of 9.5 million.
The March figures are a contrast to February, when total streams fell 15%, unique viewers declined 6%, and time per viewer dipped more than 5% to 169 minutes.
A seasonal surge in the online video audience tied to the NCAA Men's Basketball tournament likely helped boost overall viewership figures in March. CBS said unique visitors to its March Madness on Demand video service increased 60% over last year to 7.5 million, and total video and audio was up 75% to 8.6 million hours.
CBSSports.com alone generated 38.2 million streams last month and 3.3 unique video viewers -- up more than 1,200% and nearly 300%, respectively, from February. CBS also distributed its free March Madness offering across 200 sites including YouTube, Facebook and Yahoo.
Total video streams in March were up almost 40% from a year ago.
[credit : http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=104007]
Monday, April 13, 2009
Twitter’s Bestest Search Friend? Google and Microsoft Engage in Yet Another Pick-Me Face-Off
In this digital era’s version of “Spy Vs. Spy,” Microsoft and Google find themselves in yet another sharp-elbowed battle to be the one to strike some kind of commercial search deal or product partnership with Twitter, many sources with knowledge of the situation said, as they also jockey for position to evaluate the potential of the much-hyped microblogging start-up.
After last week’s explosive rumor that Google was in “late-stage” talks to acquire Twitter, which BoomTown reported was wildly premature, I set out to try to sort out exactly what was going on.
As I found out, there was a lot–mostly much talking related to possible product and distribution partnerships, centered around Google or Microsoft, especially around a deal to become the one to exclusively deliver search or other similar services to Twitter properties.
The reason for the interest? Many think Twitter’s real-time search of its 140-character “tweets” posted by users on the service will become the next great battlefield in search. Google currently dominates the general search market, with third-place Microsoft struggling to get more share.
But how to do that is in flux, as past efforts at various third-party search arrangements have had mixed success for both Google and Microsoft. Both companies and also Twitter are trying to figure out new ways to do such deals.
On top of that, it is also unclear if Twitter wants to strike a deal purely to get a payment from either Microsoft or Google, as others have done. Twitter management has indicated that they are much more interested in growth and distribution over a revenue focus.
Twitter Co-founder Biz Stone said as much on the start-up’s Web site recently, as well as in many media interviews, noting that it will begin experimenting with its own business ideas this year.
In other words, the talks Twitter is having with both Google and Microsoft could also lead exactly nowhere too.
Along with the commercial talks, both Microsoft (MSFT) and Google (GOOG) are also trying to figure out if Twitter is simply one of the many shooting stars that are far more typical in Silicon Valley or if it is sea-change start-up worth pursuing and paying up big-time to acquire.
“As impressive as what Twitter has done, we are all overexcited,” said one source. “And so it’s hard to figure out the right thing to do with all the pressure to do something.”
Thus, while an offer for Twitter from Microsoft, Google or a plethora of other players–from News Corp. (NWS) to Yahoo (YHOO) to Cisco (CSCO) to Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL to big telcos–could come at any time, said many sources, only a huge price would lead to an acquisition, especially since the growth of the service has been accelerating more rapidly in recent months than has been reported publicly.
This all makes for dicey times at Twitter, which sits at the center of all this noise, trying to build a company, while also being fully cognizant that trying to engineer a massive buyout could be its best outcome.
Further complicating the situation: The fact that Twitter co-founder and CEO Evan Williams–who has already sold one company, Blogger, to Google and eventually left after a lackluster experience, a common one of many entrepreneurs who sell out early to large companies–is less interested in selling out than in growing the company.
But without the kind of control of the company’s fate–which allowed Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg to effectively block similar buyout pressures early in its history–Twitter’s founders also might not get the last word in the event of an unusually attractive offer.
While a $500 million stock-and-cash one from Facebook last fall was turned away by Twitter due to worry about the social-networking site’s market valuation, the massing interest is overwhelming and forcing it to make some clear decisions about it path.
“When you are in a situation like Twitter is in, you have to wonder if this is the high-water mark and it is time to sell out or if you are underestimating yourself badly by even considering that,” said one Silicon Valley entrepreneur who has been in a similar spot in the past. “It can be very hard to think straight.”
Indeed, all the attention is both distracting and slightly surreal for its top execs and small 30-person staff in San Francisco, said many sources close to the situation, especially the mass of media that resulted due to that now-discounted rumor that Twitter was poised to be sold off for a giant pile of money.
In fact, Twitter has its hands full enough scaling its recent surge in growth and keeping the service humming along (it has had tech snafus in the past).
But for Google and Microsoft, this geopolitical one-upsmanship by the Internet’s two most important companies is quite familiar, and they have not hesitated to jump into the Twitter tempest.
fire-drill
If that sounds a lot like the two-month fire drill in 2007 that resulted when Microsoft and Google competed to see who could sidle up closest to then-belle-of-the-Silicon-Valley-ball Facebook, you are exactly right.
After much huffing and puffing back and forth and this way and that way, it resulted in a Microsoft “win,” which gave it the distinct honor of forking over $240 million to own 1.6 percent of Facebook at an astonishing $15 billion valuation.
Even as Facebook has grown quickly in size since then–to 200 million users, as announced yesterday–its valuation has dropped to $3 billion to $5 billion.
Microsoft had previously struck an search ad deal in the U.S. with Facebook in which it paid a guaranteed revenue to Facebook and later also did a deal to do some of the search on the site.
Such kinds of deals have become common for both Google and Microsoft in recent years. Google struck one with News Corp. social-networking site MySpace, as well as with AOL (which will also soon come up for renewal).
And Microsoft grabbed the right to pay Digg a guaranteed fee in another online ad deal. And the pair also fought more recently over a mobile search distribution deal with the wireless unit of Verizon (VZ).
And so it goes now with Twitter.
No partnership deal has been made as yet, of course, since such a thing would say a lot about Twitter’s future, since the prospect of marriage overhangs such a choice, which is also–in essence, a declaration of allegiance in the cold war between Google and Microsoft.
If that also sounds like a plot of a James Bond movie, with geeks armed with algorithms instead of gadgety weaponry, you’re also exactly right.
[read more : http://kara.allthingsd.com/20090409/who-will-be-twitters-bestest-search-friend-google-and-microsoft-engage-in-yet-another-pick-me-face-off]
After last week’s explosive rumor that Google was in “late-stage” talks to acquire Twitter, which BoomTown reported was wildly premature, I set out to try to sort out exactly what was going on.
As I found out, there was a lot–mostly much talking related to possible product and distribution partnerships, centered around Google or Microsoft, especially around a deal to become the one to exclusively deliver search or other similar services to Twitter properties.
The reason for the interest? Many think Twitter’s real-time search of its 140-character “tweets” posted by users on the service will become the next great battlefield in search. Google currently dominates the general search market, with third-place Microsoft struggling to get more share.
But how to do that is in flux, as past efforts at various third-party search arrangements have had mixed success for both Google and Microsoft. Both companies and also Twitter are trying to figure out new ways to do such deals.
On top of that, it is also unclear if Twitter wants to strike a deal purely to get a payment from either Microsoft or Google, as others have done. Twitter management has indicated that they are much more interested in growth and distribution over a revenue focus.
Twitter Co-founder Biz Stone said as much on the start-up’s Web site recently, as well as in many media interviews, noting that it will begin experimenting with its own business ideas this year.
In other words, the talks Twitter is having with both Google and Microsoft could also lead exactly nowhere too.
Along with the commercial talks, both Microsoft (MSFT) and Google (GOOG) are also trying to figure out if Twitter is simply one of the many shooting stars that are far more typical in Silicon Valley or if it is sea-change start-up worth pursuing and paying up big-time to acquire.
“As impressive as what Twitter has done, we are all overexcited,” said one source. “And so it’s hard to figure out the right thing to do with all the pressure to do something.”
Thus, while an offer for Twitter from Microsoft, Google or a plethora of other players–from News Corp. (NWS) to Yahoo (YHOO) to Cisco (CSCO) to Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL to big telcos–could come at any time, said many sources, only a huge price would lead to an acquisition, especially since the growth of the service has been accelerating more rapidly in recent months than has been reported publicly.
This all makes for dicey times at Twitter, which sits at the center of all this noise, trying to build a company, while also being fully cognizant that trying to engineer a massive buyout could be its best outcome.
Further complicating the situation: The fact that Twitter co-founder and CEO Evan Williams–who has already sold one company, Blogger, to Google and eventually left after a lackluster experience, a common one of many entrepreneurs who sell out early to large companies–is less interested in selling out than in growing the company.
But without the kind of control of the company’s fate–which allowed Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg to effectively block similar buyout pressures early in its history–Twitter’s founders also might not get the last word in the event of an unusually attractive offer.
While a $500 million stock-and-cash one from Facebook last fall was turned away by Twitter due to worry about the social-networking site’s market valuation, the massing interest is overwhelming and forcing it to make some clear decisions about it path.
“When you are in a situation like Twitter is in, you have to wonder if this is the high-water mark and it is time to sell out or if you are underestimating yourself badly by even considering that,” said one Silicon Valley entrepreneur who has been in a similar spot in the past. “It can be very hard to think straight.”
Indeed, all the attention is both distracting and slightly surreal for its top execs and small 30-person staff in San Francisco, said many sources close to the situation, especially the mass of media that resulted due to that now-discounted rumor that Twitter was poised to be sold off for a giant pile of money.
In fact, Twitter has its hands full enough scaling its recent surge in growth and keeping the service humming along (it has had tech snafus in the past).
But for Google and Microsoft, this geopolitical one-upsmanship by the Internet’s two most important companies is quite familiar, and they have not hesitated to jump into the Twitter tempest.
fire-drill
If that sounds a lot like the two-month fire drill in 2007 that resulted when Microsoft and Google competed to see who could sidle up closest to then-belle-of-the-Silicon-Valley-ball Facebook, you are exactly right.
After much huffing and puffing back and forth and this way and that way, it resulted in a Microsoft “win,” which gave it the distinct honor of forking over $240 million to own 1.6 percent of Facebook at an astonishing $15 billion valuation.
Even as Facebook has grown quickly in size since then–to 200 million users, as announced yesterday–its valuation has dropped to $3 billion to $5 billion.
Microsoft had previously struck an search ad deal in the U.S. with Facebook in which it paid a guaranteed revenue to Facebook and later also did a deal to do some of the search on the site.
Such kinds of deals have become common for both Google and Microsoft in recent years. Google struck one with News Corp. social-networking site MySpace, as well as with AOL (which will also soon come up for renewal).
And Microsoft grabbed the right to pay Digg a guaranteed fee in another online ad deal. And the pair also fought more recently over a mobile search distribution deal with the wireless unit of Verizon (VZ).
And so it goes now with Twitter.
No partnership deal has been made as yet, of course, since such a thing would say a lot about Twitter’s future, since the prospect of marriage overhangs such a choice, which is also–in essence, a declaration of allegiance in the cold war between Google and Microsoft.
If that also sounds like a plot of a James Bond movie, with geeks armed with algorithms instead of gadgety weaponry, you’re also exactly right.
[read more : http://kara.allthingsd.com/20090409/who-will-be-twitters-bestest-search-friend-google-and-microsoft-engage-in-yet-another-pick-me-face-off]
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Do You Need a Social Media Marketer?
Do you like to go on Facebook and Twitter all day? Do you excel at making online friends and writing pithy tweets and status updates? If so, there may be a job out there for you!
If more companies follow the lead of Pepsi, Ford, Dell and Toyota, then social media marketer will become a growing occupation as more companies hire full-timers to interact with consumers on their behalf via Facebook and Twitter. But the lack of ROI around social media, and the belief that such duties should be spread around rather than concentrated in one unit, may limit that growth.
“Most companies just aren’t ready,” said Matthew Schwartz, president of MJS Executive Search, which placed Bonin Bough as global director of social media, a new position, at PepsiCo in September. Schwartz said he would not describe social media marketer as a hot new occupation yet. “Pepsi was a visionary.”
A recent survey of 110 of the top CMOs by recruiting firm Heidrick & Struggles in Atlanta seems to echo Schwartz’s point. The report found that social media was a relatively low priority—ranked in the bottom third. “Mostly it’s because of analytics,” said Lynne Seid, a parter at the firm. “The things that are measurable are a top priority. Most marketers see [social media] as an experiment.”
While almost every company does some form of social media marketing these days, the function is usually performed by an interactive marketing group and not broken out separately. Coca-Cola, for instance, clearly believes social media is important. The company created an office of digital communications and social media led by Adam Brown, director of digital communications for Coca-Cola, last month. But that group doesn’t hire a single full-timer charged with social media marketing. The company prefers that all employees in marketing and communications do some social media marketing instead. “Our model hasn’t been to have a staff that does nothing but respond to tweets,” said Michael Donnelly, director of worldwide interactive marketing for Coke. Donnelly said he believes having full-time employees charged with such a function comes across as disingenuous. “The only way is to be genuine and real,” he said.
That’s not everyone’s view. Dell has more than 40 full-time employees charged solely with social media marketing on behalf of the brand. Dell formed the group in 2006 after blogger Jeff Jarvis had shown how consumers in the Web 2.0 age can flex their muscles. Jarvis’ bad experience with Dell tech support, outlined on his blog Buzz Machine, in 2005, wound up hurting the brand’s reputation. “That was a factor and it was a catalyst for us to start listening and engaging people in the blogosphere,” said John Pope, a Dell rep.
Another pioneer in the space, Wells Fargo, has had a vp of social media since 2005, Ed Terpening. Part of the function of such a position is to determine which forms of social media are worth investing in. “We were the first brand that participated with Second Life and the first one to leave,” said Tim Collins, director of experiential marketing for Wells Fargo.
Wells Fargo entered Twitter in late March and Collins sees that as the big three of social media marketing outlets along with Facebook and MySpace. Other brands have been on Twitter for a while, including Dell, which has more than 80 accounts (most notably RichardatDELL with more than 5,000 followers) on the network and Ford, whose Scott Monty holds the title head of social media for the brand. As of last week Monty had more than 16,000 followers on Twitter and has authored close to 13,000 tweets—bursts of text of no more than 140 characters. While those tweets often plug Ford products in one way or another, he occasionally goes off topic as if to underscore the fact that he’s a real person. (Last week, for instance, he entertained a discussion with a follower about the fact that Bacardi rum is actually made in Mexico, not Puerto Rico as commonly thought.)
The mix of genuineness and salesmanship is a key to being a successful social media marketer, said Collins. “You have to have a passion for the space,” he said. “You can tell some people are very passionate and you can tell [when] it’s kind of forced.”
Though Collins said Wells Fargo has been able to prove ROI on its social media efforts in many cases, Schwartz said most companies are still tentative about social media marketing.
“There’s been a lot of pushback on that as far as marketing goes,” said Schwartz. “People think that social media doesn’t work. It’s hard to find ROI on pure social media marketing, but it’s a long, slow build, not something you see immediate gratification on.”
[read more : http://www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/news-and-features/digital/e3ie2a94edbc5b0a7c1150d6cbf4741dede?pn=1]
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Social Networkers Don't Mind Ads - Razorfish Report
Good news for Social Networking sites....
Advertising is not a turnoff to people who love social media Web sites. In fact, many MySpace and Facebook users said ads on their favorite social sites have prompted them to buy something, according to a new report from Razorfish.
In its survey-based publication named "FEED: The Razorfish Consumer Experience Report," the digital marketing agency says 76 percent of the 1,006 people surveyed said they didn't mind seeing ads when they logged-in to Facebook, MySpace or the other social media sites they frequent. Razorfish also found that 40 percent of the respondents said they made purchases due to seeing those ads.
However, while consumers see a place for advertising on social networks, advertisers should think beyond traditional approaches, said Garrick Schmit, group vice president of experience planning at Razorfish. He said successful ad campaigns can come in the form of fan pages, games, widgets, videos and other "social experiences. "These experiences, or types of content, are what engage users today and will increasingly become the vehicle to acquire them," said Schmit.
Razorfish describes the survey respondents as "connected consumers." It defines them as people with broadband access who spent at least $200 online in the past year, used a community site such as MySpace and consumed or made some type of digital media including videos and music.
"Connected consumers have enthusiastically embraced social media (both technologies and networking sites), are actively building and refining their own trusted personal networks and are rapidly embracing new communication offerings like Twitter," says the report. It notes that these users are "challenging" publishers, advertisers and marketers to give them services they find useful even though those offerings "have no immediate monetization models."
The report suggests that smart marketers and publishers will figure out how to "merge tactics" so that the wall between content and ads is increasingly dissolved. "Content, in our view, will become advertising," the agency believes.
However, the report admits this evolution will not necessarily be easy. In fact, it says online advertisers and publishers are venturing into "uncharted territory," and need to take a scientific approach that will require new tools and services. Razorfish warns that "today's widget might become tomorrow's TV set" making it a challenge to understand and manage users' connections "with almost no explicit controls."
In the report the agency explains it was surprised to find 91 percent of respondents use Google, Yahoo, MSN, AOL, and Ask.com as their Internet homepages. Over 60 percent of these people have customized their homepages with content feeds and widgets. The report notes 55 percent said they use widgets with some frequency and 62 percent use them on sites such as Facebook and iGoogle.
The researchers found that, while those who view online videos don't mind the presence of advertising, they prefer banners and "newer, emerging forms of video" ads including tickers and interstitials to pre-roll video ads.
While video ads might not be as powerful as their makers might have us believe, Razorfish says retail loyalty programs -- such as Amazon's Prime and Best Buy's Reward Zone -- have a big impact on purchasing decisions.
"Clearly consumers are receptive to advertising with online videos, but the preference for companion banners speaks to the notion of choice," said Schmit. "People will always choose to click or view advertising that interests them instead of waiting for a pre-roll that may not align with their interests." Given the fact that most online videos are short, Schmit said "there's no joy" in watching a pre-roll that can be half as long as the clip itself.
The widespread use of widgets suggests people are comfortable "with the concept of distributed experiences" bolstering Razorfish's suggestion that content and services distribution is becoming more important than Web destinations. This is a big challenge for publishers, especially those focused on media and entertainment because they "currently have no clear path towards monetizing content distribution across the Web," says Razorfish.
"I definitely think there’s a place for a widget advertising network," said Schmit" He said photo-sharing sites Slide and RockYou do this well, and he noted widgets "get really interesting" when advertisers make content or services that are consumed and interacted with through widgets.
While Web destinations may no longer dominate, the report also notes that targeted, personalized recommendations offered by some sites can have an impact. Sixty-five percent of survey respondents said they made repeat purchases from a Web site that sent them a recommendation based on their purchase history.
You could read the original story at http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3631324
Advertising is not a turnoff to people who love social media Web sites. In fact, many MySpace and Facebook users said ads on their favorite social sites have prompted them to buy something, according to a new report from Razorfish.
In its survey-based publication named "FEED: The Razorfish Consumer Experience Report," the digital marketing agency says 76 percent of the 1,006 people surveyed said they didn't mind seeing ads when they logged-in to Facebook, MySpace or the other social media sites they frequent. Razorfish also found that 40 percent of the respondents said they made purchases due to seeing those ads.
However, while consumers see a place for advertising on social networks, advertisers should think beyond traditional approaches, said Garrick Schmit, group vice president of experience planning at Razorfish. He said successful ad campaigns can come in the form of fan pages, games, widgets, videos and other "social experiences. "These experiences, or types of content, are what engage users today and will increasingly become the vehicle to acquire them," said Schmit.
Razorfish describes the survey respondents as "connected consumers." It defines them as people with broadband access who spent at least $200 online in the past year, used a community site such as MySpace and consumed or made some type of digital media including videos and music.
"Connected consumers have enthusiastically embraced social media (both technologies and networking sites), are actively building and refining their own trusted personal networks and are rapidly embracing new communication offerings like Twitter," says the report. It notes that these users are "challenging" publishers, advertisers and marketers to give them services they find useful even though those offerings "have no immediate monetization models."
The report suggests that smart marketers and publishers will figure out how to "merge tactics" so that the wall between content and ads is increasingly dissolved. "Content, in our view, will become advertising," the agency believes.
However, the report admits this evolution will not necessarily be easy. In fact, it says online advertisers and publishers are venturing into "uncharted territory," and need to take a scientific approach that will require new tools and services. Razorfish warns that "today's widget might become tomorrow's TV set" making it a challenge to understand and manage users' connections "with almost no explicit controls."
In the report the agency explains it was surprised to find 91 percent of respondents use Google, Yahoo, MSN, AOL, and Ask.com as their Internet homepages. Over 60 percent of these people have customized their homepages with content feeds and widgets. The report notes 55 percent said they use widgets with some frequency and 62 percent use them on sites such as Facebook and iGoogle.
The researchers found that, while those who view online videos don't mind the presence of advertising, they prefer banners and "newer, emerging forms of video" ads including tickers and interstitials to pre-roll video ads.
While video ads might not be as powerful as their makers might have us believe, Razorfish says retail loyalty programs -- such as Amazon's Prime and Best Buy's Reward Zone -- have a big impact on purchasing decisions.
"Clearly consumers are receptive to advertising with online videos, but the preference for companion banners speaks to the notion of choice," said Schmit. "People will always choose to click or view advertising that interests them instead of waiting for a pre-roll that may not align with their interests." Given the fact that most online videos are short, Schmit said "there's no joy" in watching a pre-roll that can be half as long as the clip itself.
The widespread use of widgets suggests people are comfortable "with the concept of distributed experiences" bolstering Razorfish's suggestion that content and services distribution is becoming more important than Web destinations. This is a big challenge for publishers, especially those focused on media and entertainment because they "currently have no clear path towards monetizing content distribution across the Web," says Razorfish.
"I definitely think there’s a place for a widget advertising network," said Schmit" He said photo-sharing sites Slide and RockYou do this well, and he noted widgets "get really interesting" when advertisers make content or services that are consumed and interacted with through widgets.
While Web destinations may no longer dominate, the report also notes that targeted, personalized recommendations offered by some sites can have an impact. Sixty-five percent of survey respondents said they made repeat purchases from a Web site that sent them a recommendation based on their purchase history.
You could read the original story at http://www.clickz.com/showPage.html?page=3631324
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
