Twitter

“We’ll Figure it Out Later” is Not a Business Model

I’m in the process of reading Chris Anderson’s “Free”, which celebrates how the idea of paying little or nothing for many digital products and services is inevitable. Anderson makes a compelling argument that includes the belief that free works because it encourages other economic activity. For example, free music allows musicians to attract more fans, who then cough up money for concert tickets, merchandise and sometimes CDs.

While I like and use plenty of free services (GMail, Evernote, Skype, Firefox, Twitter), I’m also a businessman who recognizes that companies need to generate revenue to pay employees, do marketing and keep the lights on. However companies plan to make money – advertising, premium services, consulting fees – they need a plan to drive revenue to make the business viable.

The problem, however, too many start-ups have little or no idea of how they’re going to make money. Instead, the have a “business model” based on the idea that if they attract lots of users, a way to generate revenue will magically appear. After all, this “model” worked for Google, which struggled to find a business model before “borrowing” its pay-per-click business model from Overture, so why shouldn’t it work for other start-ups.

This “we’ll figure it out later” business model is flawed because while offering free services is a great way to attract users, not having an idea about how to make money from some of them is not a viable build a business.

The biggest culprit of this business model is Twitter, which still doesn’t seem to know how it’s going to make money. Sure, there’s been talk about advertising, premium business services or analytics but nothing has emerged yet. Still, it has raised $150-million in venture capital based on the fact it has become a wildly popular communications vehicle with more than 50 million users around the world.

While Twitter may eventually find a way to make revenue, it’s an exception to the “we’ll figure it out later” strategy. The vast majority (99.999%) of companies never attract enough users to figure it out. When the seed capital or venture capital is exhausted, they’re left with a modest number of users but no way to make money. Pretty soon, the pink slips are handed out, the lights turned out and the doors are closed.

So why is that so many start-ups get launched without a clue of how to make money beyond the notion that getting enough users might let them attract some advertising revenue? Why do many start-ups attract investors without even having a rough idea about how make revenue?

Make no mistake, free is wonderful for consumers, and there are clearly ways that free can be used as a powerful marketing tool to drive sales of other products and services. But for many companies, free is un-viable business model. Without an idea of how to make money, they never evolve from being interesting projects to businesses.

Instead, most up of them end up as fodder for the “free economy”, never to be heard from again as they disappear into the digital ether.

Twitter Lists Seem Interesting But….

Update: Twitter had introduced a list widget that you can place on your blog to display the list of your choice. TechCrunch describes as “pretty cool”.

You’d think given the buzz about the recent launch of Twitter Lists that someone had re-invented slice bread. That said, my take is the emergence of Twitter Lists is putting the cart before the horse.

By that, there’s a bigger problem that Twitter should have addressed before introducing Lists: specifically, how to find new people to follow that meet your personal or professional interests. Sure, there are these kind of services available such as Mr. Tweet but it’s such a major problem that it’s something Twitter should be addressing.

The problem with creating a Twitter List is you start by adding people you already know or follow. For example, let’s say you’re into cars, and want to create a list focused on manufacturers. You start with Ford’s Scott Monty and perhaps add a few more people. At that point, you may need some help with suggestions on who else to add. Unfortunately, Twitter Lists falls flat.

If Twitter wanted to put the horse before the cart, it should have started by launching a kick-ass new follower tool. This would have been well-received tool because it would have given all users a new tool to find new people to follow. Then, Twitter should have launched Twitter Lists, which would have
built to support and enhance the new follower tool. This would have made Twitter Lists more useful by also providing a new follower recommendation tool.

Instead, Twitter got ahead of itself – perhaps because there was so much interest and use of groups within tools such as Tweetdeck. Hopefully, Twitter will take a step backward, and now focus on helping people add new followers.

If you are interested in creating a Twitter List, here’s a good video by Amy Porterfield (aka @amyporterfield).

The Emergence of Twitter 2.0?

CNet’s Caroline McCarthy had a short, but interesting, story yesterday about Bijan Sabet of Spark Capital, who was talking at the 140 Conference about Twitter’s recent $100-million financing. (Spark is an investor in Twitter).

Sabet said although Twitter didn’t need the money, it loaded up so it could make some major strategic moves such as hiring new people, launching new products and making strategic partnerships. (The search deals with Microsoft and Google being case in point.)

While the $100-million raise is important, it also signifies the end of Twitter 1.0 – a time when Twitter experienced astounding growth but didn’t do a lot of interesting things other than harden its infrastructure.

Twitter 2.0 could be a much more interesting creature because the company could do more creative, innovative and strategically aggressive things. The deals with Microsoft and Google put the spotlight on the New Twitter, as well as recent the introduction of lists.

Aside from hiring more people, it will be interesting to see if Twitter uses any of its cash to make acquisitions. The company hasn’t been an active buyer but it could make some really bold moves by picking up market leaders players such as Tweetdeck and TwitPics.

More: TechCrunch reports that according to comScore, Twitter had 58.4 million unique visitors in September – 37.5 million from outside the U.S.

Is Facebook Getting Cool Again?

At BlogWorld Expo earlier this month, I sat in on a panel by Mari Smith, a Facebook evangelist whose enthusiasm is irresistible.

It wasn’t that I had a huge interest in learning more about Facebook because, frankly, I’ve never got the Facebook bug. But someone suggested that Smith did a great presentation so I figured there was little to lose.

Surprisingly, Smith’s tips, particularly about jump-starting Facebook Pages, started to resonate. In fact, I found myself implementing some of her suggestions on my Facebook Page during the presentation.

That got me thinking about whether Facebook deserved another chance. After all, 300 million registered users can’t be wrong, right?

Some more support for Facebook happened last week at the meshmarketing conference in which Facebook Canada’s Elmer Sotto did a workshop focused on 10 ways to get more out of Facebook. It struck me as solid, valuable advice that offered more justification for giving Facebook some more love.

Finally, I saw this Twitter update by social media consultant Jesse Stay:

“I’m beginning to see more and more of the same stuff in Twitter/FriendFeed as I do in Facebook. Thinking of transitioning more to Facebook”.

I found this an interesting comment because Stay is among the digiterai, who have pretty much ignored Facebook while spending a lot of time with Twitter, Friendfeed and their blogs. But if Stay is re-thinking his relationship with Facebook, maybe this is a sign that Facebook is coming back into vogue again.

Not to draw quick conclusions but maybe the pendulum is swinging back towards Facebook. And it could be that Twitter could feel the impact. At a pre-meshmarketing party last week, someone confessed that Twitter had become boring. Her thesis is that because everyone who’s working is working hard, they don’t have the time for Twitter but maybe Facebook is a factor as well.

So, what do you think? Is Facebook winning over the digiterai again?

Assetize Aims to Monetize Twitter

For Twitter, advertising is low-hanging fruit to generate revenue. But Twitter continue to insist it’s not something being actively considered. So while Twitter makes up its mind about whether or not to place ads into Twitter streams, there’s a growing number of companies doing just that.

A new player is Toronto-based Assetize, which emerged from Extreme Venture Partners‘ Extreme University, a 12-week program done last summer to nurture and incubate start-ups. Assetize bills itself as a smarter way for advertisers to tap into Twitter because its technology does a much better job of connecting ads to relevant content than players such as Magpie.

Assetize offers a self-service platform for advertisers and Twitter users looking to have ads within their Twitter stream. Using a pay-per-click model, advertising can configure the keywords they want to target and their budgets. For Twitter users, they get paid every time a link with an ad is clicked – much like AdSense on blogs.

Although the platform looks interesting, the biggest challenge facing Assetize is attracting enough advertisers and Twitter users to make it a vibrant platform. With advertising within Twitter still in its infancy, Assetize needs to aggressively move into sales, marketing and education mode to nurture the marketplace.

More: TechCrunch reports that Glam Media is going to be launching a Twitter ad network, while Ad.ly is launching an network to connect high-end brand advertisers with celebrity and high-profile Twitter users.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...