Editor's note: this is a guest post written by Tom Anderson, former President, founder and first friend on MySpace. You can now find on Facebook, Twitter and Google +.
If it is not obvious, Google + will be able to undermine Facebook when it comes to game developers and the platform for transactions. Instead of taking a cut of 30 per cent of all Farmville seeds (or any people buying), Google will take a smaller percentage for themselves. They may even receive nothing. And when it comes to "monetize" G + "site," Google's trump card against Facebook that we can't even see the ad on G +. Google has a lot to get without ever showing ads and, to put it simply, Google does not need the money. Facebook got to know about it and he got them just a little bit interested.
This week, the WSJ reported that FB is testing out channel "real-time" (as opposed to Facebook's current default algorithm "top news"). Presumably this new channel will be the new norm for users. Although I would think that Facebook listen to me when I criticize their algorithm Top news that really moving Facebook hand here (according to the WSJ) are complaints against advertisers and application developers. It seems that "Top News" thread kills virality advertiser content, and applications that are trying to find new users.
If it is true that FB considers these changes due to complaining about developers and advertisers, it's a real bad sign for FB. Facebook has made some defensive moves since the start of the G +, which in itself is unusual for them. But this is the first sign that they can comply with complaining third parties. (Hey, the IPO is heat coming … competition, it has to happen, right?) Decision-making, reported the problems of those third parties is not automatically spell doom, of course. However, Facebook was so darn good for so long because of their refusal to the IPO, their refusal to think about the short term, and their refusal to allow one of the parties should not obscure the general health services. The tough thing for Facebook, the more you get, and more competing interests, you have to consider, the more difficult it becomes your choice.
FB, the problem may seem like a positive to G ++, but it's not so easy. This is a virtual certainty that Google will launch platform (and not just platform games), but how they do it is of crucial importance. We do not want to repeat the cycle of Facebook — where FB promised world for developers, gave them free reign to build hype and then cut their marketing channels and destroyed their business (simplification of Yes, but read this harrowing tale from Paul Allen) — G + must carefully balance the needs of developers with total health community.
From what I can tell the heads of the G + known for delicate balance that is needed here. Although they gaffed as they carried it, Google decided to block business account indicates that Google understands that they need a real plan here. Frankly I'm surprised that not "regular users" talked to say they don't want brands to G +. Maybe it's just because 80% of active users on G + work in the "Internet industry" (at least according to My unscientific poll), and thus have something to gain by giving "enterprises" in the service. "Regular users" will be so happy about this? As Matt Hogan, he may not be the best idea to enable businesses to come and muck up a place at the beginning.
However, what we can see here is the general evolution of the brand-user to the extent that users trust that it just might work (like Twitter, where you can follow brands, but they can not bug you).
From poor planning on my part, never quite correct regular users/business relations at MySpace. Business would like to be able to walk and add friends on MySpace, and it was difficult to say "no" from they way, MySpace over time. Facebook was smart, make it impossible for "pages" to add people & comment for the first few years. But they recently overturned this decision. Whether this is a very good thing remains to be seen. (This is easier to move to the Facebook now that you have already created a database of "true", and Facebook has years of mining algorithms prevent spam under their belt).
But in any case, Google and Facebook have some tough decisions ahead of them: how they balance the best for the regular Guy (you & me), advertisers (big brands), small local businesses (which can never afford to spend big), developers of platforms with no competing services (games & music, which seems not to get in FB) and platform developers with potentially competitive services (such as business networking and znakomstvakotoryj FB/G + may want to get into a someday).
In the long term (5-10 years), the company that makes the right choice in these areas may just ultimately win.
The Google project, headed by Vic Gundotra and Bradley Horowitz, Google + is designed for social expansion of Google. Its main function is to make electronic exchange easy to ...
Read MoreFacebook is the largest social network in the world, with more than 500 million users. Mark Zuckerberg founded Facebook in February 2004, originally as an exclusive network for students at Harvard University. He ...
Read MoreGoogle provides search and advertising services, which together aim to organize and money in the world of information. In addition to its dominant search engine, it offers many ...
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment