Tag: Google

  • Zen & the art of SNS monetising

    The thought started from this article, which talked of how Google was losing top execs to Facebook. It apparently isnt just a phase because SNS (social networking sites) are increasingly grappling with the issue of revenue, or rather, the lack of it. These hires apparently fit the bill.

    Remember the initial days of the net? I don’t because i was a pretty late starter myself (2000- a virtual space odyssey, thats what my book would be called šŸ˜€ ), but that was still the time when (at least in india) revenue was a puzzle for everybody in dotcom, which partly explained the bust that soon happened. They had a partial solution happening with banner ads, and slowly that became the norm. In most places, it still is šŸ˜ . the problem was that to most users, it became a blindspot.

    Then came Google, and the era of contextual ads, first in searches as sponsored links, and then in any siteĀ in the context it Ā had content in. It still works. But the net has moved on. So, users know exactly when its useful to them. This is of particular relevance in the case of social networking sites.

    At a basic level, I go to SNS to have a conversation with friends –Ā  that could be just plain catching up, bitching about work, life etc or (thanks to facebook) just sharing a common interest over a game of scrabble. Can contextual ads work here? It was a difficult question to answer until one takes a look at the Facebook revenue scene. I personally don’t think it does, for the simple reason that, well, the context is wrong. Unlike search, where my intent is clearly info/purchase, its not so in SNS. This video, while totally out of context, shows what i mean about intent.

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg6qcgoay4]

    So how doesĀ a free site (for users) like Facebook get revenue, and god forbid, if they don’t, will they shut down? No, dont call Mummy yet, this WATBlog article clearly shows the Chinese (damn them) have found a way to monetise their SNS, especially QQ. (Ā what a name. dont ask me kyun) And its not online ads, thats only 13% of the revenue. The rest is from virtual goods, services and mobile.

    But i personally think there’s more that can be done. And that has a direct connection to brands. We’ll discuss that next week, after i hear from you.

    until next time,Ā remember you need to be social šŸ˜€

  • Add Sense

    Read a very nice article today on rediff, about Google’s nine innovation rules. Coming from Marissa Mayer, VP of search products and user experience, it underlines why Google’s offering always strike a chord with the audience. While I’m one of those who’re becoming increasingly uncomfortable with Google and its (non) privacy,Ā and its journey away from ” Don’t be evil”, it still manages to get my attention, inspite of all the old enemies (eg. Yahoo with Flickr, del.icio.us, Answers etc)and new upstarts (eg.Facebook) at various boundaries of its kingdom.

    More than randomĀ preaching on innovative practices one hears during sermons, she manages to link innovation to simple philosophies that should ideally be practised by all workplaces which consider itself to be ‘innovation practitioners’. The 20% time for pet projects, the sharing network between employees, the treatment of data as apolitical, the idea generation processes all speak of a system which thrives on experimenting and trying out new things, and that, i guess is the reason why Google has reached where it is in such a small timeframe.

    Meanwhile, i was also influenced by the very first principle, ‘innovation, not instant perfection’. Its a difficult lesson to learn, especially for perfectionists (and wannabes šŸ™‚ ), but it just might be a better way in the long run.

    until next time, go ogle

  • So, which is the bigger evil?

    billoo.jpg

    or

    Ā googloo.jpg

  • The New Microsoft

    Its like the typical bollywood underworld story which is told from the anti hero’s perspective… The hero makes his entrance to save society from the evil villain’s menace, then takes the villain’s place, and pretty soon the line between good and evil becomes a big blur…
    In the internet story, MS played the big villain, thanks to its monopolistic leanings and bundling tactics, almost forcing users to choose it.. and that set the scene for the entry of the perfect hero – google… and as the story goes, slowly but surely google trumped the villain at every possible juncture in a matter of few years… and users stuck to it, inspite of blips like Gmail being a snoopy service that peeps into their mailbox…
    And Google went on with its contextual relatonship with its customers… after all how can google serve its users best until it knows all that is to know about the user… so that it can serve up ads well in context and give the user the correct info exactly when he needs it… and the behemoth continues into radio ads, moves into the television ad space and local billboard space.. all in the guise of the hero serving the society, slowly converting homo sapiens into homo searchians…
    after all even if the slogan is “don’t be evil”, all it takes is changing the definition of evil…

    until next time, should the users feel lucky ?

  • G MS Y?

    While all the wars were being fought in recent times over virtual space, one player was conspicuous by its absence – but some announcements in the last few days got the gates backwide open…
    the good part is, i am not geek enough to analyse the services of the three major players in virtual space… the bad news is, that doesnt stop me from writing about it…:)
    Good Ol’ Bill is an icon, theres no denying it… but unfortunately he has never been able to translate that into a favourable opinion about his enterprise… while there are a lot of us who display ‘Get firefox’ icons, havent seen any ‘I use E’ (yup, bad one acknowledged) buttons… also, theres no denying the fact to a lot of us, Word, Excel, Powerpoint etc are still THE applications and they have indeed made lives a lot easier (hmm, not powerpoint,on second thoughts..hehe), and when you add MSN chat and Hotmail into the mix, MS automatically becomes an integral part of our automated life.. normally that gives a load of ammunition forworship, but surprisingly all that doesnt make us say ‘I Love MS’…
    Is it that we love the underdog? or is it that we hate the way MS has been getting too many dollar bills? if it is the latter, is there too much of a harm in a guy making money out ofhis ideas and work? isnt that supposed to be the mantra of knowledge working and the basis of copyrights? why should we be having a problem with the money being made? why should it be open source??
    i wonder if the ‘no love’ is because it has changed the way we work… or is it something like school?.. none of us liked it when we had to go to school, but down the line there is also a realisation that perhaps it did do some good for us, or more importantly, it made a difference in the direction of our lives…perhaps, Bill, you have to wait some more for the idolising…
    until next time, yahoo!!! Gmail is moving towards 3 GB….:)