MappingTheWeb //

As Mark Evans points out in a recent post, there is a Facebook application “gold rush” taking place right now. Everyone and their dog is scrambling to launch an app to capitalize on this fad opportunity. Many are seeing astonishing growth - from zero to tens of thousands of users in a mere couple days. But is this truly sustainable? Even more importantly, is it really worth it? I don’t think so. But don’t tell that to Facebook or the application creators.

Anything that vaults to stratospheric popularity levels in a short period of time is bound to see a fall-out or backlash of some kind eventually. In this case, the novelty of apps will eventually wear off. Some may disagree, but I would wager that ’superpoking’ and ‘throwing food’ are only cool for so long. Frankly, I’m already tired of all these ridiculous app invites after only a couple months.

The promise of monetization or a sale is what is driving this boom. But let’s be honest here - how many will actually profit from a sale or achieve reasonable revenues? My guess is under 1%. In other words, Facebook is almost creating a false sense of hope for developers. Subsequently, facebook profits from additional PR, user growth, and developer evangelism.

To me, Facebook applications are no more than a marketing funnel to an outside web presence. If you plan on making the app the entire business, you are walking a dangerously fine line. Forever more, you will be at the mercy of Facebook. If they decide to change course, you could be screwed.

My intuition tells me that the introduction of the developer platform was simply a move by the company to create short terms success and fuel PR ahead of an IPO or potential sale. Let’s analyze this further:

1. Facebook launches the developer platform.
2. Developers experience exponential growth and boast about their success.
3. The press takes notice; widespread PR ensues.
4. More developers jump on the bandwagon.
5. A positive feedback loop is created: success feeds PR, which fuels further applications. Repeat.
6. Eventually, a bubble is created as the app market is saturated and over-crowded. The dilution leads to a fall-out.

In other words, I believe that the developer platform is a short term ’stunt’ to raise awareness and exposure for the company. Over the long term, I see the move as being more detrimental than beneficial. I, for one, am already starting to get disgruntled by the addition of clutter and useless knick-knacks. The Facebook crowd, for the most part, is an older group. Such silly applications should be left for the MySpace or hi5 crowd. They degrade the quality of the experience. A seeming endless amount of scrolling is now needed to browse most profile pages. Is this the Facebook that we all remember?

Note: I refuse to make any parallels to MySpace or Geocities just yet…

Come launch day, your marketing department shouldn’t and running around like chickens. They should be relaxing and breathing a sigh of relief. Ok, I may be exaggerating a bit, but not by much.

The basic premise is this: all Internet marketing and advertising campaigns should be ready to go before launch day. That way, once the day arrives, a metaphorical switch can be flicked to activate the marketing machine.

What does this means? Well, some or all of the following should be ready prior to launch:

• PR initiatives (including a press release)
• Ad campaigns (online and offline)
• Blogger relationships
• Internal marketing functions
• Branding/positioning/messaging
• Search engine optimization
• Web analytics
• Company blog
• Contest(s)

So when launch day finally comes, you can simply ‘flick the switch’.

Some traffic will come from one-time sources (i.e. press release, news story, etc..), while some will come from residual sources (i.e. search engines, current users, etc…). The list above translates to traffic from the following sources:

• News sites
• Offline publications (newspapers, magazines)
• Blogs
• Current users
• Search engines

Such diverse sources will ensure a steady, consistent influx of traffic. The reliance on a single avenue is always risky, as it may not provide the intended outcome. Any marketing campaign should include multiple traffic funnels to maximize exposure and overall efforts. Often, the main, pre-determined source of traffic doesn’t live up to expectations and some overlooked avenue ends up driving a bulk of the traffic.

Here is a stunning revelation: the BETA invite system has nothing to do with actual testing. Rather, it is simply a marketing ploy aimed at attracting new users. Is this truly a stunning revelation? Or did I just state the obvious?

Historically, a start-up would quietly seek out BETA users to test the product. These individuals would try to break it and take note of any bugs. Feedback was key. This was back in a time when the BETA system was legitimate. Does this sound like a typical ‘BETA tester’ of today? It seems that every start-up graduates from the cliched ’stealth mode’ to the cliched ‘BETA mode’ at some point. Nowadays, these terms are so common that their marketing value has diminished to zero. In other words, these buzz words do not attract the attention and exposure that they once did. Furthermore, the misuse of the term ‘BETA’ is so widespread that rectification cannot be achieved.

Not surprisingly however, this tactic has been succesfully leveraged many times in the past, most notably by Gmail. More recently, Joost caused quite a stir with a similar strategy. But such a system is just not cool any more. People frown upon BETA logos and invite systems. They have become overused to the point of saturation.

BETA products are supposed to be full of bugs. They are supposed to contain errors. But nowadays, it seems that these BETA products are shipped in perfect condition. Why? Because they are intended for the end user, not the supposed BETA tester. Think about it. Who uses a BETA product nowadays? Everyone. This isn’t the way it’s supposed to be. If everyone is truly ready to use the product, the ‘BETA’ badge should be dropped. Here’s the way the system should work: if a company is truly in need of BETA users, they should methodically seek out a specific subset of people, rather than proclaim the need over a figurative megaphone. This will attract the wrong crowd.

So just how hot is the BETA invite market? Well, many hard-to-acquire invites have landed on eBay and sold for much higher than their actual value ($0). In addition, TechCrunch recently purchased InviteShare, a BETA invite-sharing community. Interest in the area is obvious and this will further change the shape of this newfangled marketplace/industry.

To close, I have some words of wisdom for any new start-up… “The BETA invite marketing tactic has been played out. It’s really not that sweet any more. Do us all a favour and drop the BETA… Ok? All the best.”

It’s been 112 days since the Digg meltdown. Contrary to what many had predicted, the social news site seems to be back to normal. Not much has been said about the pending lawsuit(s). Digg ringleader Kevin Rose seems unphased. His new start-up Pownce seems to occupy a considerable chunk of time. My conspiracy side tells me that Pownce is an insurance policy should the Digg fiasco take a turn for the worst. The clever bastard has a back-up plan…

So really, what has happened to Digg since the user backlash? Nothing. Simple as that. Ok, sure, the blogosphere went nuts for a couple days, but everything returned back to normal pretty quick. 

What has the Digg kerfuffle taught us about social media?

• The viral component of social media that induces explosive growth can work just as effectively in an opposing manner. In other words, the very mechanism that creates community can just as easily destroy it.
• Don’t mess with your users. Seriously. Even a hint of dishonesty or deceit will likely result in detrimental consequences.
• Be quick to respond. Should an unfortunate event unfold, provide prompt communication to mitigate user anxiety and explain the situation.

This was truly the first time we witnessed the collapse of social media. It finally *broke*. Much has been said about the benefits of social media, but little has been mentioned about its potential flaws. I’m not a critic of social media, but rather a unbiased observer. The spontaneous, uncontrollable nature of this beast may never be tamed, but it can be studied and understood. It is my hope that this will help prevent similar catastrophes in the future.

Skype goes down. The world stops. A gazillion blogs post about the outage. Boo hoo. Life goes on…

The majority of Skype users don’t even pay for the service, so it’s pretty hard to point the finger at a company who doesn’t receive compensation from the majority of its users.

In reality, we use Skype because it facilitates our lives and/or saves us loads of money. We should be thanking them. But a greedy few choose not to address this.

On the other side, however, I do feel some sympathy for those who pay to use premium Skype services. They are customers. Such a lengthy outage is inexcusable. If I were a paying customer, I’d be pissed off too.

Another point to note is that Skype is used extensively as a conferencing tool by many small companies and start-ups. These companies live and die by the service. It is very common to see an executive meeting scheduled around a Skype conference call. This free alternative is great, but a paid service offers more reliability and support should a mishap present itself. The companies that use Skype’s free conferencing service have no right to be upset if the service goes down, unless of course they are paying customers.

One thing is for certain: even if Skype does go down for a couple days or even a week, people won’t switch to an alternative service. Why? Because all their friends still use Skype. They would have to presuade their entire contact list to switch over to achieve maximum value. Is this going to happen? Not likely.

I guess what I am trying to say is that if you aren’t willing to pay, you can’t expect a perfect service.

Are we too dependent on free services like Skype? Is an outage acceptable to a user who doesn’t pay? Is it OK to demand a lot from a free service?