Very instructive and full of foresight.

Makes you understand how the web is different, how you have to accept losses before making profit, accept losses even if your main business is making profits but dying…


globalization rules…

BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | ‘Free Tibet’ flags made in China

Very interesting by Bear Stearns, about What Should Yahoo do regarding Social Networks ? (thanks Olivier)

Main points :  

1 – Leisure Social networks (MySpace, FaceBook, …) could progressively take on the usual generalist portals thanks to their open API and incremental add of new applications.
2 – a very strong growth in terms of subscriptions, use and page views (rising prime page CPM level from $4 to $18in 2016 !)
3 – If social networks come from youth, it is no longer exclusive : out of the 70 M of unique visitors on MySpace, 42% have between 35 and 54 years old (34% for FaceBook)
4 – not a US phenomenon : 56 and 63% of FaceBook and MySpace users are located outside the US.
5 – If Yahoo! bought out FaceBook, this could dramatically improve their efforts to targeted marketing thanks to the tons of personnal information everyone share with one another.

Some data :
> June 2007 in the US : 70 M VU for MySpace, 28 M for Facebook (respectively 109 M and 47 M if you take into account the international aspects)
> 51% of the time spent online by 13-24 year old is on user-generated content websites.
> Internet Ad market share made by Social Networks could reach 12% in 2011 (vs. 5% in ’07e)
> Facebook value could reach $bn 4.5-7 based on a EBITDA multiple of 45x.

This slideshow echoes also a note on TechCrunch on the coming opening of the FaceBook infrastructure following the first dent made by people using the FaceBook interface made for the Iphone on Netvibes … (opening as in “not having to log in before using Facebook services”).

Social Networks (aka SN) is fuzzing all around, but for some reasons : the tremendous growth of those social platforms raise questions.

– Is it always all about community ? Can’t some sociologist show that the way that start-ups are built reflect particular aspects of the American Culture and not necessarily how every society is functionning ? therefore doesn’t the US export via another channel its Weltanschauung?

– Everybody is focusing on the growth of those platforms ? where are the analysts of the Web Dumpster (or as TechCrunch calls it, the Terminal) ? not necessarily analysts of the dot failures, but the analysis of the old glories that faded away : old networks, old unescapable websites (you name them). Lessons could be as interesting as successes. (ok Darwinian theory is just fine but don’t we need some refinements here?)

– Don’t people have a work life anymore ? (there would be plenty to say about that last one).

What do you think ?

Update : Jeremy noted  rightly that Zlio is not a cash-back, true in the sense that clients do not receive discounts because they went through a Zlio store, but there is still cash flowing from the retailer to Zlio. This cash is either in Zlio’s pockets or in the Zlio user’s (the one that sets up the store).

The question remains to me : “is this cash-back model viable from the merchant point of view ?” At what point is the retailer fed up with paying commission fees and stops using this kind of sales’ channel ?


ZlioAfter discussing the issue with some people this morning, I left this comment on GigaOm blog : there was a note about new apps in France and notably Zlio.

Interesting numbers are displayed about it : around 100 K shops have been opened since the launch of the service (+1 yesterday by me, to test the service which is quite efficient to sell things). Revenues : 700 K$ per month to the affiliates and 80 K$ (round 10,2% commission rate) to the Zlio and its subscribers.

We also learn that Zlio has raised round 4 M$ in from Luxembourg-based Mangrove Capital Partners (venture capital with a punch”)

Questions remained :

  • how many shops remain active ? (let’s say a login in the last 3 months) ’cause 7$ a month per shop is not that much (in fact : 7,8 $)
  • Apart from the buzz, what is the difference with traditional cash-back stories ( for instance) ? (answered by Jeremy : the cash does not go to the buyer, rather to the sellerS (Zlio and Zlio’s user who set up the store)

The basic principle : “I, Zlio, bring you sales and you give me a rebate, which I can share with my users to make them use my service (and some Google Ads on the way).”

The success point : Zlio enables leaders of opinion (I would say mainly bloggers but not only if you look at the number of accounts) to monetize their influence and knowledge by becoming salesmen. Zlio opens the catalogue and the users choose the product, do the windowshop dressing and tout their products.

The trick : is this cash-back model viable from the merchant point of view ? it is one thing to bring customers to a merchant in exchange for a commission shared with the customers (win-win situation, ever used an India Rickshaw and went to crafts workshop?). It is another to encourage the customer to go through your service every time he wants to purchase products from the merchant. At what point in time do you as merchant stop the cash-backer from charging you as a new customer every trustful patron ?

To my opinion, to be viable this requires a win-win-win situation, where the e-merchant stops paying the cashbacker for old customers : this means the e-merchant’s goal is to overturn at the end by various techniques the cash-backer. (Jeremy advocates the merchant is happy that way considering the volume brought by Zlio. Maybe, the merchant is arbitraging between buying Adwords or paying Zlio, it could make sense to see Zlio as a good alternative, considering the acquisition costs)

However from a customer point of view (to say some good), Zlio remains easy to use, and simple to implement. It is quite convenient when you have some kind of thematic discussions going on your blog or forum to recommand, using your knowledge or influence, a new product or a new service. Why not earn a bit of money if you do some marketing for others?

Follow up reading: the acquisition of Kaboodle by Hearst for an estimated 40 M$ via TechCrunch

Nice article at Read/Write about crossing the chasm, ie. for a young start-up getting adopted by early adopters and then swallowed by the mass market.

I would just be nice if people stop using the sentence :  “the speed with which new technologies are coming to the market has increased dramatically.”

It could be true but it sounds a bit like the essay at school “de tout temps, les hommes ont …” 

Nice quote though : “‘For example, some people who used to blog regularly, blog less now because they discovered Twittering (microblogging). Or, early adopters who have discovered Second Life might not have as much time to spend on MySpace anymore. These are not even necessarily competitive technologies, they are complimentary, but the fact is that they all compete for peoples’ time and attention.” 

Google search for this post : 0

Follow up readings : The Attention Economy (still at Read/write)

Recommanded by TVnomics : (French)

Congratulations Danielle you deserve it so much !

trash tvDeux informations qui dénotent dans le paysage all-internet-minded :

  • Statistiques de juin 2007 de Nielsen Net Ratings : -1.4% de VU, -36 minutes de consommation mensuelle d’internet (on reste à 14h22 par mois), un nombre de domaines visités par VU en baisse à 100 domaines.
  • Article du Figaro aujourd’hui sur les recetttes publicitaires des networks US à nouveau en hausse.

APRÈS deux années de baisse, les chaînes télévisées américaines ont réussi à renouer avec la croissance en matière de ventes avancées de publicité. Pour leur saison qui commencera en septembre, les grands réseaux traditionnels comme ABC (Disney), CBS, NBC (General Electric) et Fox (News Corp.) sont parvenus à placer pour 9,1 milliards de dollars de publicité, ce qui représente un gain de 5 % par rapport à la saison 2005-2006. Les réseaux câblés affichent pour leur part une progression de l’ordre de 6 %.

CBS, le réseau dont l’audience moyenne depuis cinq ans est la plus élevée, a ainsi vendu pour 2, 5 milliards de dollars de temps de publicité. ABC se place en deuxième position avec 2, 4 milliards. Dans les deux cas, cela représente un gain de 5 %. Fox aurait signé des contrats pour moins de 2 milliards, mais afficherait néanmoins une progression par rapport à l’année dernière. NBC, en revanche, serait en gros au même niveau que l’an passé, avec 1,9 milliard de dollars de spots vendus à l’avance.

Je lis ça, je dis rien…

Next Page »