on the anecdotal level I've been seeing good evidence of Friendster use leveling off and/or fading. More importantly its *not* going elsewhere in any large number. A significant number are trying out *one* of the alternatives, but very few seem to be staying. And almost no one seems to have the patience for more then one alternative.
I still strongly suspect that Friendster will still be the largest and most culturally potent entity in this space in a year. With a little perspective I think we'll find their rapid fire growth through several key alpha consumer markets to be extremely remarkable. Its going to be extremely difficult to reproduce I suspect.
4. Clay Shirky on November 7, 2003 10:34 AM writes...
I don't understand the comparison with Web Van -- they had a physical network that didn't create network effects. I think the apposite comparisons are Napster 1.0 and eBay, where the service that defined the space gained a significant advantage.
Show .. me .. the .. money!! What is the value proposition of Friendster in a conventional sense?
eBay, like Amazon, will probably not be repeated in the near future. Both business models were based on straightforward dis-/re-intermediation of markets and stand as excellent examples of e-commerce that scale brilliantly.
Friendster et al have more in common with the audience building "online properties" in the dotcom era who thought that you could value registered users at $1500 per head based on ad revenue, sponsorship, affiliate deals etc. If they are to make money they need to charge money, and AFAIK they have yet to prove that they can take their users over that hill, so to speak.
I think Clay is right - the signs are clear: we are watching another (possibly mini) bubble, which would do more harm than good to our embryonic social software space, as I discuss in more depth here: http://www.headshift.com/archives/000685.cfm (forgive the comment linkage, but I think it's relevant).
Jim and James have demonstrated just how easy it is to build Yet Another Friendster Rip-Off, which goes to the point of how much of this "bubble" is built upon pre-existing technology and some fundamentally simple ideas. No rocket science here. Yet each rip-off exposes a slightly different nuance, and the question still remains -- outside of dating (people will always pay for sex), who will come up with the magic combination that keeps people coming back for more after the voyeurism wears thin?
7. Clay Shirky on November 7, 2003 8:26 PM writes...
It was easy to build hotornot copycats too, but no one ever displaced the original.
I'm not predicting that Friendster will succeed as a business -- as the VC's say, "There's not alot of visibility on that issue yet" (has there ever been a profession with as many ways of saying "Who the fuck knows?" as venture capital?) What I am predicting is that for as long as people are using these services, Friendster will be in the #1 spot, for the same reason that hotornot was -- they created positive returns to scale, and thus became, as a brand, the name of the space as a whole.
And nobody's ever made enough money on Hot or Not-style apps to be worth $50 million dollars. Probably some sort of lesson there as well, as I'm sure many more people have voted on HotOrNot than belong to Friendster.
1. Abe on November 7, 2003 2:17 AM writes...
a bubble that's already deflating?
on the anecdotal level I've been seeing good evidence of Friendster use leveling off and/or fading. More importantly its *not* going elsewhere in any large number. A significant number are trying out *one* of the alternatives, but very few seem to be staying. And almost no one seems to have the patience for more then one alternative.
I still strongly suspect that Friendster will still be the largest and most culturally potent entity in this space in a year. With a little perspective I think we'll find their rapid fire growth through several key alpha consumer markets to be extremely remarkable. Its going to be extremely difficult to reproduce I suspect.
Permalink to Comment2. Clay Shirky on November 7, 2003 7:04 AM writes...
A yep -- Friendster is the brand name now, and that will be almost impossible to displace.
Permalink to Comment3. Bill Seitz on November 7, 2003 9:51 AM writes...
Yeah, just like WebVan
Permalink to Comment4. Clay Shirky on November 7, 2003 10:34 AM writes...
I don't understand the comparison with Web Van -- they had a physical network that didn't create network effects. I think the apposite comparisons are Napster 1.0 and eBay, where the service that defined the space gained a significant advantage.
Permalink to Comment5. Lee Bryant on November 7, 2003 2:38 PM writes...
Show .. me .. the .. money!! What is the value proposition of Friendster in a conventional sense?
eBay, like Amazon, will probably not be repeated in the near future. Both business models were based on straightforward dis-/re-intermediation of markets and stand as excellent examples of e-commerce that scale brilliantly.
Friendster et al have more in common with the audience building "online properties" in the dotcom era who thought that you could value registered users at $1500 per head based on ad revenue, sponsorship, affiliate deals etc. If they are to make money they need to charge money, and AFAIK they have yet to prove that they can take their users over that hill, so to speak.
I think Clay is right - the signs are clear: we are watching another (possibly mini) bubble, which would do more harm than good to our embryonic social software space, as I discuss in more depth here: http://www.headshift.com/archives/000685.cfm (forgive the comment linkage, but I think it's relevant).
Permalink to Comment6. Jen on November 7, 2003 6:21 PM writes...
Jim and James have demonstrated just how easy it is to build Yet Another Friendster Rip-Off, which goes to the point of how much of this "bubble" is built upon pre-existing technology and some fundamentally simple ideas. No rocket science here. Yet each rip-off exposes a slightly different nuance, and the question still remains -- outside of dating (people will always pay for sex), who will come up with the magic combination that keeps people coming back for more after the voyeurism wears thin?
Permalink to Comment7. Clay Shirky on November 7, 2003 8:26 PM writes...
It was easy to build hotornot copycats too, but no one ever displaced the original.
I'm not predicting that Friendster will succeed as a business -- as the VC's say, "There's not alot of visibility on that issue yet" (has there ever been a profession with as many ways of saying "Who the fuck knows?" as venture capital?) What I am predicting is that for as long as people are using these services, Friendster will be in the #1 spot, for the same reason that hotornot was -- they created positive returns to scale, and thus became, as a brand, the name of the space as a whole.
Permalink to Comment8. Anil on November 8, 2003 12:57 AM writes...
And nobody's ever made enough money on Hot or Not-style apps to be worth $50 million dollars. Probably some sort of lesson there as well, as I'm sure many more people have voted on HotOrNot than belong to Friendster.
Permalink to Comment