Uncategorized

The killer app for the Internet is dying


There is a very interesting article in Newsweek about the Huffington Post that goes discusses the economics of advertising on the Internet.  In 1994, I was going around giving talks about the potential of the i\Internet to become a new medium.  Some of those reading this post maybe too young to remember that the Internet was a very different animal at that time.  The first browser had just been launched the year before. The residential broadband network we all enjoy was in the very early stages of development.  I had just signed up a number of companies like AOL, Intuit and Netscape to participate in the cable modem trails we had launched with Viacom Cable and Comcast.  I could see pretty clearly that the high speed communication to the home coupled to PCs and the platform for development and distribution of content represented by the Internet would create this new medium not only for entertainment and information but also for communications, and commerce and education.  However, I was struggling about the business model.   I did not feel that subscription services like AOL (that is how AOL worked in those days) would be the successful model.  I came to the conclusion that it would be advertising.  In those days, everyone was asking “what is the killer app for the Internet”.  It was generally accepted that the spreadsheet had been the killer app for the PC.  I came to the conclusion that it was advertising.  Obviously, advertising is not an application.  But I felt that the potential of moving advertising dollars to Internet content companies would provide the financial fuel that would allow the development of a vast range of applications.  And in general this was correct.  But it is no longer working.

I am not an expert on advertising.  These days because of technology I get to skip over most ads on TV and rarely look at a add on the net.  I think the death of advertising as the source of revenue for Internet companies is the result of simple over abundance of places to put ads coupled with a doubt that they are very effective.  But frankly, I am not sure how effective advertising was in the past on TV, magazines and radio.  And am pretty sure that their value is declining quickly as we can all skip over ads or get content like pod-casts that do not even contain ads.

So what will replace advertising as a revenue source for content?  It is not clear to me yet.  I am think the combination of free and premium services for some companies (like Linkedin) will work.  I think data mining will work for other.  For instance, Google may become primarily a data mining company.   Facebook can be one too although I think that Facebook does not have a very compelling future (more about that in a future post).

2 thoughts on “The killer app for the Internet is dying

  1. You are looking at one side of the issue… where is the revenue source that will fund content? (Time shifting now accounts for over 50% of TV watching, from what I read. Perfect for ignoring commercials.)

    I tend to look at the other side… how is a company supposed to get their stuff or services before their prospective customers for consideration? Back in the days of DEC, industry rags like Computerworld were a simple choice to reach the technical community, for example. Marketing, well – good marketing, was never about advertising. Marketing is about understanding your customer enough to know where they obtain their information so you can be right there when they need you. These days no engineer keeps bookcases full of catalogs… everything is online. Some folks haven’t gotten the memo yet.

    My dad was a recreational hunter. I learned early on that one needs to know the prey, where it goes, what it eats, all its habits. Marketing is a lot like that.

    I’ve never been a consumer B2C marketing person, but I give high credit to the folks who decided to put those big ads on the floors of supermarkets. Freaked me out first time I saw one. But a stroke of genius.

    But back to your original thought… already the net world has indicated that it doesn’t like paying for content. It doesn’t mind paying for $800 iPad devices and for access services, but it hates like heck to pay $1.50 to the Wall Street Journal to read single article, or WORSE, make a subscription commitment in order to read an occasional article. Some way of bundling access to internet sites, similar to bundling cable channels, might work in a subscription model.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s