The Internet prism
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Elias Bizannes
Dec 10, 2008, 4:52:45 AM12/10/08
to silicon-bea...@googlegroups.com
Hello beautiful people,
I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms commercially aligned as well[1]).
One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach community segment itself?
My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion here).
Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
- "Markets": These are businesses that facilitate trade amongst people. Amazon for example is classic classic case of a "markets" business, as is eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the trade of goods.
- "Communications": These are businesses that develop products that are content businesses or allow communication. For example, Inquistr and Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human communication, experience and collaboration.
- "Utility": Whilst the previous two have shaken up the retail and media industries respectively, Utility-product startups are creating a economy based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information. So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted through that process.
I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses; there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the lines of collaboration, security, etc.
But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box the world!
Thanks!
Elias
Simon Gilligan
Dec 10, 2008, 5:52:09 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Those sound pretty good .. but I'm wondering is there room for another
category .. perhaps 'Consumption'?
ie. Those startups that provide for consumption of a particular type
of supplied goods or product. ie. they let people buy something (but
not in an open market sense, like oztion)
Sorry if this is biased to my particular area, but eg iTunes movies
downloads, Quickflix, martian music, applebox (that's me) .. we all
provide a way to consume a given product. So does ezydvd and coles
online.
On Dec 10, 8:52 pm, "Elias Bizannes" <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello beautiful people,
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> - "Markets": These are businesses that facilitate trade amongst people.
>
> --
> Elias Bizanneshttp://liako.biz
category .. perhaps 'Consumption'?
ie. Those startups that provide for consumption of a particular type
of supplied goods or product. ie. they let people buy something (but
not in an open market sense, like oztion)
Sorry if this is biased to my particular area, but eg iTunes movies
downloads, Quickflix, martian music, applebox (that's me) .. we all
provide a way to consume a given product. So does ezydvd and coles
online.
On Dec 10, 8:52 pm, "Elias Bizannes" <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello beautiful people,
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> Amazon for example is classic classic case of a "markets" business, as is
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> - "Communications": These are businesses that develop products that are
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> content businesses or allow communication. For example, Inquistr and
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> - "Utility": Whilst the previous two have shaken up the retail and media
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> industries respectively, Utility-product startups are creating a economy
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
> [1]http://wpmu.thepodcastnetwork.com/siliconbeach/2008/12/09/silicon-bea...
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
>
> --
> Elias Bizanneshttp://liako.biz
Dean McEvoy
Dec 10, 2008, 4:52:27 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hey Elias,
I like thinking about these kind of frameworks. Reminded me of a slide
I did a while ago, I posted it on my blog here with some comments
http://www.bookingangel.com/blog/?p=11
I think you have come up witha good way to categorize some specific
sites but with the world the way it is today its important to
categorize businesses based upon their business model. Today more than
ever its all about the money.
Cheers
Dean
On Dec 10, 1:52 am, "Elias Bizannes" <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello beautiful people,
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> - "Markets": These are businesses that facilitate trade amongst people.
I like thinking about these kind of frameworks. Reminded me of a slide
I did a while ago, I posted it on my blog here with some comments
http://www.bookingangel.com/blog/?p=11
I think you have come up witha good way to categorize some specific
sites but with the world the way it is today its important to
categorize businesses based upon their business model. Today more than
ever its all about the money.
Cheers
Dean
On Dec 10, 1:52 am, "Elias Bizannes" <elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello beautiful people,
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> Amazon for example is classic classic case of a "markets" business, as is
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> - "Communications": These are businesses that develop products that are
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> content businesses or allow communication. For example, Inquistr and
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> - "Utility": Whilst the previous two have shaken up the retail and media
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> industries respectively, Utility-product startups are creating a economy
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
Elias Bizannes
Dec 10, 2008, 6:08:11 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Simon - thanks. But wouldn't you say consumption relates to media
consumption? You do raise a good point though - "entertainment" is
something that doesn't make sense entirely under "communications".
Things like games for example, are more of an experience.
Dean - good point. What I think is important to differentiate, is the
concepts of "product" (which is what I raise above), "revenue
model" (which is what most people associate a business model), and
finally "business model itself" which I believe is about the structure
of the business not its monetisation or the functionality of the
product. A while back, I wrote a post on this very topic[1] where you
can read more in detail my thoughts. Basically, I proposed there are
three types of models. They are:
1) Destination: your business is structured, so that value for you and
your users is extracted by people visiting your website. Typical dot
com "eyeballs" business
2) Platform: You business is structured, so value is obtained by
hosting other businesses and products.
3) Network. The new type of business model that's being innovated on
the Net, which is that your business is structured without having
people needing to visit your services on the face of it, but instead
following the user around. So for example, the Google adsense network
is distributed - Google's systems works with it being embedded in
other people's websites.
Again, I am likely completely wrong. But I've found the literature in
this area under-developed, so it doesn't hurt raising some questions.
[1] http://liako.biz/2008/04/how-business-is-done-on-the-internet/
consumption? You do raise a good point though - "entertainment" is
something that doesn't make sense entirely under "communications".
Things like games for example, are more of an experience.
Dean - good point. What I think is important to differentiate, is the
concepts of "product" (which is what I raise above), "revenue
model" (which is what most people associate a business model), and
finally "business model itself" which I believe is about the structure
of the business not its monetisation or the functionality of the
product. A while back, I wrote a post on this very topic[1] where you
can read more in detail my thoughts. Basically, I proposed there are
three types of models. They are:
1) Destination: your business is structured, so that value for you and
your users is extracted by people visiting your website. Typical dot
com "eyeballs" business
2) Platform: You business is structured, so value is obtained by
hosting other businesses and products.
3) Network. The new type of business model that's being innovated on
the Net, which is that your business is structured without having
people needing to visit your services on the face of it, but instead
following the user around. So for example, the Google adsense network
is distributed - Google's systems works with it being embedded in
other people's websites.
Again, I am likely completely wrong. But I've found the literature in
this area under-developed, so it doesn't hurt raising some questions.
[1] http://liako.biz/2008/04/how-business-is-done-on-the-internet/
Simon Gilligan
Dec 10, 2008, 6:21:34 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hi Elias,
I think I mean consumption in a more traditional, commercial sense. I
might buy a song and download it to my mac. Or I might buy some fruit
and veg and have it delivered to my door. The common ground is a
commercial transaction that requires delivery of some sort of product.
In that sense, I think it breaks out of the communications/media
bucket.
I think I mean consumption in a more traditional, commercial sense. I
might buy a song and download it to my mac. Or I might buy some fruit
and veg and have it delivered to my door. The common ground is a
commercial transaction that requires delivery of some sort of product.
In that sense, I think it breaks out of the communications/media
bucket.
dekrazee1
Dec 10, 2008, 7:51:46 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hiya Simon!
Nice to see you here :)
This might be a bit simplistic, but don't businesses like the ones you
mention fit into the first category?
Whether it's books (Amazon) or DVDs (Applebox) - both involve the
trade (sale/rental/download) of something?
Rai
Nice to see you here :)
This might be a bit simplistic, but don't businesses like the ones you
mention fit into the first category?
Whether it's books (Amazon) or DVDs (Applebox) - both involve the
trade (sale/rental/download) of something?
Rai
Simon Gilligan
Dec 10, 2008, 8:14:40 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hi Dek .. and back atchya :-)
Good point .. maybe these businesses could, but rentoid and oztion are
enablers of trade between third parties - it's open and market-like.
Whereas Coles Online (and me with APPLEBOX) are enabling a new
mechanism of trade only with ourselves. So we're closed and un-market
like .. but still very friendly!
Good point .. maybe these businesses could, but rentoid and oztion are
enablers of trade between third parties - it's open and market-like.
Whereas Coles Online (and me with APPLEBOX) are enabling a new
mechanism of trade only with ourselves. So we're closed and un-market
like .. but still very friendly!
Emily Freeman
Dec 10, 2008, 11:21:08 PM12/10/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hi Elias
My 2 cents worth.
I wonder if you would also consider Service businesses in your
ecosystem? It probably defends how broadly you define 'startup', but
there are many new businesses emerging which focus on providing
services such as advertising, media or technical/development solutions
relevant to the new media & digital space. These might include a
social media/marketing agency, mobile media buying, or the provision
of technical services such as developing mobile websites for clients.
I personally am in touch with half a dozen 'startups' locally, all of
whom fit into this category, but not into any of the other categories
you propose.
Cheers, Emily
My 2 cents worth.
I wonder if you would also consider Service businesses in your
ecosystem? It probably defends how broadly you define 'startup', but
there are many new businesses emerging which focus on providing
services such as advertising, media or technical/development solutions
relevant to the new media & digital space. These might include a
social media/marketing agency, mobile media buying, or the provision
of technical services such as developing mobile websites for clients.
I personally am in touch with half a dozen 'startups' locally, all of
whom fit into this category, but not into any of the other categories
you propose.
Cheers, Emily
> Hello beautiful people,
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> - "Markets": These are businesses that facilitate trade amongst people.
> I've got a challenge that requires some thinking on your behalf. First some
> context: I'm working with my employer PricewaterhouseCoopers to try to
> support the start-up ecosystem. Not exactly sure what we are doing yet, but
> I am in discussions on developing a place for the firm in the broader scheme
> of things, that I hope, will make "silicon beach" more of a reality (because
> as Mick articulates, you need all the players to make a tech hub work - you
> need not just investors and entrepreneurs, but professional services firms
> commercially aligned as well[1]).
>
> One thing that I've been asked to do is to give a market understanding to
> the partners, so that we could then frame our efforts against that. I
> certainly have some thoughts on the topic, but then again, so does everyone
> else. So the reason I am posting, is to ask how does the silicon beach
> community segment itself?
>
> My views (which certainly have holes, but trying to start a discussion
> here).
>
> Consuming facing businesses came in three forms
>
> Amazon for example is classic classic case of a "markets" business, as is
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> - "Communications": These are businesses that develop products that are
> eBay. In Australia, Australian start-ups Tjoos and Rentoid would fit this
> categorisation. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on the
> trade of goods.
>
> content businesses or allow communication. For example, Inquistr and
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> - "Utility": Whilst the previous two have shaken up the retail and media
> Norg.com.au are both blog-based "new media" businesses (media
> by definition lets not forget, is the communication of messages). However
> it's a blurry line, as they are also "social media" businesses - which makes
> social networks MySpace and Facebook part of this category as well as there
> core value is communication. At core however, is the fact that they are in
> the business of communications. So Australian startup 3eep, would be in this
> category - a social media/social networking businesses focusing on
> community. So the defining characteristic, is that it's based on human
> communication, experience and collaboration.
>
> industries respectively, Utility-product startups are creating a economy
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
> based on information. I essentially define these companies are entities that
> create products for the creation, manipulation and retrieval of information.
> So Google's search and Google Reader would fall squarely into this; but so
> would web services in the more generic sense like Aussie startup Skitch
> which allows you to create pretty pictures on a Mac. Web applications and
> 'software-as-a-service' fits under hear. So the defining characteristic, is
> that it's based on the manipulation of information and value is extracted
> through that process.
>
> I would just like to say, this is a way of classifying products, and a
> business arguably has multiple products which means there is cross-over on
> all the categories. Of course, that's just the consumer facing businesses;
> there's a place also for the enterprise but which arguably are the flip side
> of the above. Or you could arguably create another classification along the
> lines of collaboration, security, etc.
>
> But to start with, would like to get feedback on the above and see if that
> sticks. If anything, to help visual analytical thinkers like myself to box
> the world!
>
> Thanks!
> Elias
>
EddyChan
Dec 11, 2008, 8:15:25 PM12/11/08
to Silicon Beach Australia
Hi Guys, interesting discussion you have here. Here's my take on the
current state of 'Web2.0' - almost all start-ups and enterprises so
far have fallen into one of these categories and this is how they
build their revenue model.
Slide Here To Help Illustrate (free for all to take in PPTX format):
http://chan03.goodbarry.com/Web2_0Ecology
Market Creators - includes Amazon, Ebay, Job Sites, Shopify, Angelsoft
http://angelsoft.net/ etc - these guys are in the business of
connecting buyers and sellers of all products AND services and taking
a slice of the revenue. They have the strongest revenue model because
they facilitate in trade. A lot of smaller start-ups try to create
some sort of niche marketplace for example certain types of art. The
growth in this sector is to be able to create more credible
marketplaces for non-virtual services - accounting/law/consulting.
Media/Content Portals - includes all the video sites youtube/vimeo/
google vids etc, music sites (last.fm), photo sites - flickr, picasa
and written content of course which are all the blogging platforms and
CMSes like wordpress which allow people to publish content cheaply and
distribute to a wide audience. The rest of us can go to these portals
to 'consume' the content. The revenue model here is based on context-
specific advertising of course. This is hard space for startups to
compete in unless you have some sort of niche that you're attacking.
For example if you made a mashup content site that focused on up-and-
coming Australian content you might have yourself a nice media
channel.
Aggregators/Filters - there's a lot of crap out there on the net so
these guys have made it their business to filter it out and serve it
to you fresh on a plate, in some ways it's much more powerful than a
Google Search. Digg, Mahalo, Guy Kawasaki's Alltop, Addictomatic, and
the rest of the guys who filter (by way of voting) and aggregate sit
in this boat. Context-specific Ads again are the monetization path
once again.
Communication Tools - The defining attribute here is that these tools
allow people to talk to each other whether it's 1-to-1, 1-to-many,
many-to-many - Skype is one example. People are going to blast me for
this but essentially Twitter is a pure many-to-many communications
tool. All the chat tools and chat aggregators like Fring belong here.
Social Networks - I really hate the term 'networks' because these are
more 'self-promotion' tools. The defining aspect here is that these
tools allow you post a profile of yourself on the web (and any
associated content) so others can come to have a look. It's your own
personal Ad and you can choose who comes to see it (privacy settings)
and how you want to design your online persona. Think about Facebook,
Myspace and LinkedIn. There's heaps more out there but one can only
maintain so many networks. Not up-to-speed as to how these guys
actually make money.
Services - In the purple box, there is actually a whole service
industry out there helping people get onto Web2.0 and to use it for
their business. You have web designers who create sites with user-
contributable content, you have marketing strategists (whatever you
want to call them) who advise businesses how to leverage this or build
their own little web2.0 application for their business.
Central to the above 6 is the fact that they:
- all facilitate in users being able to contribute in some way
- their users are all networked to each other on the system/platform
(i.e I setup my account and i can connect to others),
- there's collaborative contributions
- a lot of them become advertising channels as a means of monetizing
as ad spend moves from traditional forms of media (print, TV) to
online where increasing numbers of people are getting their
entertainment and news.
You can mashup any of the above 6 to create your own little
application (in fact most apps have some sort of crossover, I've taken
extreme examples) - Ning comes to mind as the place where you can have
content, social networking etc
Then there are platform providers who enable these things to happen
e.g Google Maps who provide embeddable maps to anyone for free,
hosting providers etc.
The aim of the game is to now think outside the box I've just drawn or
at least push the boundaries by making the 'box' more mainstream,
Cheers and thanks for reading my long rant,
Eddy
current state of 'Web2.0' - almost all start-ups and enterprises so
far have fallen into one of these categories and this is how they
build their revenue model.
Slide Here To Help Illustrate (free for all to take in PPTX format):
http://chan03.goodbarry.com/Web2_0Ecology
Market Creators - includes Amazon, Ebay, Job Sites, Shopify, Angelsoft
http://angelsoft.net/ etc - these guys are in the business of
connecting buyers and sellers of all products AND services and taking
a slice of the revenue. They have the strongest revenue model because
they facilitate in trade. A lot of smaller start-ups try to create
some sort of niche marketplace for example certain types of art. The
growth in this sector is to be able to create more credible
marketplaces for non-virtual services - accounting/law/consulting.
Media/Content Portals - includes all the video sites youtube/vimeo/
google vids etc, music sites (last.fm), photo sites - flickr, picasa
and written content of course which are all the blogging platforms and
CMSes like wordpress which allow people to publish content cheaply and
distribute to a wide audience. The rest of us can go to these portals
to 'consume' the content. The revenue model here is based on context-
specific advertising of course. This is hard space for startups to
compete in unless you have some sort of niche that you're attacking.
For example if you made a mashup content site that focused on up-and-
coming Australian content you might have yourself a nice media
channel.
Aggregators/Filters - there's a lot of crap out there on the net so
these guys have made it their business to filter it out and serve it
to you fresh on a plate, in some ways it's much more powerful than a
Google Search. Digg, Mahalo, Guy Kawasaki's Alltop, Addictomatic, and
the rest of the guys who filter (by way of voting) and aggregate sit
in this boat. Context-specific Ads again are the monetization path
once again.
Communication Tools - The defining attribute here is that these tools
allow people to talk to each other whether it's 1-to-1, 1-to-many,
many-to-many - Skype is one example. People are going to blast me for
this but essentially Twitter is a pure many-to-many communications
tool. All the chat tools and chat aggregators like Fring belong here.
Social Networks - I really hate the term 'networks' because these are
more 'self-promotion' tools. The defining aspect here is that these
tools allow you post a profile of yourself on the web (and any
associated content) so others can come to have a look. It's your own
personal Ad and you can choose who comes to see it (privacy settings)
and how you want to design your online persona. Think about Facebook,
Myspace and LinkedIn. There's heaps more out there but one can only
maintain so many networks. Not up-to-speed as to how these guys
actually make money.
Services - In the purple box, there is actually a whole service
industry out there helping people get onto Web2.0 and to use it for
their business. You have web designers who create sites with user-
contributable content, you have marketing strategists (whatever you
want to call them) who advise businesses how to leverage this or build
their own little web2.0 application for their business.
Central to the above 6 is the fact that they:
- all facilitate in users being able to contribute in some way
- their users are all networked to each other on the system/platform
(i.e I setup my account and i can connect to others),
- there's collaborative contributions
- a lot of them become advertising channels as a means of monetizing
as ad spend moves from traditional forms of media (print, TV) to
online where increasing numbers of people are getting their
entertainment and news.
You can mashup any of the above 6 to create your own little
application (in fact most apps have some sort of crossover, I've taken
extreme examples) - Ning comes to mind as the place where you can have
content, social networking etc
Then there are platform providers who enable these things to happen
e.g Google Maps who provide embeddable maps to anyone for free,
hosting providers etc.
The aim of the game is to now think outside the box I've just drawn or
at least push the boundaries by making the 'box' more mainstream,
Cheers and thanks for reading my long rant,
Eddy
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
Message has been deleted
0 new messages