I hope everyone has read this article
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free?currentPage=all
it has a great list of potential ways a free service can generate revenue.
Or for the digest version, Armano's visualization
http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2008/10/the-4-kinds-of.html

It's perfectly reasonable for a startup to consider getting usage first
before having a solid business model. As Andreensen says, distribution is
your biggest challenge. Then again, Reid Hoffman emphasizes funding
strategy. If you have a good funding strategy, you have time to solve both
the distribution and revenue challenges.

It depends (to quote circa 1997 Jared Spool) also on the market you are in.
In an enterprise market (B2B)  its useful to take a Four Steps to the
Epiphany approach, where you test your business strategy with your potnetial
customers from day one. But in the consumer internet businesss, especially
advertising based, overempahsis on business model will often result in
making decisions that limit usage and growth in exchange for early
profitability.

Morover, in new categories, like social networks, there is no accepted model
for profitability so it's difficult to know what will succeed. You could
easily argue that while search existed for many years, it only found its
business model when overture invented the auction-based keyword bidding
approach.

If I were Zuckerberg, I wouldn't put a timetable on finding a business
model. There are a number of them that might work and I assume they'll try
them all. They've got enough money they have bought themselves time to
tune.  Smart.

But it's hard to say if they'll find a breakout approach in three months or
three years. It's like saying I'm sure I'll have a cure for baldness in
three years...  we didn't think there was a real viable solution to that one
until suddenly there was.  I think it quite likely Facebook won't find a
business model that will make them massively profitable google-style, and
they'll keep bebopping along with minor profits. Unless, of course,  they
do. And if they do trip over the right approach, they are poised to maximize
it because they have the userbase in place.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Jared Spool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On Oct 11, 2008, at 12:05 AM, Kontra wrote:
>
>  We don't live in a theocracy where *you* get to judge whether legally
>> accrued profits are to your liking or if a buyer of a company is allowed
>> to
>> see value in it that you can't.
>>
>
> *I* believe *I* do.
>
> (And Eric's right. You probably meant meritocracy.)
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to