A gradual blending of old and new.
[+] Web 2.0 is direct marketing
In the traditional business world, it may not be difficult for start-ups to innovate or produce good products, but it surely takes much more efforts for them to channel products to end-users. Finding a channel may not be very hard, but it would cost you dearly. Capitalist who own channels are tough guys to deal with.
Ten years ago the emergence of the Internet brought some changes for the first time. For Internet start-ups, their products are websites, and their services can reach end users directly. They don't need other channels. This was how the advantage of the capital-intensive newspaper industry, which controlled the distribution channel, gradually dissolved. The Web 1.0 world has taken its place.
This new channel of the Internet has impacted on traditional media, traditional business models and also traditional communications. Generally, in the Web 1.0 era, there are a lot of people with only a small capital starting their businesses. They can do so because they've found a low-cost marketing channel to break the blockade set by traditional capitalists.
Yet after 10 years, some startups, such as Yahoo!, have become new capitalists. They control the distribution channels and suffocate the chances of new Internet startups, which have to buy expensive advertisements from "traditional" channels - Web 1.0 websites - to draw visitors to their websites.
Many years ago in the traditional business world, there was a new channel called direct marketing. It was about bypassing the traditional distribution channel by marketing through social networks. Today with so many tycoons in the Internet, how can we avoid them and do business in a low cost way?
The answer lies in social networks. Web 2.0 startups make ingenious use of social networks or interpersonal relationship to do low-cost marketing. To market through social networks is a very smart strategy. Without this, we won't see significant growth in these new websites' user-base and traffic.
[+] Back to the basics is the key to growth
Many people have the experience of buying products via direct marketing, but they don't have much confidence in it. People who participate in the direct marketing system constantly come and go, making it not very stable. Web 2.0 services attract new users through interpersonal relationship in a similar way. Moreover, a brilliant marketing strategy still cannot solve the inherent problems of products.
The first article of this series talks about two problems of Web 2.0 websites. The first is high user churn rate, and the second is that once users decide to leave, they won't turn to other competitors but will quit all websites/services of similar kind for good.
For a website operator, this has two implications. Firstly, users who leave your competing websites won't go to yours, which means you have to target at first-timers. Think about those users who are still new to the market, and they are the ones your products should be designed for.
Secondly, users will leave sooner or later, so most importantly you should strive to capture heavy users. Only heavy users would migrate among Web 2.0 websites of similar kind or try new websites. An important step for your website to succeed is to seize this group of users.
Once a website can control a certain group of heavy users, it can then start to think about how to either make profits or stay small and survive gracefully, like all successful community websites. However, is there any way to expand the user-base by drawing in less-active users?
My suggestion is, get rid of the strong community atmosphere and cultural ambiance! They are incompatible with things that can meet people's basic needs, such as storage, tools and content.
These things, simply put, are products of Web 1.0.
[+] Next step: storage, tools and content
The founder of Facebook Mark Zuckerbery once said that Facebook is not a social network but a social tool. His words are often interpreted as "Facebook as an operating system or platform," and Facebook's open API implies such possibilities.
His words are impressive because he points out concisely that the key to get big is to serve as a "platform." My understanding of his words is that platforms and tools are things that have little to do with culture. They can be used by anyone and don't require users to change their habits.
You use Gmail to write emails and MSN to send messages very easily. These tools don't have much to do with culture (at least not as much as online community websites.) Operators who have been focused on developing a vibrant online community to retain active users need to think about what are the tools that are not so hot but can be used by all.
Instant messaging (IM), a tool that is highly related to social activities, is one example. For the past ten years, the IM market has been very stable. If a social networking service (SNS) provider with several hundred million users launches a new IM tool, it may have the potential to change the market dynamics.
In addition, people get tired of social activities once in a while. Maybe a user just needs a space to store their photos, documents and bookmarks. S/he doesn't want anyone to know the URL of his/her homepage or to bother her/him with status alerts. Is it possible that a SNS website can provide such functions?
Storage is one of such basic needs. Some active users may be happily busy with various social activities all day long, but there are still more people who need only basic services. What will make a user to keep on visiting a website once s/he gets tired of online social activities? Maybe s/he just needs a space to store pictures.
Active users visit a website because they need the social network there; other users do so simply because this is where they store their stuff.
[+] Web 2.0 evolution is about to complete
The third thing is content. This is easier to understand, and many Web 2.0 websites are doing it. For those who are not keen on social activities, let's give them some content. Using tags to aggregate content is a common method.
So at the end you'll find that Web 2.0 is still about the four pillars of the Internet, which I mentioned years ago: content, community, communication, and commerce.
In Web 1.0, a website operator would start from providing content and then functions of online community, communications and commerce. In Web 2.0, an operator would start from developing communities and then content and communications tools and lastly commerce.
We finally get a clear picture of Web 2.0 in the context of our time. It's about a grand evolution of websites all over the world. The result will not be about replacing old websites with new ones, but a gradual blending of old and new.
Whatever it is in Web x.0, it is all to be used by people. And the humanity of people do not change.
- Read More
Prev : Web 2.0 Finale (2) Websites With a Specific Culture Can't Grow Big
- Today in History
Web 2.0 Finale (3) Finally blended in Web 1.0 - 2008/01/06
The Fourth Generation of Internet Marketing (3) IM Marketing - 2007/01/07
The user-base size of a Web 2.0 website is determined by the social class it targets at.
[+] The social class a website targets at determines its size
The take-off of Web 2.0 has drawn in a huge number of startups; however, the prospects no longer look so rosy. Lots of websites are on the verge of closing down and are struggling to survive and make a profit. It becomes more difficult to get funding because venture capital in Asia is losing interest in this business.
The market situation has generally settled. In China, websites with over ten million users can expect to get funding in the third round, but they are also facing the challenge brought by major Web 1.0 websites interested in the Web 2.0 market. For those with only several million users, it's unrealistic to expect fast user growth; operators must strive to make profits.
In Taiwan, the no. 1 portal in the market, Yahoo! Taiwan, is playing a very powerful role, making it difficult to survive and prosper for small Web 2.0 websites in the already cramped market. Yet, at the same time, there are some established online community websites that are successful and making good profits.
Why is it so? I mentioned before that the rationale of Web 2.0 development is based on sociology. As such, the size of a Web 2.0 website's user-base is very much determined by the social (or cultural) class it targets at.
Web 2.0 websites grow along with the expansion of user's social networks. Users bring in other people whom they meet in their daily life, including strangers or acquaintances. As more and more people of the same class gather at the website, it will become more difficult for those who belong to other classes to join.
Once the initial user-base is formed, a website operator would study these users' way thinking and social behaviors more carefully so as to retain and encourage them to bring more new users. This consequently reinforces its focus on a specific cultural ambiance or social class, and the cycle then goes on and on.
[+] The management team's social class determines the size of user-base
To observe the development of a Web 2.0 website, one needs only to look at its initial user-base. Google's social networking service (SNS) website Orkut has got very popular in Brazil unexpectedly and this has made it difficult for users from other countries to join. Look around and you can hardly find anyone using Orkut, even though we are all Google users.
The biggest online community website in Korea, Cyworld, attempts to enter the US market. Its initial target users are white Americans; however, it turns out that the website is more appealing to young Asians. The reason is simple: the design of the website's interface, including functions and the overall feel, is more friendly and attractive to Asian users.
Another example is Friendster, a SNS website, which is very popular among Philippine users. Again, users from countries outside the Philippines would find it not easy to become a part of the community. You can call it cultural barrier. Look closer and you'll find that although transnational Web 2.0 website can reach users all over the world, it is always those who share something in common would flock together.
In China, 51.com, a Web 2.0 website, started from Internet cafes in provincial cities to build its user-base, and now it is struggling to draw in white-collar users in major cities. On the other hand, other Web 2.0 websites also meet difficulties in entering provincial cities. The above cases illustrate the effects of cultural ambiance and social classes in the real world on the user composition of Web 2.0 websites.
Those Web 2.0 websites targeting at the "upper classes" (the white collars) are sure to have limitations 0n user growth. Particularly in China, white collars, mostly living in coastal areas, make up only a fraction of the population. It would be a tough challenge for Web 2.0 websites aimed at this particular group of people to grab more than ten million users.
In Taiwan, two leading social bookmarking websites, HEMiDEMi and funP, have very different user communities in terms of their cultural ambiance. While the former is more attractive to elites, the latter is more proletarian. Yet both websites are focused on the class of white collars, and their performance is not as good as established grassroots online community websites in terms of traffic and profits.
If you move a step forward, you'll find that by looking at the founders of a Web 2.0 website, you can almost tell what the website will be like. Founders will naturally apply their way of thinking, which is surely conditioned to the social class they belong to, to developing online communities.
[+] Cultural products are for niche markets that never grow too big
Instead of aiming at a specific social class, some Web 2.0 websites would target at a group of people who share the same interests. There are online communities devoted to subjects of comics, sports, literature, book reviews, or food and restaurants.
These communities will definitely be conditioned by the size and scope of these social groups. For example, how many comic fans can you find in China? How many people in Taiwan love good food? What about the market prospects? In China, it may be feasible for website operators to cater for a specific niche market, but it may not be sustainable in Taiwan.
Why are there growth limits on Web 2.0 or online community websites? In addition to the conditioning of social classes, cultural products are for niche markets instead of for mass markets. A website that has specific cultural ambiance can never grow too big.
Does it mean that only websites that have "no particular culture" can grow big? By "no particular culture" I mean that there are no specific cultural features that can be attached to the websites. It is not about high culture versus vulgar popular culture. What I am trying to say is, as long as a website can be linked to a specific culture, there will surely be people who don't like it. You cannot please all and, as a result, the website will never be able to grow too big.
This is such a dilemma: an online community is always formed by people who are attracted to its cultural ambiance and who share similar interests. These people gather and stay and naturally develop a certain culture. Consequently, people who don't like its cultural ambiance go away. Many established online community websites remains the way they have always been for years without much change.
Surprisingly, you may find the solution in Web 1.0.
- Read More
Prev : Web 2.0 Finale (1) An Inherent Problem Unsolved
Next : Web 2.0 Finale (3) Finally blended in Web 1.0
- Today in History
Web 2.0 Finale (2) Websites With a Specific Culture Can't Grow Big - 2007/12/30
Why the user churn rate of Web 2.0 websites is so high?
[+] Users' typical Web 2.0 experience
Mr. X is an ordinary white-collar worker. He uses the Internet to search information and contact customers at work, and after work he may spend some time on the Internet for leisure. The Internet is a medium he uses frequently in his daily life, but it is not particularly important in his life. At least he is not a person who hangs on the Internet everyday.
Recently though he has been getting emails with subjects like "you have been added to somebody's friend list" and the like. Clicking the hyperlink he found that it's by a friend on MSN. How could you decline a friend's invitation? So he signed up that social networking service.
By this way, Mr. X has joined Facebook, MySpace, Friendster, LinkedIn and a bunch of local Chinese language websites. Registering at these websites is a lot of pains. Every website asked him to fill in his profile, upload photos and even contribute his MSN contact list.
At first he was worried that if these friends would visit his personal blog, and it would be impolite if he didn't call at theirs in return. Such relationship pressure was such that he spent two hours after work to reply these messages online for a period of time.
(Interestingly, he didn't know that his friends were tied up on the Internet for the same reason.)
First it was acquaintances, then a bunch of strangers, who added him to their friends list. In the beginning it was fun and nice to socialize with these people online, checking out their newly updated blogs and photos and leaving messages to each other.
After about three months, Mr. X started to get bored socializing with these people online. As the number of friends kept growing, he could not but spend more time on the Internet visiting these websites. At the end two hours a day was not even enough.
He finally decided to quit such Internet services that he had been addicted to when he had almost reached the verge of breakdown. What was the meaning to spend so much time on this stuff? Life should not be like this, and he had to get things back under control.
[+] Typical experience of Web 2.0 website operators
All Web 2.0 websites operators are asking why the user churn rate is so high, and there is seemingly no way to remedy this problem as if it is inherent in Web 2.0 websites. New businesses planning to ride on the force of social networking, which continues to wane, are declining.
These Web 2.0 websites are like a big sieve, trying to capture a large number of users at a time; yet after three months, it always turns out that only half of them remain as effective users, and the rest simply disappear. The size of users may seem big but it is not substantial at all.
For a Web 2.0 website to enjoy growth, its social networking expansion needs to be faster than its user churn, so that, overall, its scale would be increasing. Yet what about when the growth of user numbers slow down?
Social networking websites MySpace and Facebook have shown strong performance and they are yet to hit the growth ceiling with the whole world as their market. (MySpace should reach its growth limit sooner than Facebook as the former has more users.) Therefore, seeking to expand foreign markets seems to be a solution to sustain growth.
Nevertheless, an inherent problem remains unsolved.
Another amazing effect of Web 2.0 websites is that, heavy users are very committed. They are very active and they remain so for a very long period. They visit the websites and stay there everyday.
From registered users to effective users to active users, the number of users continues to get smaller. Is it normal? I would say yes. In terms of online community, it's just the way it is. Just as I mentioned years ago, online communities are where "people of similar attributes gather to warm each other. And these people are the so-called "heavy users," such as active bloggers.
The characteristic of Web 2.0 is high interactivity, which means highly demanding for users. Those who are willing to interact with others and write blog articles are not normal people. They have stronger achievement motive and desire to express themselves, and they find their stage at some community website and feel a sense of belonging.
The question is, while these heavy users are having fun, what are the ordinary netizens doing?
[+] People can get sick of Web 2.0
As to those who quit some Web 2.0 website, do they turn to similar services of competing websites? Some of them (well, the heavy users) do, but for most people who leave, they just won't touch such kind of services and they leave forever.
Only a few people who, after quitting Facebook, would turn to MySpace. Most people would just quit social networking services (SNS) for good. It's the same for blogging. Only a limited number of people would migrate from one blog service provider to another and continue writing. Most would simply stop blogging.
Quitting a website is totally different from quitting a kind of service. For example, we know very clearly the difference between "turning to sohu.com from sina.com because of getting tired of the latter" and "quitting new websites for good."
Woops! It turns out that people can lose interest in Web 2.0 services.
Woops! So what's next when all netizens have become users of my Web 2.0 website?
If market development is like a chess game, then Web 2.0 websites that have been so popular for the past couple of years are entering the endgame phase. These websites operators may appear successful, but in fact they are getting uneasy. How to get away from the doomed path of Web 2.0 websites is an inevitable challenge.
Surprisingly, you may find the solution in Web 1.0.
- Read More
Prev : Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers Next : Web 2.0 Finale (2) Websites With a Specific Culture Can't Grow Big
- Today in History
Web 2.0 Finale (1) An Inherent Problem Unsolved - 2007/12/23
The Fourth Generation of Internet Marketing (2) RSS Tracking - 2006/12/24
Dream of "Digital Furniture" Store - 2003/12/28
If so, telecom operators would be shut out of the mobile TV market.
[+] The past experience of cell phone manufacturers
From the tide of WAP-based Internet accessing in 2000 to the crazy bid for 3G licenses, and then to the bet on MMS for promoting sales of camera phones and music phones that enable music downloading, and finally to 3G phones with audio/video services, cell phone manufacturers have had thrilling experiences over the years.
The world cell phone market started to show signs of saturation in 2000. To maintain their growth, manufacturers had to motivate consumers to replace their phones with newer products. All of the thrilling experiences in the past 7 years seem to be a quest for what really are the selling points. Fortunately, the result so far has been satisfactory.
In summary, there are a few observations:
1)Mobile Internet is a hard-to-handle concept. The key is consumers tend to compare their expectation for mobile Internet with their PC-based Internet experience, which, in most cases, ends up in disappointment, as cell phones are not so easy to handle as PCs. Mobile Internet has been successful in Japan, only because of the low PC penetration rate there.
2)Telecom operators wish that new cell phones be bound with particular services, so that they could benefit from their sales, instead of being un-paid sales reps of the manufacturers. However, it turns out that consumers buy camera phone only because they can use it to take pictures, and anyone seldom uses MMS service.
3) There's no concern for the shortage of content accessing channels. Despite the hot sale of music phones bound with download service offered by telecom operators, most users choose to transmit music from their computers to cell phones, instead of downloading them from the WAP portal provided by telecom operators. Although it is more troublesome, but it is free.
4)3G audio/video services, including IP-based audio/video streaming and video phone, have not brought satisfactory user experience. It is a very simple concept to allow both parties of a phone call to see each other. However, due to privacy concerns, it has not been able to become a killer application.
[+] Telecom operators might be ignored
With the above experience, cell phone manufacturers finally realized that their business is to make and sell handsets. The simpler their products are the better. There's nothing simpler than the concept of mobile TV.
Consumers no longer have to bother whether the TV programs are downloaded from the Internet, nor cell phone manufacturers to care about whether their phones are bound with particular services offered by telecom operators, so long as they free themselves from the troublesome 3G audio/video experience.
In fact, a hi-tech company in mainland China has developed a sort of chip, which can be built in cell phones to receive traditional analog TV signals. In other words, with such a chip, you will be able to watch wireless channel with your cell phone, regardless of its specification or standard.
The only shortcomings are the mobility and fidelity. As analog TV signals are not intended for mobile environments, the fidelity cannot be compared with that of digital programs of mobile TV. However, it would be good for some people, if the programs are played on small-screen cell phones.
In most cases, however, people watch mobile TV on static environments, e.g., bus or subway stations, or in offices. It explains a fact that cell phone manufacturers will be able to sell their products without binding themselves with telecom operators.
The only thing that those manufacturers have to worry about is where programs would be, once new standard-based mobile TV is launched? Will telecom operators become content aggregators as we discussed in the previous section? If not, they'd better establish connections with content providers right away.
[+] Charging or not, it's a matter about the structure of the industry
The high production costs of movie/TV programs turn out to be a big obstacle for traditional value-added service providers to produce contents themselves. Imaginably, a big part of contents for mobile TV will come from traditional TV stations.
An interesting cooperation mode is that after consumers buy a mobile TV-enabling cell phone, they will get a set of passwords from TV program providers. Upon activation, the cell phone will be bound with the passwords to enable watching programs. The fee is charged each month through the phone bill from telecom operators.
That mode is designed for charging fees. If mobile TV programs are offered for free, and program providers depend on ads for their incomes, the passwords and the additional lines in the phone bills of telecom operators would be unnecessary. If so, telecom operators would be shut out of the mobile TV market.
With regard to the mobile TV services, the only way for telecom operators to gain the favor of cell phone manufacturers is to persuade content providers to charge fees, in which case, they would become the largest content aggregators and channels for charging fees. Otherwise, they would be easily abandoned in the game.
In addition to traditional TV stations, will website operators (e.g. Yahoo! and Google), which are gaining influence in the mobile Internet sector be able to get a share in the market? Those players do not have program-producing ability themselves. However, through audio/video content sharing, they will have some opportunities.
Audio/video content sharing sites, such as YouTube, has a lot of interesting programs. In spite of the low fidelity (as most programs are produced by non-professionals, after all), such programs might be good enough for cell phone-sized screens.
Currently, the mobile TV market is still a virgin land for a lot of players, including telecom operators, cell phone manufacturers, traditional TV media and emerging Internet media. The future will be interesting and full of expectations. Eventually the biggest winner will be consumers. The distribution of audio/video contents will be fast and convenient as never seen before.
- Read More
Prev : Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators
- Today in History
Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers - 2007/12/02
Great Future of Wireless Broadband (4) WiMax, 3G and 4G - 2006/12/03
Internet and Books (1) Dilemma of Online Publishing - 2005/12/04
VoIP (2) Who Depends on Whom - 2004/12/05
VoIP Gives out the First Cry - 2003/12/07
"Killing time" is the core for the development of mobile TV.
[+] Consumers are spending less time watching TV day by day.
Being optimistic about the mobile TV market, chip makers, cell phone manufacturers, telecom operators, media operators and value-added content providers have been making preparations in advance. However, is mobile TV really what consumers want? An unspoken doubt is: will anyone really watch TV on the go?
First of all, a trend is crystal clear. Consumers are spending less time watching TV through TV sets. Statistics show that at least in mainland China and Taiwan, the number of people surfing Internet after 8 p.m. at night are increasing steadily, so is the time spent.
Each person has only limited hours in a day. As more and more people choose to spend their off hours in front of computer screens, the TV audience group would diminish. IPTV has not been successful, largely because it is still trying to bring people back in front of TV screens, ignoring the fact that nowadays people hardly watch TV anymore.
The correct way to attract today's TV audience is to move audio or TV programs onto the screen of computers and cell phones. However, the decrease of the time for watching TV and the increase for using computers do not mean that the hours spent on watching cell phone screens would increase.
Here we have two questions to think about: 1) Consumers' hours on the go are fixed (on their way to work/home, or weekend outdoor trips, etc.), so what are their requirements for TV programs during those hours? 2) Is it possible to stimulate the enthusiasm of consumers for mobile TV even in room?
Will consumers buy if we successfully address the user experience challenges for watching video programs on 3G cell phones, and enable press-and-play, fast and effective channel switching and easy, simple billing?
[+] "Killing time" is the core for the development of mobile TV.
Product managers of mobile TV programs might have been racking their brains for clues about consumer requirements. The fact is they don't have to. What consumers want is just to kill time. It would be so boring at bus or subway stations that consumers would like to have something to watch; they may just want to snatch a little rest during busy office hours to steal a look at the cell phone, or they want to take a look at some important news.
Killing time, by all means, is the most critical application of mobile TV. There's no need for complicated interaction programs. Previously, 3G cell phone-base audio/video programs were so troublesome to operate that the "interaction" eventually turned "killing time" into "killed by time".
"Killing time" is also the key to mobile TV billing. One simple question: how much are you willing to pay for killing time? Currently in Taiwan, cable TV bills are about NTD 600 per month. How much, then, is reasonable for mobile TV? 200? Or 100?
DVB-H-based mobile TV offers one-way broadcasted digital programs, which, in theory, don't have to be received only with cell phones. Special terminal devices would be developed in the future for receiving such wireless digital programs. And there might be USB terminals for computers, too.
If digital TV itself is offered for free, there's no need to bother with which terminal device to use (ideally, of course, it's more convenient to be built in cell phones). In view of the current situation, however, monthly billing modes such as those adopted by the cable TV sector will be considered by operators. Therefore, integrating the fee into cell phone bills seems to be a natural choice.
If so, telecom operators would be put into a very subtle position. They might have nothing to do with mobile TV program provider, or become just a billing solution provider for the later, or even play a role similar to cable TV system operators.
[+] The subtle position of telecom operators in the mobile TV industry
In the first case, where telecom operators have nothing to do with digital TV content providers. TV-enabling cell phones bought by consumers (or other terminal devices) will be able to receive TV programs by design. If the programs need charges, consumers can make payment to TV program provider directly to get user IDs.
To get a simpler picture, just imagine binding a cell phone with a digital TV terminal. Each device functions independently without the interference of the other. If TV program providers want to charge the users, they could choose a number of channels, but would have to print and send the bills themselves.
Program providers can also choose to cooperate with telecom operators, if they do not want such troubles. That leads us to the second case: fee collection through cell phone bills. A more deep cooperation model could make interactive programs together with mobile operators and enable real-time program balloting through GPRS.
Trouble, however, is at door. There would be numerous program providers and TV channels. Say, there might be 5, and a consumer could choose to pay one for the program he watches, but he would not be able to afford all 5 if he wants to watch them all.
Generally speaking, that is not good news to the mobile TV sector. The real solution to maximize the interest of program providers is to build a single platform to enable free switching of channels. Yes, there are always competitions. However, if competitions lead to obstacles for consumers, that's no good to anyone.
More over, consumers have been accustomed to the monthly billing mode of one package for watching over 100 channels, which will not change in a short time. Therefore, a player capable of integrating all programs, which is similar to a cable TV system operator, is highly expected. Who will assume this role? It seems to be telecom operators.
That turns out to be the third case. However, everybody wants to dominate. The TV industry does not want their channels to be controlled by others, while the telecom industry will not give up the opportunity of entering the media market. Ironically, the fate of this scenario depends on whether mobile TV is fee-based or not.
- Read More
Prev : Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody Next : Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers
- Today in History
Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators - 2007/11/25
Great Future of Wireless Broadband (3) Scarce Resources - 2006/11/26
Google's Choice (2) Lessons for the Software Giant - 2005/11/20
VoIP (1) It's a Fool Not to Make Telecom Money - 2004/11/28
Press a button and the programs are popping up on your screen, with high fidelity and no worry for the cost of data transmission.
[+] Press the button and no program comes on your screen
Watching movies on handsets has been the dream of every telecom operator since the beginning of 3G (of course, they keep telling the consumers through TV ads: "this is what you have been dreaming for"). Fixed line operators, in the meantime, have been doing everything they can to sell IPTV to their customers.
Unfortunately, there have been only a few successes worldwide for those two dreams, which should largely be accredited to their particular geographic or social environments, for example, mobile Internet in Japan, mobile TV in Korea and IPTV in Hong Kong. In other countries or regions? Hardly heard of.
Nevertheless, technological progresses are being made continuously. The development of mobile TV is bringing in a new light of hope into the industry. In fact, "mobile TV" is just a general term, which covers any technology that enables consumers to watch TV on their cell phones.
By that definition, mobile TV has been a reality in CDMA/WCDMA-based 3G cell phones. However, before we go further into the development of the mobile TV sector, we need to take a look at what actually happened to 3G cell phones.
First of all, 3G has 3 major goals: high-speed Internet access, streaming media and video phone. With IP-based Internet access, users cannot get the streaming media movie they want by just pressing a button. Instead, they have to select a set of hierarchical menus.
Throughout the interaction process, users have to send requests and receive responses through the cell phone. A program has to be buffered before being played. This is a sheer difference from our experience with TV, where we get programs by just turning on the TV set. It is this difference that shapes everything.
[+] Billing modes stop consumers
In short, with conventional TV, you get the program as soon as you turn it on, not to mention the fast and effective channel switching through the remote controller. With Internet-based IPTV, you turn it on, but have to wait for a while; you switch a channel, but have to wait for a while; you press the play button, but also have to wait for half a minute. For that reason, IPTV has not been able to replace cable TV, nor has 3G cell phone-based streaming media.
Telecom operators had hoped to graft video phone to movie/TV programs to get better interactive experience (for example, allowing users to watch football games by dialing 123456). However, with the 64K bandwidth and poor transmission quality of video phone (maybe you cannot even see where the ball is), they had to give up.
In addition, there's a billing problem. For decades, telecom operators have been accustomed to billing by minutes or by transmitted data volume, as they say, such billing mode could better reflect their costs (they need to be paid so long as there're data flowing through their telecom equipments). However, consumers are loath to pay. Have you seen anyone who pays his TV bills by minutes?
Monthly billing could be a compromise. However, telecom operators have not been able to introduce total monthly billing packages. For example, they might pack a few programs into one package. However, there are usually many such packages (as each telecom operator would cooperate with a number of content providers). Want to get all the packages? Well, pay for them all!
What's more, the monthly packages only cover the transmission costs of telecom operators. To ensure the reasonable income for content providers, consumers have to pay for contents separately. How could a consumer possibly understand, or withstand so many layers of charges?
Are telecom operators ready to become media companies? It seems not. For example, how about offering completely free mobile TV programs and leaving telecom operators and content providers to earn their bread solely from ads? For telecom operators, that is horrible.
[+] The turmoil of standards
In addition to telecom operators, closely related with the sector are traditional cell phone manufacturers. The global cell phone market has been saturated for years, and the years of fast growth gone. Yet leading cell phone manufacturers are still there and thriving - thanks to continued innovations.
The first innovation might be the camera phone introduced a few years ago, followed by the music phone. New technologies, combined with successful marketing, have triggered tides of changing handsets among consumers. What would be the next innovative application? Obviously, it would be cell phone + TV. And the next? Cell phone + GPS.
Over the years, telecom operators and cell phone manufacturers have learned that consumers favor individual cell phone applications over mobile Internet access. Such applications should be easy and simple, and have nothing to do with Internet accessing.
Now, there are new technologies coming to us. Digital files are transmitted mainly through broadcasting technologies. You will no longer have to wait like you did with 3G or IPTV. Press a button and the programs are popping up on your screen, with high fidelity and no worry for the cost of data transmission.
For the industry, however, the war is just beginning. There are too many standards for using the cell phone as the carrier to play TV programs. While some standards, e.g., DVB-H are derived from the TV industry, others, e.g., MBMS, have their origins in the telecom industry.
TV-derived standards alone have already seen Japanese, Korean, European and Chinese standards, not to mention 3G-based digital TV broadcasting technologies developed by the telecom industry. The turmoil seems to have cast a shadow over the outlook of the sector.
- Read More
Prev : The Next Step for Web 2.0 (3) Collective Will Is the Cornerstone of Everything Next : Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators
- Today in History
Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody - 2007/11/18
Great Future of Wireless Broadband (2) Public WiFi is Not Enough - 2006/11/19
Great Future of Wireless Broadband (1) Living in the WiFi City - 2006/11/12
Google's Choice (1) Lessons for Portals - 2005/11/13
A Word of Advice for Small Online Stores - 2004/11/14
"Dear, we have been apart for too long. So you're here. We are as one from the beginning. Let me hold your hand once again."
[+] Collective spiritual power
This is the third article of the series. I spent two weeks thinking how to put it into words because, as the series goes, we will inevitably talk about issues related to philosophy and religion, which is of much greater complexity and diversity than the sociological topics regarding Web 2.0 we previously mentioned.
If you cannot see what philosophy and religion has anything to do with the future of Web 2.0, or even feel offended, I can only regrettably admit that my attempt is a failure. Every religion has its god(s), and it is difficult to use a single theory to cover everything while avoid offending other people. May I ask for your pardon in advance.
Almost every religion in the world, wherever it comes from, has the ritual of group worship (or chanting and the like). Such ritual implies that we all believe that the collective spiritual power of a group of people can change the way the world runs. We call it divine power. When changes do happen because of the power, we call it a miracle. At bottom, it's the collective will of man. The source of the power to change is blessing, especially collective blessing.
Blessing is a kind of tremendous spiritual energy endowed by god to man. Amazingly, when you give your blessing to other people, you'll receive even greater positive energy than that you give. Similar effect happens to hatred. Therefore we realize that one cannot get happiness by cursing others.
Such spiritual energy exists not only in religion, but in our daily life and in our mind. Just think about it: how many thousands of millions of people in the world that bears hatred towards the U.S. over the past few decades? At the end there was the 911 incident. So who is to blame for the evil summoned? Don't point fingers at others.
[+] The world as one
"Collective will" is the cornerstone on which the world operates. Some thoughts buried deep in your subconsciousness are unknowingly taken as true. In the Bill Clinton era, there had been considerable progress towards world peace; yet later the Americans' collective will summoned a belligerent president onto the stage.
In the area of religion, it is easy to see how collective will works. If you look around, you can also see how people's collective will changes the fate of a country - good leaders always work on forging collective will that is positive and uplifting . Moreover, the fate of humans is summoned by themselves collectively. There is no exception to that.
How can humans uplift themselves collectively? The ultimate truth behind the "collective will" is "the world as one." The hell exists only where this truth is blinded.
The country that inflicts violence on another will receive the evil consequence in the end, because to do harm to others is to do harm to oneself. We all feel sorry for victims of 911 incident, but we cannot ignore what the Americans had done in the Middle East before. That may be one reason for this hostility to American people.
Similarly, the group of people that send blessings to another will receive the positive energy of the blessings as well, because we are as one. You may say that I am talking about Buddhist causality, but more simply, it's just "what you get is what you give."
So smart people are never sparing in giving. The Bible tells us that, "It's better to give than to receive." To give you something does not mean that something will be taken away from me because you and I are as one. On the contrary, the positive energy created by sharing will ultimately benefit you and me.
[+] The desire that lies deep inside our hearts
I hope that what I just mentioned above reminds you of the Internet. Indeed the Internet is a giant network that carries the collective will of all human beings. In the previous Web 1.0 era, "Its" purpose was to carry all kind of information and make our life more convenient. In Web 2.0, "It" starts to carry the shared will of people increasingly.
The original spirit and the essence of the Internet are openness and sharing. Through the connection of networks, people are getting closer to one another. In Web 2.0, with the emergence of various services such as Blog and social networking services (SNS), people are exchanging not only information but also emotions.
I once wrote to my colleagues that, "Think about it: our users shed tears when reading their own Blog articles, behind which is the platform, tens of thousands of lines of program code, constructed by you. There is nothing more significant in your work than this."
If a Web 2.0 website operator does not know how important "emotions" are, or how Web 2.0 can help people communicate and exchange feelings, then s/he doesn't know what else s/he can do, so to speak. Nowadays people are not looking for information tools or operation platforms.
Major Web 2.0 websites like MySpace in the US have every capability to facilitate global exchange. Moreover, through proper guidance, maybe they can allow users to enhance themselves a little bit and positive thoughts to generate during interpersonal interaction. Just imagine how people have shared will flows on the giant network of the Internet….
I do not intend to preach about "website operators' social responsibility." Internet companies are not charities. They are not obliged to do charity. However, everyone wants to bless and be blessed. If website operators do something about it, it's just to 'satisfy consumers' needs." Isn't business opportunities come from fulfilling consumers' demands?
[+] Collective enhancement of all humans
In Web 1.0, we think about how to promote the exchange of information; in Web 2.0, we think about how to establish relationship and to increase interpersonal interaction. In Web 2.0 Next, we need to think about "what can touch our hearts." What we need to connect is people's hearts but not information.
We need to turn the Internet into a medium of emotions, a platform of exchange of souls, so that users will feel more emotions when using it. This echoes to the desire deep inside our hearts. When that desire is fulfilled, we feel close to god.
Some friends wrote to me, saying that online emotions are not real. Some are worried that spending too much time on the Internet may impede the emotional exchange with other people in our daily life. Think about it: in your daily life, the number of people you are familiar and share feelings with may be within five. This is your social network, much more lonesome than you may think.
And these few people constitute the world you recognize. You never think there is any relationship between you and African people, nor do you understand what is "the world as one." The Internet Next brings forth a brand new chance that we've felt 10 years ago. Now it's finally mature with full energy.
Web 2.0 Next will seek to satisfy users' emotional needs (love and blessing), and encouraging sharing (open oneself) and exchange (global integration). It will need an upgrade from information exchange to emotion exchange. Human beings need to enhance themselves collectively, and they should start from getting in touch with each other. The Internet can make all of this possible.
"Dear, we have been apart for too long. So you're here. We are as one from the beginning. Let me hold your hand once again."
- Read More
Prev : The Next Step for Web 2.0 (2) The Fourth Flow: Emotion Flow Next : Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody
- Today in History
The Next Step for Web 2.0 (3) Collective Will Is the Cornerstone of Everything - 2007/09/16
The Web 2.0 Revolution (4) the Google Paradigm - 2006/09/17
The Web 2.0 Revolution (3) Advertising Revenue is Not Enough - 2006/09/10
Envisioning China's 3G Market (3) Systems & Markets - 2005/09/11
Three Musts of Digital Content Biz (2) Stop Selling "Containers" - 2004/09/19
Three Musts of Digital Content Biz (1) Content is Cheap - 2004/09/12
Easy profits from virtual business are what Web 2.0 should aim at.
[+] Changes in money flow, logistics flow and information flow
After 10 years of development of the Internet, people have become very familiar with the terms of "money flow, logistics flow and information flow." Especially in the area of eCommerce, the three flows can generate much business value. Some businesses are very successful by taking advantage of only one of the three flows.
Although "logistics flow" is a bridge between the Internet and the physical world, its importance has reduced with the introduction of Web 2.0. On the other hand, "money flow" and "information flow", though remain unchanged in forms, have experienced significant change in essence.
In Web 1.0 era, we spent great efforts to enable the money flow to move smoothly between the Internet and the physical world, so that financial tools in the physical world, such as credit cards or ATM cards, can be applied online, and that there are C2C payment tools such as Paypal.
We think a lot about how information should be transmitted (results are e-mails and real-time massaging tools) and gathered (results are portals and content websites) and how to cope with information asymmetry by inventing new business models (results are online job site and online auction).
The Internet has driven the cost of information transmission down. The revolution in money flow, logistics flow and information flow has made the Internet world as it is today. Yet we have sensed an emerging force of the fourth flow - the emotion flow -, which is about to change the three flows.
[+] Emotion flow will bring forth "the emotion highway" and "the media of emotion"
In the past, when you were done with a piece of online news, you were done with it. Maybe there were some people who would leave a comment below the news, but most people left quietly. Then some website operators made some changes to allow readers to score the importance of the news from one to ten points. Yet few people chose to leave a score.
The scoring system has finally been simplified to two options: "push" and "bury." If you are in favor of an article, you push. That is how the news article popularity website, digg.com, in the US succeeds. Then, we start to see news websites provide a function to allow readers to express their feelings about news articles like " happy," "sad," "confused" and so on.
The dawn of the Internet Next is upon us. Indeed, what really matters is not information per se, but what people think of the information and furthermore, how they "feel" about it. A simple "agree" or "disagree" is not enough.
You must have seen in commercials a network of beaming cables through which information flows freely. The so-called "information superhighway" has embodied people's imagination of the Internet. Now what is ahead of us is "emotion superhighway."
There must be many ways to reflect people's emotions flowing around global networks and represent these emotions on websites. Blog have been seen as grassroots media, and social networking websites a tool for social networking or meeting friends. Web 2.0 Next application will be "emotion media."
[+] Emotion: the next thing Web 2.0 is to deal with
Wanna know the moods flowing on the Internet globally? Check out http: //worldmood.info/. This service simplifies moods into smiley face and frowny face. Maybe it can be used to predict stock market performance - isn't it the sum of investors' confidence and moods?
In the time of emotion economics, the ability to control a tremendous amount emotional data will be highly valuable. We do know that emotions affect our consumption behaviors, but we do not have a chance to quantify the relations between emotions and consumption. Web 2.0 may provide a solution.
Indeed, it is very difficult to control a huge amount of personal emotional data. Yet it may work if we focus only on a specific kind of emotion and develop an emotion-centric website. Instead of attracting heavy traffic and drawing revenues from advertising, the strategy of focus survives by selling virtual products. Examples are:
Flowers for Hope: http: //www.flowersforhope.com/garden/ This website allows you to make a wish. Each wish is represented by a flower. Other people can water your flowers, while you can also check out other people's wishes. You know that you are not alone. Your wishes are being taken care of.
Secret: http: //secret.moumentei.com/ This is a very simple website in terms of technology and interface design. Yet it offers thrills to peepers and exhibitionists and even the peeped. I marveled at my first sight of this website.
[+] As emotional products get more popular, micro payment becomes a challenge
With the emergence of emotion flow applications, the selling of virtual products will become a major revenue source for Web 2.0 websites mentioned above. Some people are willing to spend 1 US dollar for a virtual object to express their detestation or some small money just to play kids online. "Emotion" has become a real product.
At the time of purchasing a virtual emotional product, the expression of an emotion, or psychological therapy, is completed. That is the magic of emotional products. A successful design of emotional products is really a test of creativity and understanding of human nature.
However, how do you pay small money like 1 US dollar, by credit card or ATM card? Virtual emotional products are absolutely linked to impulsive spending. Entry of long credit card numbers and repetitive confirmation can kill that impulse of spending.
In Web 2.0, micro payment becomes a challenge, because the profit from each virtual product is too small to make up for the credit card processing fee. Those who can solve the problem of micro payment will be able to reap the profits of the long tail of virtual emotional products.
Emotion flow will get even more important in Web 2.0 Next. Before, people discuss on whether online users would be willing to pay for information or the use of information processing tools. Now, people who can control the emotion flow of online users will have a chance to pull the money out of users' pockets.
As virtual emotional products get more popular, dependence on logistics would only decrease. Why? Because it is all about psychological satisfaction, and there is no physical thing involved - no delivery, no guarantee and no product return. Easy profits from virtual business are what Web 2.0 should aim at.
- Read More
Prev : The Next Step for Web 2.0 (1) The Dawn of Emotion Economics Next : The Next Step for Web 2.0 (3) Collective Will Is the Cornerstone of Everything
- Today in History
The Next Step for Web 2.0 (2) The Fourth Flow: Emotion Flow - 2007/09/02
Envisioning China's 3G Market (2) 3G License & Market Strategy - 2005/09/04
The Internet in the future will become a place for group therapy.
[+] Emotional products in the physical world
There are many ways to sell "happiness." One is to write a book on "happiness" (hedonics), turn it into some kind of study and sell it in bookstores. Or, you can package it in a mineral water advertisement and represent the bottle of water as an indispensable thing when families and friends get together happily.
In a fiercely competitive car market, a car dealer seeks to boost sales by presenting its car as "the only car that equipped happiness." In a trendy sitcom, the leading actor would win the heart of thousands of female audience by calling," I swear I'll bring you happiness."
This is the power of "emotional products," Marketing experts in the traditional business world have long noticed that the key to a consumer's purchasing decision, sometimes, is not the function or price of the product, but something that can trigger certain memory or emotion deep inside the mind of a consumer.
For those who buy the book/mineral water/car/trendy sitcom DVD, do they then live happily ever after? No. More precisely, their feeling of happiness reaches completion right at the moment of consumption. Emotional products that cannot achieve such effect would definitely fail.
Certainly you can say that emotions are added value to the above mentioned products; they are not the products themselves. Yet after ten years of development of the Internet, we begin to see that "emotion" per se can become a product and has the potential to change the look of the business world.
Yes, the dawn of emotion economics is upon us. In the past, "It" is the added value of some products; now "It" will become a product and will revel "Its" value through the form of Web 2.0. Strong emotions will become a kind of belief, so the reference for emotion economics will be religion.
[+] Internet from physical to spiritual
I sort out the characteristics of traditional Internet, Web 2.0, and Web 2.0 Next in the following chart. Simply put, the mission of the Internet will evolve from "carrying information" to "carrying emotion."
From eCommerce to emotion-centric websites, ordered from left to right of the chart above, we can see that during these 10 years, the Internet has evolved from more physical to more virtual and from material to spiritual.
Though eCommerce is an important business of the Internet, 70% of the operation, such as warehousing, logistics and payment processing, is done in the offline world in a way similar to that of mail order or brick-and-mortar retail stores.
Information processing is a critical issue in Web 1.0. The lessening of the problem of product information asymmetry has led to the emergence of eCommerce. Users can compare prices online with just a click, and they can easily find product information or even other people's experience of the product before making purchasing decisions.
Web 1.0 media have moved a lot of content online and even produce their own in order to reduce the cost of acquiring information. Too much information however creates the problem of overload. Then there is the search engine that provides precision to help filter undesired information.
In this phase, the trait of the Internet as a "tool" is very obvious. People use the Internet to make their life more convenient, with a focus on how to "improve efficiency." As a result, many traditional business models are gradually replaced by the Internet for better efficiency.
[+] Web 2.0 Next: the emergence of "emotion centric websites"
Blog ushers in the era of Web 2.0, empowered people to publish their own work - the so-called "individual publishing" - for the first time. There is no problem for us to download information anymore; now it's time for us to upload and express our voice.
Such characteristic then starts to push Blog to the way of Social Networking. People of similar interests and tastes are gathered and get to know each other through well-designed guidance. Content on Blogs only provide an excuse for people to start a talk.
Well, the kind of blogs mentioned above are only those that are focused on content sharing. The number of bloggers is increasing, and it is impossible that every one of them is good at writing or photography. As a result, a lot of bloggers are just letting off their feelings of these days. Normally there are only a few words on the Blogs.
Yes it's about emotions. So what to do next is to lead the people who have similar or opposite emotions to get gather and allow their emotions to vent and thus reach completion through some kinds of rituals or activities.
Just like the one who buys "the only car that equipped happiness" - his desire for a happy family reaches completion at the moment when he pays for it. It is easier for us on the Internet than in the physical world.
What kinds of (good and bad) emotions and desires do people have? They may include:
- Hope. (It's said that among all living beings, only humans will have hopes.)
- Happiness. (Longing and expectation for happiness that one lacks or desires.)
- Hatred. (To smooth it away through some kind of ritual.)
- To be loved, cared and blessed (and thus gain strength).
- To know if there are other people in the world who have similar weird thoughts or particular experience or so on.
- To enjoy solitude (while keep in touch with the world!)
- To fulfill the desire and enjoy the excitement to peep and to be peeped.
- To satisfy the sense of vanity or accomplishment (or to find motivation to catch up) through comparing with others.
- To do good and help others (everyone wants to do a little good as long as s/he has a chance.)
- A secret whim to "kuso" or to do non-sense reckless doings (and enjoy the pleasant sensation to break the rules and customs of the society).
- Greed (and jealousy and desire to monopolize that comes along.)
- Innocence and the desire to be like a kid. (This is why Little Prince is so popular.)
- The hobby to collect things (We are all more or less obsessed with collecting some things.) and fetishism.
- Hesitation when faced with choices and desire to pry into the future. (This is why fortune telling is so popular.)
- ...
The more subtleness of human nature you observe, the more you can grasp the essence and spirit of emotion economics. What will people get gather for, and what kind of emotion will they pay for its completion? Through creative packaging, the items listed above can be developed into interesting and colorful "emotion centric websites."
Simply put, the Internet in the future will become a place for group therapy.
- Read More
Prev : The Spirit of Web 2.0 New Media Lies in "Inter-personal Communication"
- Today in History
The Next Step for Web 2.0 (1) The Dawn of Emotion Economics - 2007/08/26
The Web 2.0 Revolution (2) the Emergence of New Media - 2006/08/27</