Interesting concept

[DaveBunny]

Hi all,

Bear with me on this one... so, Microsoft recently paid over 200m dollars for shares in Facebook. Plentyoffish makes over 3 million dollars per year from adwords alone. I'm sure there are loads of other examples of such social networking sites that are worth ridiculous amounts of money.

My question is this... How much of their success relies on luck i.e right place, right time? Could this success be forced?

Imagine if 100 people each had a share in the same company. That 100 people consisted of developers, social marketing experts, designers etc... basically the perfect balance needed to create the next big thing...

Interesting concept or crazy talk?

Dave

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

I suppose with the right budget and manpower companies can make things happen but like most things in life "right place, right time" comes into it. But putting yourself places that are likely to be the right places is a good idea. Acting on opportunities is vital.

Remember though that many social media sites have only recently become profitable and social media sites can go out of favour so in a saturated market it is a risky investment.

 

[david64]

I think it could been seen as luck if you look at is being the first one to the table, i.e. an early Internet pioneer.

I don't think successful sites get anywhere without a lot of hard work and most likely sizable-gigantic budgets. I have made sites for people of this sort, had quotes from many more wanting them. All of the sites fall flat on their bytes because:

1 - they know nothing about the Internet
2 - lack of budget
3 - they expect a web design company can deliver them success on a plate

If it was that easy everyone would be doing it.

Take Twitter for example. The thing is a load of old cobblers. It's got about as much substance as a daytime TV talk show presented by Paris Hilton and Peaches Geldof. However, its the talk of the town because its got clever people behind it with gigantic budgets.

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

I think it could been seen as luck if you look at is being the first one to the table, i.e. an early Internet pioneer.

I don't think successful sites get anywhere without a lot of hard work and most likely sizable-gigantic budgets. I have made sites for people of this sort, had quotes from many more wanting them. All of the sites fall flat on their bytes because:

1 - they know nothing about the Internet
2 - lack of budget
3 - they expect a web design company can deliver them success on a plate

If it was that easy everyone would be doing it.

Take Twitter for example. The thing is a load of old cobblers. It's got about as much substance as a daytime TV talk show presented by Paris Hilton and Peaches Geldof. However, its the talk of the town because its got clever people behind it with gigantic budgets.

I agree David I can't remember how many prospects have said they want a Facebook designing or, indeed, an Ebay. They just want to copy success.

An idea alone is worthless, it's the execution that matters. There is probably space for a new social media site if a niche in demand was found. But like you said determination and persistence are required. Alongside a big budget and/or lots of time. Networking with the right people is invaluable too.

I can't agree with you about Twitter though. Its realtime search is quite useful. Bing is also using realtime search. I'm not saying it's better or worse than relevancy based spidered search but it can compliment traditional search such as Google and Yahoo.

What do you think?

 

[david64]

Best quote request I ever had was "something like Google" and the budget field was filled in with the figure 500 (£).

Yeah. I do agree that the real-time search of twitter is useful. However, it just seems like a popularity contest to me. I'm sure it has uses that are of benefit to people. However, its too disposable pop culture for my tastes.

BTW are you a fan of The Tykes? One of my favourite teams

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

I'm not really into footie more into snooker and tennis. I love it when the snooker is on at the Crucible in Sheffield and all the players are around.

I think the problem with Twitter search is its lack of relevance and potentially spammy content. It might make a dent in Google's share but I doubt it could ever take a significant proportion.

 

[JElder]

The other issue you would have would be getting 100 people who not only had the skills, but were willing to wait 5 years for a payoff.

Given most sites, they often make no (or little) money for the developers until they are sold (like facebook) or otherwise commercialise, like Google. This is not a fast process, and all the time people have to eat, pay mortgages, run cars, etc. There may be the potential to make a small fortune, but it is both high risk and delayed - which many people can not afford to do.

 

[GNU]

Take Twitter for example. The thing is a load of old cobblers. It's got about as much substance as a daytime TV talk show presented by Paris Hilton and Peaches Geldof. However, its the talk of the town because its got clever people behind it with gigantic budgets.

Haha yeah thats what I think. I cannot understand how something so mediocre got so big. Ive heard a few funny comments ref twitter lately... one was reference to a question "have you made any money from twitter", the response went something like:

"I have saved loads on my tax bill as a result of the time I wasted"

Have also heard it described as "the dumbing down of the web"

It (twitter) is a nice idea, but when I hear people talking about "twitter replacing google", and endless drool being churned off the end of sphinn it gets pretty boring.

On the plus site, I hear you can make good money ranking twitter pages for viagra...

 

[Funkybearman]

The book about facebook founders is due for release next week. I'm sure it will make interesting reading

 

[david64]

The book about facebook founders is due for release next week. I'm sure it will make interesting reading

I'm more interested in everyone's personal details they are hoiking off to the military industrial complex.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Tykes are rugby aren't they?

 

[david64]

Tykes are rugby aren't they?

I don't know? Maybe there is a rugby team of that name too. The Tykes is one of the nick names for Barnsley FC. One of the more glamorous teams in the Championship

 

[DaveBunny]

hmmmm... I agree that hype is the deciding factor of whether a project of this nature suceeds or fails. I think therefore a large proportion of the '100' would need to be marketeers across different disciplins.

The obstacles as I see it would be:

Money - although if it went viral might not cost the earth.

The big one for me would be the effective organisation and communication of 100 people working towards the same goal and the legal headaches of having 100 shareholders.

Idea, idea, idea or do something vastly better than what has been done before.

P.s.

Barnsley more glamorous than Scunthorpe??

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Many people form a business with a strict exit strategy. Getting a load of people together, especially marketers (internet or otherwise), is a recipe for disaster rather than success