Comments on: Did Facebook just miss a huge ($3 Million+) revenue opportunity? http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/ Social Media is about Cliques not Clicks Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:35:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: scotthoffman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-212 scotthoffman Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:57:11 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-212 Thanks for the comments, and I am a big fan of Viddler. I used the service on <a href="http://www.Lotame.com" rel="nofollow">www.Lotame.com</a><br><br>While I was at lunch today, I had an epiphany. Facebook should have charged for the URLs for several reasons:<br><br>Revenue: even if it doesn't feel like a lot of revenue you have to start somewhere (and they now have 6,000,000 URLs registered as reported by Silicon Alley Insider) They did just take $200 Million in Venture Capital...I am not certain about the transactional cost, but Apple has figured it out with the $.99 app.<br><br>Premium Service: Facebook has stated (and restated) that they want to find premium services to charge for...this could have been a first try. And like so many things in life, once you give something away for free, it is very hard to charge for that item or service in the future.<br><br>Testing: They could have proved out their new Micro-Payment platform, and set the stage for 1st and 3rd party payments in a secure way.<br><br>When I started this debate, I was fairly neutral, but now I am leaning toward the position that they should have tested applying a small annual fee for this service. Thanks for the comments, and I am a big fan of Viddler. I used the service on http://www.Lotame.com

While I was at lunch today, I had an epiphany. Facebook should have charged for the URLs for several reasons:

Revenue: even if it doesn't feel like a lot of revenue you have to start somewhere (and they now have 6,000,000 URLs registered as reported by Silicon Alley Insider) They did just take $200 Million in Venture Capital…I am not certain about the transactional cost, but Apple has figured it out with the $.99 app.

Premium Service: Facebook has stated (and restated) that they want to find premium services to charge for…this could have been a first try. And like so many things in life, once you give something away for free, it is very hard to charge for that item or service in the future.

Testing: They could have proved out their new Micro-Payment platform, and set the stage for 1st and 3rd party payments in a secure way.

When I started this debate, I was fairly neutral, but now I am leaning toward the position that they should have tested applying a small annual fee for this service.

]]> By: sandieman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-211 sandieman Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:42:05 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-211 Not sure how much ill-will it would have caused. Also what is $3M anyways to a company making most it's revenue off of ad revenue?<br><br>And could only imagine the amount of revenue taken off the top from $.99 transactions. Not sure how much ill-will it would have caused. Also what is $3M anyways to a company making most it's revenue off of ad revenue?

And could only imagine the amount of revenue taken off the top from $.99 transactions.

]]> By: scotthoffman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-213 scotthoffman Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:26:02 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-213 Eric you are on to something with the last comment - "could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution?" wow that blew my mind... Eric you are on to something with the last comment – “could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution?” wow that blew my mind…

]]> By: scotthoffman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-21 scotthoffman Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:57:11 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-21 Thanks for the comments, and I am a big fan of Viddler. I used the service on <a href="http://www.Lotame.com" rel="nofollow">www.Lotame.com</a><br><br>While I was at lunch today, I had an epiphany. Facebook should have charged for the URLs for several reasons:<br><br>Revenue: even if it doesn't feel like a lot of revenue you have to start somewhere (and they now have 6,000,000 URLs registered as reported by Silicon Alley Insider) They did just take $200 Million in Venture Capital...I am not certain about the transactional cost, but Apple has figured it out with the $.99 app.<br><br>Premium Service: Facebook has stated (and restated) that they want to find premium services to charge for...this could have been a first try. And like so many things in life, once you give something away for free, it is very hard to charge for that item or service in the future.<br><br>Testing: They could have proved out their new Micro-Payment platform, and set the stage for 1st and 3rd party payments in a secure way.<br><br>When I started this debate, I was fairly neutral, but now I am leaning toward the position that they should have tested applying a small annual fee for this service. Thanks for the comments, and I am a big fan of Viddler. I used the service on http://www.Lotame.com

While I was at lunch today, I had an epiphany. Facebook should have charged for the URLs for several reasons:

Revenue: even if it doesn't feel like a lot of revenue you have to start somewhere (and they now have 6,000,000 URLs registered as reported by Silicon Alley Insider) They did just take $200 Million in Venture Capital…I am not certain about the transactional cost, but Apple has figured it out with the $.99 app.

Premium Service: Facebook has stated (and restated) that they want to find premium services to charge for…this could have been a first try. And like so many things in life, once you give something away for free, it is very hard to charge for that item or service in the future.

Testing: They could have proved out their new Micro-Payment platform, and set the stage for 1st and 3rd party payments in a secure way.

When I started this debate, I was fairly neutral, but now I am leaning toward the position that they should have tested applying a small annual fee for this service.

]]> By: sandieman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-20 sandieman Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:42:05 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-20 Not sure how much ill-will it would have caused. Also what is $3M anyways to a company making most it's revenue off of ad revenue?<br><br>And could only imagine the amount of revenue taken off the top from $.99 transactions. Not sure how much ill-will it would have caused. Also what is $3M anyways to a company making most it's revenue off of ad revenue?

And could only imagine the amount of revenue taken off the top from $.99 transactions.

]]> By: scotthoffman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-19 scotthoffman Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:26:02 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-19 Eric you are on to something with the last comment - "could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution?" wow that blew my mind... Eric you are on to something with the last comment – “could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution?” wow that blew my mind…

]]> By: Eric Porres http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-18 Eric Porres Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:07:25 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-18 Given that they haven't raised the floor yet on the ability to buy highly targeted social ads, I think Facebook is missing a multi-Bn dollar opportunity by not charging users $0.99/month for use (and yes, I would paid $0.99 for the vanity URL...Apple "app" like = rounding error). FB has such ubiquity now and no other social service comes close to matching its ease of use. The "switching cost" with respect to time involved to port friends, apps, and preferences over to another social service is way too high with respect to time-value to do so. Once your significant other gets on Facebook, you cease to care that much about other social services.<br><br>Someone made an interesting comment below about a Facebook payment service; could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution? Maybe...on the Internet, you're no longer a dog. Given that they haven't raised the floor yet on the ability to buy highly targeted social ads, I think Facebook is missing a multi-Bn dollar opportunity by not charging users $0.99/month for use (and yes, I would paid $0.99 for the vanity URL…Apple “app” like = rounding error). FB has such ubiquity now and no other social service comes close to matching its ease of use. The “switching cost” with respect to time involved to port friends, apps, and preferences over to another social service is way too high with respect to time-value to do so. Once your significant other gets on Facebook, you cease to care that much about other social services.

Someone made an interesting comment below about a Facebook payment service; could we seen Facebook vanity URLs replace OpenID as a payment / verification of identity solution? Maybe…on the Internet, you're no longer a dog.

]]> By: James Eliason http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-17 James Eliason Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:42:20 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-17 Hey Scott! I think you are right, there was a opportunity to make at minimal $3,000,000. On a much larger scale Facebook is probably behind the scenes working on a more powerful revenue generation model with vanity URL's and their payment system. I can just see the day where millions of users interact with a Best Buy application, and at the end they are given the option to purchase through the app (discount given!) and pay via Facebook dollars. That is pretty powerful. Companies like Paypal will probably want to think of ways to combat the on-coming frieght train of purchases on Facebook.<br><br>I would have paid $1 for <a href="http://www.facebook.com/jameseliason" rel="nofollow">www.facebook.com/jameseliason</a> and as you know, I would glady pay for <a href="http://www.twitter.com/jameseliason" rel="nofollow">www.twitter.com/jameseliason</a> especially if I could advertise on Twitter :) Hey Scott! I think you are right, there was a opportunity to make at minimal $3,000,000. On a much larger scale Facebook is probably behind the scenes working on a more powerful revenue generation model with vanity URL's and their payment system. I can just see the day where millions of users interact with a Best Buy application, and at the end they are given the option to purchase through the app (discount given!) and pay via Facebook dollars. That is pretty powerful. Companies like Paypal will probably want to think of ways to combat the on-coming frieght train of purchases on Facebook.

I would have paid $1 for http://www.facebook.com/jameseliason and as you know, I would glady pay for http://www.twitter.com/jameseliason especially if I could advertise on Twitter :)

]]> By: scotthoffman http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-16 scotthoffman Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:57:55 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-16 Thanks for your comments Lisa, I always believe that in your personal life "money ain't everything" but for a corporation..."money is everything" it is the fiduciary responsibility of the company to pay the shareholder (or stakeholders) the value of their investment. Thanks for your comments Lisa, I always believe that in your personal life “money ain't everything” but for a corporation…”money is everything” it is the fiduciary responsibility of the company to pay the shareholder (or stakeholders) the value of their investment.

]]> By: Lisa Jo Barr http://cliqology.com/2009/06/did-facebook-just-miss-a-huge-3-million-revenue-opportunity/comment-page-1/#comment-15 Lisa Jo Barr Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:49:57 +0000 http://cliqology.com/?p=136#comment-15 maybe its simply that "money isn't everything" and that they will get their "payment" through it's users enjoyment. This is a good lesson for us. maybe its simply that “money isn't everything” and that they will get their “payment” through it's users enjoyment. This is a good lesson for us.

]]>