Social Networks on Media Buyer’s List for 2010

Let’s try something new here in the world of Internet marketing. Rather than rushing off and pronouncing next year as the year of (place latest over-hyped trend here) let’s enjoy the real beginnings of social media and networks. If you’re asking “What do you mean, that’s old news!” then you are one of the sheep who likes to follow the flock that is looking for “What’s next?” rather than staying in the “What’s about to really work?” reality of business.

What I am driving at here is that social media and social networks have enjoyed a 5 plus year run of becoming known and accepted by a wider audience. It’s safe to say that the flywheel effect (wink and a nod from the Good to Great crowd) has been hit with regard to social networks being part of our online existence moving forward for the foreseeable future. Before we head off, however, and decide what will be the next greatest thing that enhances or improves ‘communication’ let’s let social networks first do something that has been elusive thus far: make money.

B to B Online reports that a new study from the Center for Media Research tells the tale of the maturation of the social network into a real marketing tool that is a viable marketing medium.

A new study by the Center for Media Research found that 56% of media buyers plan to buy ads on social networks next year, ranking just below those that will buy ads on e-mail marketing platforms (57%).

So we now enter the social network phase where marketers accept the platform as a way to spend to reach their customers and potential customers. With media buyers leaning toward social networks in larger numbers it’s the signal that the time is actually here. We need to sit on this reality for quite some time before we go rushing off to declare the next thing that is being offered which is ‘cool’ but not able to turn a profit.

Social networking is finally on the precipice of becoming a real business with real money being pumped into it and real profitability on the horizon. It’s taken a long time to get here and unless people throw on the brakes and figure it out it will be underutilized and left for dead as the industry rushes towards marketing’s next shiny object.

The “2010 Media Planning Intelligence Study” was based on an online survey of 1,164 media buyers and planners. It found that overall, 57% of media buyers plan to buy nontraditional media next year and 43% said they will buy traditional media.

The shift is more real than ever and those that will benefit will realize that the coming wave of users will be very satisfied in the world of Facebook and Twitter for quite some time. The masses will not likely be looking for the next greatest thing to come along because normal people find something that works and they stick with it.

So Internet marketers should slow down and enjoy this new era. Put a stake in the ground and stop rushing after the next big thing. The latest and greatest is here and it needs to be mined for a long time. Of course, maybe it’s not cool to be where everyone else is but those who like businesses will be more than happy to reap the rewards of being with the dull masses who are happy where they find themselves.

RockMelt: the Next Netscape? (And Do They Want to Be?)

Remember Netscape? Come on, you know you do. If you were online before 2000, you probably remember the erstwhile most-popular web browser, the predecessor of Internet Explorer, and ancestor of Firefox. The original Internet success story, Netscape went public before making a profit, then doubled its revenues every quarter in 1995. In the mid-90s, they had 90% of the browser market—but by the end of 2006, less than 1% of Internet users were still on Netscape. The following year, Netscape released its final version.

Now that we’ve had our history lesson for the day, let’s get up to speed. Netscape founder Marc Andreessen has finally anointed a successor to Netscape—and it ain’t Firefox. Although FF is the child of Netscape’s open-source Mozilla initiative, it’s another, as-yet-unreleased browser that has Andreessen’s attention these days: RockMelt.

Andreessen has worked with RockMelt’s co-founders before. Tim Howes worked at Netscape, and both Howes and Eric Vishria were executives at Andreessen’s Opsware (now sold to HP). The project is so early in development that no one is talking about it (and robots.txt blocks all user-agents from their site).

The company site only features the logo and a signup for updates. The New York Times says there used to be a privacy policy on the site, but after a reporter asked about it, the policy was removed. However, the NYT says the policy indicated RockMelt would somehow integrate with Facebook (a Facebook spokeswoman said they had no knowledge of RockMelt, but Andreessen is on FB’s board).

The policy says that a person could use a Facebook ID to log into RockMelt, suggesting that the browser may be tailored to display Facebook updates and other features as users browse the Web. Another browser, Flock, based on Firefox, already incorporates feeds from social networking sites.

The article also notes that Google Chrome has failed to gain much of a foothold in the browser market so far, despite Google’s prominent positioning efforts. Other startups without Google’s face time could face even greater barriers to entry—but integrating with FB could be a good way to gain some of that exposure.

What do you think? What kind of implementation would you expect for a browser integrated with Facebook? Would you be interested in that? Will Andreessen’s endorsement be enough to get RockMelt more than hype?

The One in Which I Ponder the Chances of Success for Microsoft & Yahoo

Now that we’ve all had time to digest Microsoft’s 10-year deal with Yahoo, it’s time to ask ourselves if this partnership will live up to the hype?

It seems like we’ve been talking about this deal every other day for the past year or more. In fact, digging through the Marketing Pilgrim archives–and ending up 30 pages deep in “Microsoft/Yahoo” rumors–I discovered it was back in September of 2007 that the idea first germinated:

…Under the scenario discussed by top executives, Yahoo would have outsourced that search-advertising activity — which places small text ads next to Web search results — to either Google or Microsoft Corp…

At the time, Yahoo’s then CEO Jerry Yang said there were “no sacred cows” for the company. Then promptly dismissed any notion that the company would give up operating its own search engine.

My, how things have changed.

Now–with the drama behind us and the deal announced–we need to consider if this act of collusion will end up presenting a serious challenge to Google’s dominance. While Microsoft’s Bing.com continues to inch forward with market share, will the general search public flock to the Google alternative–or will it send us deeper into the warm embrace of the search engine we’ve loved for the past decade?

I could see how we might ultimately come to like Bing. It’s got a catchy name, some cool TV ads running, and could provide those that love to live outside the mainstream, a flashy new search engine to evangelize. But, does a partnership with Yahoo actually dilute Bing’s chances of success? I’m not talking about success as measured by an increase in market share–by that measure, the deal is already a winner. I’m talking about real success. The kind of success that doesn’t just come from cannibalizing Yahoo’s existing search traffic, but from honest-to-goodness market share stolen from Google.

That’s where I simply don’t see much chance of a happy ending. I’ve worked for a company that decided it wanted to increase market share by means of acquisitions. Sure, you get to show growth on paper, but that’s not growth that’s sustainable. It pleases the shareholders, but neither the heart or mind are satisfied. Want further proof that buying market share is not sustainable? Take a look at the stagnation going on over at IAC’s Ask.com.

The biggest obstacle now facing Microsoft’s Bing is this: do we consider it a weaker offering, because it had to partner with Yahoo? Or, does the partnership increase its chances of success?

Perhaps the only glimmer of hope for Microsoft is that Yahoo has played this role in a previous life. Remember when all of your searches at Yahoo were powered by Google? Back then, Google was still building its own audience, and the exposure provided by Yahoo was, obviously, valuable to the company. Can Yahoo do the same for Bing?

There are many questions that I’m leaving unanswered. This post is merely a means for me to share my own thoughts on the deal–not to tell you how you should feel about it. Feel free to chime in with your own opinion on the chances of Microsoft and Yahoo truly challenging Google. I look forward to reading them!

<img border="0" src="http://constanthit.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/3be0d_vertical-leap-seo-234.gif”>