Marketing Pilgrim - Latest Comments in Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Bradley Davis — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 02:12:11 -0000

Perhaps Google realizes that social networks are highly trend effected and their life cycle is very short and sharp at the growth stage. Google has so many applications that they could integrate into one killer social network that could do some massive damage to the others.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Perde — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 20:08:23 -0000

I think it should be safe to assume Google is not willing to acquire every bright internet company : )

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

marshal sandler — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 05:18:06 -0000

Fact Check-I am not sure the buy in on Facebook was a bid ! What facts do any of us have that Google Loses ! Google is a well branded educationally oriented firm ! Gmail has developed some excellent work a day world applications! Microsoft in this case was forced by competition to spend $200 Million Plus dollars to create a larger market through Facebook Subscribers! Google did not spend $200million dollars to create a Market for Gmail !
Microsoft took a gamble on buying a Branded Mailing list trust me it is a straight business transaction buying Market Share ! The subscribers on Facebook have value their apps are at a very low level of Abstraction! Semantically Yours!

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

TanNg — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 05:49:05 -0000

I believe that Google need FaceBook, otherwise they didn't participate on the bid. They lose, that is the fact, undeniable.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Barkley — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:00:26 -0000

I believe that the future of all of this, as it continues, will be highly specialized sites. History is a great teacher of this and look at television as an example. First started out with 3-5 choices (the big 3 networks), then a few UHF stations and ultimately hundreds of specialized channels (and not just sports but micro channels like Golf, Tennis, NFL, etc). Its all about meeting people where they have the strongest interest. MySpace, Facebook and others will survive because they have tonage but smaller players will have a role.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Life without Google? — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:01:25 -0000

It's funny but, when mentioning $240M and Google in the same sentence, it would be the same as saying I have $2.40 in my pocket. It resonates to me so perfectly as to how utterly desensitized I am to Google and Money.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

MadMax3000 — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:30:45 -0000

Orkut is the next big thing in social network in USA. It's really popular in Brazil, and Google is ready for some big impact on Nov 5 2007.

It seems like a majority of the readers keep on underestimate orkut, they think it's a small player... from from I read on mashable.com, their platform will integrate everything: gmail, gtalk, documents, and whatever other service google.

So let's see... Google may hurt FaceBook since it's game time.

MadMax 3000
http://www.givemebeats.com/

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Furniture Store — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:41:04 -0000

Agreed that social networking sites are the thing right now and no one can afford to miss that boat.

But dont denigrate Orkut, I am a bit of a fan myself. Just so happens that my friends and shool mates seem to have all congregated there.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

marshal sandler — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:50:09 -0000

Excellent article ! I think as Google keeps pumping Gmail with Apps everyone can use ! Gmail
may be in a great position as the vehicle that feeds the social networks their content ! No one as large as Google needs a Social Network their Brand Identity is established

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

wade — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:45:44 -0000

For all we know Google already has a top-secret SN in double-secret private beta now. If they don't, what the heck are they waiting for?

btw, if they release one, i would vote to name it Peeple

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Water Portal — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:32:27 -0000

Google could really come up with a brilliant social network with all its services integrated, Gmail, Gtalk, Blogger, Piaca and many other useful services it has as standalone products.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Iantrepreneur — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:15:34 -0000

wow good way at looking at it - yea google needs to let the baby orkut grow into something more seroious because social networking is hot hot hot

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Steven Bradley — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:15:42 -0000

Interesting take on the sale. I'm actually surprised Google hasn't already launched a social network. And I agree Okrut doesn't count.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Andy Beal — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:14:48 -0000

@Doug - MSFT might not life the comparison with Yahoo 360 ;-)

http://www.techcrunch.com/2...

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Doug Mehus — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:00:14 -0000

Windows Live Spaces is still a social network, much like Yahoo! 360. They just took a different approach, tying blogs, groups, networking, instant messaging and the like into one personal "hub". It's still larger than some of the ones you mentioned, Dogster and Bebo.

I recently deleted my own MySpace account because the interface is terrible and the back-end infrastructure (what large website uses Microsoft IIS as a web server, complete with *.cfm file extensions!?) is even worse coupled with a lack of friends and poor Canadian user adoption. Now, I only have Facebook and LinkedIn accounts and plan to keep it that way.

As far as Bebo goes though, what a terrible company. They're barely in the top 10 for most popular social networking websites yet their founder (who many describe as an obsessive, money-hungry publicity whore) tries to demand a billion dollars for his website. Until they lower their valuation to something reasonable, they won't get bought out and will go the way of Friendster (if they're lucky) or ZeroDegrees (if they aren't; that is, shut down with no advance warning). I'm putting a very generous valuation of $125 million on Bebo and not a dollar more.

Cheers,
Doug

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Andy Beal — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:01:34 -0000

@Jeff - kind of proves my point. Doesn't exactly capture mind share as a social network. It's more of a connection of blogs, than a true social network.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Owen Cutajar — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:57:45 -0000

But I want my Google implant TODAY!

Good post Andy, nice to see an analysis of the situation.

Re: Why Microsoft Needed Facebook & Google Didn’t

Jeff O'Connor — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:56:30 -0000

Excuse me, but if Windows Live Spaces isn't a social networking site (albeit a piss-poorly named one) with tens of millions of users, then what is?

I'll tell you what it isn't - it isn't a niche social hub for people whose native tongue is Portuguese.