hostgator coupon July 2014 hostgator coupon 2014 June Hostgator coupon June 2014 Dreamhost promo code 2014 our business news > first class business
Joseph Smarr » Winning Market Share in the Sharing Market

Main menu:

Add to Google

Subscribe via e-mail:

insurance types cosmetics today fitness animals automobile reviews business money buy jewellery finance loans home helps> insurance companies in market finance news medical product money us technology in finance time roof repairing places where cook recipes business ideas business pay buy insurance car price in compamy marketing company guide cosmetics product diet info healthy live samples of business plan home decoration tech news auto insurance home improvement online business tips personal loans product reviews security types top business list top company list home tricks weight loss help what kind of business should i start business letter format business case template general business business type it security what is a good business to start health loss business me magazine news

business ideas

Site search


January 2012
« Jul    


Winning Market Share in the Sharing Market

[Usual disclaimer: I currently work for Google on Google+ (which I think is awesome), but as always the thoughts on this blog are purely my personal opinion as a lifelong technology lover and builder.]

At the core of innovation in social networking is the competition to be a user’s tool of choice when they have something to share. Most people go to social networks because their friends are sharing there, and there is an inherit scarcity to compete for because most people aren’t willing to share something more than once (some may syndicate their content elsewhere, if permitted, but the original content is usually shared on a single service). Thus every time people are moved to share, they must choose which tool to use (if any)–a social network, via email/sms, etc.

Conventional wisdom holds that the main factor determining where a user will share is audience size (i.e. where they have the most friends/followers, which for most people today means Facebook or Twitter), but the successful rise of services like Foursquare, Instagram, Path, Tumblr, and Google+ shows that there’s more to the story. Despite the continued cries of “it’s game-over already for social networking” or “these services are all the same”, I don’t think that’s the case at all, and apparently I’m not alone.

These newer services are all getting people to share on them, even though in most cases those users are sharing to a smaller audience than they could reach on Facebook or Twitter. What’s going on here? It seems to me that these services have all realized that the competition for sharing is about more than audience size, and in particular includes the following additional two axes:

  • Ease of sharing to a more specific/targeted audience
  • Ease of sharing more tailored/beautiful content

Sharing to a more specific/targeted audience sounds like the opposite of “sharing where all of my friends/followers already are”, but not everything we say is meant to be heard by everyone. In fact, when I ask people why they don’t share more online, two of the most frequent responses I get have to do with having too much audience: privacy and relevance. Sometimes you don’t want to share something broadly because it’s too personal or sensitive, and sometimes you just don’t want to bug everyone. In both cases, services that help you share more narrowly and with more precision can “win your business” when you otherwise would have shared reluctantly or not at all.

Foursquare, Path, and Google+ (and email) are all good examples of this. Sharing your current location can be both sensitive and noisy, but on foursquare most people maintain a smaller and more highly trusted list of friends, and everyone there has also chosen to use the service for this purpose. Thus it wins on both privacy and relevance, whereas Facebook Places has largely failed to compete, in part because people have too many friends there. Similarly, Path encourages you to only share to your closest set of friends and family, and thus you feel free to share more, both because you trust who’s seeing your information, and because they’re less likely to feel you’re “spamming them” if they’re close to you. And by letting you share to different circles (or publicly) each time you post, Google+ lets you tune both the privacy and relevance of your audience each time you have something to say. Google+ users routinely post to several distinct audiences, showing that we all have more to say if we can easily control who’s listening.

Sharing more tailored/beautiful content is in theory orthogonal to audience size/control, but it’s another instance in which smaller services often have an advantage, because they can specialize in helping users quickly craft and share content that is richer and more visually delightful than they could easily do on a larger and more generic social network. This is an effective axis for competition in sharing because we all want to express ourselves in a way that’s compelling and likely to evoke delight and reaction from our friends/followers. So services that help you look good can again “win your business” when you otherwise would have shared something generic or not at all.

Instagram and Tumblr jump out from my list above as services that have attracted users because they help you “look good for less”, but actually all five services have succeeded here to some extent. A foursquare check-in has rich metadata about the place you’re visiting, so it’s a more meaningful way to share than simply saying “I’m eating at Cafe Gibraltar”. Instagram lets you apply cool filters to your photos, and more importantly IMO, constrains the sharing experience to only be a single photo with a short caption (thus further encouraging this type of sharing). Path just looks beautiful end-to-end, which entices you to live in their world, and they also add lovely touches like displaying the local weather next to your shared moments or letting you easily share when you went to bed and woke up (and how much sleep you got). Again, these are all things you could share elsewhere, but it just feels better and more natural on these more tailored services. Tumblr is “just another blogging tool” in some ways, but its beautiful templates and its focus on quickly reblogging other content along with a quick message has led to an explosion of people starting up their own “tumblelogs”. And on Google+, one of the reasons a thriving photography community quickly formed is just that photos are displayed in a more compelling and engaging way than elsewhere.

The future of social networking will be largely about making it easier to share richer content with a more relevant audience. Some already decry the current “information overload” on social networks, but I would argue that (a) many/most of the meaningful moments in the lives of people I care about are still going un-shared (mainly because it’s too hard), (b) the feeling of overload largely comes from the low “signal-to-noise ratio” of posts shared today (owing to the lack of easy audience targeting), and (c) the content shared today is largely generic and homogeneous, thus it’s harder to pick out the interesting bits at the times when its most relevant. But as long as entrepreneurs can think up new ways to make it easier to capture and share the moments of your life (and the things you find interesting) in beautiful, high fidelity, and make it easier to share those moments with just the right people at the right time, we’ll soon look back on the current state of social networking with the same wistful bemusement we cast today on brick-sized feature phones and black-and-white personal computers. Let’s get to it!

  • Dave Clarke

    “The future of social networking will be largely about making it easier to share richer content with a more relevant audience.”

    Agreed. My friends are in different places online so I share where appropriate. This is no different to offline where I meet up and share stuff with friends in different places.

  • Todd Masonis

    For me, I don’t think ease of sharing is really the main motivator, instead it’s the feedback you get after sharing. It takes some amount of work (however small) to share something and you receive a nice dopamine response when some likes, comments, or retweets something you shared. And certainly if you take the time to write a long, thought-out post (like this one), it’s the comments and re-shares that are going to dictate whether it was a positive experience and you will do it again. Certainly if you get none, you are unlikely to keep it up.

    I think maybe instead you should look at the rise of sharing based on the ease of getting positive feedback — both the amount and from whom. There are definitely people I care more about in my network and not everyone is equal, so getting me the right sort of validation for my shares is key.

  • Joseph Smarr

    Yep, definitely a good point. And you’d think that “size of audience” would best correlate with “amount of feedback received”, but a) I find it’s most important to get “some” feedback (i.e. getting any comments is great, then it tails off as you get more in terms of perceived reward), and b) getting feedback from people you know and care about (like your comment!) is a lot more rewarding than getting feedback from strangers/followers (tho the latter is still nice), so smaller networks may allow more “quality over quantity” of feedback. In this regard, Google+ is my favorite place to share (perhaps not surprising, heh) because I can post some things to close friends/family and get their feedback (high-value, but low quantity), and I can post other things publicly and get a lot of feedback from people I don’t know but am glad to hear from topically.

  • chengwenxia

    Chanel Factory
    Chanel Outlet
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    Chanel Factory Store
    chanel handbags outlet
    chanel handbags outlet online
    chanel factory outlet store
    replica chanel watches
    replica chanel sunglasses
    cheap chanel bags
    chanel handbags low price
    Chanel 2.55 Classic Handbags
    Replica Chanel 2.55 Classic Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel 2.55 bags
    fake Chanel 2.55 Classic handbags
    Classic Chanel 2.55 handbags knockoff
    Chanel 2.55 Reissue Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    Replica Chanel 2.55 Reissue Handbags
    fake Chanel 2.55 Reissue handbags
    hanel 2.55 handbags knockoff
    replica Chanel 2.55 Reissue bags
    Replica Chanel Belts
    Replica Chanel Leather Belts
    fake chanel Belts
    chanel Belts knockoff
    chanel Belts knockoff from china
    Replica Chanel Leather Belts Wholesale
    Replica Chanel Cambon Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel Cambon bags
    fake Chanel Cambon handbags
    Chanel Cambon handbags knockoff
    Replica Chanel Clutch Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel Clutch bags
    fake Chanel Clutch handbags
    Chanel Clutch handbags knockoff
    Chanel Clutch handbags knockoff from china
    Replica Chanel Coco Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel Coco bags
    fake Chanel Coco handbags
    Chanel Coco handbags knockoff
    Chanel Coco handbags knockoff from china
    Chanel Handbags 2010 Replica
    Cheap Chanel Handbags 2010
    replica Chanel Handbags 2010
    fake Chanel Handbags 2010
    Chanel bags 2010 knockoff
    Chanel bags 2010 knockoff from china
    Chanel Handbags 2011 Replica
    Cheap Chanel Handbags 2011
    replica Chanel Handbags 2011
    fake Chanel Handbags 2011
    Chanel bags 2011 knockoff
    Chanel bags 2011 knockoff from china
    Chanel Handbags 2012 Replica
    Cheap Chanel Handbags 2012
    replica Chanel Handbags 2012
    fake Chanel Handbags 2012
    Chanel bags 2012 knockoff
    Chanel bags 2012 knockoff from china
    Cheapest Chanel Ipad 2 Cases
    Discount Chanel Ipad 2 Case
    replica Chanel Ipad 2 Case
    fake Chanel Ipad 2 Covers
    Chanel Ipad 2 Case knockoff
    Chanel Ipad 2 Case knockoff from china
    Cheapest Chanel Iphone 4 Cases
    Discount Chanel Iphone 4 Case
    replica Chanel Iphone 4 Covers
    fake Chanel Iphone 4 Case
    Chanel Iphone 4 Case knockoff
    Chanel Iphone 4 Case knockoff from china
    Cheap Chanel Ladies Watches
    Replica Chanel Ladies Timepieces
    Chanel Ladies Watches replica
    fake Chanel Ladies Watches
    Chanel Ladies Watches knockoff
    Chanel Ladies Watches knockoff from china
    Cheap Chanel Mens Watches
    Replica Chanel Mens Timepieces
    Chanel Mens Watches replica
    fake Chanel Mens Watches
    Chanel Mens Watches knockoff
    Chanel Mens Watches knockoff from china
    Replica Chanel Mini Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel Mini bags
    fake Chanel Mini handbags
    Chanel Mini handbags knockoff
    Chanel Mini handbags knockoff from china
    Chanel Sunglasses 2012
    Chanel Sunglasses 2012 Sale
    Cheap Chanel Sunglasses
    Cheap Chanel Sunglasses Online
    replica Chanel Sunglasses 2012
    fake 2012 Chanel Sunglasses
    Chanel Sunglasses knockoff from china
    Replica Chanel Tote Handbags
    Chanel Factory Outlet
    replica Chanel Tote bags
    fake Chanel Tote handbags
    Chanel Tote handbags knockoff
    Chanel Tote handbags knockoff from china
    Cheap Replica Chanel Wallets
    Chanel Wallets Outlet
    Chanel Wallets Outlet Store
    replica Chanel Purses
    fake Chanel Wallets
    Chanel Wallets knockoff
    Chanel Wallets knockoff from china
    Cheap Chanel Bags 2012
    Cheap Chanel Bags Replica
    replica Cheap Chanel Bags
    fake Cheap Chanel Bags
    Cheap Chanel Bags knockoff
    Cheap Chanel Bags knockoff from china
    chanel bags
    chanel bags replica
    chanel handbags
    Replica Chanel Bags
    Cheap Chanel Handbags
    Chanel Bags Sale
    Chanel Handbags Store
    discount chanel bags
    chanel bags outlet
    cheap chanel bag
    fake handbags chanel
    chanel bags online
    chanel bags free shipping
    chanel handbags free shipping
    Replica Chanel Bags Online

  • Pareja Mane

     Great post keep up the good work

  • esperent matanda

    plaise english not explique