MappingTheWeb //

Recent executive turmoil has landed Yahoo in the spotlight many times. This isn’t the kind of PR and publicity that any company wishes for. Obviously, changes and transition are in store for this Internet giant over the next year. But where should the focus be placed? How will short term strategy decisions affect long term goals? To be honest, I really have no idea at this point. I think we need to delve further into the strengths and weaknesses of the company to determine where emphasis needs to placed and where losses need to be cut…

Yahoo started out as a directory, then blossomed into a search engine. Today, most people would still consider Yahoo a search engine by all accounts. I do not believe this to be the case, although search obviously does play a big role in the success or demise of the company. In my mind, Yahoo is a services company. Unlike Google, which derives the majority of its revenue from search and advertising, Yahoo provides a vast array of services which diversify its revenue stream. We do know that Yahoo Search Marketing (i.e. the new Overture) does bring in large revenues. Having said that however, we also know that many other services drive huge revenues that Google (among others) fail to acknowledge. Examples of this include:

• Yahoo HotJobs 
• Yahoo Shopping (i.e. stores)
• Yahoo Dating and Personals
• Yahoo Autos
• Yahoo Travel

All of these areas drive revenues that are NOT advertising-based. This presents a significant opportunity, as well as the possibility cross-marketing and promotion. Evidence is apparent by the willingness of Yahoo users to spend money on services they find value in. Once this trust threshold can be reached, the sale of further services is quite possible. I guess what I’m trying to say is:

“Yahoo is NOT a search company. Search simply provides an entry way into Yahoo’s world of services.”

This does bring up an interesting point however. If Yahoo places less emphasis on search and continues to fall behind, then they are failing to provide that initial entry way or door. Yahoo must continue to allocate a reasonable amount of resources toward search to *at least* remain on par with the rest of the second-tier players (i.e. MSN, Ask, AOL). Failure to do so will not only affect the prospect of future users, but also the loyalty of current ones.

Many may argue that Yahoo should push the limits and throw huge amounts of resources into search in an attempt to thwart Google and create the next-generation search engine. My thought for those people is this: Yahoo has already established an image in the minds of consumer. The company has not positioned itself to be the best search engine, providing cutting-edge, relevant results. Their search technology is ‘good enough’ - it is the status quo. The company and brand would have to re-invent themselves to do so, and spend a ridiculous sum of money in the process. Even then, I still don’t think Yahoo could compete at a higher level. Google, on the other hand, is known as the leader is search. The company is globally recognized for its PageRank algorithm and relevant results. Positioning of the brand has already been established. Lastly, further evidence against the re-invention of Yahoo: the recent attempt at re-invention by Ask.

Whether Yahoo continues to focus on search or put more resources into other services is yet to be known. One thing is for certain - a strong action plan is need, and it is needed soon. The fate of the company will be strongly influenced by decisions to be made in the next year. Good luck to whatever management is left.

Everybody has their own list of web apps they CANNOT live without. These are the essential tools to daily life on the net. I find that my top apps tend to remain the same, although some changes do occur.

Anyways, here is MY list. Be sure to add your apps at the bottom…

10. Wikipedia - my source for information and research (PS. I know it’s not 100% accurate).

9. Digg - informative and entertainging news bits and articles.

8. Skype - allows me to keep in touch with friends, family, and contacts over IM or voice. 

7. Feedburner - keeps track of my RSS feeds and stats. 

6. Clicky - provides in-depth web analytics with a clean, usable interface.

5. iGoogle - displays all my RSS feeds; doubles as my search page. 

4. MSN Messenger / Hotmail - used for IM with friends; web-based e-mail. Ya, ya… I could use GMail, but all my friends use MSN Messenger and it integrates with Hotmail, so give me a break. 

3. Wordpress -  best blogging platform available, in my mind.

2. Firefox - my web browser of choice… obviously. 

1. Facebook - essential social network that keeps track of friends, family, and colleagues.

Just missed the list…

• YouTube - premiere video site on the net; this was tough to leave out of the top 10.
• Craigslist - used often, but on an inconsistent basis.
• Technorati - used for searching blogs quite often.
• Joost - I dabble from time to time…
• MyBlogLog - blog social network; used to use more, but it’s being overrun with SPAM.
• 9rules - my blog network; not so much a tool as it is a tight community.

So, that’s the basis for my life on the net. I’m sure many have similar apps of choice, while others have their own favourites. It will be interesting to look back at a post, such as this, in a year’s time to determine what changes have occurred in our online habits and behaviours. Which companies fell off the list? Which ones were added? The evolution of the Internet will no doubt affect the evolution of our ‘lists’, as new products and services crop up, while others fall by the wayside. Innovation is occurring at a blistering rate and no-one can remain at the top forever.

A limited number of first-time entrepreneurs hit it big and sell their company for millions. Some might call this luck. Less frequently is an entrepreneur able to replicate this feat and sell a second company for a considerable amount. Almost never is one able to do this for a third time. At this point, luck cannot be taken into consideration - a formula has been established.

Niklas Zennstrom co-founded both KaZaA and Skype, two wildly popular Internet successes. He’s on his way to a third success - maybe his biggest yet - with Joost.

A great article was published by BBC the other day. It profiled the mindset and thought process of Zennstrom. This Swedish genius is THE disrupter among disruptive technology disrupters. He identifies an industry with problems and short-comings, then launches a company in an all-out attack. In particular, he has a keen interest in the Internet communication and media areas, as all of his disrupters have spawned from these realms. Here is a simple breakdown:

• Music - KaZaA
• Telephone - Skype
• TV - Joost

What’s next? Something in the radio industry - along the lines of Last.fm or Pandora?

On a side note, his luck with five-letter company names is almost uncanny. Superstition? Strategy? Coincidence? Only Zennstrom really knows.

One thing is for sure. Zennstrom likes being in a position of power. He likes disrupting. Some might call him the shit-disturber of the online world. He is quoted as saying:

“For me, a disruptive technology is only worthwhile if it gives people something they didn’t have or couldn’t do before.”

His motivation and determination are inspirational. He conquers one area, then moves on to another - methodically and systematically. His quest to make things “faster, lighter, or cheaper” is a main driver and source of energy. His never-ending search for the next ‘big thing’ has never been centered around a given product or area, but rather a mentality. Simply put, he wants to give regular consumers a better way of doing something they’re already doing. Thus, he is not looking to re-invent the wheel - just expand upon it.

I know I rant about certain topics to no end, but there are certain things I feel passionate about. The semantic web is one of them. I glorify links and a static web. I’m boring and lame. Call me Mr. Web 1.0. Having said that, I focus on simplicity and a stream-lined user experience. Practicality and logic are two ideals that I admire when perusing a site.

Directories are a great business model. They have a built-in:

• revenue model (i.e. premium listing)
• marketing mechanism (i.e. SEO)

The hierarchical nature of the system makes it easy for users to find what they are looking for. Furthermore, this set-up also facilitates search engine crawling, ensuring that all pages are indexed.

Directories fulfill all the requirements of a site well-optimized for search engines. Page titles, URLs (in many cases), META tags, headers, page content, and anchor text are all well-described by default.

Directories are also ideal for anything ‘local’. Regional sites have proven the model. The YellowPages and online classified ad sites, like Craigslist, function much in the same way. They are useful to the non-techie and provide offline value.

I find directories to be similar to forums and discussion boards from a user-participation stand-point. They both rely highly on social media and “crowd-sourcing” to aggregate content and data. Users and site visitors are submitting info to add value to the site or discussion, or to provide exposure for a given cause. In any case, the directory ’system’ takes care of the work, leaving little human labour to deal with site functionality. This allows the site to scale with very little additional manpower or resources needed. It is automatic.

So next time you’re conjuring up an idea for a web business, forget the ’sexy’ social networks and web 2.0 hype. Think simple, think straight-forward, think directories.

Individuals who partake in the buying and selling of domain names are called “domainers”. These individuals can also create revenues by generating traffic to the given properties, then maxizing the ad revenue per page view. By producing tailored landing pages and optimizing for search engines, the influx of traffic can be constant and ongoing, creating a flow of income.

The former tactic sounds very similar to the real world and real estate investing. Essentially, they are the same thing. In either case, the investor is purchasing some ‘property’ in hopes that it will increase in value. Subsequently, a sale will produce a capital gain. 

Many of these investors possess comprehensive portfolios of domain names, containing tens of thousands of names or more. The names range from high-end .com properties to smaller, more niche, long tail offerings. As mentioned above, these fortune-seekers can generate revenue not only via a sale, but also via traffic.

World famous domainers include:

• Yun Ye - probably the most famous domainer; Vancouver man who sold this 100,000+ domain portfolio to Marchex for $164 million in 2004
• Frank Schilling - his sites apparently generate 1% of all Yahoo ad revenues, or over $30 million a year
• Rick Schwartz - multi-millionaire who turned $1,800 into over $20 million; has owned such domains as men.com and porno.com

The domain investing world is a very interesting space that I would like to learn more about. It is a very underground, low profile industry due to its (sometimes) unethical and shifty nature. In any case, it is captivating and opens your mind to a whole new world of business on the Internet.

Note: I would highly recommend reading this article on domain investing. It is not only entertaining, but very educating.