MappingTheWeb //

[FriendFeed is the New Hot Sh*t] - Almost exactly a year ago (March 13th, 2007 to be exact), I wrote a post entitled “Twitter is Hot Sh*t Right Now”. Well, a year has passed and the Twitter hype continues to build. The skeptics are eating their words and micro-blogging continues to climb in popularity. This Internet phenomenon may very well be the future of personal blogging. So now what? What’s next? Let me introduce you to FriendFeed…

If you haven’t heard of or checked out FriendFeed yet, it is a must. This extremely useful, yet simple, service has caught fire and become very popular among the A-list tech bloggers. As was the case with Twitter, many think this short-term viral growth will subside. I’m not so sure.

What makes Facebook so viral and sticky? In other words, why do users continue to visit the site on a frequent basis? Answer: the news feed. They are constantly receiving new news about their friends’ activity. This is both interesting and useful. So why stop at Facebook? What if there was a universal news feed that could tie together all the services that your friends are using? This is the basis for FriendFeed.

Once I’ve added my friends, I can see new updates and changes on services like Twitter, Flickr, StumbleUpon, Ma.gnolia, Pownce, or a blog. Not only that, but I can reply and rate the content as well - all from the FriendFeed site. Very cool. The user experience is clean and intuitive. They’ve added only the necessary features and nothing more. I congratulate them on a job well done.

The only thing I don’t like about FriendFeed is their stereotypical web 2.0 logo… but I’ll let that one slide.

What are your initial thoughts on FriendFeed? 

[The Beauty of Organic Search Results] - Yes, I just called organic search results beautiful. The reason is simple. They drive free, qualified traffic. It doesn’t get any better than that. I’m a true believer in quality content and good page structure. From a corporate perspective, too little money is being put toward SEO. Its inorganic cousin, PPC, seems to be reaping in the bulk of the marketing budget. There must be a balance though.

I am extremely biased when it comes to search engine marketing. I think that most companies tend to overlook SEO in favour of PPC, as they assume that the latter provides more immediate, visual results and a better ROI. Little do they know, a well-executed SEO campaign can also provide immediate results in as little as a few days. Obviously, the upfront cost of optimization needs to be taken into consideration, but I still believe the long-term, residual benefits of SEO to be greater than those of a short-term PPC campaign.

In other words, an SEM budget should be weighted slightly toward PPC in the beginning, but transition to SEO over time. In the end, the ROI should be excellent, as organic search should be driving the majority of traffic.

[Effectiveness of Facebook Apps as a Marketing Tool] - A little while back, I asked readers to submit questions they would like me to answer or blog about. The first one I’d like to tackle was submitted by Mark Evans, who blogs at MarkEvansTech and serves as Director of Community of Canadian-based start-up PlanetEye. Mark wrote:

“What’s your take on the effectiveness of Facebook apps as a branding/marketing tool?”

My cliched first thought was, “Good question”. After giving it some further time and consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that, as a whole, Facebook apps are not a great marketing tool. Obviously this is a generalization and apps may prove to be a successful strategy for some companies. Let me explain my logic…

It’s all about perception.

Branding and positioning are an important part of any online strategy. Subsequently, solidifying status and credibility within an industry is essential. Still with me? The recent onslaught of Facebook apps has saturated the “marketplace”.  A lack of management on behalf of the social network has driven many to utter frustration with the highly-touted platform.

For this very reason, I think that the introduction of a Facebook app may be more detrimental than advantageous, in some cases, unless extreme caution and delicacy are exercised. A suitable Facebook app would have to provide compelling value and utility. Furthermore, there would have to be a certain level of fit with the exposed community of users.

My guess is that a majority will disagree with this train of thought, but I’m just giving my take on the situation.

In all honesty, I think that most apps are being created for amusement purposes - not as branding vehicles.  The ability to “poke” someone or write on their “FunWall” is great, but these dominant apps may reflect negatively upon your company if you are trying to portray a more professional, sophisticated image.

Jumping back to August 2007, I wrote a post about the short-term success and long-term failure of the platform. I still believe much of that post to be true. The effectiveness of apps has decreased significantly due to the surge of entrants.

I think that more users are starting to see things the same way as I do. For the most part, Facebook apps are more of a hassle than they’re worth.  They cause huge amounts of clutter and force users to scroll down long profile pages to find what they’re looking for. They’re also very distracting at times. What I find most annoying is the increased page load time. In other words, unless you’re creating an app for pure amusement or you happen to be in the business of “fun”, then Facebook apps are likely to be a poor marketing tool unless a cautious, very well sought out strategy is executed upon.

[When Will Twitter Be Acquired?] - Place your bets. The Twitter sweepstakes is about to begin…

My instincts tell me that a Twitter acquisition is in the near future. Potential acquisitor? Probably Google. It seems like a perfect fit with Blogger. In addition, the clean, simplistic look and feel of the micro-blogging leader lends itself well with other Google products.

Who knows though… Google may lose the race. But I think it’s only a matter of time before someone swipes this hot property. Yahoo is the obviously second choice. I could even see a bidding war erupt should rumours begin to circulate.

My guess is that the market would be willing to pay a hefty premium at this point in the game. Then again, I would wager that the company has already been approached, but is demanding a ridiculous sum (see “Facebook”). I await in eager anticipation…

So who’s the buyer? What’s the price tag? When will it happen? Any guesses?

[Yahoo’s Lemming Strategy] - Can someone explain to me Yahoo’s new “lemming” strategy? It seems that once a space catches fire, Yahoo scrambles to launch a low-budget copy of the industry leader. The lack of human and financial resources allocated to these initiatives is apparent. In the end, these offerings are bound to fail.

The two examples that immediately come to mind are Yahoo! Mash and Yahoo! FireEagle.

When Yahoo failed in its bid to acquire Facebook, the company realized it had to do something to capitalize on the explosive growth of the sector… and fast. Enter Yahoo! Mash. This afterthought of a product fails on all levels. The interface is ugly and the feature set is weak at best. There is no compelling reason why anyone abandon ship at Facebook or MySpace to join Yahoo! Mash.

Yesterday, Yahoo launched a BETA version of FireEagle. Though I have yet to try the service, I’ve heard mixed reviews. It is being touted as a location-based Twitter. After viewing the front page of the site, I can see why - the look and feel screams of Twitter. Obviously, Yahoo has recognized the potential of micro-blogging and made a decision to enter the space. Is it too late? Does the offering live up to expectations? It is too early to tell, but I instinctively have my doubts.

What we do know is this: there are two ways to enter an industry - build a product/service or acquire a company. It seems that Yahoo has focused on the latter in previous years (i.e. acquisitions of Flickr, del.icious, MyBlogLog). More recently however, the company has transitioned toward a more internal based approach (i.e. development and launch of Yahoo! Mash and Yahoo! FireEagle). Neither strategy seems to be overly successful thus far, although I would tend to favour the acquisition strategy in this case. It will be interesting to see whether Yahoo continues this “lemming” strategy or whether they revert back to acquisition mode.

What do you think of Yahoo’s new approach? Do you think they should stick with it or revert back? In general, how should they go about introducing/launching new products?