Yahoo 360 and the perils of early adoption

Posted on August 30, 2006 by JoeDuck

I’m was messing around *a little* with Yahoo!’s excellent social networking application “Yahoo 360”, wondering why it’s not more popular and why I’m not spending more time with it. They are of course related, since widespread adoption is going to justify more of a committment from me and until I see that happening I can’t “afford” to spend time building up contacts and 360 groups only to find nobody else is using it. I had a similar experience with LinkedIn which is also very good but seems narrowly focused more on those who are looking for work, hiring people, etc rather than lazy pseudo-tech bums like me who are happy where we are.

I’d like to keep up with Jeff Clavier and the Silicon Valley Search SIG group, but the 360 group is not active at 360…yet. I do think Yahoo’s built a great environment for virtual biz “meetings” and it may spring to life. It’s totally understandable that the SIG is not using this much – they also would need to see a “critical mass” of interest and commitment to become more involved.

In terms of utility Yahoo 360 seems to be in what I’d think would be a sweet spot – somewhere between Myspace’s legions of ranting teenagers and LinkedIn’s almost elitist business formality and (at least for now) narrow focus on technology workers.

I don’t spend much time on any single application – even my own sites which really need the TLC not to mention major overhauling, but to me 360 is really getting close to the right social networking environment if it had widespread adoption.

Microsoft ads will monetize Facebook Faces

Posted on August 24, 2006 by JoeDuck

Nice play by Microsoft to capture future users, though I’m still very intrigued that all these models can thrive by giving users a very modest number of tools to put themselves online, providing common space for people, and then keeping all the money. I don’t mind *sharing* some revenue with big players but I think it’s remarkable how people simply let the big players nab all the bucks that are the result of their collective …. efforts.

Even *current* Myspacers, most of whom are young teens, envy Facebook accounts which are more restrictive and targeted. I’d guess Facebook eyeballs will be worth 2+ times Myspace Eyeballs in terms of advertising value – maybe much more.

Why is everybody writing off MS and bearish on Yahoo? Once they stop being idiotic they’ll realize they have the same sized audience as Google and will monetize that viewership.

With Vista’s launch, MS will control viewers in ways only their lawyers know for sure.

Google’s at 60% of the search market. That’s probably about as high as it will ever go.

WordPress noindex / nofollow problem solved

Posted on August 23, 2006 by JoeDuck

Last week I noticed my precious little blog posts, which have been nicely indexed by Google, were dropping out of the index like flies. Of course I should have checked the source code but it took Aaron’s note today to make me realize the blog was placing a noindex/nofollow everywhere, making it impossible to get indexed.

Appears this also happened to the illustrious Matt Mullenweg of WordPress fame, and there I learned to flip the “privacy” feature back to allow searches in.

To fix the WordPress NOINDEX NOFOLLOW problem click DASHBOARD > OPTIONS > PRIVACY and select to allow search engines.

I’m still a bit concerned that somebody may have done this maliciously, but never attribute to malice that which can be reasonably attributed to stupidity (or some bug in the system).

Anyway, who would stoop so low? Duck hunters?

Google Stock Value? Ask the insider traders?

Posted on August 21, 2006 by JoeDuck

Bloomberg reports something very interesting a few days ago:

Nevertheless, it is remarkable that not a single Google insider has bought a single share of the company in the 18 months since the IPO lock-ups expired, according to data compiled by Bloomberg …

At first glance this seemed more conspicuous than it really is. Although I think Google is overvalued, insiders like Brin or Page who have tens of millions of shares generally should NOT buy shares regardless of how bullish they are on the company. This is simple diversification of one’s worth. For these guys their worth was almost entirely tied up in Google stock and they were right to diversify. Thus this is simply good fiscal management, not a statement about what they think the prospects are for Google in the long term.

Does Web 2.0 success flow from the seven deadly sins?

Posted on August 20, 2006 by JoeDuck

Yahoo reports a neat quote by Reid Hoffman who founded LinkedIn.com the business networking site and has invested in many other 2.0 companies. He was asked for investment criteria and replied: “Which of the seven deadly sins does it appeal to?”

Let’s review the seven deadly sins to see if internet success stems from addressing them.
Thanks to deadlysins.com for this summary of the seven deadly sins:
Pride is excessive belief in one’s own abilities, that interferes with the individual’s recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.

Envy is the desire for others’ traits, status, abilities, or situation.

Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.

Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.

Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.

Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.

Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.

OK, we’ve got a problem. I suppose you could argue that Google and Yahoo are not “2.0” companies, but clearly the big online money is not coming from the sins as much as from *search* which may be indirectly related to the sins as in people searching for sins, but I think the seven sins criteria falls short in favor of simple curiosity, socializing, and habituation (~aka branding) criteria which drive the top sites like Myspace, Google, and Yahoo and can be expected to drive future 2.0 successes.

Yahoo! too much 2.0 can be a … confusing…. thing.

Posted on August 19, 2006 by JoeDuck

Awhile back I failed to make my point about Yahoo doing “too good” a job at 2.0 for their own good, but now I see they are back at it again. Yahoo Photos looks like some really good stuff, and if I remember correctly they have a huge library of pix and a user base that is something like 10x greater than Flickr. But I’m already confused. Yahoo owns Flickr, which is a great application. Are they expecting Flickr users – and more importantly developers of picture applications – to switch to Yahoo Photos? Why? Are they rebranding here? Sure I could spend a little time trying to answer these questions but this is not high on the list. I know Flickr and love it and I’ll use it until further notice.

My earlier point was that offering people too many choices, or unclear choices, gets in the way of people *accessing* those quality innovations. One of Google’s virtues has been to offer simple, targeted solutions. MSNs vice has been to offer cumbersome, bloated and confusing applications which change names every 6 months.

Yahoo, please follow the Google “instructions for use should be obvious and intuitive” plan.

Google v. Kinderstart ing over again in September

Posted on August 18, 2006 by JoeDuck

The Google vs Kinderstart Lawsuit was dismissed though judge Fogel suggested that if Kinderstart can show a case of “manual intervention” by Google the outcome might be different and it’s now clear they’ll refile in September, probably as a class action. If the judge means they only need to show that Google’s done manual intervention *in any case* then this is going to get interesting, because everybody in SEO knows that Matt’s spam team routinely zaps sites that violate guidelines from the index. I doubt this was Kinderstart’s problem though – rather a severe algorithmic downranking that many sites have suffered over the past few years. However the Google lawyers may have failed to understand the nuances of the algorithm vs violations and how humans interface with this at Google (I think no single person knows everything over there). Thus if the judge felt Google claimed “no manual intervention whatsoever” then I think he might get pissed to know how often violating sites get killed off.

If this is any indication of the thinking that could guide the decisions I have no idea what’s going to happen here.

If Scoble is worried, your 2.0 should worry too.

Posted on August 18, 2006 by JoeDuck

Robert’s concerned about potential failures of Web 2.0 companies. He’s one of the best connected online people and his departure from Microsoft last month to join podtech signalled some *optimism* about the potential of Web 2.0. Now that he’s in the trenches with other 2.0 startups it makes me nervous to hear him worry, though I think his concerns are legitimate and notable.

To me a key question remains unanswered, and relates to how people will relate to community niches which I predict will dominate the future of online activity, though I’m not sure how search will fit into the mix and it may continue to generate most of the revenues.

Will people primarily:

1) Join online communities as they grow up organically from the ground up ?
(e.g. Myspace, Facebook, PlentyofFish, Flickr)

2) Join communities that they are directed to via advertising and other activities at Google, Yahoo, MSN, AOL?
(e.g. Yahoo360)

3) Start with 1 and finish with 2 after the big company aquires the 2.0 company?

There are other possibilities but I think option 3 is going to be the pattern we’ll see for most companies. FOX’s aquisition of Myspace and Yahoo’s of Flickr suggest that the big guys may just wait to see what creamy companies rise to the top and skim them off. This experimental approach seems logical given the very high level of uncertainty associated with all things online.

Travel peeps – 1 generation = internet peeps

Posted on August 11, 2006 by JoeDuck

Asked about my CA trip I noted that my second Google party was not as fun as the first. Free (good) beer and mini burgers only go so far. I think the magic of Silicon Valley is wearing off – in fact this was my second trip down in 4 weeks with a Virginia reunion in between, a nice trip to the ol’ Virginia roots and relatives in the Shenandoah Valley.
There was a fun highlight of being in on a conversation between Google and Microsoft’s key search guys at the Google Party, though no spectacular SEO insights came out of it other than unmasking the main MSNdude poster at WMW (who was talking to GoogleGuy).

One thing I noted is how travel industry folks tend to be 1) friendlier than internet peeps, 2) older, often by a generation, and 3) lacking at internet events. This may serve me well as I push ahead with some travel ideas where I’ll be mashing up some databases with flickr, google video, and maps. I think the Travel industry is so mired in the mythologies surrounding print and TV advertising that it will literally take a new generation of travel professionals to realize the lost online opportunities. With the new sites I’ll be putting more of my money where my mouth is.