3 ms·

I have this theory that anything build by a network effect, can be undone by a network effect. I agree that no company ever gets flat out killed - well, not if

I have this theory that anything build by a network effect, can be undone by a network effect. I agree that no company ever gets flat out killed - well, not if they have a billion in cash and not in just a year or two. However, I don't think comparing Facebook to Google in the unkillable sense is correct. Google is far more unkillable than Facebook, because: A) You need to accumulate lots of data to even have a chance to beat Google. No algorithm you come up with will be competitive until you have a mound of data similar to theirs, and accumulating that data takes years. B) My friends leaving Google has little impact on me. So, with a Facebook, you can pick off a city or social group, and snowball that. That's exactly what Facebook did to MySpace, and there's no analog in beating Google. To beat Google, you need time, money, and it's a moving target. That's why the only serious contender is Bing. To beat Facebook, you need a better design, indomitable passion, and clever marketing. Really clever marketing. What is keeping you on Facebook is just the fact that they have your list of friends and family. I'm not saying Facebook is easy to beat, and I believe over time, they have accumulated some of the defenses that Google has. However, a company built on a network effect can die by a network effect. Easy come, easy go.

encoderer 16y ago
Interesting. What if somebody wanted to immensely improve one niche of search? Maybe become THE tool to use to find a very narrow and specific kind of information. I think there is a vector there that could be used against google.
IgorPartola 16y ago
Your theory is sound, but I think for the wrong reasons. The only way to kill a network effect product is with network effect. You cannot bribe 30M users. You cannot offer a marginally better product (e.g.: better privacy controls). You have to offer a different product that will not directly compete with Facebook, but will take eyeballs away from them. Think Farmville. Farmville is genious: it uses Facebook itself to get into people's brains and then they spend hours on it. Imagine if Farmville became just slightly more fun to play than to stalk your ex and her new boyfriend, etc. If you must create a social network to compete with Facebook, make it be a part of Facebook at first too. Integrate it. Make sure that it takes me zero effort to jump between Facebook and your Smashbook. Then start improving your Smashbook in ways that Facebook cannot or will not. Add those better privacy controls. Implement a better social model. Remove annoying ads. Basically, do what Gmail did to Hotmail: it uses the same system and I am not cut off from my friends if I switch, but I get to use better tools. But there is no way in hell that you can start a social network about collecting stamps and gradually outgrow Facebook. You may make a decent chunk of change on this, so it may be worthwhile, but it will not kill Facebook.
greyman 16y ago
You are right that it's a lot of work to beat Google in its own game, but what I realized recently is that Google as a text search service is not that essential for me as it used to be like 5 years ago. For example, now when I am searching for news, like I want to know what's new with wikileaks, I start my search on twitter, where I get more fresh and more diverse info. Or if I want to know about something I know very little about, I start on Wikipedia, etc. So while Google can be unkillable, other companies can make it less indispensable by providing completely new ways of searching for info.

encoderer 16y ago

Interesting. What if somebody wanted to immensely improve one niche of search? Maybe become THE tool to use to find a very narrow and specific kind of information. I think there is a vector there that could be used against google.

IgorPartola 16y ago

Your theory is sound, but I think for the wrong reasons. The only way to kill a network effect product is with network effect. You cannot bribe 30M users. You cannot offer a marginally better product (e.g.: better privacy controls). You have to offer a different product that will not directly compete with Facebook, but will take eyeballs away from them. Think Farmville. Farmville is genious: it uses Facebook itself to get into people's brains and then they spend hours on it. Imagine if Farmville became just slightly more fun to play than to stalk your ex and her new boyfriend, etc. If you must create a social network to compete with Facebook, make it be a part of Facebook at first too. Integrate it. Make sure that it takes me zero effort to jump between Facebook and your Smashbook. Then start improving your Smashbook in ways that Facebook cannot or will not. Add those better privacy controls. Implement a better social model. Remove annoying ads. Basically, do what Gmail did to Hotmail: it uses the same system and I am not cut off from my friends if I switch, but I get to use better tools. But there is no way in hell that you can start a social network about collecting stamps and gradually outgrow Facebook. You may make a decent chunk of change on this, so it may be worthwhile, but it will not kill Facebook.

greyman 16y ago

You are right that it's a lot of work to beat Google in its own game, but what I realized recently is that Google as a text search service is not that essential for me as it used to be like 5 years ago. For example, now when I am searching for news, like I want to know what's new with wikileaks, I start my search on twitter, where I get more fresh and more diverse info. Or if I want to know about something I know very little about, I start on Wikipedia, etc. So while Google can be unkillable, other companies can make it less indispensable by providing completely new ways of searching for info.