if every brand builds a social network that means at least another 3,000 networks worldwide doesn't it, how will people cope, how will they be financed, exciting to consider?
modemlooper
· 1 year ago
I work for a social media marketing company and we build social networks and blogs for brands. I do not think every company will jump on the band wagon as it only works if there is a lifestyle involved around the product. We currently have a blog for 24 Hour Fitness is centered around a consumers 3month fitness journey but I could easily see it expanded into a social network of fitness enthusiasts. www.24fitclub.com
Jamie
· 1 year ago
Forums and user profiles do not a social network make.
Mia
· 1 year ago
Some brands like Reebok have a good understanding of their user base and are leveraging their social network to effectively engage that community. Others like Starbucks have jumped onto the social bandwagon without any thought to how they can add value to their users.
Deborah
· 1 year ago
Shows what an evolving thing social networking is, like dot.coms and dot.bombs. Will be interesting to see how big corporations can pull off seeming non-corporate with such sites vs. something like Ravelry based on knitting with a young mom-pop group and knitting rock-stars (who would've thunk-it!) and who rations out how many can join per day among 1000s on their waiting list. Now don't go and overload their servers all at once...
Sav
· 1 year ago
I think one of the fundamental issues with adoption and success of brand driven social networks is the conflict of interest. If you compare a Starbucks' social network to the other generic coffee networks, they will typically have more usage because the 'Starbucks' logo on the top makes it feel like a marketing campaign. These networks would do better if the company invested in a new brand and drove the network separate from it's own brand. That would mean they would genuinely have to care about the users and the issue and not about profit.
Jake Lockley
· 1 year ago
Be fair now, don't you know social networks are the new black? Even if they aren't actually social networks but just sites that allows users to post information and messages.
Ben Strackany
· 1 year ago
I agree, I think many tighly branded or vertical SNSes might just become an expansion of forums, knowledgebases, or other standard and nearly-ubiquitous online communication features we see today.
Right now IMO two large barriers to user participation are 1) lack of focus (i.e. why should a user participate) and 2) ease of participation. Hopefully #2 will get easier as sites make it easier to contribute without being registered, or making registration as painless as possible via OpenID, an AJAX GreyBox in situ registration form, and/or the ability to import your existing online identity (avatars, interests, etc) from gravatar and/or other SNSes.
MaxGladwell
· 1 year ago
This is truly pushing the limits of the long tail of social networks. They can work b/c there are plenty of Prius owners and Starbucks fanatics to support these micro niches. However, it makes much more sense for companies to have branded environments within a Facebook, MySpace, or (better yet) a social network that focuses on their vertical...such as a Prius environment within an automotive network like www.carspace.com. Companies may have to have multiple branded environments. Pepsi might have one in www.blocksavvy.com for the urban market and another with MySpace that associates the brand with music and entertainment.
These new vertical social networks, as well as the big horizontals, need to start designing & offering environments with all of the tools and features that companies like Toyota and Pepsi need to build two-way communities. They'll want a certain level of customization and control. Neither MySpace nor Facebook currently offer enough of either...which is why companies start their own.
It mght be helpful to distinguish between a community (a bunch of people that probably don't know each other but share a common interest)and a social network (a network of links between people who actually know each other). These all sound like community sites.
norman
· 1 year ago
Community and Social Network is a big difference
MaxGladwell
· 1 year ago
Good point. In my view, social networks imply the basic features of friending, photo sharing, blogging, and such. They don't rely on any other content than the UGC provided by the members of the network. E-communities imply that the primary reason for existence is content that attracts people with in a common interest and may include forums to discuss. iVillage is a classic e-community. An e-community adds a social network when it adds the features of a social network.
But the lines between network and e-community are blurring as they both evolve.
Alex: Looks like a great solution. My point is that companies would be better served in building a branded network environment within, say, the Martha Stewart social network as opposed to a standalone one. Unlike Pepsi and Toyota, Martha sells advertising as a big part of its business model. They'd do well to offer (with your platform, of course) advertisers the added value of building a community (w/social networking features) within the Martha community, complete with a set of tools for control, customization, management, and a means of promoting it i.e. advertising. It's like an affinity group but much more robust.
RENE
· 1 year ago
in china thinks looks different When asked about the business model of the 360Quan.com ( Officially China's 2nd Largest Social Network ), Koolanoo Group Global President and CEO O. D. Kobo said the company’s current focus is not commercial profitability, but rather the development of what could be the dating site for China’s young people.
All Comments
www.24fitclub.com
If you compare a Starbucks' social network to the other generic coffee networks, they will typically have more usage because the 'Starbucks' logo on the top makes it feel like a marketing campaign.
These networks would do better if the company invested in a new brand and drove the network separate from it's own brand.
That would mean they would genuinely have to care about the users and the issue and not about profit.
Right now IMO two large barriers to user participation are 1) lack of focus (i.e. why should a user participate) and 2) ease of participation. Hopefully #2 will get easier as sites make it easier to contribute without being registered, or making registration as painless as possible via OpenID, an AJAX GreyBox in situ registration form, and/or the ability to import your existing online identity (avatars, interests, etc) from gravatar and/or other SNSes.
These new vertical social networks, as well as the big horizontals, need to start designing & offering environments with all of the tools and features that companies like Toyota and Pepsi need to build two-way communities. They'll want a certain level of customization and control. Neither MySpace nor Facebook currently offer enough of either...which is why companies start their own.
www.maxgladwell.com
But the lines between network and e-community are blurring as they both evolve.
Max Gladwell