The problem I see with this approach of monetizing Twitter accounts (and yes, possibly monetizing Twitter if any power users will agree to participate in revenue sharing with Twitter) is that the property offered does not seem to provide any real value to the advertiser. The background image is large but why would I need to visit pages of people I follow after actually subscribing to them? I don't know, maybe if I need to find something important on their pages while I was offline, but that really happens rarely. Thumbnail images sound better to me - at least they are shown even when the followers read the tweets in a desktop client like Twhirl. But in addition to them being tiny and, thus, only suitable for icons, rarely logos, they don't really allow for the only option that could add value in terms of traffic to the advertiser's page - linking back to the page. So if I was thinking about advertising my company like this, I'd really need to think it twice as it only works to a certain extent for brand awareness, not traffic.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
You're right, in a sense, Svetlana. But when you're talking about power users, you have to imagine that a measurable percentage of the 1000+ folks that follow me, for instance, hit my profile page each day. Who knows why - perhaps they are sending me a DM, perhaps they want to see my updated profile. Perhaps they're a new user.
But if I suddenly have branding associated with my page that wasn't there before, don't you think that would cause a stir? What if Leo Laporte or Kevin Rose did it with their many more thousands of followers than I? Suddenly you're talking about something that becomes a news story.
This only works for power users, I realize. But if someone, at least in this current Twitter environment, does this, it's effective marketing, in my opinion.
Rodney_Rumford
· 1 year ago
Ummmm. Terrible idea. What if the high bidder is a spammer or porn promoter or something that you would rather not be associated with?? I guess if you want to rent your brand out for a month to make a few bucks that is fine.
By the way people rarely go to your main twitter page if they are already following you. The real value is in posts that the twitter user will tweet to promote a product or service. ;)
This is getting nearer to a concept that is actually a few years from becoming real but it centers around what I call "My Social CPM Value".
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
With most ad deals, you reserve the right to refuse service. This is brand advertising, after all, not a CPC situation. If this were my auction, I'd make that clear from the outset - the winning bidder's ad campaign is subject to approval.
They aren't buying the account from me. Just renting space. Renters need to be good tenants.
Formguy
· 1 year ago
Interesting article - but I have to agree with others - Mark, I do follow you but haven't been back to your page since the day I started following.
Sure you might get new people everyday but the impressions and penetration of the ad wouldn't seem to be worth the cost. Maybe as a throwaway in a bigger ad program but not as a primary way to gain eyeballs.
Michael Chin
· 1 year ago
Clever. More interesting than the images and the background, etc., is: "I average about 8-10 outbound ‘tweets’ a day, and your brand would be represented in each."
Does that mean that the brand is represented in the content of the tweet or by association?
If most people use Twitter via SMS, Twhirl, IM (BRING IT BACK!!!) isn't that where the value is? What's the line there for Ian?
Is there more value in the conversation itself vs a person's profile page?
SocialBang Chat
· 1 year ago
you could also add a "sponsered by theluckywinner" to the end of each tweet, although that will eat into your 140 characters :)
Evan Williams
· 1 year ago
Thanks for the idea. I'm not particularly optimistic about this as an overall business model for Twitter. For one thing, the percentage of users whom this would apply to is very tiny. Twitter is meant to be a communications tool for the masses. We love the Scobles and other power users, but they're kind of anomolies (by definition). The the percentage of these users who wanted to do this is even smaller -- and Twitter's share of that is smaller yet. And that's assuming this model even works.
That said, we're cool with people monetizing their own use of Twitter, in general (as long as they're above-board about it). Because it's all opt-in, if people are annoyed or not getting value, unfollow is easy.
As a side note, and for the record, while we don't mind the community brainstorming, we're not in desperate search for a business model. We have some ideas we'll try out when the time is right, but Twitter isn't going to go away for lack of one any time soon (nor will reliability issues be solved with one).
Lastly, please stop perpetuating the "Scoble is the reason that Twitter is failing" myth. We've not said that. Our system has been the problem -- and we're working on it! :)
Thanks.
Glen Stansberry
· 1 year ago
You're a champ Ev. I think that one of the biggest mistakes startups make is implementing a business model too soon. With a site like Twitter, where there are a multitude of ways to monetize, it's hard to pick the best one (or 2).
Good for you for sticking to your guns.
Ian Schafer
· 1 year ago
Good points, Ev. All of them.
As a matter of fact, I'm not actually just trying to draw attention to monetizing twitter (I trust you have that under control), but social media in general.
Am I the only person who thinks the Twitter.jp/Toyota deal is genius?
Walt Ribeiro
· 1 year ago
Interesting business models. I enjoy the community brainstorm :)
I love twitter, I find it to be a great site!
vaspers the grate
· 1 year ago
I agree with all that Ev says. I think some small text advertisements in the right sidebar of Twitter would not be intrusive or distracting. They could go under Stats or People. Even a discrete linked logo might be okay.
While I like experimenting with other services like Plurk, Pownce, and Jaiku, I must admit that, for its occasional glitches and downtimes, Twitter reigns supreme.
The simplicity is superb.
Thanks Evan and Biz for this universal communication tool, as revolutionary as Blogger was, which remains the best blog software in the world.
vaspers the grate
· 1 year ago
I meant "in spite of its occasional glitches and downtimes".
I have complained about Twitter in the past, but I have relaxed lately, since so many other socnets, live video streams, and other tools are experiencing some real problems lately.
"We have nothing to fear but success (ie, scaling) itself."
Andrea
· 1 year ago
I think if you want to monetize Twitter you don't have to try to sell away parts of it. Who's going to en up seeing your twitter home more the once or twice in a lifetime? You rather have to exploit its presence into your target market in order to spread the word about other services you can monetize (the point is: what?!?).
In other words, I think it's a good sidekick to a more central monetizable service, but it's not good as an ads system itself, since it's easy for the user to get away or bored, with all the other tweets out there.
Why should I follow a tweetstream when it's packed with ads, unless it provides me with a good service or I get paid for it?
My two cents, A.
zeroinfluencer
· 1 year ago
Would this be a good time to mention the TwitterFund?
Even if it doesn't raise loads of money (compared to the $15M VC cash recently injected), it's a good experiment in a community's desire to help something the community wants to succeed, to do so.
Formguy
· 1 year ago
@chrisreed - no offense if Twitter can't fix its problems with 15 mill in VC than I don't think Twitterfund is going to help them.
While I think it is an interesting idea and study on community I think this is much of what's wrong with "Web 2.0"
There have to be sound business models to making a company or service - otherwise let them succeed or fail on their own. Twitter is great - I'm an addict - but if I had to pay would I...maybe/maybe not? Asking a community to donate money to make it scale/work is silly - that's what the app should do in the first place - WORK!
Diane Guercio
· 6 months ago
I think that the value for an advertiser lies in the buzz surrounding the transaction, as Mark had said. Because this type of transaction is still rare, people will likely follow the renter (if only for a short time) to see exactly what it's all about. I am going to rent out my space for a month to benefit the TwitterQueens, who are having an event in NYC and need sponsorship. See you on Ebay!
All Comments
But if I suddenly have branding associated with my page that wasn't there before, don't you think that would cause a stir? What if Leo Laporte or Kevin Rose did it with their many more thousands of followers than I? Suddenly you're talking about something that becomes a news story.
This only works for power users, I realize. But if someone, at least in this current Twitter environment, does this, it's effective marketing, in my opinion.
By the way people rarely go to your main twitter page if they are already following you. The real value is in posts that the twitter user will tweet to promote a product or service. ;)
This is getting nearer to a concept that is actually a few years from becoming real but it centers around what I call "My Social CPM Value".
They aren't buying the account from me. Just renting space. Renters need to be good tenants.
Sure you might get new people everyday but the impressions and penetration of the ad wouldn't seem to be worth the cost. Maybe as a throwaway in a bigger ad program but not as a primary way to gain eyeballs.
Does that mean that the brand is represented in the content of the tweet or by association?
If most people use Twitter via SMS, Twhirl, IM (BRING IT BACK!!!) isn't that where the value is? What's the line there for Ian?
Is there more value in the conversation itself vs a person's profile page?
That said, we're cool with people monetizing their own use of Twitter, in general (as long as they're above-board about it). Because it's all opt-in, if people are annoyed or not getting value, unfollow is easy.
As a side note, and for the record, while we don't mind the community brainstorming, we're not in desperate search for a business model. We have some ideas we'll try out when the time is right, but Twitter isn't going to go away for lack of one any time soon (nor will reliability issues be solved with one).
Lastly, please stop perpetuating the "Scoble is the reason that Twitter is failing" myth. We've not said that. Our system has been the problem -- and we're working on it! :)
Thanks.
Good for you for sticking to your guns.
As a matter of fact, I'm not actually just trying to draw attention to monetizing twitter (I trust you have that under control), but social media in general.
It's kind of a follow up to a column I wrote here: http://adage.com/digitalnext/post?article_id=12...
But I love having this conversation...
I love twitter, I find it to be a great site!
While I like experimenting with other services like Plurk, Pownce, and Jaiku, I must admit that, for its occasional glitches and downtimes, Twitter reigns supreme.
The simplicity is superb.
Thanks Evan and Biz for this universal communication tool, as revolutionary as Blogger was, which remains the best blog software in the world.
I have complained about Twitter in the past, but I have relaxed lately, since so many other socnets, live video streams, and other tools are experiencing some real problems lately.
"We have nothing to fear but success (ie, scaling) itself."
In other words, I think it's a good sidekick to a more central monetizable service, but it's not good as an ads system itself, since it's easy for the user to get away or bored, with all the other tweets out there.
Why should I follow a tweetstream when it's packed with ads, unless it provides me with a good service or I get paid for it?
My two cents,
A.
http://www.twitterfund.com/
I would be okay with that.
But the concept of users/fans of something donating a bit of cash to improve it really appeals.
But I would say that - it's partly why I built http://www.twitterfund.com
Even if it doesn't raise loads of money (compared to the $15M VC cash recently injected), it's a good experiment in a community's desire to help something the community wants to succeed, to do so.
While I think it is an interesting idea and study on community I think this is much of what's wrong with "Web 2.0"
There have to be sound business models to making a company or service - otherwise let them succeed or fail on their own. Twitter is great - I'm an addict - but if I had to pay would I...maybe/maybe not? Asking a community to donate money to make it scale/work is silly - that's what the app should do in the first place - WORK!
I am going to rent out my space for a month to benefit the TwitterQueens, who are having an event in NYC and need sponsorship. See you on Ebay!