In 2004, I was doing a research project with RMIT University on Semantic Web. The goal was for the query to ‘recognize’ who a person is and how s/he is connected to the world. One issue arose: no single source provides sufficient data of the level of connectedness we expected.
6 years later, the whole thing world has changed. One entity has accumulated more data than most others: Facebook.
We started talking about Web 3.0 backed by Semantic Web in 2005, and Social Graph in 2006. But until this point do we realize how the new web shall have to rely on a skeleton offered by a company and its alliance (Microsoft, Zynga).
I’ll think more of what new business models will emerge, the changing competitive landscape, disruptive innovation and most importantly, how do we capitalize on this.
Business
| 
bing, business-model, competition, computer science, facebook, innovation, la-trobe, microsoft, research, rmit, semantic, web-3.0, zynga
1. Google’s massive free cash flow
When time is right, a dividend would strongly boost GOOG’s stock price, strengthening their confident announcement that crisis was over.
Or a share repurchase might be useful a strategy, especially when they need more innovation.
2. Social Media is not a fad, but an evolution.
But, sub-trends exist. Where’s the opportunity?
“Social media begins to look less social” will be a good sign for ecosystem to grow. Twitter apps, Facebook apps & games for example.
“Corporations look to scale” and they will need tools. Beyond communication, think market research, CRM.
Finance
| crm, facebook, google, How Marketing is done, How to better Communication, innovation, market-research, share, social-media, strategy, twitter
I quickly noted here and here that Facebook was in its interim period.
That period lasted for half a year from March 2009 to October 2009.
This is the visualization of the shift in Facebook’s direction.
What was Facebook intention for moving toward content in the first place
- Experiments for innovation. Even Mark was surprised that web games was loved so well
- Competition with Twitter
Why the move back in October 2009 makes sense
Firstly, the most Facebook can be is a content aggregator and hosting, not a critical content creation platform. Holding the position on the content side is not sustainable.
Secondly, content on Facebook serves the purpose of building relationship. The key is still relationship. Abandoning relationship to be on the content extremity was not sustainable either.
The gap
The shift to maintain balance between relationship and content leaves creates a gap between Facebook itself and its clones. e.g. Zing Me
And a gap is an opportunity.
@anhhung wrote a review on Mimo, the Twitter clone that supports SMS as I had envisioned.
I don’t intend to dig further on Mimo. Just this thought crossed my mind:
When an original product innovates, it creates a gap with its clones. This gap either forces to clone to chase the cloned, or allows the clone to innovate and differentiate itself.
If the second action is taken, an opportunity has been realized.
1.With Facebook, blogs, forums, Twitter and such, you and I - normal people - can make our voice heard. Just 5 years ago, we could not have possibly done that when mainstream media still dominated (via @TanNg).
2. Michael Jackson-related traffic doubled Twitter’s update frequency, tripled Facebook’s
The event of Michael Jackson is not an excuse to assess whether Facebook or Twitter has won , but an opportunity to see how many more people Social Media as a whole have conquered, and how much change Social Media have created.
Outcoming Influence, not Incoming traffic.
And appropriate collaboration would enlarge the pie for all.
3. The event clears doubts of the power of Social Media (via baekdal)
4. Michael was a true Innovator (via @xoai). He invented the shoes for Anti-gravity lean
Comments (1) 
