Hitchhiker’s Guide to 650 :: January :: 2006

TechnologyJanuary 12, 2006 12:28 pm

Oh my god. . . this is hilarious. . .

Commenting on the results, Bill Burnham, Chief Blogger of Burnham’s Beat explains “This quarter’s results continue to demonstrate that blogging is a complete waste time. While we did not achieve our previously forecasted results of 100 billion page views and ‘Google-style cash, Baby!’, we remain hopeful that people forgot about those projections. There are several reasons for missing our projections including an outage of our hosting provider in late Q4 which cost us a least $1.00, the continued poor quality of the writing on the site, high oil prices, several deals that slipped to next quarter, and uncertainty created by the war in Iraq. ”

On a serious note, reading between the lines (not too hard actually) .. . Yahoo has higher ASP on their keywords (cause they yet to have an full blown ad network to drive down keyword prices like Google), but still need to work on their content/behavioural ad serving algorithm. (BTW, I thought both contract prohibits showing adds from another ad network on the same page?). For Google, the increase in take rate (and corresponding decrease in Traffic Acq. Cost) could mean that Google is struggling to hit revenue targets? (you know, raising prices is the first thing companies do before missing earnings! . . . )

We added an additional search advertising partner in Q4 and were generally disappointed with the results. While revenue per click is higher at this partner, overall click through rates are much lower. In terms of our main advertising ‘partner’ we have seen a clear pattern throughout the year of them reducing the revenue share they pay to their blog-related ‘partners’. Apparently they aren’t making enough money as it is and need to stick it to the little man.”

Technology 11:18 am

Remember back in 1998 when all we have to do is add an “e” or a “.com” behind any business model to raise a few million dollar in venture capital? Pets.com, fork.com, drugs.com, grocery.com, etoys.com, eDiamonds, etc etc . . . well, 7 years later with almost all things already “e-enabled”, VC’s are being inundated with the same old business plans again with the only difference being the appending of “@ the edge”. (kinda like adding “in bed” to all the fortune cookie inserts)

So now we get reviews @ the edge, classified @ the edge, e-tail @ the edge (pet @ the edge? groceries @ the edge?), payment @ the edge, auctions @ the edge, video distribution @ the edge , VOIP @ the edge . . . ok you get the point. . .

Don’t get me wrong, the .com trend was/is certainly a game changing event (Amazon, eBay) for many industry as well as creating many incredibly profitable small businesses (yes! selling pet supplies does work online ). “@ the edge” has just as much merit because the web is getting flatter (ie the tail is getting longer) and the walled gardened models has serious structural flaws. But as is everything, true innovation doesn’t come from following a macro-trend.

Everyone is already wise to the structural shift to the edge taking place. For every “@ the edge” idea, there are 30 teams, 10 business plans, and 5 VC/angel financed startups looking to enter the space. If your only competitive advantage is speed of execution, you are kinda screwed . . .