In a poll last week, we asked our readers to bust out their crystal balls and read the financial futures of some of our favorite Internet companies.
Answering the question, "Whose financial future do you find most tenuous?" nearly 400 readers weighed in, producing the following results:
Huh. Kind of strange, isn't it? With the likes of unprofitable pals Digg, Facebook , and Twitter on the list, the majority of our readers still cast their doubts upon major players Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) and Yahoo Inc. (Nasdaq: YHOO), who received 31 percent and 23 percent of the vote, respectively.
Recently, in separate interviews, both Jay Adelson, CEO of Digg, and Alex Payne, software engineer at Twitter, offered little in the way of high hopes for each company's profit picture in the near future. Without necessarily predicting their own empty-pocketed doom, both confessed neither company has been profitable, with Twitter yet to even nail down a conceivable business model.
And then, of course, there's Facebook -- once valued by Microsoft at $15 billion -- with a failed ad sales plan and an earlier projection to come up short about $150 million in 2008. Put down the abacus, kids. That's a lot.
Yet Google and Yahoo are the companies that should should be worried?
Well. Yes, in a way. Those born before June '08 will recall that Yahoo gave up its shot at being acquired, and suffered an initial drop in its stock price. Google, too, has seen its stock slide this year, a trend we suspect will continue as long as Google continues to maintain its assumed status of "irrelevant" in Web 2.0... and whatever buzzworthy tech era comes next.
Rather than frivolously cast their votes with companies with actual money, financial success, our readers seem to think, will come to those who can maintain a relevant and timely presence in the current era of the Web -- not on the Internets of Christmas Past. After all, it's evolution, baby.
Now... if someone could only squeeze some dollars out of a Poke, we might be in actual business.
One thing for SURE and two things for CERTAIN - Yahoo is KING when in comes to Alexa Global Traffic Rank. Wow, I said the one thing for sure saying and quite like it this time..people often abuse it.
I'm wondering if it's because they (Yahoo) captured the e-mail addys faster and hotter than HotMail? I don't visit the site much, although they are the goto for feeds.
Yet Google and Yahoo are the companies that should should be worried?
I don't know why google should worry. They "own" the online ads business and they are doing fine. My crystal ball may see yahoo as one of the company that should rethink about their future finance, but not Google. Anyway, we have hard time succeeding in predicting the future, and the FUTURE will tell.
"Buying companies seems to be the only way for Google to be a relevant presence in Web 2.0".
I picked out the above misleading and erroneous statement from your comment and i can only come up with two reasonable expalanations for it: Either you are out of this world OR you have a definition of Web 2.0 which most of us don't know!! FYI, Google and Web 2.0 are twins and as someone aptly put it" Because of Google, Web 2.0 rapidly catches the mainstream attention. Because of Web 2.0, Google grows to its full potential". So your statement is a subtle act of disinformation.
Now to the Poll result, i still can't accept your attempts in trying to make sense of the poll result. Even if the word 'tenuous' was correctly understood in context by readers, it still shows that the predictive potential of IE's readership should not be relied upon. There is definitely no way in a list containing the likes of tweeter, digg and other mushrooming web 2.0 innovations can traditional internet firms like google and yahoo tops a poll of firms with qestionable financial futures. Those who say so have just shown some indiscretion as i do often by allowing personal sentiments and grievances to cloud the reality.!!!!
World-wide advances (or improvements) from social responsibility perspectives among other may require expanded definition, further collaboration and innovation, and greater application of metrics as an indicator and motivator. Whether a supporter or voting otherwise one may be able to draw ideas relative to Social Responsibility (Government, Corporate, Personal, and so on) from Obama’s 28-Aug-2008 speech (in which he accepted the nomination for President of the United States). Around the world many Americans and others (including Canadians like myself living outside the US) likely tuned in. If you missed it, see BarackTV/Speeches. In any event, on-going steps towards potential world-wide advances in social responsibility likely would involve overcoming significant challenges, including perhaps as example overcoming the challenge of producing an expanded definition that is derived from (and further stimulates) collective wisdom.
Arriving at an expanded definition may mean asking many how they would define social responsibility from government, corporate, personal and other perspectives. The complexity and pure potentiality of a potentially simple looking question (e.g., with it potentially covering a range of topics and movements from Green IT and well beyond) ideally is something that can be explored by many around the world. Ideally the emerging formalized global IT profession will be an increasingly major contributor to maturing what Social Responsibility can fully mean. Ideally the same global profession can increasingly be a major catalyst in helping to bring about the application of Social Responsibility to higher, wider and deeper intrinsic and pervasive dimensions.
Ideally Research Assistants (e.g.) will somehow further help the world expedite progressive continual progress. Ideally this post is of a bit of help (e.g., perhaps it somewhat helps inspire or ignite a tiny bit of desire and confidence within an individual somewhere to somehow be an on-going contributor to increasingly making things better). Hope this response is of some help as it may be October before I’m able to get back to reading about or commenting on progress (from various perspectives) made by IE and others around the globe. Perhaps the next Web Wide World video (potentially from Africa) will be insightful in some potentially related way (you'd have to ask Steve Saunders about that).
Can you explain the positive world-wide advances to social responsibility further. It sounds really interesting!! $2.5 trillion seems high, however there will be alot of changes between now and 2020 and the social web will extend its reach and integrate with EVERYTHING.
Great points! I was speaking for myself in regards to having to look up tenuous. It wasn't difficult to assume the context, however I wanted to be certain. I titled the comment Verbal SAT because I got a 370 on my verbal SAT...which is shameful, however I'm not embarrassed to admit it. I almost doubled my math however :-). And that was years ago..
I have much respect for all of the companies in the poll as they contribute heavily toward the industry's direction.
Good point, Chad. And besides, who is to say Google or Yahoo won't acquire one of these start-ups? Google was recently rumored to be buying Digg for $200 million until that deal fell through. Perhaps next it'll go after Twitter? Buying companies seems to be the only way for Google to be a relevant presence in Web 2.0. Although, after it bought JotSpot, its original users were disappointed with what Google did/didn't do with it.
I would hope that you are correct regarding "tenuous". I think that Google and Yahoo do have a lot to lose, but you need to remember that they have a LOT to invest. MySpace and Facebook may be all the rage now, but what about web 3.0, or heck web 2.1. Chat used to be the big thing, who knows what is next. Texting perhaps?! Google and Yahoo are diversified enough to survive the transition to future technologies. I don't think that anyone can say the same about MySpace.
If the global community is able to “generate profits for the social networking industry” (e.g., $2.5 TRILLION BY 2020!), ideally doing so concurrently inspires positive world-wide advances to social responsibility.
I have to say I completely disagree with the idea that our readers were confused by the word "tenuous."
I understand why you'd think it's ridiculous that half our poll takers would cast their vote with Yahoo and Google. But I can also understand why some people might have voted this way.
If you disagree with my assessment in the blog, also consider the fact that Yahoo and Google both have a lot (A LOT) more to lose than these other companies. While Digg, Facebook, and Twitter are still trying to figure out business models, whether to go public, whether to start partnerships, etc., Yahoo and Google need to maintain their business models and their fortunes going forward... yet seem to be having trouble evolving with the rest of the Internet.
I'm sure our readers have different reasons for going with a certain company in this poll outside of sheer confusion. I'd love to hear from some others on this as well.
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
We hope you can tune in for an IE Radio interview today with a true industry innovator, Jeff Jonas, chief scientist at IBM. We're talking to Jonas today at 3:00 p.m. ET. Do. Not. Miss. It.
Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL)'s recent unveiling of its "magical" iPad may have fanboys counting the days until March, but if a recent poll on Internet Evolution is any indication, not everyone is buying into the hype.
We do a lot of grousing here on Internet Evolution, and usually for good reason, considering the amount of nonsense that keeps this industry afloat on its cloud of hot steamy air!!!! But... we can still happily acknowledge those titans who have succeeded in leading the way or paving new ground in their respective fields and, in turn, give credit when it is well deserved.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been working with Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) to look into the attacks on its Chinese servers.
Smarter Collaboration: How to Thrive in a Challenging Business Environment Market conditions are changing faster than ever, and organizations need to improve their agility and adaptability in order to provide better service and improve processes. The ability to work with customers, business partners, and employees as effectively as possible - while at the same time holding down costs - is a key to success. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
What can users today do to protect their online privacy? The simplest and most obvious option is to not use the Internet – at all. However, once all digital information is consolidated over the Internet, trying to protect digital identity by simply unplugging from the Internet becomes impossible – a fact that has manifest implications for civil liberties, Saunders says.
By 2011 the number of Internet-connected sensors will exceed 1 trillion, making your chances of doing anything or going anywhere unnoticed pretty much zero. Saunders talks about how the 'sensortization' of the Internet is eliminating the traditional divide between online and offline populations.
The 20th Century Internet was characterized by the ability to interact with other people and information on the Internet largely without anyone knowing who you were. The Internet of this century, conversely, will be defined by identity. Saunders explains how Internet users are unwittingly contributing to the demise of the anonymous Internet.
Steve Saunders talks about the risks inherent in uncontrolled, widespread profiling of Internet users, and how one day this practice could form the basis of a new industry, the Outernet, which in economic terms will have outgrown the commercial value of the Internet itself.
Search companies and social networks are collecting incredibly detailed information about their users, says Steve Saunders, who predicts that these 'profiles' could one day become commodities to be bought and sold by companies on 'profile markets' or 'identity exchanges’ – the digital DNA equivalents of the financial and commodities exchanges on which stocks, oil, and gold are traded.
One of the most important Internet issues of all time is being ignored by the media. In this three-part video series Steve Saunders explains how search companies are turning the tables on their users by creating user profiles for financial gain, and how soon this trend will explode into full scale profiling.
YouTube launches 'YouTube Direct' to give 'citizen' journalism a better platform and in so doing may just ensure that 'quality' journalism soon becomes a thing of the past.
The Google backlash continues. After seeing their Project 10^100 submissions disappear into the bowels of a Google server farm, a group of irate developers has started their own site to re-collect and vote on the ideas.
In the final episode of this series about the death of Internet anonymity, Saunders describes how the Internet of the future will start to attain a level of intelligence that requires no human intervention. Scary.
Research shows that the youth of today like Facebook – but not blogging or Twitter. Does that mean Facebook has won, or just that it's not yet out of favor? Will all the services we see today fade into Ovaltine-or-Wheaties status in just a few years?
What kinds of companies are doing the most innovation in the data center? Turns out it's midtier enterprises that are taking the "Just Right" approach.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Email This
TWEET THIS
