Repetition. Repetition. Repetition. and oh yeah, Repetition.

i.e. if your ad only gets one impression on a person – you have only that one shot at getting their interest and whatever the next step it (a click through on a text add in a paid search for example)

However if you want to shift longer term behaviors – say beverage preferences, car brand loyalty, choice of where to go on vacation, airline/hotel/car rental chain etc – then you need to show to that user a much richer and ongoing message – and in most (successful) cases show overlap between your message and that individual’s self-perception.

So if you can offer an advertiser more places where the SAME audience is splitting their time and attention – so that a given advertiser can show overlap with their target users’ passions – the value to that advertiser is much higher.

It is also important to think both in terms of current users (and retaining them over time) and of future new users. A site such as MySpace is in part designed to be refreshed with new users as new teenagers/college students get online and grow up. Likely some portion of people who were using mySpace when younger may shift to newer tools/communities over time – but by targeting a youth market mySpace will always have new users entering.

Offering a richer set of tools – and related – venues for advertisers is attractive.

If I were advising mySpace/Photobucket I would also encourage them NOT to kill off services to other networks. Photobucket (and likely many related competitors and services) may be early examples of cross-network services which succeed in helping weave together the networks of the future – and of retaining customers for one network, even as those customers may shift some (even most) of their attention to a newer service.

i.e. if you use Photobucket to store your media – sharing it initially on mySpace – you are unlikely to move it even if your friends and you shift your focus to a new site – IF that site also allows you to keep your content and use it from Photobucket. Thus mySpace could continue to generate revenues even as some users might migrate to other places online.

Shannon

Say a loving couple split for a brief period because one half did something without the other’s permission, leaving the other half to lock the other out of its world. You figure it’s not too serious, and they’ll probably mend their e…

See this quote “At some point the end user of all these free services is the same user and they can’t be monetized any further no matter how many new services are added. Advertisers will eventually figure this out. Ad rates will drop. Revenues will drop…and stock prices will drop. It is all about the stock price.”

On the price paid…”triple the acquisition price to get to the revenues needed, every year, starting today, to break even…not to earn back your investment, or pay the opportunity cost…just to break even. It is a tall order for free services layered on top of other free services.”

Free services layered on other free services…to the same users…is not a winning proposition.

Don Dodge

– They bought it – for their price …

– if anyone else bought it / its gets blocked again

The corporate entity behind Myspace bought Photobucket to prevent others from doing the same. That’s all.

…but even for this one reason alone it was well worth doing: competitive blocking/insurance.

為了怕被買走所以自己出手嗎 ?

剛剛看到一則新聞，(可能是最大的) 社群網站 MySpace 買下 (確定是最大的) 網路相簿網站 Photobucket，不過根據 TechCrunch 的說法，其實這對 MySpace 的市佔率應該不….

By controlling the majority of the content on the site they can more tightly integrate with MySpace therefore making users apprehensive to move to other social networking sites due to a lack of integration with the images they already have stored at PhotoBucket.

Also it allows for the potential monetization of content (images/videos) hosted on other sites, possibly even advertising MySpace on competitors sites!

If I was MySpace I would make it so embedded images on sites are restricted to a certain size and if someone wanted a larger image they have to click and are shown the full sized image with advertising at the top of the page (or if they don’t want to restrict them make it easy for them to do this by making the same kind of embedding you get on YouTube videos so users would do this on there own accord).

On a massive traffic website the paying advertisers want eyeballs (there is no such thing as relevancy targeting on a myspace), and if your 1 set of eyeballs gets to see the same ad more than once, even better. Branding requires a continuous pounding of a message into a persons head before it really sinks in.

News Corp could care less about the overlap. The advertisers on Myspace and/or photobucket could care less about overlap.

Heck even my 4 years old uses it!! And I introduced Yahoo! to her first, but the Google logo catched her attention a lot more, what can I do