July 27, 2007

How Much Is A Facebook User Worth? At Least $0.30

Michael Arrington

32 comments »

People aren’t wasting any time trying to figure out how to monetize all those thousands of Facebook apps that have sprung up over the last couple of months. At least three advertising experiments have launched - the most promising, by far, is RockYou.

fbExchange

The first out the door was FBExchange, a copycat of the LinkExchange idea from the nineties. It was created by the 30Boxes Calendar team - Narendra Rocherolle, Julie Davidson and Nick Wilder. Display others’ ads on your facebook application and build up credits, which can then be used to run your own ads on other apps. It’s a cheap and easy way to get exposure for your application, should the viral Facebook machine not create enough growth to keep you happy. See GigaOm for more. The company says they’ve booked $200k in revenue after just two weeks live.

Lookery

Lookery, founded by serial entrepreneur Scott Rafer, is a straight up advertising network targeted solely at Facebook applications. They say they’ll have access to deep demographic data on users and can therefore target ads to users with very specific characteristics - a woman between the ages of 20-25 in New York, for example. That theoretically will lead to much higher advertising rates. I like the idea, but Facebook itself has access to the same data and more and has had trouble selling high CPM ads at scale. Lookery needs big scale to be successful, and so will likely struggle in the early days. For now, Rafer says, they are passing 100% of revenue to content providers and will start to take a cut in a month or so when the economics support it.


RockYou

RockYou has been quietly testing their own idea of an advertising network - selling “users” to other applications. They’ve had a tremendous amount of success building viral applications on Facebook so far. Their Super Wall app, for example, has nearly 3 million users and is adding hundreds of thousands of new users each day. It’s basically what it says - a better “wall” where friends can leave messages. With Super Wall, people can add pictures, video and other rich media.

They’re offering to promote third party applications on Super Wall, and charging on a per-user-acquired (CPA) basis. When a user is signing up for Super Wall they are asked if they’d like to also add a additional application (the advertiser). See the screen shot to the right (click for large view).

The test so far are going very well. CEO Lance Tokuda told me today that they moved $30k in inventory in just four hours. They are testing various price points, but the low end seems to be around $0.30 for each user they sell to another application, and they believe they can get as much as $1 over time. The effective CPM (or revenue per 1,000 pages) is a “multiple of $20″ he says. This make them possibly the first Facebook application to have found a real way to monetize users and pageviews.

Tokuda also says they have developed an API for Super Wall and will give free access to other applications to build their functionality into it. This can make your head spin a bit - Facebook is now widely considered a platform, and now Super Wall is a platform on top of a platform. It’s a good thing I guess that no one is slowing down long enough to really think too hard about how quickly the online world is evolving. Instead, they’re experimenting wildly. And some of this stuff is going to stick.

  • Sphere It

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

  1. share.websitemagazine.com
  2. Facebook Users Worth $0.30? Hm. More Please. « J-Squared Media: Inside
  3. evans ink » Blog Archive » adsense vs. fb: apps & oranges
  4. SocialMedia Opens Self-Serve Facebook Advertising For All
  5. SocialMedia Opens Self-Serve Facebook Advertising For All « iBrian
  6. Networked_Performance — Meta-Markets: Speculating on Social Media
  7. ephedrine weight loss products
  8. What is a Facebook app worth? - - mathewingram.com/work

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Charles Dalton-Moore

    Nice… create something that draws the crowd, and then charge for apps to get in on your success. A couple of the clients we are building FB apps for have already asked about buying an initial audience to start the viral process.

    I can certainly see this as being a valid model for apps that are experiencing rapid growth… just needs someone to build a marketplace for it now ;)

  2. Adam

    How long will the cross promotion of apps be able to occur?
    My feeling is that the real money will be there if someone sells these placements to P+G, automotives, etc.

  3. Justin

    “The test so far are going very well. CEO Lance Tokuda told me today that they moved $30k in inventory in just four hours. They are testing various price points, but the low end seems to be around $0.30 for each user they sell to another application, and they believe they can get as much as $1 over time. The effective CPM (or revenue per 1,000 pages) is a “multiple of $20″ he says.”

    Holy hype. Of course facebook widget users are click-happy right now, its all new and whizzy, very few of the widgets involve actually buying anything, and the early adopters are willing to click anywhere for a while.

    But sorry, there is no way after the dust settles that advert CPM (or CPA) *inside* widgets is worth any more than adverts facebook runs, which are famously - along with adsense “network” adverts in general - low paying.

    $20 effective CPM? congrats if they can open a purse with that powerpoint presentation but I’m sure they themselves are not fooled by their own press. Sucks to be the investor who is.

  4. simon

    Its a matter of time before Facebook builds their own network and/or requires a rev share from the ads that reside on the platform applications. In addition, exisiting third party ad networks already have ad inventory that can be leveraged to support the growing audience. I question the Lookery proposition since they don’t have advertiser relationships and they need to acquire publisher (widget) inventory. Not a viable business.

  5. David Shantz, Graphita Live Studio

    It stands to reason that advertising on an application is in many ways worth LESS than pages on a static community site…The user of a web-based application is trying to do something specific and the intention is probably not to get distracted from the mission at hand…visitors to applications are also statistically there for less time.

    The other problem with paying for audience as an application is that people tend to move on…some of these applications have audience numbers that soar and crash all over the place…it’s not necessarily building equity.

    We have an entertaining graphical web application named LiveStudio -luckily we were not so busy with product development and paid integrations, so we can see how this shakes out a bit…plus we actually print things for a living..

  6. SutroStyle

    Soon, soon this bubble will burst.

  7. Jay (living in First Life)

    Yawn. Come on, do you really believe RockYou will keep that up? It’s really a big Ponzi scheme.

    “I will give you 30 cents to get you to pay someone to install my app when they install your app.”

    I then turn around and do the and tell someone else “Give me 30 cents to get you to pay someone to install your app when they install my app … that I paid 30 cents to have installed.”

    Don’t you see the failure of the logic here? Someone has to figure out a way to make money here and that hasn’t been done. The ponzi scehme doesn’t work forever.

    Arrington - what happened to your legal background? These kind of insights should be cake for you.

  8. Rex Dixon

    Well as part of the Lookery team, I will have to say it has been an exciting experience on the very ground floor of a startup. I came on board right before the quiet launch. We are busy, and seeing some pretty impressive stats so far, a lot more than honestly I thought a simple facebook app would generate.

    Anyways, thanks for the article Mike - Have a great party!

    Rex
    Publisher Relations, Lookery

  9. Ro

    Mike-

    Thanks for the write-up. Jay, you’re making it a lot more complicated than it is. Simply put, we have an installed base of 23MM apps on Facebook growing at 500K new installs a day. We have a very high click-through rate on cross-promotion and can deliver between 5K-30K new installs/users per day per app promoted on our network. We’ve been selling this placement for $0.50 CPA and are already oversubscribed. I don’t see what you’re referring to above.

    Ro

    VP Business Development
    RockYou

  10. David Mackey

    All of them aren’t bad ideas. With the first, can you monetize your credits? For some providers more advertising probably isn’t needed - but if one had a choice between advertising and monetizing, that’d be nice.

  11. Ian

    Why is it that rockyou reminds me of an adware/spam scheme?

  12. yowza

    as a facebook hater, i see all of this as AWESOME

    the whole platrorm will turn into one large-scale shitfest of excessive and lame monetization, and the users will hoof it to someplace else

    oh by the way peter thiel is about to make it 0-2 in timing bull markets to shop his companies. paypal could have netted 10x its ipo valuation if it had better timing, and i can assure you that whatever fantasies he has in his mind of fb now, this week’s stock activity yanked $1B off the top

    the bear should have one beneficial impact - 75% of the turds floated here are about to get definitively flushed.

  13. Adam Loving

    Interesting, I was just doing the CPA calculation in my head for Zuckerbucks this morning. I have spent about $1000 on referral incentives (built in to the app) and have landed 5800 users. That works out to be $.17 / user. But I also had to do all the work of building the app.

  14. yanni

    hi michael,
    awesome this is marvellous doing good rounds on the internet ..i came and gone through your website and intrested in near future for communication with you ……
    this is certainly a good platform for sharing and required for rapid development and growth …internet business i welcome for further communication …

  15. Andrew Fife

    “[RockYou is] offering to promote third party applications on Super Wall, and charging on a per-user-acquired (CPA) basis.”

    Sounds like a pyramid scheme.

  16. Pablo Graiver

    “It’s a good thing I guess that no one is slowing down long enough to really think too hard about how quickly the online world is evolving. Instead, they’re experimenting wildly. And some of this stuff is going to stick.”

    These last couple of lines from your post are a fantastic summary of the evolution of the web, where business (or the ability to become one) acts as a natural selector for a too-wide number of tech species that keep popping out.

    Cheers

  17. kishore

    Face book has such a poor conversion rate i guess

  18. Edward J Thomas

    I wrote a piece on valuing online video properties a few days ago, but this same model can be applied to any destination site. One point I’m trying to make here is that maybe instead of trying to figure out how much a user is worth, it might make more sense to look at it from a “user-engagement” perspective (i.e. with the accompanying metrics). It’s awfully hard to accurately measure what constitutes an actual person on the web with existing measurement tools. So perhaps this model is more relevant to establishing ad rates and other valuations of the sort (i.e. CPC, CPA, etc.).

    So not to get sidetracked–let’s get back to Facebook. Using my model, Facebook values at $2,930,775,392. Please see my spreadsheet on how I came up with this here: http://www.edwardjthomas.org/u.....nModel.xls

  19. Jay (living in First Life)

    Edward - I’m impressed that unlike other TC fanboys, you actually understand math. Your model is interesting, but simplistic. Simpler models tend to be more useful as they reduce how far off one can be in terms of variance, but they also don’t show details which explain differences. Think of a regression that is purely linear versus one that has 12 degrees. The one with 12 degrees will probably be more powerful but may not be worth it depending on the T-stat.

    There are a few other problems with your model:

    A) In favor of a higher valuation for Facebook
    1. Those are Youtube’s current stats and not at the time of acquisition. The implied value in visitor hours per day was much higher at the time of acquisition.

    2. There are lots of stupid people who will pay a high price for YouTube.

    B) In favor of a lower valuation for Facebook
    1. YouTube has obvious advertising integration opportunities, Facebook does not. The moment starts targeting messages based on user profiles and demographics, people will start giving less information away. It’s not like Gmail where you have no choice.

    2. Grouper was sold for a much higher valuation than your model suggests. Perhaps the slope of the line charting $ value versus total visitor hours per day has a negative first-order derivative implying that as the site gets bigger, it can command a lower value per user.

    Either way, it’s an interesting analysis. If “valuations” are done by “how much more should we pay for this asset based on how much Google paid for YouTube, then good for Facebook. If the valuations are based on tangible ability to drive advertising and revenue generation, no comment.

  20. JasonM

    “It’s a good thing I guess that no one is slowing down long enough to really think too hard about how quickly the online world is evolving …” but building applications on top of applications is a bing risk especially when someone similar to News Corp buys Facebook and starts to lock it down.

  21. Edward J Thomas

    Jay - Thanks for the thoughtful feedback. It’s nice to hear that you’re a numbers guy too ;)

    I’m aware of the hook-ups you mentioned and made note to some of them in a previous posting off of my blog. (http://www.edwardjthomas.org/?p=10)

    I guess the that point I’m trying to make it that for these destination web sites, we should strive to apply some kind of fundamental analysis for baseline valuations. A model doesn’t have to be overly complex, but rather should go farther than unique visitors alone. As the field of web analytics evolves we should be able to apply more rational (I use that term loosely) valuation models to online real estate.

    A simple valuation model (as per my previous post) can also aid investors as more destination sites go public. A model that weighs in time spent on site will reduce the likelihood of investors being duped by juiced traffic numbers (through adware, clickfraud, SEO, etc.). The model that I proposed is just a starting point…

  22. jose

    I think it´s very exagerate to say that “Super Wall” is a platform on a platform. Facebook will built their own network to keep apart this utilities… I bet that.

  23. Anthony

    The issue with facebook is its ease of use and rather dull gui. Everytime I log in there’s messages for Apps I’ve stupidly installed… So far I’ve been bitten by zombies and vampires, been sent plants for my garden.. probably the only one I do actually enjoy is the film review one. Otherwise, there’s a lot of adverts being sent untargetted by the users. So yeah, the advertisers have the advantage of knowing who does what, but if I’m sent something by a friend that I don’t like, it’s negative publicity. For example. Each time you install an app you send to your friends. Now, there’s people out there with like 2500 friends. You expect them to sift through to find the people they hope will like the application?

  24. Thorson Beresford

    Cool im worth something, i wonder how much GMAIL users are worth?