Are you just about sick to death of the so-called magic phrase “Web 2.0?”
If so, you’ll be pleased to hear that it’s doomed to crash and burn faster than Britney’s, Lindsey’s or insert scandal-ridden starlet’s…

I think from a VC/Investor standpoint, yeah it’s pretty much dead. VC’s are trend-chasers but also egomaniacs– they don’t want egg on their face.

As #44 Paul J mentioned but didn’t totally finish up the point, sites like Facebook will get sub $1 CPMs for many reasons:

1) their demographic is so scattered
2) it’s a page view whore, avg time per page prob under 20 seconds
3) its’ users are savvy and ignore ads
4) their claims at targeting users are only as good as you’re willing to believe; most advertisers would prefer platforms that target users based on content. e.g. Ever notice all those annoying friend icon site banners on myspace? Good advertising is contextual. Media plans don’t really account for the “lets market this to everyone on the face of the planet” approach.

The dolt (#5, Axel) who said that:

“…brands that don’t want to advertise on popular (read: high traffic) user-generated content sites will leave space for their competitors ….”

Obviously doesn’t know his ass from a hot rock. This presumes that there is a lack of places to place online advertising dollars and that SOME brand will want to buy ads where none of the other brands want to.

My Own Predictions:

- Online ad spending will increase

- Google Adwords rev will take a nosedive

- Many new ad-networks will die; the big ones will need to keep innovating and increasing value to advertisers

- mid and long-tail ad networks (Adbrite, Blogads, Gorilla Nation, Federated Media, Tribal Fusion, etc) will flourish

- Annoying and invasive ad integrations will be the only way that the big sites will continue to draw high CPMs.

hi, if you have time, go to my blog take a look, thx!!!!! ^o^

The blog have many informations, hope to able to help you!!!^^

Ultimate Diligence Blog (=^ v ^=)

http://ultimate...g.blogspot.com/

But other than that, i don’t know the difference between Web 1.0

And user-generated content sites will learn how to sort content more efficiently – they won’t be abandoned. Duncan is correct, as long as people are visiting sites, the advertisers will come too.

Internet Evolution (www.internetevolution.com) is holding a cash contest for 2008 web predictions. Obviously there’s much speculation surrounding Facebook and Google but I think Paul J (above) is on the money when he points out that much of the appeal online is the ability to attain instantaneous data on consumers and ad viewers.

The sheer amount of raw data available to advertisers will completely change the playing field.

We’ve recently launched a search engine that helps users find niche interest social networks and helps social network owners promote them.

Users search for sites related to whatever their interest is and webmasters submit their sites tagged with related keywords.

The idea is that due to the increasing popularity and proliferation of niche subject social networking sites thanks to Ning et al, users have a way of finding like-minded communities and these social networks receive targeted traffic that helps build user base and monetize.

Please take a look! We’re still building the database. Feel free to register and submit your niche social network or social media site for free.

http://findasocialnetwork.com

when you have a loyal community that trusts you and you have advertisers who want to reach that audience, the only challenge that remains is to find a way to unite the two in a mutually beneficial transaction. we have rejected the traditional banner or text link approach in favor of integrating advertisers into our site. the result has been to reject more advertisers than we accept and then to make sure we can actually find a benefit for our audience with those products.

we dont just let consumers click off of our site and send them to a third party website where they have to get their bearings all over again. instead, we provide a second layer of advertising detail to anyone that clicks on our ads. this gives all the relevant information before a consumer has to make the commitment to leave the site.

but the end result is that it is working for us. we are a datapoint of one, and admittedly our traffic is still in its infancy, but we are getting appointments, contracts and ads from national advertisers. diettv has found selling advertising one of the easiest parts of our start up. and if our datapoint of one is any indication, the advertising world can expect a lot moreadvertising innovation from community based websites because the old model of banner ads no longer works.

Predictions of “flocking to the ‘next big thing’” ==> Did this guy just open his eyes for the first time in his life? This is what people have been doing as long as there have been people. I mean, dude, you essentially predicted that people will continue breathing in 2008. Wow, really out on a limb there! Haha!

Bottom line ==> Scivisum = retarded (sorry to insult any retarded people out there by comparing them to Scivisum)

The one thing I personally hope to see in 2008 is a drop in advertising prices. I want another shot at the oldendays when LowerMyBills was the poster child for buying up as much cheap affiliate advertising as possible all over the web and sold that shit for 350 mil.

http://www.chinabirdsnest.com

The real change in online advertising for the majority of these sites will be what their value to advertisers is. The reason online advertising is still on a very strong growth path is not because Companies realize that their (potential) customers are online – though it certainly helps!. It is because they can track and target their audience creating more efficient and relevant messaging.

What all these “web2.0″ advertising reliant companies are going to face is the quality of their advertising product is generally very poor. This means what advertisers are willing to pay – as they smarten up in their spending and analytics – is changing quickly. Sites like Facebook have problems delivering efficient outcomes to advertisers even at rates of less than $1CPM (Cost Per Thousand Impressions or Ad Views). So what are smaller sites worth traffic wise? Who wants to fund a company that’s only source of profit might be an eCPM of $0.50 or less. Where is the upside? Remember in Bubble 1.0 CPM rates where at crazy levels of $100+ on sites like Yahoo.

From a marketing point of view this excess cheap inventory can be a boon if you know how to drive some value from it. And at rates of $0.05 CPC (Cost Per Click) or less, it’s worth playing around with. It’s not going to keep many doors open from a business point of view though. It might not even cover the costs of bandwidth.

The other 99% Americans are still not as smart as the rest of the world anyway. They love Digg and Reddit (what on earth they’re thinking?). They stay on Facebook/MySpace for hours (good for them, I hope they stay there forever instead of studying). They read Wikipedia (which contains a lot of errors). They spent money on Kindle and iPods from generation 1 to 5,6,7 (that’s why McDonalds are still in the business of paying low salary; these people need to work to pay the bill right?).

So no, UGC, ads supported websites are going to be OK as long as there are these 99% not so smart Americans. And we (the rest of the world) know that the number will not change (^_^).

Merry Christmas.

Scivisum, a UK-based research firm is predicting that Web 2.0 will die in 2008 as companies pull advertising budgets from the user-generated content sites that make up Web 2.0. They cite questionable content as the motivator behind pulling advertising…