The demise of a popular but unsustainable business model now seems inevitable
IN RECENT years, consumers have become used to feasting on online freebies of all sorts: news, share quotes, music, e-mail and even speedy internet access. These days, however, dotcoms are not making news with yet more free offerings, but with lay-offsand with announcements that they are to start charging for their services. These words appeared in The Economist in April 2001, but theyre just as applicable today. During the dotcom boom, the idea got about that there could be such a thing as a free lunch, or at least free internet services. Firms sprang upto offer content and services online, in the hope that they would eventually be able to monetise the resulting millions of eyeballs by selling advertising. Things did not work out that way, though, and the result was the dotcom crash. Companies tried other business models, such as charging customers for access, but very few succeeded in getting people to pay up.
Then it happened all over again, starting in 2004 with the listing of Google on the stockmarket, which inflated a new Web 2.0 bubble. Googles ability to place small, targeted text advertisements next to internet-search results, and on other websites, meant that many of the business models thought to have been killed by the dotcom bust now rose from the grave. It seemed there was indeed money to be made from internet advertising, provided you could target it accuratelya problem that could be conveniently outsourced to Google. The only reason it had not worked the first time around, it was generally agreed, was a shortage of broadband connections. The pursuit of eyeballs began again, and a series of new internet stars emerged: MySpace, YouTube, Facebook and now Twitter. Each provided a free service in order to attract a large audience that would thenat some unspecified point in the futureattract large amounts of advertising revenue. It had worked for Google, after all. The free lunch was back.
Now reality is reasserting itself once more, with familiar results. The number of companies that can be sustained by revenues from internet advertising turns out to be much smaller than many people thought, and Silicon Valley seems to be entering another nuclear winter .
Internet companies are again laying people off, scaling back, shutting down, trying to sell themselves to deep-pocketed industry giants, or talking of charging for their content or services. Some Web 2.0 darlings managed to find buyers before the bubble burst, thus passing the problem of finding a profitable business model to someone else . But quite how Facebook or Twitter will be able to make enough money to keep the lights on for their millions of users remains unclear. Facebook has had several stabs at a solution, most recently with a scheme called Facebook Connect. Twitters founders had planned to forget about revenues until 2010, but the site now seems to be preparing for the inclusion of advertising.
The bill, sir
The idea that you can give things away online, and hope that advertising revenue will somehow materialise later on, undoubtedly appeals to users, who enjoy free services as a result. There is business logic to it, too. The nature of the internet means that the barrier to entry for new companies is very lowindeed, thanks to technological improvements, it is even lower in the Web 2.0 era than it was in the dotcom era. The internet also allows companies to exploit network effects to attract and retain users very quickly and cheaply. So it is not surprising that rival search engines, social networks or video-sharing sites give their services away in order to attract users, and put the difficult question of how to make money to one side. If you worry too much about a revenue model early on, you risk being left behind.
Ultimately, though, every business needs revenuesand advertising, it transpires, is not going to provide enough. Free content and services were a beguiling idea. But the lesson of two internet bubbles is that somebody somewhere is going to have to pick up the tab for lunch.
补摹写类~
1、not yet.....but...
Its strange that our boss not yet punished them but made a rise in their salary
2、连着用动名词的那句~
The students are again ,after the examination, complaining about lack of time, regreting their inattention or checking answers with others in fear and trembling.
考研英语作文的范文名师批改(十二)
2015年考研英语一真题作文参考范文解析
2015考研英语作文绝密押题预测(一)
2015考研英语作文:人生价值类模板
2015考研英语作文绝密押题预测:文化交流类
2015年考研英语一大作文范文(最新发布)
2015年考研英语一作文题目:情感
2015年考研英语二小作文范文参考
2015考研英语小作文解析及范文
2015考研英语作文绝密押题预测
2015年考研大作文范文及解析(英语一)
从2014年考研英语作文看2015年的写作考点
2015年考研英语(二)小作文参考范文
2015年考研英语一小作文参考范文及解析
2015年的考研英语二小作文范文
研究生奖学金助学金政策解析
2015年考研英语二作文题目
2015年考研小作文范文及解析(英语二)
2015考研英语大作文范文及解析
考研英语作文名师批改,因材施教范文
2015考研英语作文预测及范文:网络利弊
2015年考研英语二小作文参考范文2篇
2015考研英语大作文权威押题预测(三)
2015考研英语作文解析:话题围绕社会热点
首发:2015年考研英语小作文范文
2015考研英语一大作文解析及范文
2015年考研英语一作文题目公布:教育类
2015考研英语一范文(例文)
考研网首发:2015年考研英语二小作文范文
2015考研英语范文家庭关系类模板
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |