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.
雅思口语长期备考方法介绍
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-生命的意义
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-快乐的真谛
雅思口语Part 1常见话题26个
每日雅思词汇:关于网球的那些词儿
雅思口语话题趋势预测及答题评分要点
雅思口语高分答题思路五个
雅思口语考场答题注意事项五个
雅思口语考试内容简介
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-生活中的暴风雨
如何参考使用雅思口语话题范文?
雅思口语经典话题:Foreign Country
雅思口语考官是如何评分的?
雅思口语高分句型3个
雅思口语高分需避免9大习惯
如何提高雅思口语的流利度?
雅思口语经典素材:乔布斯
雅思口语Part 1常考400句(1)
雅思口语考官最喜欢和最讨厌的答案是什么?
雅思口语评分标准解析:7分
雅思口语话题总结:地点
雅思口语问题的两种解答方法
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-人生三大遗憾
雅思口语part 1的三个答题技巧
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-上帝的回答
判断雅思口语能力的依据是什么?
雅思口语话题范文:weather
雅思口语素材:名人名言-尼采
常见雅思口语话题40个
雅思口语话题练习题:Relatives
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |