Posts tagged google +


The changes to Google+ are great. But they don’t matter

May 16th

67 comments

google plus logoWhat an exciting week of announcements from Google!

Of course many of us in the social media space were focused on the interface improvements on Google+, but the company also announced:

  • It is re-charging the crucial Maps effort, including graphics, animations, and local landmarks
  • Partnership with NASA on a new quantum computer laboratory to study artificial intelligence
  • A host of specialized apps for Google Glass called Glassware, including alliances with Evernote, CNN, and Elle
  • A new free photo storage system that gives you an option to let Google select, tag, and improve your photos for you
  • A Spotify-like streaming music feature called All Access.
  • Significant enhancements to Google Now, a competitor to Siri.

I wanted to stand up and cheer. In fact, I did stand up and cheer. What amazing stuff!

So you might be surprised when a reporter asked me how this will help Google+ win customers away from Facebook and I answered “It won’t.”

Arguably Google+ already had a better interface than Facebook. So why would an even spiffier interface make a difference? It’s not about the interface. It’s about psychology.

In life, we enjoy having choice most of the time. We like picking out a car or a breakfast cereal from a long aisle of choices. But on the web, we don’t want choice. We only have the psychological bandwidth for one Twitter, one LinkedIn, one YouTube. And yes, One Facebook.

Moving from Facebook is not like switching to another website or even another wireless carrier. It’s switching a lifestyle — and that is very, very difficult to get people to do.

According to research from the Social Habit, 80 percent of Americans between 12 and 24 have a Facebook account and are active at least every other day. That is incredible market penetration. Facebook is the largest media entity in history. And their user interface is terrible. Their record on privacy is terrible. Their ads are annoying. None of that seems to matter, right?

What Google does not seem to realize is that they do not have an interface problem. They have a marketing problem. They need to be spending tons of money to connect to “the cool kids” creating influence and lifestyle choices in junior high and high schools. They need to make Google+ teen-fashionable, not more like Pinterest.

I absolutely love what this company is accomplishing. To a large extent, they are creating our future. I’m just not sure if or when Google+ is going to be part of it on a mass scale.

Now I know there are a lot of passionate Plussers out there ready to skewer me in the comment section. That’s OK. All I ask is that instead of focusing on how much you love G+, let’s focus on the concept of platform adoption. Are these changes enough to get Google+ to “tip?

, , , ,

For Google, the party is over before it starts

Jul 1st

187 comments

There are going to be a gajillion articles about Google +, the new “Facebook killer.”

I haven’t seen the platform yet. I haven’t tested it. I don’t care about Google’s legacy of failure with other abysmal attempts at the social space. But I can predict it’s not going to kill Facebook. Here’s why.

I had a 17-year-old kid in one of my classes a few months ago. He’s a complete social media freak and a brilliant kid. I asked him: “If I gave you $50 bucks, would you switch from Facebook to something else?”

“Could I move everything on Facebook to the new platform?”

“No, I don’t think Facebook would allow that.”

“Then no.”

“What if it was $500?”

“No way.”

“What if it was $5,000?”

“Nope. Just couldn’t do it.”

And that my friends, is why nothing is going to beat Facebook. Here is what Google and every other pretender doesn’t understand. Facebook is not a website. It’s a lifestyle. The party’s over.

In more technical terms, Facebook may be entrenched as the king of social networking sites for a long time because the emotional and psychological cost of switching to something else is too high.

In our tech-addicted society of hyper-change, we’ve become conditioned to expect the next big thing. But every time we get our hands on the latest gadget or test drive an application, there is an inherent switching cost associated with that effort. If we try it out and perceive that the benefits of switching are too low compared to the time and energy it takes to make the change, we’ll drop the idea and simply stick to what is already comfortable and familiar.

The idea of raising this psychological switching cost is at the very heart of most marketing efforts! We want to create so much passion and loyalty for our products that consumers would never think of switching.

Most current users will find it very difficult to change to another social networking platform because the equity investment in Facebook is so high … and getting higher every day. That’s where they have their circle of online friends. That’s where they go to check on the Farmville crops. That’s where they go to see the daily pictures of the new grandchild. And that is where they are going to stay. It is their online home. Increasingly, it is their Internet.

Now some will say that the Google platform offer unique value as a viable ADDITION to Facebook. That is also faulty thinking. People abandoned MySpace because they just didn’t need two. Who has the time to maintain and commit multiple identities, multiple sets of friends? Is Google going to really offer something so uniquely sustainable that Facebook won’t be able to provide a competing alternative if they need to? To really make this work, Google will have to steal massive page views/ad dollars from Facebook.

I know this is unorthodox thinking, but I think this is the conclusion you have to come to if you focus on the fundamentals of human behavior instead of technology and gadgets. Google is not going to be able to catch Facebook, even if Google plus is great. The comment section is yours …

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
,