Good, Better, Best, “Not So Fast!”
Popularity: 12%
First it was MySpace and Facebook, then it was Digg, now it’s Twitter. Web 2.0 moves fast. Ideas come out, some sites show a little promise, they spread like wildfire and bam, they are blowin’ up. V.C’s are investin’, and the buzz is deafening.
What I find interesting however, is it seems Web 2.0 ideas have a short shelf life. The sites don’t go anywhere, they are still growing, but the buzz seems to die, and the money follows the buzz. How many social networks do you think investors are looking at. How many Digg like companies are on investors radars? My gut is telling me, not many! It’s a whole lot of been there and done that. BUT, are the first or second players in a new industry the best? Does first to market always mean the winner? New players to a market, can at times see what the early adopters missed.
Why don’t investors see that?
Apple clearly wasn’t first to the Mobile market. However, their approach has turned it on its head. In 1999, search was supposed to be dead, Yahoo, Ask Jeeves, MSN, and Alta-Vista already did it. The talk was about portals. Nobody told Google about that.
The negative association with terms like; “A Me Too site” or “Been there, done that” are enough to make a entrepreneur cringe, but should investors and entrepreneurs be so quick to move to the next big thing? Are MySpace and Facebook, the best a social network can be? Is Digg, the penultimate in social bookmarking? Is giving up on those spaces and moving on to the next cool thing, the right way to go, or just the coolest thing to do? I ain’t sure, but I’d love to hear what all the cats who said “Search was dead” have to say about it. Cause I know they ain’t holdin’ any Google equity.
Things mature, markets change, a new player to an existing market doesn’t always mean “Me Too!” It may be the best, and that is better than good and better!
