Welcome to Glass House Sign in | Help

Why the bubble will pop

Three stories paint a pretty clear picture of the bubble we're all seeing. 

Let's start with the latest in the bubble writings from the NYT. Pegged to the start of the Web 2.0 conference, it's a good look at the overall madness going on in the Valley right  now. Here's the part that should make everyone stop:

Some trace the start of the new bubble to eBay’s $3.1 billion acquisition of the Internet telephone start-up Skype in 2005. EBay’s chief executive, Meg Whitman, reportedly outbid Google for the company. This month, eBay conceded it had grossly overpaid for Skype by about $1.43 billion, and announced that Niklas Zennstrom, a Skype co-founder, had left the company.

Yep, in the world of real business, "audience" or "community" still looks like "eyeballs" did in the last bubble.

The, go over and check out what is happening in the TV ad market, in this story in the WSJ. This is not a surprise, people have been pretty consistent in looking at ads as necessary evils.  But remember that point: given the choice, people are NOT viewing ads. With me?

Then flip on over to another WJS story, this one looking at how to better target ads. Setting aside privacy concerns (because consumers have pretty much voted on this one already; they don't care about privacy), you start to see what is fueling the bubble -- the potential to monetize advertising in a new way.

Now look at story number two -- people don't like ads. When they can figure out how to avoid them, they will. So what you have is a wash of money coming into the Valley (mostly) aimed at serving up more ads to people who don't want to see them, in ways that are pretty sure to irritate them. Call that rational? Finally, to see the collective insanity in full display, look back at this BusinessWeek story about the mythical Google phone. Here we go:

Imagine your cellphone as a mini marketing machine. As you head into your car after dinner, a text alert pops onto the screen of your handset announcing the 9 p.m. lineup at a nearby cineplex. You choose the Jodi Foster flick The Brave One and a promo video for the next Warner Bros. (TWX ) release, a George Clooney movie, starts running. Afterward, more text appears, prompting you to launch the phone's Web browser so that you can click through to buy the movie's ringtones and wallpaper.

That kind of 24/7 advertising engagement--on a phone, no less--may sound like a nightmare. But what if you could determine the kinds of products you get pitched? Or, when your flight gets canceled in a faraway airport, text messages pop up for the best hotel deals in town? No random insurance ads or airline deals for trips to places you never visit. Best of all: Watch or read the custom ads, and your phone minutes are free.

I'll bet right now that NOBODY will see this as a good thing, other than a company trying to capitalize on the idea that "new" advertising represents a gazillion dollar pie. Will the bubble pop? Absolutely -- there is a total dislocation of reality between people trying to make money selling technology that allegedly presents new opportunities to serve up ads in new ways and the consumer who is about to be inflicted with all these ads.

Caveat: targeted ads, privacy concerns aside, fall outside the bubble. They potentially represent a way to charge more for ads that people might actually want to see, as opposed to just jam more ads into the system.

Technorati tags: , ,
Published Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:34 AM by FrankShaw

Comments

 

Robert Hof said:

And a fourth story that takes a little longer and (I believe, but I'm biased) more nuanced view: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_43/b4055055.htm

It's easy to focus on the few ridiculous valuations (most of which have not yet been realized in actual deals), but most Web startups are not selling for crazy sums. (Yet.) If there's a Web 2.0 bubble, I'm not convinced we'll see a sudden pop and masses of unemployed people as Tim O'Reilly seems to suggest. Look at the Skype writedown--virtually no reaction from investors, and apparently no impact on current deals.

October 17, 2007 10:27 AM
 

FrankShaw said:

fair point; the difference with Skype is that it actually offered a real service....but eBay overpaid. A bunch of the new bubble companies can't say the same thing -- they are looking at getting a slice of a theoretical huge ad market to pay for whatever it is they are trying to sell. If that ad market is overstated (and it is), then their business model, such as it is, is dead.

October 17, 2007 10:32 AM
 

Kip Kniskern said:

Bubble debates aside, there is still a basic question about ads that you are not addressing: Does subjecting users to more ads (regardless of whether they "want" them or not) persuade them to buy more?  In other words, is a consumer society fueled by ads, and would having less ads reduce the desire for consumption?

Not really a pleasant thought, but perhaps a provocative one.  If we only bought what we "needed" or "wanted", our level of consumption might be far less than it is today.  From a green earth standpoint, highly desirable, but from a new house in Half Moon Bay or a new private jet landing at Moffett standpoint, maybe not so much.

October 17, 2007 7:25 PM
 

FrankShaw said:

You are totally right -- much study has been done that shows that ads do drive consumption, and that the fact that we are now exposed to not just a "keeping up with the joneses" who live next door, but to the perfect houses we see on TV makes it hard.

Gregg Easterbrook wrote a good book about this a while back -- "The Progress Paradox."

October 17, 2007 7:30 PM
 

Badsra said:

I would like to elaborate a little on Kip's comment - it's the ads that make our 'wants' appear to be 'needs'. While 'needs' market will function even without any ads (you need bread, after all), the 'wants' market may not (12 grain and 8 grain breads).

Then again, whether we will be happier, healthier and more comfortable without products being pushed on to us is still debatable. Maybe there is a fine line between 'relevant contextual advertisements' and the push to flood every available space on the internet and personally I feel the both are moving towards each other.

October 20, 2007 1:10 PM

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(optional)
(required) 

WE reserves the right to refuse to post or to edit or remove, in whole or in part, any Information that is, in WE's sole discretion, unacceptable, undesirable or in violation of these rules.
Submit

Syndication



» Blogs that link here
» View my profile

Powered by Technorati