The death of a thousand cuts

[andrewducker]

Something that successful startup companies do well is to throw ideas out
at high speed, see what sticks, and then build on that, iterating rapidly
towards a product that people actually want to use.

It's something that large companies do badly, which is why they are
frequently disrupted, eaten alive from the insides by faster moving, more
flexible competitors.

William Gibson came up with the phrase "The street finds its own uses for
things."* and it's a lesson that you'd think any designer of tools would
have learned by now. If you designed what you thought was the perfect egg
de-whiter, and then discovered that it was selling in massive amounts to
motorcycle owners to be used as a rear-view mirror then the _last_ thing
you do is tell them that they're using it wrong - you design some new
boxes, stick some adverts in the motorcycle magazines, and work out a way
to make it an even better rear-view mirror.

Sadly, illustrating how badly large companies do this is the perfect
example of Google Plus. Where a site with potentially awesome
functionality was launched, and then people started using it wrong.
Leading to Google throwing people off the site, and causing endless bad
blood. People who would have happily used their real names are now upset
at Google for removing the option from others, and traffic has
fallen 37% over the last couple of weeks.

There was another case I saw, where a webcam video feed site decided to
throw off their "adult" users, because they were only a small proportion of
the userbase, and the site didn't want to be associated with that kind of
thing. And then discovered that the adult content users were a massive
proportion of the _paying_ user base. Thankfully, they realised this in
time to turn things around.

I suspect I'm being optimistic if I expect Google to be that smart.


*in the same short story that laid the paving stones of his Sprawl trilogy
and coined the word "cyberspace". He was clearly having a good day.

Comments

[ciphergoth]

I am really genuinely astonished that Google are being this stupid. Google are not generally characterized by stupidity.

[matgb]

Aye, the mind boggles that they're actively chasing away people. I mean, technically it's almost the same TOS as FB, but FB just doesn't enforce them unless there's a complaint.

But at a very basic level, no punctuation in names? On a web service? They're actually banning Tim Berners-Lee from using his name on there. How beyond stupid is that?

[jack]

traffic has fallen 37% over the last couple of weeks.

And it's worse than that; Rachel switched away from gmail, because she tried google+, and then didn't trust gmail not to lock her out. I know people who never wanted to use gmail in the first place, but that's the first data point of people I know abandoning it, and if your new shiny service torpedos your existing successful service, that's even worse...

[kerrypolka]

Yeah, I'm considering doing the same, and am definitely at least (as R has done) setting myself up to be able to detach from Google services if and when I choose, which I didn't feel the need to do before G+.

[andrewducker]

See also: Googlekaze.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

I've thought of the situation as "the universe offering you a clue". You might or might not notice the clue.

Oprah Winfrey is an example-- when she saw complaints about talk shows not being positive enough, she created a positive talk show.

The Knights of the Dinner Table empire happened because Jolly eventually noticed that his comic strip was what got the most attention in his gaming magazine.

[andrewducker]

Great example!

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

you design some new boxes, stick some adverts in the motorcycle magazines, and work out a way to make it an even better rear-view mirror.

You missed - double the price :-)

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

I am very not fond of doubling the price.
I have this /craziola/ idea that you'll really piss people off and alienate your emerging market by gouging not-quite-so early adopters.

Then again, I have no frickin money

[zz]

what you do is segment the market and offer a standard/deluxe (double the price) and basic (original price) version, aiming to convince people to spend more because they don't want to be seen getting the cheapo version, while still extracting money from the poor & unshallow too.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Maybe you will annoy them but if they want the product then they'll pay the price.

[tysolna]

Ah, that explains why G+ seems so empty these days.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

and I only just got there. D'oh!

in other news, the new Wolves In The Throne Room album is excellent. Yes, you really did need to know that.

[tysolna]

I have to say I really liked the first four minutes of "The Cleansing", but as soon as the double bass drum and screaming vocals kicked in, it became a tad too doom for my taste... Although I could get used to it, mind, they have substance. Hmm, maybe another listen...

Now, Dead Can Dance on the other hand, dark ambient, less doom. ;)

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

mmmm... you may, then, appreciate Karl Sanders.

also possibly The Wounded Kings

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

stray thought for the hour: Apple are a massive *financial* success because they are absolutely forward about expecting people to pay. A distinct lack of google/facebook esque backdoor action, as it were.

and, of course, in convincing people that their products are worth paying for.

One creeping realisation I've seen reported rather a lot is people coming to realise that the G+ real name policy may well be a result of Google finding it far more profitable to sell complete identities than a mere collection of relatively anonymised browsing habits. When that recognition kicks in - that Google want to force you to be a more convenient *product* - people start to get a damned site more suspect as to what Google are really selling. And to whom.

[ajr.livejournal.com]

Not surprised traffic has fallen. I still haven't found a way to crosspost my tweets there, and I haven't added (or been added) to any circles in weeks. I gave up looking for people myself when Google kept saying "You might like to add this person who isn't on Plus to your circles". No I wouldn't. I want to add people who ARE on Plus. Stupid Google.

[andrewducker]

Apparently the API is still months away. *sigh*

[apostle-of-eris.livejournal.com]

I wish I'd saved a copy or a link or something . . .
I once saw a 1920's ad from the phone company explaining that the telephone is such an important business instrument that you shouldn't tie it up with personal business . . .

[andrewducker]

This would be the same phone company that wouldn't let you plug your own phone in to their system for decades, of course.