Getting people to pay for content is the major focus for online. The Financial Times is taking a big lead in this area with more than 120,000 paying customers forking out £4 a week = £500k/week revenues . They claim to have 1.9 million registered users as well.
We are pleased to advise that we have our first content co-creation and web event series signed-up and underway = Ancient World in London. It is a time-based, online/virtual/mobile/live series that will inspire people to make their own discoveries of the history that makes London one of the world's great cities. More info here and the micro-site is here. We think this first program will be the shape of things to come more and more for making online communities relevant and engaging.
I remember the day of the AOL/Time Warner deal was announced--it seemed like the final proof that online would dominate media and how we deal with sorta, well everything. In 1999 eBay had bought Butterfields ($260mm) which was an old school auction house showing how online could snap-up and transform anything it fancied.
London Eye-Pods. The wheel goes round and round on the web also as AOL makes latest flight to the web future as "Aol." . Will it be retro-chic to have an @aol.com email? Yikes.
There of course is a huge amount of curiosity relating to virtual worlds and online, immersive experiences from people that are not actual users (yet). We still believe that the community is the heart of the matter and that the virtual, online needs to add value to that. The community needs to engage and then the virtual is a place to do something relevant.
The hard question is whether or not Brands are trusted members within a community. The harder answer is generally -- No! What to do to get back to Trust?
Trust Me, Only the First Bite Hurts. Many Brands have lost trust with consumers, so entering a Community is not a positive move as perceived by the members. In fact some Brands almost seem to hate or be at war with their customers. So what can a Brand do to get back to Trust? Drive CIC.
The problem with UGC (User Generated Content) is, as anyone dealing with UGC already knows, err..well, all those Users really. They make a lot of noise—some is interesting, but most is noise. UGC can fill your site with a lot of content, but how much of it is 1) relevant 2) monetizable?
Example: UGC problems at YouTube. While they are serving 1.2 billion streams per day how much of it is worth watching or not infringing? YouTube has a commercial partner program to try to sift out the good from the bad and reward stuff that adds value. It is hard to imagine just how many take-down notices they process each day? Millions? When YouTube kills an account for breaking the community standards, there is a flare of angst against them.
