Why Google & Facebook are making life more difficult for us

I too see this problem, but it's nothing that is not to be overcome. Perceptions always change and so we as marketers have to change the angle from which we act in order to ensure our personal success.

But it's not only services like Facebook and Google or the millions of sites offering information for free that contribute to this attitude of many internet users. Many just see the internet as another application on their computer that they have paid for (namely to their internet providers) and therefore have the right to use everything that's in this application for free (as it is with other software).

Indicators for this way of thinking can be found in everyday life. Who has not heard sentences like the following?
- "My internet is broken."
- "Oops. I just closed the internet."
- "Let's just fire up the internet and see..."

We as marketers shouldn't not try to change their way of thinking as it's chaning often enough by itself, anyways. We should rather base our campaigns based on this attitude. If we can achieve this, success is just around the corner :-)

Products that cost money always have one significant edge over free products: The fact that they cost money.

No matter how great the free offerings of anyone else are, having to pay for something always makes it seem just a little bit more exclusive.

Everyone uses Google. Everyone uses facebook. Everyone's on twitte. (and even if they aren't, the could be)

But not everyone is part of the "membership x" site, which costs $97 a month.
That alone already sets it apart from anything available for free.

Just to clarify: I'm all for offering great products for free. And I'm not at all for putting crap in a nice packaging, slapping a price-tag on it an then hyping it as something super-exclusive.

All I'm saying is: the connection between price and perceived value is still very strong and I doubt it's going anywhere.

No I don't agree

I would say they have helped us more by introducing IM to the masses.

Its all a matter of perception I guess.

Q

No, I don't agree at all.

They are both massively successful because they provide tools which are out of this world for "free".

Torture your business advertisers? I don't think so. They hold their advertisers ACCOUNTABLE. They expect you to play by the rules they put in place. They expect you to provide quality to customers. They expect you to behave like a mature adult instead of a child in a candy store.

If you violate their ground rules you get "disciplined". It is kind of like the kid in the candy store with good parents. They keep their kids under control so everyone can enjoy the candy store, not just the kid who is running wild.

Barry

So work with the wind instead of against it... create a marketing funnel and offer something for free. Then work to upsell to paid products.

I think that with the platform they provide and the actual ease on which can advertise to essentially the whole world that the cost of having to play by their rules is quite appropriate.
Go back 20 years and try finding customers that would be interested in your product not only from another part of the world.....but where you can target by age, sex, interests, and education.

I suppose try thinking.....If i had invented Facebook....how would i want my advertisers to behave?

They are 2 massive powerhouses and with that come a MASSIVE responsibility.
Its going to be fascinating to see what its going to be like in 20 years from now. Very exciting!

I don't agree with that. I think the average internet user is smart enough to know that big wigs are not giving stuff away for free... just like they know NBC and CBS are not free. They know they are making money because they log into these sites every morning.

People do not expect everything over the internet to be free... informational products (maybe) but just look at iTunes? are they failing? are they free?

We just need to develop products that are better than the free services. Facebook was initially founded on the principle of exclusivity. Don't you think if there were some social platforms that were asking for money and promising exclusivity ppl would leave facebook to join them?

Just follow the Apple business model. Innovate and remind yourself that people like to feel "special".

Hope that makes sense,
S

(p.s. google can only torture you, if you let it )

I agree with what you have said, I am one of those people who would rather buy an expensive product then some cheap free product.

The internet changes faster than a Politicians mind. You have to create Good content to be successful online these days. Not only do you have to create good content they want to know more about who you are and do you drink the same kinds of juice. Newbie are not as naïve as before. That is just the way it is.


So, embrace it and run.

Free content is simply another form of advertising. P.T. Barnum used it to promote his museums and circus and even himself. Businesses used to give away 'green stamps'. Google and Facebook aren't doing anything new here at all, they've just updated a very good advertising business model to this century.

But, to get to the other point of your post, why are Google & Facebook are making life more difficult for small time Internet Marketers?

The answer is simple, control over the market coupled with their elitist neo-corporatist outlook.

They want anyone who has a product to sell to have to come begging to them to advertising it online. They don't want affiliates, associates, dropshippers, etc. advertising but they want the actual corporation who is producing and selling the goods or services. They only want to deal with companies that can bring them money regularly and who they regard as equals in some way.

Also, they don't want small businesses to advertise with them but larger corporations with deep pockets. They have an innate elitist disdain for the small business person. In their world view, ordinary individuals who didn't attend Harvard or Stanford shouldn't be entrepreneurial but happily work as a cog in a big corporation. I won't go on here since it might get political but you can maybe read between the lines.

Actually, they follow a slightly different concept.

When your consumer is not your customer, the consumer's needs come first.

Historically, nobody has ever done this well. When your consumer was not your customer, you took after your customer - the guy paying you money - at the expense of the consumer's needs and desires. That's why radio and television are thrashing around trying not to die: their consumer is the audience, but their customer is the advertiser. Newspapers have a mix, but have sided largely with the advertiser (who writes bigger checks), and they're in trouble.

Google and Facebook are the first companies to do even a remotely decent job of caring for the consumer first while still serving a separate customer.

And yes, as an advertiser, that kind of sucks. It means you don't get to do whatever you want anymore. The wild west days are over, and good riddance. Because it's never been good for you, as an advertiser, to stomp all over the consumer.

The conventional wisdom, of course, is that you don't let this problem happen. You align your consumer with your customer. But even then, you have to give sufficient importance to consumer needs as opposed to your own needs for customers.

As long as Google and Facebook don't start sending real people into our local cities and towns to work one on one with the small business owners we are better off.

I think there is plenty of opportunity to take advantage of their systems and package that information up and sell it as a service to the local business owners in order to help get them more exposure for their business.

Respectfully,
Tim