MySpace sold yesterday for a reported $35 million. This is far, far from the estimated $327 million paid for it only six years ago by the News Corporation. And although no less a celebrity than Justin Timberlake reportedly has a stake in it, it likely will take more than the wunderkind to save it. But I’ve been wrong before. Nevertheless, it might be time to take stock of what by any measure is a precipitous fall from grace. According to Wikipedia: “Myspace became the most popular social networking site in the United States in June 2006, a position that it held throughout 2007 until 2008.” That was only a few short years ago. Now it continues to lose mindshare to Facebook, which is the social network of choice these days. Meanwhile, it hemorrhages staff.
So although MySpace is far from out (yes, I know my post titles push the hyperbolic envelope), it might still be a good moment to consider some potential lessons of this fall from grace. A few I can come up with:
- No position is unassailable. Not that long ago Microsoft was the king of the hill and Apple was against the ropes. Now Apple enjoys a larger capitalization than Microsoft. Who would have predicted that in the mid-80s? Only those who are now rich, as Apple’s stock at one point was under $2/share and now it is well over $300/share.
- If you’re at the top of the heap, look down. Your competitors are just as likely — perhaps more — to be the small upstart with a cool new idea than it is to be a large, slow-moving competitor. For example, at one point SyQuest owned the removable storage market. Then along came Iomega with the Zip drive and within a few years SyQuest was in bankruptcy.
- Never stop innovating. If you’re resting on your laurels, then prepare to ride them to the poorhouse.
- Know your audience and give them what they want but can’t envision or articulate. The best products are those that elicit an “aha!” from the creator and a “duh” from the user. That is, a breakthrough in creativity that finds an immediate and welcome home in the hearts of its adopters since it so obviously fulfills a need or desire that he or she probably wasn’t even aware they had.
Facebook would do well to heed these cautions, as Google+ takes to the field. Being Number 1 today is no guarantee of being Number 1 tomorrow. Just ask MySpace.
About Roy Tennant
A simple thing. While in the thick of digital storage/retrival and use, it must be remembered that reliance on continuity of information transfer from person to person has broadened from the humble written word in a stable, dry room. While providers must watch for the next “best thing”, recorders have to watch what their record base relys on. Electricity supply, software support, lifespan of hardware, title to and licencing of software, training/retraining of recorders/users, etc. A back should never be turned to the future, let alone the present, but a glance at the horizon has to be given to ensure survival. I love digital media but the very word “backup” says quite a bit. I have looked at remains going back six thousand years and they were as bright as any here today. Learning transfer – renewed generation to generation, makes us what we are. That must continue.
I still don’t understand quite why FB took off so fast given the existing dominance of Myspace. It might be interesting to learn!
On whether FB should fear G+, well, not on the basis of Wave, Buzz, eHealth or @scilib’s tweets on first experiences of G+. It’s maybe notable that the successful social players have all come from nothing; existing big players have generally failed in this space. Maybe if G set up a completely detached skunkworks project…
Another way of saying that any organization can and will be disruptively innovated. Libraries are not immune.
“I still don’t understand quite why FB took off so fast given the existing dominance of Myspace.”
Remember, originally Facebook was only accessible to the Academic peeps — which was probably a good thing initially since it allowed FB to improve the system till it was a bit more ready for prime time.
In general, I’d only add to Roy’s piece, that as consumers of these systems, we have to be ready for a bit of flux, being flexible ourselves to gravitate gracefully and strategically from one system to the next.
It’s also all the more reason to be careful in our evaluation of the next ‘hit’. I mean, it’s not necessarily a ‘hit’ just because people say so.
Opps, forgot the second part of my brilliant aside: It’s not necessarily a ‘hit’ just because people say so — or not a ‘hit’ just because you’re one of the first to notice it.