The end of facebook coming?

[Johndrago]

It's been a difficult time for Facebook and great opportunities for Google.

[dpaanlka]

I really don't think people are giving the market enough credit. I don't believe it's literally about what's newest. If it were, Bing would have usurped Google Search by now, Chrome would have usurped Firefox by now, Ubuntu would have usurped Windows by now, Windows 7 Phones would have usurped iPhones by now, Picasa would have usurped Flickr by now... I could go on and on.

Rather, it's about product. If Google+ is to usurp Facebook, it must offer something compelling enough to make people switch. I've been on Google+ since the day the limited beta came out, and I wouldn't say that it has met that criteria yet.

[JustinHartley]

Hi All


I totally agree with some of you guys, the google "plus one" thing ids going to take over Facebook but if implemented strategically and if people understand its benefits and features it will totally take over facebook.

[keith10456]

Hi All


I totally agree with some of you guys, the google "plus one" thing ids going to take over Facebook but if implemented strategically and if people understand its benefits and features it will totally take over facebook.

I don't think it will "take over" FB. But I believe if implemented correctly (and Google seems to be on that path) it will eventually have a substantial impact.

Google is being smart about Google + by it NOT being a "social networking site" that you have to go to. For the most part, they're going about it as - you already have it. It will be part of your overall Google experience.

As some of you may have already noticed, Google is putting a black bar at the top of all of their sites. That black bar will be/is tied to Google +. So whether you're using the search engine, YouTube, Gmail, Adsense, etc, you will already have Google +. It will just be a matter of utilizing the + features.

[meTG]

It is true facebook days are numbered. Because Google+ is now being introduced in market. Google+ is also a social networking site because people prefers the newest in the market. And when Google+ is fully launched and partially it is introduced when it is fully introduced in the market it doesn't have to pass from introduction stage as it is Google's site. Then people refuses to accept it as a best social networking site.

I don't think so. I have a friend starting a new social network called "FriendTree" but that doesn't mean his social network will become more successful that Facebook. I think people will just be where most of their friends are.

[Tom]

I think that in order for a new social networking site to compete well with Facebook, it will need to approach the idea of social networking from an original and creative perspective. Simply creating a Facebook clone with a few new features is not going to turn the tide, so to speak. I don't see why Facebook and such a hypothetical social network could not coexist in the same market, but there would no doubt be competition between the two if it were to ever come about.

[Lumpy Burgertushie]

and to even begin to imagine competing with facebook, you would need the money and marketing muscle that only something like google could have.


robert

[dpaanlka]

and to even begin to imagine competing with facebook, you would need the money and marketing muscle that only something like google could have.

But money and marketing muscle is nothing without truly new innovative ideas. See Google buzz, Google profiles, etc...

I've been on Google+ since the day the limited beta started and I'm not sure what all the impressed individuals are impressed about. It's nice but I check it maybe twice a week, whereas I check my Facebook twice or more a day.

[Tom]

and to even begin to imagine competing with facebook, you would need the money and marketing muscle that only something like google could have.

Well, that's not necessarily true. When Facebook first began, it had little money to work with and not much marketing muscle, and MySpace was the major network at the time which probably seemed hard to top. However, word of mouth among college students seemed to be all the marketing it would need, and sure enough it became the "top dog" of today's market. It's not impossible for another website like Facebook to emerge in a similar fashion, but it would certainly be a one in a million chance.

[drathbun]

On the other hand, facebook still has that fresh sense of purpose... ie their moral goal to make the world transparent... and I like that, I like that a lot!

...and they do that by collection anything and everything they can about you, and exposing that to their advertisers. True transparency at its very best.

What blows my mind is how many corporations have embraced facebook. On TV commercials now they don't have

Code: Select all

www.my-company-name-here.com

but instead they have

Code: Select all

www.facebook.com/my-company-name-here

And I'm not just talking about small companies, but large companies like Ford and other top 100 US companies. Why would they do that? Why would they give up control of something so important (their web-facing customer presence) to a third party?

[Lumpy Burgertushie]

they too have fallen for the media hype that is facebook without thinking about the details.

It is like a damn virus. wish I had created it.

robert

[AdamR]

And I'm not just talking about small companies, but large companies like Ford and other top 100 US companies. Why would they do that? Why would they give up control of something so important (their web-facing customer presence) to a third party?

Because it strongly emphasizes two very powerful sales techniques: 1) Foot in the door and 2) Social influence, specifically by peers

By getting people to the Facebook page of a particular company, it should be relatively easy after that point to get them to "Like" said page. Not only have they agreed to your small request, but you've just guaranteed that they will now see a steady stream of your advertisements and wall posts in their News Stream from now until whenever they un-Like you. That's a lot more powerful than someone visiting your website once.

Secondly, by seeing that potentially thousands of other people have Like'd a particular company or have posted thank you comments or kudos to a company, it reinforces that company's quality in a person's mind.

- Adam

[PilotRight]

Tumblr will be most powerful and influential in the resolution

[keith10456]

... What blows my mind is how many corporations have embraced facebook. On TV commercials now they don't have

Code: Select all

www.my-company-name-here.com

but instead they have

Code: Select all

www.facebook.com/my-company-name-here

And I'm not just talking about small companies, but large companies like Ford and other top 100 US companies. Why would they do that? Why would they give up control of something so important (their web-facing customer presence) to a third party?

I'm baffled as well when I see that.

A company would produce a commercial, then show/state their Facebook page without mentioning "their" website I would understand if they mentioned their website, then displayed their Facebook page at the bottom of the page... Or stated something like, "We're also on FB at...". But that's not the case.

Companies used to do the same thing with their MySpace page.

I think it would be more beneficial for them to let the main focus be on their website, and let the FB (Twitter, etc.) page be secondary.

[keith10456]

Tumblr will be most powerful and influential in the resolution

You're joking right?!

Tumblr is good... I use it. In fact, I think it's better than Twitter. However, I don't see it out-lasting FB or Twitter. In fact, there's a big chance that Tumblr will be purchased by one of the said companies.