DISQUS

vanguyafo,

Digg making a deal with Microsoft is a B2B transaction. It makes sense for a company of digg's size because (1) it guarantees some level cash flow and (2) lets them keep their sales team small.

IOW, they basically outsourced their sales team to Microsoft.

I'm constantly surprised by how few people realize this. On Facebook, especially, people want to build apps, not brands, and then wonder why their SocialMedia ads aren't making them millionaires.

Sometrics is awesome, no doubt about it. We're really excited to have such high-quality players entering the analytics space on Facebook.

It's a shame for Facebook that a third-party was able to release a superior analytics solution than the one they have on the site, especially given Facebook's already solved the difficult problem: storing, translating, and scaling all the data.

It's not a shame for developers, though, who finally have access to a proper analytics solution.

Andrew,

Yay! We've used similar models internally at Adonomics. I have a BS in Mathematics, so this stuff makes me happy.

If you're interested in any of the data we have I'd be happy to share with you. We're the only ones with data before the switch to DAU, so we actually have detailed graphs of user growth.

You can email me at jesse[at]adonomics.com if you're interested.

Cheers,

Jesse


CTO, Adonomics

I guess it depends on what you mean by "music offering." AFAIK all this is about their Pages feature and using it to promote music and film, as a ramp up to SXSW.

They're positioning themselves against MySpace, not iLike.

I've been saying this since the start, but it's possible the Facebook Platform becomes nothing more than a gaming platform.

I don't think it's decided yet, but that's not such a bad "worst case scenario."

Here's what would be even more funny. Tech-heads like to pretend people adopt technologies because they're "better" or "more open," so lots of people are pushing OpenSocial and related technologies.

What if it's the cross-platform game platforms that are what ultimately bring all the social networks closer to interoperability? e.g., I want to log into Facebook and see my high scores from Bebo, damnit!

What restrictions could there possibly be? Right now there are none and TOS violations are all prosecuted after-the-fact.

Even if you were to, say, charge for API keys a la domain names this wouldn't stop apps like this. This app probably made several thousand, if not tens of thousands, of dollars in the time it was running.

As long as the money is there people will find ways to get around any obstacles.

I don't see why developers would be upset by this. I see no reason a priori why this would negatively impact their invite conversion rate.

Think about what's happening: I see I have "10 requests" but I have no idea what. Maybe they're useful, maybe they're not. So I click and scan the list.

Now I'm in a situation where I'm evaluating requests one-by-one in the expanded form. So, e.g., I might see my best friend invited me to some app. Before I'd just see the app until I clicked through, now I don't see even see that.

I've been talking about this possibility since my Introduction to FBML article back in early June, and I'm glad Facebook was the one to get the ball rolling. I figured some other social network would just do it, but it looks like Bebo and Facebook were talking to each other the whole time.

Facebook 2, Google 0

This is a play right out of the MSFT handbook. In the long run it does leave Facebook vulnerable to open source efforts, but the same can be said of MSFT. They're still a $100Bn+ company.

It took two years for VisiCalc to appear on the Apple II. I don't see why you're in such a rush to find Facebook's killer app. I mean, six months? Come on.

Is this using Open AIM or the fact that XMPP, the protocol underlying Google Talk, supports the idea of an "AIM transport?"

Hey Ayelet,

Nice post, and glad to hear you find Adonomics useful. Let me know if there's any data you'd like directly for future blog posts.

Yours,
Jesse
CTO & Creator, Adonomics

Get outta my head!

I commented to a friend two nights ago over dinner that it might just wind up that the Facebook platform amounts to nothing more than a way to integrate games with Facebook.

Don't tell Lee I said that. ;)

"Version 0.5", "in the process"

I call it a big load of "whatever." Put up or shut up. If you're getting the press you need to be able to take the criticism.

west,

I agree that adoption/distribution is the key problem for OpenSocial to solve if they want to really attract mindshare, but I don't think they're done it yet.

See my article here about just that point: http://20bits.com/2007/11/07/memo-to-opensocial...

And Nick,

That's a good point. Google isn't doing this out of the kindness of their heart. I think it's really funny that everyone floats the line about how Facebook could step in at any second and change the rules of the game, compete with apps, etc., but here is Google setting itself up to be in the same position.

Everyone just has "Google does no evil" intoxication, I think. They have their business interests, Facebook has theirs. That's the best perspective to analyze the situation from.

I think what they mean is that they won't know anything about you, specifically, but Facebook will still give them aggregated numbers, e.g., "54% of your fans are male."

That sort of thing.

I also got a big fat server error.

Hooray.

Put another way, it's obvious Slide and RockYou are playing for keeps. If you want to win that means you either need to beat them at their own game or get the referee to change the rules.

On a visceral level these sorts of spam-tactics bother be, but let's face it: if the users are installing it that means they want it.

Facebook sets the rules and you can't cry foul when someone pushes them to their limits. If Facebook thinks these tactics damage the platform's reputation in the long run then ultimately it is their responsibility to put in measures which prevent it.

As I said at Community Next, 90% of applications have 1000 or fewer daily active users.

Mark,

I've explained this about half a dozen times before and in fact it's answered right in the auction's Q&A section: it says "no reserve" because they change the structure of the auction and eBay doesn't allow you to change the description of an active auction. No conspiracy there.

You can call "I am Hungry" worthless until the cows come home, but the developers of "I am Hungry" are now $20k richer. The reality of the situation won't change no matter how annoyed you are that such a "worthless" app got that kind of money.

You've now gone from "no reserve" to "definitely a $5k reserve" to "maybe there was a reserve, maybe there wasn't." The reason you can't pin down a position is because you have no facts to back up your argument. All evidence points to the simplest conclusion: The "I am Hungry" auction had a reserve, as the Q&A section clearly says, and people were out-bidding themselves in order to suss out the reserve price.

Mark,

The auction had a reserve so the bidding pattern is actually expected. I know you'll say it had a small reserve price but the fact is you have no first-hand knowledge -- I can't imagine Dan or anyone involved with the auction actually told you.

In short, your argument is 100% speculation. Did you even talk to Dan or AppStars directly?

Mark,

2) The market is the final determiner of valuation. They "I am Hungry" guys got $20k, the fact that you think it's only worth $50 doesn't change that. The buyers obviously thought they were getting a deal.

3) We didn't make anything off this sale. We contacted Dan after he originally posted the auction to let him know that if he restructured it he could make much more than he would otherwise.

5) Ask Dan if you want the reserve price, don't just speculate. You don't know what it was and the information is not available publicly.

Mark,

I'm Jesse, the CTO and creator of Adonomics. Lee has a tendency to write overly long comments, so I'll simplify the timeline for you:

1) The original auction was created with no reserve and was hovering around $1.5k-$1.6k
2) After talking with us as Adonomics the developers of "I am Hungry" realized they would be underselling if they kept it at this price.
3) We advised them on how to restructure the deal (a refund for developer time spent and payment to come in installments) in the hopes that it would increase the price.
4) In addition, Dan et al. added a reserve price to the auction. eBay doesn't let you change the description so the auction still said still said "no reserve."
5) People outbid themselves in an attempt to just barely surpass the now-hidden reserve price.
6) The combination of (3) and (4) led to a winning auction of just over $20k.

Everything is legit.

At Altura we decided to test this hypothesis and create a purely viral app from scratch without huge marketing campaigns. Our app is silly, of course, but you can see for yourself how fast its growing: http://adonomics.com/about/17603244640

We've been going full-tilt for less than a week and we already have more than 60k users.