Last week, we took a look at Unthink, which is looking to establish itself as an alternative social network to Facebook.
As more people become concerned about Facebook’s dominance and approach to privacy, Unthink is looking to establish a foothold by giving users control over their profiles and all their information. So far, it has attracted more than 100,000 registered members.
It is an encouraging start but it is difficult to say whether people are simply curious about Unthink or seriously interested in the idea of a new social networking service.
As much as people may like to complain about Facebook, you’re not seeing a wave of defections to the revamped MySpace or startups such as Diaspora. Instead, most people are sticking with Facebook because, after all, their friends and family are there.
So what would it take for a new social networking service to catch fire? Is it possible for a new player to wiggle its way into the top tier along with Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google+? (Note: For the sake of argument, I don’t consider Google+ a new social player given Google’s search dominance.)
One of the challenges facing a social startup is it has to have more than just more features than the incumbents. A good example is Pownce, which had more bells and whistles than Twitter but, for whatever, reason didn’t have Twitter’s buzz or cache. As a result, Pownce disappeared into the bowels of TypePad.
To capture enough users to become an established player, a social startup needs to have a service that’s user-friendly with almost no learning curve or “grit”, and strikes people as cool and happening. It would also help to have a few high-profile mavens such as Robert Scoble and Walt Mossberg embrace it in a major way.
Even this may not be enough to get a social start-up over the hump. The gap from the bleed-edge/leading-edge to mass adoption is huge. As much as online users are finicky and not terribly loyal, many social media users are creatures of habit. Once they establish a presence, build a community and integrate a social media service into their personal and/or professional lives, it’s hard to leave.
For a new social media service to close the gap, it needs a combination of great timing, luck, a service that delights for a variety of reasons. It doesn’t necessarily have to been chock-a-block with features but it just needs to do a few things really well with perhaps a few interesting wrinkles.
In many respects, we’re talking about a David vs. Goliath world in which startups battle against large and well-entrenched market leaders. It’s not an impossible task but it would take a lot of things to unfold in the right way to materialize.
What do you think? What would it take for a startup to become a top-tier social networking player?
Tags: facebook, linkedin, Social Media, twitter
“Note: For the sake of argument, I don’t consider Google+ a new social player given Google’s search dominance.”
This statement makes no sense Mark, of course Google+ is a new social player.
I have the site, the niche and the ideas for my David, http://www.SupaHeroz.com, to take on Goliath, but being an unknown and without the vital connections, no one wants to take it seriously, or even acknowledge it.
Shame really, as there are some potentially great entrepeneurs lurking in the woodwork who just need a little help and advice to change the world.
Unique perspective on social interconnections is key. We’re seeing a lot of sites that claim to be just like Facebook|Twitter|Foursquare but private|corporate|cloud-enabled…it may be something like Dropbox that people love but is generally under-appreciated for what it does and how it does it. Its most recent deal with HTC may presage some pretty unique capabilities.
Erm, Google is a new social media player, it’s just not very big yet because it’s not good, interesting or popular. And a simple answer to the question is no, it will be very hard for a new, big social media player to enter the market now.