Internet & media

SHARE

Recently Scott Adam described an upcoming new way of doing business. He calls it ‘Broadcast shopping’. The main idea is that potential clients expose their intention to buy on an online platform. Clients can do this by describing their specific need or problem. On the other hand we would find companies that could provide a solution in the form of a product or service tailored to the specific needs of this person. They can send these customers their proposal, but so can other companies. Thereby this ‘request for proposal’ platform creates a reversed auction where companies are bidding against each other. In the end this should result in a better deal for the customer, like a lower price. Looking at the revenue model of such an internet platform, it could make sense to ask for a small access fee or to take a small commission on the actual transaction.
Although Scott claimed this is currently a non-existing business model, we see already the first experiments in the market. First of all these concepts will start in industries where it is worth the effort to start bidding. The margin on a bottle of milk will probably be too low. But within the field of real estate or banking the margins are much higher. Since 2008 the Dutch start-up Moviq.nl is giving homeowners the possibility to put their house up for sale, hypothetically of course. Thereby people can ‘flirt’ and test the market to see what their houses could be worth. Another Dutch initiative, that was only online for a few months this summer, was Spaarbod.nl. On this platform banks had the chance to bid against each other with the best interest rates to persuade individual savers. Although this second example went offline, this doesn’t mean that ‘broadcast shopping’ has no future. Scott is correct when stating that many more of these business models will follow. It will only be a matter of time.

Consumer goods, Entertainment & tourism

SHARE

After several very basic business models, it is time for a more advanced example. The problem it focuses on is rather straightforward. When buying a gift for somebody together with some friends, you might run into the hassle of collection money. The start-up Wraply.com will try to solve this with a simple and convenient online service. The person that initiates this group buying process is the main client of Wraply. At first he will have to choose a gift from any e-commerce site. Affiliate shop partners can benefit from extra exposure but will off course need to pay Wraply a fee for this. From that point on more friends can be invited to donate a contribution for the gift. In the future Wraply could take a tiny percentage as commission on these contributions, which could generate a reasonable secondary revenue stream. Once all the money has been collected, the sale will be closed. The webshop sends the product on behalf of this group of friends to the lucky one. In the end all these friends will hopefully give this person a ‘happy feeling’ experience.

Similar business systems can be found in some gift certificate models. As always many players are involved which could make it hard to manage. But in this case, everything is fully automated. This makes a huge difference. Wraply didn’t only take away the hassle for its clients, but also for itself by using this model. Hooray!

Other-industries

SHARE

The new start-up Irehab.com tries to take a different approach to health care. Patients can get free advice on how to treat specific complaints. By answering a few questions and looking at several 3D animations, these users should be able to diagnose themselves. To treat for instance ‘back pain’ they can follow step-by-step instruction videos made by physical therapists but personally selected by external doctors to fit the needs of that specific patient. The first 10 consults are free of charge, both for the patient and the doctor. On the platform itself, they will have a private area where they can keep track of the results. After the first 10 consults the doctors will have to pay $0.99 for each patient that they want to follow up in the future. For further advice the patient will have to pay a fixed nominal fee per month directly to the clinic or doctor. On average this fee will be around $9.99. The only money that Irehab.com” receives will be the $0.99 per month, so they will need a large database to make this Freemium concept profitable. Within a few years it will be common practice that people will diagnose and monitor themselves without the hassle of expensive expert consults. Many companies are looking for ways to monetize this evolution. Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault are only a few of the large group IT services that are around these days. But also beyond the normal web experience we see these experimental concepts. Recently Apple presented the Lifescan’s New Diabetes iPhone App that communicates with a seperate glucose monitoring device. The latter works similar as the VirtuaGym concept we presented earlier. There people could monitor their offline exercise habits to benchmark these with other peers online. This D.I.Y. health care market is nearly unexplored so you may expect a boom of new concepts and ideas in the coming year. Many of them will fail but some of them will change the way we look at health care forever.

Internet & media

SHARE

Quirky, the social product development community, has a very intriguing multi-level business model that shows other web 2.0 projects that money making from day one is possible. Product developers all over the world can submit their ideas to the Quirky platform. Since the posting of these ideas will cost a designer 99 dollar, a first qualitative filtering will be made upfront. The Quirky team itself makes the final selection of which product idea will be produced and sold on the website but they make use the inputs of their online community to support their decision. These users give design advice on the product idea, the brand name, packaging and so on and will receive a small percentage of the 30% profit generated by that specific product idea. Of course also the actual designer of the product will get a share of this profit once the product has made actual sales. To lower the risk, Quirky will only start to produce and sell a product in their webshop once 500 people made a pre-sale of it. If the product idea never reaches this level, the designer will at least receive the marketing data gained of the platform. 99 dollar for these brief insights is still a fair price. Next to the submission fees of all the designers Quirky will gain of course a lot of money out of their webshop , once it will be running at full force. Quirky floats on top of several trends and manages to offer value for all the stakeholders involved. Design influencers win, product designers win and so does Quirky. Where other crowdsourcing plaftorms struggle to find a good balance between trading social currency (influence, exposure, reputation,…) next the ‘normal’ currency (dollars), it seems Quirky got it right. Selling user generated content is not new but this unique approach seems to have enough potential to grow large. Although this sounds promising, Quirky should be aware not to burn their money too fast since they are giving away a few dollars to those who talk about them(*) and to those who fill in a small survey. They do need of course a large community to gain momentum but the investment in new members by offering them 20 dollar (**) is maybe not that sustainable.

(*) Since we’re testing out the service as well, the quirky link in this article has a ‘referral’-identifier attached to it.
(**) You first need to submit a 1 minute survey

Internet & media

SHARE

Get paid to tweet! Yesterday Super Chirp was launched as a tool for twitter users to get paid for their content stream. The application allows twitter users to send direct messages to people who pay to subscribe. Adding new vocabulary, a ‘chirp’ is a direct message sent via twitter to a paying subscriber. Any twitter user can sign up for Super Chirp with his or her existing twitter account (unlike twitpub), and set a monthly price between $0.99 and $9.99. Subscribers pay the small monthly fee for a stream of information. Super Chirp keeps a cut of 30%, leaving 70% for the publisher.

We have touched upon twitter’s monetization before with 77 Ways Twitter Could Make Money. Super Chirp illustrates how 3th party apps are monetizing twitter’s free service by offering paid premiums. Why does twitter refuse to enter the arena? From a user perspective, Super Chirp is another new tool for ‘prosumers’ and organizations to earn money. Think of celebrities (f.e. Britney Spears), stock tips, “the funniest guy on twitter”, horoscopes, charity, authority bloggers, early info… Do you have something unique to sell in small messages?

Banking & professional services

SHARE

As previously described on In-Game Selling, companies are moving from advertisement based revenue models to in-app commerce or in-product selling. Timebridge.com is an excellent example of the same principle. Timebridge offers a scheduling service enabling people to collaboratively determine when to meet, also on mobile. Their actual revenue model is the resale of online and phone meeting services. This is not a freemium model, as Timebridge does not sell a premium of its own product. It is not an advertising business model either, since Timebridge is not earning on selling its users’ attention to advertisers. Timebridge’s business model consists of offering its users a free service that serves as broker platform to resell 3th party (meeting) services with commission.

A lot of free products and services go with a freemium or advertising strategy, but advertising is not sustainable for a number of reasons. In-app commerce, or broader, in-product selling is there to challenge advertising. Micro-payments will be a crucial facilitator in getting consumers to actually paying for content again, in times where people are used to free and ad-supported. Like Timebridge, in-game selling, blogs with jobs/widgets/affiliate programs… can your product or service offer a channel to sell and buy things? Sales people earn more than advertisers, don’t they?