Will dot.coms survive in the local economy?

[yuga]

We've heard of big dot.coms such as Yahoo! and eBay and Amazon, but not all of them big multi-national companies do really generate big bucks these days don't they?

How about the local/regional ones? How do you think they will fare? How will these local dot.coms sustain the harsh Philippine economy?

[CaRaMBa]

If these companies can think of a way to get steady revenues, not only from advertising, and at the same time control their burn rate, then they will be okay.

[zimdude]

... also, they should be doing something sensible and not silly. Since the Philippine economy isn't too great anyway, a "dot com crash" will not happen as it did in the US.

[NoisyCricket]

If BLUE-CHIP companies like PLDT and San Miguel are down by as much as 40-70% in Stock Value, it seems bleak for DOT-COMS, especially those with no products to really "sell", or products that are also provided by other DOT-COMS.

[ginoledesma]

Not unless they give some the the local community can actually use and somehow "need." Yahoo, eBay, and several other dotcoms are struggling to get better profits, whereas several dotcoms like PriceLine plummetted down the drain.

[CaRaMBa]

Just a thought, since the bandwidth is paid in dollars, whether the provider is from the Philippines or from another country, if the peso goes up to P80-$1 - UH OH!

[yuga]

the usual advertising model for virtual companies doesn't seem to work here in the philippines... people aren't that confident that online advertising can replace and be better than the usual "offline" tri-media.

but we've seen better days... take for example auction sites which, in my observation, clicks the most with pinoys... and another online site which earns offline and not online (thru gigs and parties).

hmmm... ano pa ba?!?

[bUrAoT]

Originally posted by yuga

How about the local/regional ones? How do you think they will fare? How will these local dot.coms sustain the harsh Philippine economy?

Well it will be better if our government will give everybody a computer and internet connection for dotCOMS to surely be successful. Lets face it, Computer nowadays are really expensive and majority of filipinos can't afford it so the government should provide free internet cafe's in different baranggays and teach them the internet industry.

I hope that Mr. Villarde will be the one to start openning free internet Cafe's :)

[francisd]

I guess dot.coms are not my main concern.

My concern right now is "How many existing companies will survive in the local economy?".

[NoisyCricket]

Originally posted by yuga
the usual advertising model for virtual companies doesn't seem to work here in the philippines... people aren't that confident that online advertising can replace and be better than the usual "offline" tri-media.

but we've seen better days... take for example auction sites which, in my observation, clicks the most with pinoys... and another online site which earns offline and not online (thru gigs and parties).

hmmm... ano pa ba?!?



Ang dami ring auctions sites dito sa Pinas, eh.. Baka divided na rin ang market.

http://www.surfingbananas.com
http://www.bidshot.com
http://www.pinoyauctions.com
http://www.(ano pa ba? :D ).com

[batang uliran]

The economy right now is tough for everyone - especially on dotcoms that have traded on future growth and revenues. There is no surefire way of making money in the philippine internet market right now because it's too small. Time will tell and the pretenders will fall by the wayside.

[yuga]

I heard EDSA.com earns P600k a month for advertisers.... hmmmm....

[NoisyCricket]

ok yan ah! How about advertising rates for Inquirer.net! :D

[codeslut]

I think the whole .com model was flawed from conception. Trading on future growth and revenues? That's crazy. I mean, it works for a while, but you have to show someone the money sometime.

TANSTAAFL.

Moral of the story: have an actual product. Have skills you can rent out.

[yuga]

Inquirer.net uses the CPM model in selling to advertisers.

and just look te their rates:


Run-of-Site Banner campaigns

Gross CPM - $20

Increase brand awareness and visibility. Drive traffic to your site by putting your banner ad (468 x 60 pixels) in the number one Philippine web site.

Category or Targetted Banner campaigns

Gross CPM - $25
Give your banner campaigns focus by advertising in content categories or sections, such as Business, Lifestyle, Sports and InfoTech.

Sponsorships

Gross CPM - $30
Boost your brand by exclusively sponsoring a specific content area on Inquirer Interactive. Choose a special interest section where a "presented by" or "sponsored by" tag will be fixed and linked to your web site.



ALERT
Gross CPM - $30 (text)
ALERT is Inquirer Interactive’s electronic newsletter, containing summaries of the day’s top stories.You can put in up to 400 characters (including spaces) of information on your company’s promotion/campaign, which will be linked to your web site.

[lechon 2000]

What does "CPM" mean?

[yuga]

Clicks Per Thousand (M means 1 thousand in Roman Numerals)

[lupuS]

Displaced dot-com employees and nervous Hollywood technicians have found an unlikely shelter from the economic downturn: the porn industry.

Executives at the area's leading adult entertainment firms report a surge of resumes and telephone inquiries from disillusioned techies, as well as mainstream camera operators, grips and lighting experts who are worried about strikes by Hollywood writers and actors.

The porn companies, many of which produce X-rated videos and popular erotic Web sites from San Fernando Valley industrial parks, have not been hit by the faltering economy. Instead, porn is one of the few profitable enterprises on the Internet. For employees, the work is steady, although the nonunion wages generally are low by Hollywood standards.

Just how many dot-com refugees are heading to the thousands of porn-related sites is unclear, but a check of some of the larger firms indicated that most are actively hiring technicians from the mainstream Internet world.

"We're getting all sorts of calls from technology head-hunters asking if we have openings," said Bert Manzari, chief executive of DHD Media in Santa Monica, an online adult entertainment company. "They're asking to place everything from database administrators to programmers to executives.

"It's funny, because a year ago, we couldn't get anyone to call us back," he said.

Industry watchers in tech and entertainment centers across the country say the migration is increasing as the porn industry expands. Executives in the recession-proof adult entertainment field say the calls and resumes underscore the mainstreaming of porn into American corporate life.

Read the full story (http://www.latimes.com/print/20010423/t000034314.html)

[lord eira]

I even read from web news that Yahoo! Australia is banking on porn to sell ads and earn revenue. :(

[NoisyCricket]

Just got back from the US where I attended an IT Seminar which took us on a tour of Silicon Valley Companies. :)
Not a single dotCom was featured.

Everyone was into hardcore technologies. Biotechnology was popular. The study of Human Genomics, Microarrays, Micro Fluidics, all that kind of stuff.

Very few people want to invest in dot coms these days. VC's are now trying to diversify their investments in areas where competition cannot simply duplicate your idea, as was possible with the dotComs. Anyone can copy a dotCom more or less, but to begin a new company at a level where other companies have spent years and tons of money on R & D on New Patented Technologies... well, that's something else.

My cousin in the US is a Recruiter for PeopleSoft, and he is getting a ton of resumes from people who claim to be CEO's, GM's, VP's of dotComs, and they know they can't really leverage their GM experience. In fact, he says you offer them the lowest available package, and they jump at the chance to work with you.

That's sad. Say... anyone want to buy shares of WebVan at 7c a share? (The last time I looked anyway..) The week I left they were appealing not to be de-listed.. axed.. squelched.. picked off...

And *they* were a dotcom that at least had a product to sell.. :(

[yuga]

I thought the President/CEO of the former Andersen Consulting (read: Accenture) resigned to head WebVan last year or was it the previous year? Anyway, kawawa naman siya! Walang kwenta 'yung 2 point something million shares niya. :D

[zimdude]

Well at least in the Philippines, dot com executives are still glamorous... :D (just read INQUIRER 2BU)

[karengkeng]

I think it is safer and wiser for a traditional business to use e-business as a strategy or an additional channel to expand their business and reach other partners or customers. But for a company to rely solely on the internet to win in the marketplace, suicide ata.

All the hype the past years created this illusion that any regular guy can make millions on the web without any research at all. Click and mortars will survive because they didn't lose their focus. It's going to be a challenge for netgens and dotcoms to keep their heads above the water at this time.

I was talking to a dotcom guy based in libis a couple of days ago and he said they're headcount's being trimmed down tremendously.

[lupuS]

Originally posted by yuga
I thought the President/CEO of the former Andersen Consulting (read: Accenture) resigned to head WebVan last year or was it the previous year? Anyway, kawawa naman siya! Walang kwenta 'yung 2 point something million shares niya. :D

Webvan CEO Resigns (http://www.wsrn.com/apps/news/art.xpl?id=1956735&f=NEWS&s=WBVN)
Friday, April 13, 2001 06:06:10 PM - siliconvalley.internet.com

by MichaelSinger - http://siliconvalley.internet.com


After two years at the post, Webvan (Nasdaq: WBV) chairman and CEO George Shaheen is leaving the company.

The Foster City-based Internet grocery delivery service, Friday announced Shaheen's departure citing his desire to "pursue personal objectives."

"A different kind of executive is needed to lead the company at this time and as such, it no longer makes sense for me to continue in my role," says Shaheen.

Shaheen's departure comes as the company's stock price is down to 12 cents a share and its own auditors are reportedly questioning whether the company can remain in business.

"I am proud of the role I played in the launch of this pioneering business," says Shaheen, convinced that Webvan has a solid business model. "Unfortunately, changes in the capital markets have altered the timetable and operating approach to the achievement of the model as originally envisioned."

Shaheen had served as served as CEO since October 1999 and was named as chairman of Webvan's board of directors in February 2001.


I can only hope he learned something during his stay at Andersen, and did not put all of his life savings in this venture.

[zimdude]

So how are the locals doing... especially those depending on ads... for instance, EDSAMAIL which is a poster child for this - they have dialup infrastructure, etc.

[mamangbumbero]

Originally posted by lupuS
I can only hope he learned something during his stay at Andersen, and did not put all of his life savings in this venture.


He'll prolly bang his head on the wall some more when Accenture's rumored IPO pushes through.

[mamangbumbero]

Zimdude, your company is the one that partnered (bought?) with PSINet. Isn't it? Just wondering, how are things now that PSINet is in the brink of bunkruptcy?

[zimdude]

our company was transferred to inter.net (http://www.inter.net) which was spun out and is not controlled and only minority-owned by PSINet. we even get our bandwidth from other providers besides PSINet. so, we're not affected by PSINet's problems.

[yuga]

Is it true that PSINet is facing a delisting memorandum from NASDAQ?

[lupuS]

PSINet Announces NASDAQ Delisting

4/23/2001 11:18:00 AM
ASHBURN, Va., Apr 23, 2001 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- PSINet Inc. (PSIX) announced that it has been informed that the staff of NASDAQ has determined that its securities should be delisted from the NASDAQ Stock Market at the opening of business on April 27, 2001.

NASDAQ halted trading in PSINet's common stock, at last price of 3/16, and in PSINet's Series C preferred stock, at last price of 1-3/16, on April 3, 2001. That trading halt will remain in effect until the company's securities are delisted on April 27.

The Company does not believe it has any reasonable basis for challenging the NASDAQ staff's delisting determination, and is therefore not planning to appeal it.

PSINet previously announced that it is likely that its common stock and preferred stock will have no value.

Complete Story (http://cbs.marketwatch.com/tools/quotes/newsarticle.asp?siteid=mktw&symb=&guid=%7B82BCAB78%2D4E79%2D4782%2D88BB%2DC855A8E5B9D6%7D)

[zimdude]

actually, I don't follow what's happening... but that is said to be bad for tech stocks in general since PSINet is one of the oldest tech stocks... it's been public since 1995.

back to the topic - local dot.com's? Any more insights? Looks like pinoyexchange.com is doing well :D

[yuga]

Is it ok to ask if what's PEx's monthly revenue amounts to? I hear EDSAMail is making 2M a month. Mas malaki kaya ang sa PEx? ;)

Another question: Would anybody know how many Pinoy Portals do we have right now?

[zimdude]

Who would pay Edsamail 2M a month? I think in this post-dot com gloom people realized that advertising doesn't yield results... or maybe they know something we don't... :|

Portals, well, after the craze, not many are still alive and kicking! The only newish one I could think of is http://www.itnetcentral.com .

[zimdude]

Quoting manabs at "Psst... Corporate Chismis here..." (http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php3?postid=931546):


Given all these dot.com companies folding up, who do you think will survive and why? Also, can you give an in-depth explanation why all these failures (on top of them having no revenue inflows)?


Imagine a boom that led to the US dot com crash due to overexpecting business plans, plus, no e-commerce... to survive, you have to be paid, whether by the subscribers, or by sponsors and not plain advertisers who don't get leads directly from the web anyway.

Looks like the ISP-type service model is the one that works since people really have to pay; credit & collection would be the problem here.


I find it pretty sad actually...at least for the long-term investors. I'm sure a lot who cashed out during the hype's peak are laughing all the way to the bank.


Lots of dreams down the drain, huh? I don't think opportunistic cashing out is relevant to the Philippines since very few got listed. More cash-outs were achieved by mergers & acquisitions.

[maxwell]

Originally posted by zimdude
back to the topic - local dot.com's? Any more insights? Looks like pinoyexchange.com is doing well :D

I can only speak for myDentista.com, so far we're doing fine. slowly and surely getting some revenues from ads and other marketing programs.

I think that local dotcoms still has a chance to earn, but not in millions. IMHO, we should learn how to target locally since it would be a lot easier marketing-wise and investment would be a lot smaller.

As always, payment gateways and security are issues that we still have to deal with, specially with the rampant spread of "carders".

[yuga]

I gather Inq7.net doesn't even earn much in Banner Ads sales despite the millions of page views a month. :(

[NoisyCricket]

I don't know about that.. I think it generates some revenues, but perhaps not really enough to make the founders of INQ7.net filthy rich..? (not sure).

There is a distinction between a dotCom, whose revenue streams are derived solely from the web (Amazon.com), and a dotCorp, which aims to provide an online presence for its real brick and mortar business. While the former exists as an entity itself, the latter is more of a multi-media channel for its clients to know more about the company. So if you absolutely KILLED http://www.cocacola.com, Coke would still be alive and kicking; it merely sheds its online "shell".

Take away Amazon.com's web-based store front, and what have you got? Not much.

But at least, it is a dotCom that actually, and successfully, sells an actual product STRAIGHT to the end-user.

With some portals for example, management will try to generate a critical mass (or hope to), and sell (not even a real product; NOT even a service) but the actual users themselves to advertisers.

It's confusing to me. The business model seems to me like it is putting the cart before the horse. The dotCom Portal says to its advertisers: Buy US, Advertise with US, and we'll guarantee you the audience. But where is the audience? You sell what you don't have yet. You can't build a startup and begin with a million users.

You'd have to have the kind of content that no one else has, and can't copy or steal from you. News? You're competing against media giants like INQ7.net, CNN.com.. Search Engine..? I use google all the time. You'd have to be very niched to provide content no one else can provide, and even then, your target wouldn't be everyone, and you wouldn't have a great market. And if you did find such content, people will just steal your ideas. Poof...!

Besides, the same user that you are selling to advertisers, DOESN'T want to be sold..! :D They hate it when you divulge their personal info, give out their email address (because they KNOW you'll spam them), and will only click on your banners if there's something in it for THEM.

So what is it in store for them? I don't know. A portal may be a hub for information, but it may be faster to go straight to the source of the content than have to go through a portal first. Just didn't click maybe? A mall is a gathering of shops, but you can actually leave the mall with a full stomach (the first need of any human being), a book, a watch, a comic book, a magazine, a toy.. something.

If your site sells nothing, provides information you can get anywhere else, you lose members.

It's a very tangled web.. Who is selling what to who? More importantly, the question is = Who are the customers of the dotComs? The endusers or the advertisers?

If we say it is the advertisers who are the clients of the dotComs, you almost cut out the end-users out of the equation - there's no direct benefit for them really. He or she would say, ok, you're selling my info to the advertiser -- what do I get? People don't read the Inquirer because they know it is an advertiser's haven, but because they want to read about the news. Another example. You want to put up a business. You want to sell shoes. So you make the shoes, and you sell them to ... that's right - the advertisers.. (Did I miss something there? You're a manufacturer of whatever product - toothbrushes, shoes, cars, and instead of selling to the consumers, you're selling to advertisers? That's pretty messed up, man. You sell your product STRAIGHT to the people who need to buy it, who need to drive the car, or wear the shoes... To sell it to someone else is just.. well... off-tangent and insane.) There was a HUGE gaping hole somewhere in the mind who thought of THAT logic..! (Amazon sells books, not ads.)

So if the advertisers are not the customers, then they must be the end-users themselves. Right. Just as everything should be, but how do you generate revenue directly from them? Well, 1. charge a fee for your service, (and Netizens don't really like paying for things online they previously got for free :) or 2. sell them something. Giving away all these things for free.. well.. what's that going to get you? (Are you running a business or a free lunch?)

Is there a third party? Selling it to someone OTHER than the end-user and the advertiser (in the vain hopes some advertisers in the country, in the region, or on the planet will bite...)

Weird...

[Leigh]

with regards to banner placements, most companies don't like to place their ads alone, they want something that people will remember them by.

Like yehey for example, ( i read an article late last week about their online advertising, am still looking for the link, please bear with me) they had this successful campaign with benson's eclair and they got money for that.

It's more of the service you can offer the people, in our country alone, a lot of people make sites, if these people just continue learning and improving...adding services, they will eventually survive the stiff competition.

the Internet is fairly young in our Country and a lot of the business people are still conservative, maybe with education and awareness, they would learn to trust the Internet with their products.

[guapa]

some local dotcoms fail because they started lavishly. like, they hold office in expensive addresses, hire marketing people, IT people, and so on. They spend millions of pesos just by launching their web site or starting their business.
For me, starting a dotcom business shouldnt be that expensive. I started mine with nothing. Now, I got my own regular visitors to my site who are loyal and who keeps on coming back to my site. My site now gets almost 8,000 hits a day and got almost 10,000 hits a day when I provided a coverage of the local election. I also have clients, who really pay me monthly, in addition to the set-up fee and others, who recently renewed their contracts with me ( after 1 or 2 years). I don't earn millions per month yet but I hope to be able to buy a car from my earnings from this site soon.
I have a new client this month and more whom I cant even attend to anymore. I only got me and my husband (who also shares the same passion as i do)to work on this little business. I dont have an office ( I work from my bedroom) but I am just on the Net 3-8 hrs a day. I work on my website business only in the evenings after my regular office day b'coz i work full-time for a company too.
I host my sites in US web host servers and chose not to set-up my own webservers (which most dotcom operators are doing).
Now, I am redesigning my site so I can already claim that
my site is a portal site. And I am now considering of hiring someone who can help me with some computer works.
I also got my own share of competitors, but slowly they are fading and I still claim that I hold the lead in our category, I say I am a survivor.
My site (http://www.bohol-island.com) is very simple, yet it's already our cyberhome, specially to my fellow provincemates who are now living abroad.

[ducksoup]

I want to know if local e-commerce has actually made substantial amounts of money - money that pays for start up costs and overhead -in its six, or so, years of doing business. And if not, will it ever?

How effective are content rich sites (pinoycentral, pinoyexchange) in raking in pesos from ad space? Are there studies or facts one can quote from?

Has any notable research group conducted studies on the state of local e-commerce. If so, has it been published or made publicly available?

And, do the rank in file in local dotcoms get paid for their work or is work purely pro bono?

I've heard of idea incubators like the Ayala subsidized, Ideafarm. According to the numerous press releases, companies like these actually finance a dotcom idea, provided that it has a sound business model. If we are to believe the releases, has Ideafarm and its ilk already provided capital for a fledgling dotcom.

A follow up to that would be, are these idea incubator-sponsored websites making money? How do these incubators make money?

Are we dealing with new age altruism here?

Why am I asking these questions? Well, I have a lot of time to spare before the movie I plan to watch starts; I might as well do something productive while I'm waiting. :)

[ducksoup]

Originally posted by karengkeng
I think it is safer and wiser for a traditional business to use e-business as a strategy or an additional channel to expand their business and reach other partners or customers. But for a company to rely solely on the internet to win in the marketplace, suicide ata.

All the hype the past years created this illusion that any regular guy can make millions on the web without any research at all. Click and mortars will survive because they didn't lose their focus. It's going to be a challenge for netgens and dotcoms to keep their heads above the water at this time.

I was talking to a dotcom guy based in libis a couple of days ago and he said they're headcount's being trimmed down tremendously.



I'll agree with karengkeng. Traditional business should see the Net ONLY as an extended tool for conducting business. Companies should not transcend their current state. Imagine companies like Marlboro selling cigars exclusively on the Net. I know it sounds far fetched, but there are some companies who have actually left brick n mortar status for the much coveted online persona.

Nobody has yet to devise a decent business model- at least to my knowledge- that can make companies good money online. So, why bother selling socks on the Net, if you can make more money selling them to retail outlets.

But then again, who am I to say that the Net can't make an individual rich. Jeff Bezos would probably have a mouthful to say about this.:)

[ducksoup]

But what about, content?

Can websites make money out of content like cartoons, movies, online books and games?

Will you actually charge copious amounts of dinar just to see and hear Sidney Sheldon's lateswt novel?

Is content on the Net superior to that of Cable telvision? Is the electronic word just as intersting as the printed word? Is it easier to read?

Is it true that the Internet is highly over rated? What is there to do on the Net besides search for porn and esoteric bits of trivia?

It's obvious that the Net in its current state is not as pervasive as traditional media (televison, radio, newspapers), but given time and the decreasing cost of processing power will the Net equal or rival its long standing cousins?

Is there hope for LOCAL content providers? If so, where are they? And why isn't the Ideafarm looking for the content kings, or have they found them already?

[ducksoup]

Can anybody tell me if Pinoyexchange is making money?

I would think so.I count you as one of the few web success stories here in the Philippines.

With a community of over 15,000, (I moderator tells me that it's somewhere around that number) Pinoyexchange is a wonderful place to advertise and conduct market research.

And,you guys have a veritable brand going for you here. You can translate this success to a cable televison show, a magazine and a number of other things. Right now, You already have a radio show, so why not cross media platforms?

Anyone, care to answer my question? Ms. Charo? Ms. Leigh? KuyaDanny?

[nix]

Hi ducksoup. I've been reading some of your posts in these are my comments:

- PEx is making some money but it is not yet profitable. Yes we are looking at expanding our brand to other media platforms, but we realize that there are several facets to our business model that we want to explore outside of simply being a media play.

- As for Internet business models, it is perfectly understandable why there are not too many profitable dot.coms. There are profitable business models, however. CNet, Yahoo, EBay, Expedia, Travelocity, Tape.com, and several other web sites (from gaming to travel to B2B to retailing) are profitable at this stage. Several other web businesses could be profitable should they lower their marketing expenses.

- The problem with the Internet is that several groups have concentrated too much on market share as opposed to profitability. A lot of web sites have started charging for their services. For example, XDrive is now charging for the web space on their site. They estimate that even if only 2 percent of their subscriber base sticks it out with them, they would be profitable. Note that a lot of other sites are following in their footsteps.

- Do not compare the Internet to traditional media. The Internet has its own scenarios of use that other media formats cannot match. One must only unlock its potential, and be able to distinguish hype from truth to appreciate this.

- The problem with the Net Industry is that too many people tried to do a get rich quick act to profit from this new phenomenon. Too much money going around, too many services vying for the same markets. Expect 90 plus percent of all commercial web sites to eventually fold or be absorbed by a bigger player. In the end, only a few giant enterprises will remain standing. Chances are, brick and mortar incumbents will be the ones remaining.

[ducksoup]

Originally posted by nix
Hi ducksoup. I've been reading some of your posts in these are my comments:

- PEx is making some money but it is not yet profitable. Yes we are looking at expanding our brand to other media platforms, but we realize that there are several facets to our business model that we want to explore outside of simply being a media play.

- As for Internet business models, it is perfectly understandable why there are not too many profitable dot.coms. There are profitable business models, however. CNet, Yahoo, EBay, Expedia, Travelocity, Tape.com, and several other web sites (from gaming to travel to B2B to retailing) are profitable at this stage. Several other web businesses could be profitable should they lower their marketing expenses.

- The problem with the Internet is that several groups have concentrated too much on market share as opposed to profitability. A lot of web sites have started charging for their services. For example, XDrive is now charging for the web space on their site. They estimate that even if only 2 percent of their subscriber base sticks it out with them, they would be profitable. Note that a lot of other sites are following in their footsteps.

- Do not compare the Internet to traditional media. The Internet has its own scenarios of use that other media formats cannot match. One must only unlock its potential, and be able to distinguish hype from truth to appreciate this.

- The problem with the Net Industry is that too many people tried to do a get rich quick act to profit from this new phenomenon. Too much money going around, too many services vying for the same markets. Expect 90 plus percent of all commercial web sites to eventually fold or be absorbed by a bigger player. In the end, only a few giant enterprises will remain standing. Chances are, brick and mortar incumbents will be the ones remaining.



You know what, nix, I find it highly ironic that the Internet and a huge share of its content will eventually end up in the hands of big business. The internet was founded on guerilla warfare type principles. Everything on the net was a result of ingenuity and creative thinking.

Now, we have a big player like Disney joining in the fray and buying out half of the net's content. On the upside, we might start to see something really entertaining on the web. But the downside to this is the curtailment of that free and chaotic spirit that the Web created.

The web is the everyman's medium of expression, but I fear its days as such is coming to a close.

Yes, you are right the Net is unlike other forms of media. It incorporates many elements (text, graphics, sound, interactivity) and it is more personal than say television, but it still follows the rules of old media.

It's an argument as old as AOL. Many say that the Net is a non-traditional form of delivering the message, and that it does not adhere to any of the old rules, but it does. For instance, the Net's existence is highly dependent on advertising.

An old hat in the media game,advertising still plays a huge role in this medium's capabilty to deliver the message.

Like all forms of media, the Net delivers a message and there's nothing non-traditional or novel about that concept. And besides,the Net is too ingrained in everday life to be non-traditional.

I also find it interesting that retail is the main source of revenue for the Net. Content, many say will eventually sustain the Net, but until high speed access is something we can all have, we'll have to be content with looking at JPEG files of Tom Clancy's latest book to be entertained.

Thanks, nix, for responding. I've babbled long enough. Hope to hear from you soon.

[ducksoup]

This one's for my friend Mark, a non-Pexer who loves to wander these forums. I still don't understand why you don't want to register, Mark.:)

Okay, I admit it, Mark. I mistook the word 'non-traditional' for the word 'unconventional.'

But, I still think there is nothing non-traditional with the Net as a medium of delivering content.

You cite, hypertext and the non-linear way a message is delivered over the Net.

But, what you failed to notice is that we still interpret the message in a linear way. When we go to CNN.com to read the news we don't start reading the links first. We read the lead of the news stoy first, then we go through the story paragraph by paragraph.

We read the lead first and we end with the final paragraph because this is how our mind orgainzes information-in a linear way.

Our thought process is linear, Mark. I don't care how many links you have on a news story or how much hyper-text has 'revolutionized' the way the message is now delivered. Things are still the same be it off or online. People still read the news online the same way they would read it offline.

All that information on a Website means squat if you can't organize it in way that normal people can understand.

The Net-the deliverer of information Net-still adheres to same principles that guide televison, radio and print.

And,Mark, I believe that local content has promise.

Go to the nearest bookstore and you'll see that local magazines are doing well over their international counterparts.

Mark, there is a need for localized content. I simply cannot empathize with what the people at Onion.com are saying.

Yes, their stuff is funny, but I want to see Pinoy humor on the Net, too. We have an abundance of materiaL that local humorists can lampoon. The whole Erap debacle is proof of this.

Care to argue somemore, Mark? Come on, I dare you to register. :)

[zimdude]

I asked at another thread - are the US terrorist attacks going to end what's left of the "New Economy?" If investors will go for tangibles and established stuff, what funding will be left?

How will that translate to the local dot coms?
How are they doing now?

[aisrael]

Dot-coms will always be around.

Whether or not they'll be profitable, or popular, or glamorous or whatever is beside the point.

It's like asking, "because of the recent global economic shifts & turns, and because of the liberalization of the retail industry, and the entry of foreign / big players... will the humble sari-sari store die out?"

It won't, because there will always be a niche for small-market, frugally run retail outlets.

In the same vein, a 'dot-com' run by, say, an individual or a couple of partners, with just enough of a budget to keep itself online, that doesn't rely solely on advertising revenue, has, IMhO, very good chances of survival.

The 'dot-com' bubble & subsequent crash, IMhO, can be 'placed' on a couple of significant factors:

1.) Unmanageable growth.
2.) Unreasonable revenue expectations / valuations.
3.) Untested / unreliable business models.

It's not about being or not being a "dot-com". It's about basic business principles being 'chucked' out the window all in the name of being a 'dot-com'.

My 0.02 Php.

[zimdude]

So the "crash" was the economy's self-correction?

What are the plans of the dot com's? Any dot com people want to share?

[Krakista]

Originally posted by aisrael
Dot-coms will always be around.

..... because there will always be a niche for small-market, frugally run retail outlets.

It's not about being or not being a "dot-com". It's about basic business principles being 'chucked' out the window all in the name of being a 'dot-com'.

Music to my ears. I've been working on something the last two years that would allow SMEs to set up an online catalog cheaply.

:)

[zimdude]

Hmm, will the SME customers have Internet access? If not yet, then the service may be better off mobile. I don't see an increase in personal Internet subscriptions as far as I can tell.