raif’s random rants…

on february 19th, fortune magazine ran this article about facebook.

overall it had some good observations, decent insights and asked some interesting questions. but nothing that hasn’t been discussed elsewhere. all in all it did a good job of providing a state-of-the-nation on the fast growing social networking site that now has 175 million users.

my beef with the article was the following chart.

the problem is that comparing facebook to any of these technologies is NOT a fare comparison at all.

each of these technologies had two main barriers to adoption:

first is the upfront and the ongoing cost to the user. to get a telephone, you had to pay the connection fees and then incur monthly fees – flat AND usage based. same with cellular phones. first cellphones were ridiculously expensive to buy and the rate plans were outrageous. similar with a tv. even now a tv costs hundreds of dollars. and to get any utility out of it you either need cable or a dvd collection or both. same with the ipod. cost hundreds of dollars and then more for buying mp3s.

facebook doesn’t cost anything to start and there are no ongoing costs either. other then you’re time.

the second major barrier each of these technologies had was around infrastructure. back in 1876 when supposedly telephones were available, it didn’t mean that you could just get it just because you were ready to pay for it. you had to wait for the infrastructure to roll out to your area (the wires etc.) similar issue with ipod. you needed an internet connection, and fast enough computer before you could get meaningful utility out of an ipod. also, not sure where ipod would be without itunes…

facebook did not face any of these infrastructure challenges either.

reaching 175 million users in 5 years is not shabby at all. however, that doesn’t imply anything about how it compares to the telephone, the television, the ipod or the cellular phone.

overall, a pointless comparison offering no insights whatsoever. fortune mag. FAIL.