November 1, 2009 at 10:39 am · Filed under Facebook, web2.0
It’s amazing to me that the same lead gen style setups that swept through the affiliate industry in 2003-2005 have now made their way to Facebook:
In short, these games try to get people to pay cash for in game currency so they can level up faster and have a better overall experience. Which is fine. But for users who won’t pay cash, a wide variety of “offers” are available where they can get in-game currency in exchange for lead gen-type offers. Most of these offers are bad for consumers because it confusingly gets them to pay far more for in-game currency than if they just paid cash (there are notable exceptions, but the scammy stuff tends to crowd out the legitimate offers). And it’s also bad for legitimate advertisers.
If you’ll remember, for a $1.00 payout (but eventually up to $2.00 or $2.50 as the market became saturated), publishers could send an email address and zip code (or just email address) of a “consumer” hoping to win their free iPod (and eventually laptops or HD TV’s).
The quality was, of course, terrible. However, this was about getting a one time credit card charge through a miasma of a three step co-reg process.
Amazing that this trick still works, just with new clothes.
Interesting post on GigaOm that asks the question, but there’s an even more fun discussion on FriendFeed courtesy of Robert Scoble liking the article in his Google Reader Shared Items:
Soon subscribing and following won’t matter. Publishing good stuff that people “like” will matter most with the only little advantage in having a lot of subscribers or followers will be that your good content might reach more people faster. – Charbax
Which is “worth” more? I’d say they are both pretty worthless if you’re a hack and have no idea how to monetize your followers or subscribers (*cough* Sam points finger at himself *cough*). However, their worth is totally dependent on your platform, the audience and how you interact.
Nevertheless, I think it is very telling that the conversation is much better on FriendFeed via Robert’s Google Shared Items… which got there because he “liked” the post.
With this type of activity on Google and especially on Facebook, the future will be very likable, not just subscribable.
Btw, my Google Shared Items page is here if you’d like to follow what I “Like.”
Which one is worth more? Apples and Oranges?