Twitter on Advertising: Let’s Try That One Again

Just a couple days ago, Twitter cofounder Biz Stone was publicly saying that advertising wasn’t part of the company’s revenue plan. Oh, how a few days change things.

In a post on Twitter’s blog, Stone writes, “to say we are philosophically opposed to any and all advertising is incorrect.” He goes on:

“The idea of taking money to run traditional banner ads on Twitter.com has always been low on our list of interesting ways to generate revenue. However, facilitating connections between businesses and individuals in meaningful and relevant ways is compelling. We’re going to leave the door open for exploration in this area.”

Stone then uses the blog to say he’s speaking at the Cannes ad festival next month. Open mouth, extricate foot, keep Cannes speaking gig.

Twitter Founder: Ads “just not quite as interesting to us”

Is Biz Stone nuts? At yesterday’s Reuters Global Technology Summit, the Twitter co-founder said the company is exploring revenue streams from services and enhancement that it hopes businesses and professional Twitter users would buy. As for ads, he said, “There are a few reasons why we’re not pursuing advertising — one is it’s just not quite as interesting to us.” He added:”There are no people at Twitter who know anything about advertising or work in advertising. So we don’t have anyone there to make or take those calls.” (Reuters)

Hmm, I know a few hundred folks who are champing at the bit to take those calls … the same ones who debate endlessly about what Twitter’s revenue model should be. Were Stone’s remarks just posing? Would he REALLY turn down ad revenue simply because no one at Twitter could take a few calls? Is he REALLY willing to fork over that ad revenue to the myriad companies that are sprouting up to create ad models for Twitter? Or is he onto something: that advertising, no matter how many calls came in, wouldn’t be enough to sustain the company?

Very strange, indeed. As for that revenue stream from services, well, that’s a tough one as well. In the Reuters article Stone mentions “lightweight analytics” and a directory that would make it easy to tell which Twitter accounts were legit. Those seem ho-hum to me, but maybe I’m missing something.

Social Media Podcast with Smallbiz America

I was interviewed recently by David Wolf of Smallbiz America about social media marketing. In the interview I answer these questions:

1. You’ve been in this space since 1993—-has anything totally surprised you in terms of the ways internet advertising and marketing has unfolded?
2. At eMarketer—-you’ve got a birds-eye view of how the world of social media is changing the landscape of marketing. What does social media do that traditional media simply cannot do?
3. The issue of brand control has certainly been a concern for many companies as they make their entrance into social media. How are you seeing companies manage their brands in a world that’s all about letting go of control, and harvesting authenticity from the consumer?
4. How do you see strategic possibilities evolving for companies that want to participate in social networks as advertisers—-how are they looking to approach the challenge?
5. Do you think it’s more effective for companies to create their own social networking platforms—-or is it a better idea to leverage the existing platforms that have huge traction?
6. How is search marketing evolving—-and what can we look forward to in terms of changes there?

A History of Twitter

The LA Times has a nice oral history of Twitter, from Jack Dorsey, one of its founders. Key points:

- The idea for Twitter started in 2000 (and had the working name Stat.us)

- Dorsey started germinating the idea by thinking about taxis, ambulances and bike messengers that automatically transmit their whereabouts in a given city. But the people connection was missing.

- Originally, the terms was “watching” — which evolved to “following.”

- On the Twitter name: “Bird chirps sound meaningless to us, but meaning is applied by other birds. The same is true of Twitter: a lot of messages can be seen as completely useless and meaningless, but it’s entirely dependent on the recipient.”

Twitter’s User-Generated Business Model

Twitter needs a business model and it seem everyone BUT Twitter is trying to figure it out.

It’s amazing, really, to see so many people raising their hands to offer up their ideas of how Twitter should make money. Market research. Search. Contextual ads. Paid recommendations. Questions and answers. Silicon Alley Insider is running an entire contest devoted to helping Twitter. Eleven of the best presentations are available for anyone to see.

Obviously people have a strong attachment to Twitter and I agree that it represents a turning point in how people communicate. I personally expect that its user base will grow substantially in 2009. But I can’t fathom the amount of time and energy the Twitter community is investing to help it figure out the revenue problem. Has this ever happened with any other company, and so publicly?

If and when Twitter comes up with an actual plan, who gets the credit?

Update: In the San Francisco Chronicle, Twitter CEO Evan Willams has this to say about his company’s revenue efforts: “We don’t like to make too big a deal of it. We don’t want to rush it.”

Twitter’s Revenue Model: Charge Commercial Users

Twitter co-founder Evan Williams yesterday opened up to TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington about his revenue plans — details many in the Web 2.0 community have been eager to learn. Even Arrington expressed surprise about how revealing Williams was.

In a transcript of the interview (also in video), Williams says:

The broad strokes on the matter are obviously Twitter is being used for a lot of commercial purposes right now, in addition to social purposes. We think that works pretty well. We think there’s a lot of companies that we’ve talked to that seem to be getting a lot of value out of it. If that continues, if that becomes a rich world for users and the companies, we think we can extract some revenue from that.

And later, a revenue model that seems to suggest Twitter might charge for businesses to promote their specials or answer questions:

One scenario that’s kind of interesting and I’m sure you’ve noticed, [there’s a lot of] questions and answers over Twitter. You combine instant answers and mobility and the fact that people are traveling around me asking a question. Like, “Where should I have dinner in the part of San Francisco?” Or, there are companies now that are sending, they’re little cafes that are sending their lunch specials for today. If you can make that querriable or just allow users to opt-in to receive that kind of stuff …

Other models that Williams discusses: search ads (Twitter confirmed its purchase of Summize yesterday) and traditional ads (which Williams says he’s not really interested in doing).

Twitter has been gaining momentum for several months now and a lot of companies are active there – Southwest, Comcast, Zappos, to name a few. It will be interesting to see how Twitter defines what is a promotional tweet and what is not, and what is a commercial use of Twitter and what is not. If Comcast finds someone complaining about their service on Twitter and offers to help (as it did with Arrington), then should Comcast have to pay Twitter for that?

Summize is Cool

This is going to make me — and a whole lot of other people and companies — use Twitter a whole lot more.

On a related note, why do people I don’t know keep finding and following me even though I haven’t posted a tweet in months (bad social media expert, bad, bad, bad)? Is anyone else disturbed by the image of strangers following you?