External web services and traffic-generating sites. Why be friends?
In general, the Internet market should in theory be one of the most progressive, and large players should stimulate its development.
Or not?
For me, it is quite logical that companies engaged in the same conversion services, conducting advertising campaigns in the network with a deliberate analysis of the effectiveness of traffic, develop the advertiser market for the same portals and contextual systems. Any automation tool, a new sales channel using the Internet strengthens the position of the entire market and all advertising sites, and most of those with the most efficient traffic.
')
In the course of the development of our projects ( www.restoranonline.ru , www.tradeins.ru ), judging by what you have to face quite often, I come to the conclusion that everything is not so obvious.
At the moment, the web services market is actively being built around the already existing continents - Twitter, Facebook, Google, Yandex, etc. In the market of mobile operating systems, platforms are fighting for good applications, because if developers do not write for them, sooner or later they will exactly what is happening with Symbian right now.
In the niche portal industry, a lot of things can revolve around the main traffic-generating elephants, and here comes the most interesting, in view of the specificity of regional portals (the word regional or niche, very often reflects the breadth of worldview on the Internet and what happens in it ).
The most far-sighted platforms have already acquired their APIs for a long time, some of them are actively acquiring now, there are open clear partnering programs, such platforms encourage external developers, increase satellite services around themselves, and even buy the most fit to their ecosystem. See how much everything revolves around the same eBay, or VKontakte, or Facebook. A huge number of external web applications interact with them from outside.
But as they say, despite the positive external trend of integrations of everything, everything, and with everything, it is stupid and even impossible to resist - there is still a huge amount of web dinosaurs on the fields of the RuNet. The point is not the age of projects and their technologies, but the mentality of the leadership and the openness of projects for external independent applications.
There are dozens of “impenetrable” web sites, which, instead of sound business logic with external services, make it easier to pursue a policy of “autocratic isolationism.”
And the farther the region, the more distinct this rhetoric. Is it really not clear that everyone will receive “full google” sooner or later?
Monopolistic bravado is often reinforced by overt technological backwardness, which still maintains the viability of their business models, only because of the traffic habits of going to them.
The Internet is an open ecosystem, and one cannot isolate oneself from external services without damaging oneself and one’s own users. A counter-engineering solution that does not violate any rights can be developed on any barrier. This is just a dull, useless struggle.
Moreover, the argument at the "deadlock talks" is usually always the same, regardless of the region and the profile of the regional platform. It seems that there is some kind of virus to which the leadership of a huge number of regional portals is exposed when the portal reaches a certain number of visitors per day :-).
It creates a feeling of a business model of a “glass dairy cow” - which is being milked, but God forbid to touch something, it suddenly breaks and the udder disappears ... It seems that you are negotiating with a strong player, almost a monopolist in your region, and he begins to make such arguments which are difficult to call anything other than complexes.
The first category of arguments is usually from the banal Shirli-Myrlynsky - “you eat too much, I mean zazhralis”, and from the limited thinking of your own commercial service.
Immediately everything is simple if the company does not have 100% of the entire market, then the reluctance of these 100% will somehow come closer, this is already a contradiction to the fundamentals of the business as such.
The second category of arguments, unwise protectionism, which indirectly only forces failed sales partners to sell competitive platforms (commission to the same advertisers no matter who they get from). There are examples when monopolists, because of their stubbornness, on the contrary, only stimulate the emergence and development of competitors.
In general, when companies do not need additional sales - this is not even a wake-up call to the commercial management, this is already a diagnosis of severe stagnation or personnel problems. There is such a saying - "neither myself nor the people."
It’s like a MVNO model that works normally around the world and doesn’t work in Russia (take the example of Verizon in the USA). To give one’s infrastructure to a competitor who doesn’t have his own iron in some region for 35 kopecks per sms for his subscribers is a bluff, but his subscriber is for 5 kopecks. \ Sms is not ... Well, complete nonsense, all of Europe and the States normally use this model working on their services, services and branding loyalty of their customers. And we - pussy measured. Whose channel is the one and the dad ... So they are building all the networks, mastering billions of dollars in infrastructure.
But the third category is the most mysterious and is most covered by some incomprehensible complexes, and the complexes are not compatible with the status and market share of a strong player.
It turns out that a large “intractable” marketplace is not so confident in itself and in the quality of its traffic that it is easier for it not to give transparent interaction with itself than to have additional service and additional profit.
Vaughn, the same Yandex, absolutely do not hesitate to send if he did not find anything on other search engines. And what, he himself this as the market share dropped?
And I see, when Yandex speaks to sites "or only I index you or just Google" :-))).
Kindergarten and only.
The saddest thing is that sales of such portals may not even represent the quality characteristics of their traffic, its conversion rate and that the most sad thing is that they don’t want to know. And even more so they do not want to implement the tools of such analysis. The less clear the response, the less likely it is that the client will calculate the real return on such a monopolist.
And even if the response is good, the reluctance to give additional service to its existing customers at the expense of some satellite web service, eloquently visualizes the "People Hawa" approach
They do not want to “negotiate”, maybe because they are afraid to see real returns, maybe because they lack the qualification to add variables, but the most common reason is dull laziness.
Such problems immensely inhibit the entire industry.
Whoever understands this before, he acquires stronger satellites around his portals and has a more symbiotic effect for his own system and his advertisers.
Or not?
For me, it is quite logical that companies engaged in the same conversion services, conducting advertising campaigns in the network with a deliberate analysis of the effectiveness of traffic, develop the advertiser market for the same portals and contextual systems. Any automation tool, a new sales channel using the Internet strengthens the position of the entire market and all advertising sites, and most of those with the most efficient traffic.
')
In the course of the development of our projects ( www.restoranonline.ru , www.tradeins.ru ), judging by what you have to face quite often, I come to the conclusion that everything is not so obvious.
At the moment, the web services market is actively being built around the already existing continents - Twitter, Facebook, Google, Yandex, etc. In the market of mobile operating systems, platforms are fighting for good applications, because if developers do not write for them, sooner or later they will exactly what is happening with Symbian right now.
In the niche portal industry, a lot of things can revolve around the main traffic-generating elephants, and here comes the most interesting, in view of the specificity of regional portals (the word regional or niche, very often reflects the breadth of worldview on the Internet and what happens in it ).
The most far-sighted platforms have already acquired their APIs for a long time, some of them are actively acquiring now, there are open clear partnering programs, such platforms encourage external developers, increase satellite services around themselves, and even buy the most fit to their ecosystem. See how much everything revolves around the same eBay, or VKontakte, or Facebook. A huge number of external web applications interact with them from outside.
But as they say, despite the positive external trend of integrations of everything, everything, and with everything, it is stupid and even impossible to resist - there is still a huge amount of web dinosaurs on the fields of the RuNet. The point is not the age of projects and their technologies, but the mentality of the leadership and the openness of projects for external independent applications.
There are dozens of “impenetrable” web sites, which, instead of sound business logic with external services, make it easier to pursue a policy of “autocratic isolationism.”
And the farther the region, the more distinct this rhetoric. Is it really not clear that everyone will receive “full google” sooner or later?
Monopolistic bravado is often reinforced by overt technological backwardness, which still maintains the viability of their business models, only because of the traffic habits of going to them.
The Internet is an open ecosystem, and one cannot isolate oneself from external services without damaging oneself and one’s own users. A counter-engineering solution that does not violate any rights can be developed on any barrier. This is just a dull, useless struggle.
Moreover, the argument at the "deadlock talks" is usually always the same, regardless of the region and the profile of the regional platform. It seems that there is some kind of virus to which the leadership of a huge number of regional portals is exposed when the portal reaches a certain number of visitors per day :-).
- we already have strong positions - we do not need anything. What sane business refuses additional income without incurring costs?
- we have sales partners, we do not want them to narrow the market. Nonsense - if your sales partners worked incredibly well, we would not have clients whom we are ready to sell to you. What kind of sales partner whose interests are higher than their own income?
- we need you to work only with us then (we do not want your service to work with our competitors), we do not want to blur the advertising market.
It creates a feeling of a business model of a “glass dairy cow” - which is being milked, but God forbid to touch something, it suddenly breaks and the udder disappears ... It seems that you are negotiating with a strong player, almost a monopolist in your region, and he begins to make such arguments which are difficult to call anything other than complexes.
The first category of arguments is usually from the banal Shirli-Myrlynsky - “you eat too much, I mean zazhralis”, and from the limited thinking of your own commercial service.
Immediately everything is simple if the company does not have 100% of the entire market, then the reluctance of these 100% will somehow come closer, this is already a contradiction to the fundamentals of the business as such.
The second category of arguments, unwise protectionism, which indirectly only forces failed sales partners to sell competitive platforms (commission to the same advertisers no matter who they get from). There are examples when monopolists, because of their stubbornness, on the contrary, only stimulate the emergence and development of competitors.
In general, when companies do not need additional sales - this is not even a wake-up call to the commercial management, this is already a diagnosis of severe stagnation or personnel problems. There is such a saying - "neither myself nor the people."
It’s like a MVNO model that works normally around the world and doesn’t work in Russia (take the example of Verizon in the USA). To give one’s infrastructure to a competitor who doesn’t have his own iron in some region for 35 kopecks per sms for his subscribers is a bluff, but his subscriber is for 5 kopecks. \ Sms is not ... Well, complete nonsense, all of Europe and the States normally use this model working on their services, services and branding loyalty of their customers. And we - pussy measured. Whose channel is the one and the dad ... So they are building all the networks, mastering billions of dollars in infrastructure.
But the third category is the most mysterious and is most covered by some incomprehensible complexes, and the complexes are not compatible with the status and market share of a strong player.
It turns out that a large “intractable” marketplace is not so confident in itself and in the quality of its traffic that it is easier for it not to give transparent interaction with itself than to have additional service and additional profit.
Vaughn, the same Yandex, absolutely do not hesitate to send if he did not find anything on other search engines. And what, he himself this as the market share dropped?
And I see, when Yandex speaks to sites "or only I index you or just Google" :-))).
Kindergarten and only.
The saddest thing is that sales of such portals may not even represent the quality characteristics of their traffic, its conversion rate and that the most sad thing is that they don’t want to know. And even more so they do not want to implement the tools of such analysis. The less clear the response, the less likely it is that the client will calculate the real return on such a monopolist.
And even if the response is good, the reluctance to give additional service to its existing customers at the expense of some satellite web service, eloquently visualizes the "People Hawa" approach
They do not want to “negotiate”, maybe because they are afraid to see real returns, maybe because they lack the qualification to add variables, but the most common reason is dull laziness.
Such problems immensely inhibit the entire industry.
Whoever understands this before, he acquires stronger satellites around his portals and has a more symbiotic effect for his own system and his advertisers.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/124613/
All Articles