If, like me, you are watching Google+ fever spread across the twitternets with a mixture of bemused fascination and eye-rolling annoyance, read on.
If, however, you have jumped heart and soul onto the Google+ bandwagon, gorged yourself on its koolaid with such gusto that your sweat now tastes Googlicious, and think Google+ would make a fine spouse were you able to marry a digital platform… read on.
Based on some of the questions I have been asked repeatedly these last few weeks, here are 8+ things you probably should know about Google+:
1. Will Google+ change the world or the internet?
No. Google+ will not change the world. Or the internet. But if it scales, it might help Google buy a lot of really big yachts, really fast private jets, small countries whose names end with “-Stan,” and install a few hundred thousand solid gold toilets in its offices and server farms around the world.
2. Will Google+ kill Facebook?
No one really knows. I suppose it could, but the odds are not in Google+ killing anything anytime soon. If it does, it will be to some degree related to Facebook’s inability to compete both as a social network and as viable revenue model and not because Google+ is particularly awesome or groundbreaking.
Pros:
_ Facebook needs to stop antagonizing people (privacy concerns are still a major Achilles’ heel for Facebook, for starters). Love = loyalty. No love = well, you know.
_ Facebook’s functionality is still very limited. It doesn’t really plug into productivity and collaboration tools, and this is a problem as users (consumers) increasingly look for seamless integration of word processors, email, video conferencing, VOIP, calendars, mobility, spreadsheets with their social platforms. The simplicity of Facebook’s design and the limited amount of customizability that helped it compete against MySpace (and win) may also bring about its own undoing now that digital platforms have matured.
_ Facebook lives in a fairly closed and limited search ecosystem. What this means is that its advertising revenue model is also rather limited compared to what Google is trying to build. Facebook has kind of backed itself in a corner with its model while Google has a lot of breathing room. That gives Google an enormous strategic advantage. (It does not, however, mean it will succeed in doing anything with it.)
_ Speaking of search, it is a lot easier for Google to build and scale a social network than it is for Facebook to build and scale a search engine. And moving forward, you kind of need both to win. (Or at least a model that incorporates rich, real-time consumer data and massive reach.)
_ Facebook is the biggest fish in the pond because it is pretty much the only fish in the pond. It’s the default winner. That isn’t a good long term survival strategy. After all, what is the cost of jumping ship? $0. These platforms are free. Social equity can be both moved and rebuilt pretty easily. Can Facebook stand up to a better, cooler alternative?
So basically, Facebook needs to adapt very quickly in order to stay relevant. Size alone won’t carry its dominance forever.
Cons:
_ Facebook is huge. HUGE. As a social platform, Google+ has an enormous challenge in scaling to size. It has to do it, and it has to do it fast unless it wants to become the Yahoo of social networks. Without scale, Google+ is just a nice little productivity interface, and the only company it will be competing against is Microsoft, not Facebook.
_ Google+ isn’t sexy. Sorry Google+, but you kind of look like crap. Remember that you aren’t just after middle-aged computer nerds, bloggers, social media “gurus” and… well, yeah, what I said: computer nerds. The rest of the world has to want to use you too.
_ Google+ isn’t compelling enough for most people outside of the nerdy middle to want to bother with it yet. Facebook may be annoying, but it’s familiar, everyone is already there, and the effort of having to leave it and start over isn’t being driven by excitement or necessity. (It has to be one or the other in order to enjoy any kind of velocity.) What’s missing in Google+ right now is a compelling reason for people to want to make the effort (and take the risk) of making the switch. For most people around the world, it is missing the compelling “why.” (“It’s new” won’t ever be enough. After 5 months, when the tech bloggers get bored of talking about it and move on to the next Quora or Empire Avenue or Spotify, what will drive an accelerated adoption?)
_ Google Wave and Google Buzz were going to revolutionize the interwebs too. Ooops. Sure, Google does search VERY well, but that doesn’t mean it will do anything else well, even in the pursuit of taking search to the next level.
_ Google and Plus will have to deal with the same privacy concerns Facebook did. Perhaps more so. You don’t have to be the most trustworthy company to win. You just need to be less shady and risky than everyone else. If Google finds itself at the center of enough privacy concern discussions, Facebook might come out the lesser of the two evils. “Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t” is a pretty important element when dealing with an adoption campaign. If Facebook begins to feel threatened, expect this topic to magically surface at regular intervals.
In other words, it could go either way. Facebook and Google+ have their own sets of strengths and weaknesses.
3. Is Google+ really the “Blue Ocean” product some tech writers claim it is?
No. Google+ is simply Google building a better data acquisition mousetrap and advertising delivery pipeline. It is Google’s natural evolution. Let’s quickly look at that in more detail.
– Data acquisition: Seeing the majority of search queries isn’t enough. Google also wants to be able to see what Facebook sees, what Twitter sees, what Foursquare sees. Not only that, but it wants to own that data. It wants to be able to understand and profile consumers better based not only on their searches and the content of their emails, but also on the types of conversations they have, on the content they share, who they share it with, where they hang out, etc. This paints a far more granular (see “complete”) model for consumer tastes and behaviors, which allows Google to better target them with ads.
And yes, selling ads is how Google makes a chunk of its money.
– Advertising pipeline: In the same light, Google has looked at how much time people spend on Facebook and did the math. If they can build a platform that will attract as many eyeballs as Facebook and for as many minutes (even hours) per day, it will be able to sell a lot more ads.
This isn’t “Blue Ocean.” It’s just the evolution of an existing model.
And yes, if it pulls it off, Google will pretty much own the web.
If.
Everything else you hear about how awesome and cool and functional Google+ is, is basically window dressing. If you want to get to the heart of what Google+ is really about, this is it: Data, eyeballs, behavioral modeling, better targeting, ownership of advertising revenue on the web.
4. What about Microsoft?
Google+ seems to me a bigger threat to Microsoft than to Facebook right now. Think about how Google has gone after Microsoft Office and Outlook. Think about what Chrome is doing to Explorer. Now bring the Google+ interface into the mix and see how Google’s productivity tools offer a compelling, very well integrated alternative to Microsoft’s aging core products. If you have been paying attention these last few years, you have probably watched as Google has been systematically working to erode Microsoft’s market share, one product at a time. Now Google+ promises to give collaboration and productivity a forward boost. What is Microsoft’s answer?
Here’s the irony though: Microsoft’s R&D people are 5-10 years ahead of everyone else in their ideation and prototyping, but the company still refuses to bring its coolest product ideas to market. Google and Apple are where they are today in great part because Microsoft chose to pass on projects it figured it could always get back to someday. Its weakness has never been technical. It also hasn’t been due to a lack of imagination or access to talent. It is purely cultural. If Microsoft is going to be a contender in anything except gaming (XBox) five years from now, the aging giant needs to change its approach to product development, product diversification, and it needs to work faster. And for that, it has to step away from itself and realize that not fully understanding who you are as a brand, as a company – in other words, having a static vision of yourself – kind of gets in the way of being a market leader. I am rooting for Microsoft, but something has to change. Microsoft simply has to start thinking bigger. In a way, Microsoft has to unMicrosoft itself in order to move forward.
5. What about Twitter?
What about Twitter? It is still evolving and growing. Unless Google builds a solid substitute for Twitter that plugs into its little universe and it all scales really well, Twitter will be fine for a little while longer.
6. What about Amazon?
Amazon has a history of partnering with Google (1)(2)(3) and it makes a lot of cash. Amazon is fine with or without Google+, but yeah, if Google+ scales, Amazon won’t be hurting for chewing gum money.
7. What about LinkedIn?
If Facebook didn’t kill LinkedIn, chances are that Google+ won’t either, even if it becomes the Goliath of the interwebs.
8. What else should we know?
For starters, you should know how to get started with Google+. Whether Google+ is the next big thing or the next big flop, these handy videos by Chris Brogan will help you get started with the new platform and find out for yourself what the big deal is about. And if that isn’t enough, check out Mashable’s complete (and very handy) guide. If you love Google+, great. If you don’t like it, great. The world spins on either way.
Beyond that, I caution you against drinking anyone’s koolaid. Shiny object syndrome is a major source of noise on the web these days. Tech bloggers make a good living creating content on their blogs with the purpose of attracting as much traffic as possible in order to make as much advertising revenue as possible (and catch the eye of larger media outlets like Mashable, CNN, etc.) So every tech story they can get their hands on has the potential of earning them stacks of cash. The incentive then isn’t to truly analyze or report (or even wait and see), but to sensationalize every new platform release, from Quora to Google Buzz. There is nothing wrong with it, but just be aware of how the web “thought leadership” and content curation bubbles work. A lot of noise doesn’t mean a whole lot except a feeding frenzy of web traffic and incremental revenue. Right now, Google+ is the big story. A while ago, Google Wave was too. Don’t fall for the link-bait.
No one can predict the success of a digital platform. No one. Google+ could be the coolest thing in the world and yet never go anywhere.
Apps moving the the cloud is nothing new. SaaS (Software as a Service) is nothing new. Digital social networking platforms are nothing new. Integration of productivity and collaboration tools is nothing new. Will Google+ do it better? Maybe. Maybe not. We’ll see. maybe all Google+ will manage to do is inspire another company to build something that blows everyone out of the water and truly revolutionizes the web and computing. Google+ may simply be a milestone in a fast and long technical evolution. A footnote. A catalyst. No matter what happens, Google+ will be replaced by something else eventually. Maybe in 6 months, maybe in 6 years, but this is inevitable. So stay adaptable and flexible, and don’t get too attached.
If you want to leave Facebook and put all of your eggs in the Google+ basket, that’s fine. No one says you can’t try out Google+ and stay on Facebook as well. There is no need to take sides. You can own a Mac and a PC too without tearing a hole into the space-time continuum. You can like tea and coffee, paper and plastic, surf and turf, Lady Gaga and Mozart. Don’t make Google+ (or any social or digital platform) into a religion. Do you think the first people who tasted Pizza stopped eating spaghetti? Did headlines in the newspapers read “Pizza: The Spaghetti killer?” Did people wear buttons on their lapels at social events reading “I’ve switched to Pizza?” A little perspective goes a long way.
If you want to wait 3 or 6 or 12 months before jumping into the Google+ universe, nothing says you can’t. There’s no rush. Ease into it at your own pace. In the meantime, people will still be able to reach you by email, through Facebook or Twitter or LinkedIn, or even by sending you good old hand-written postcards – you know, with stamps.
I hope this helped. Cheers.
* * *
And if you haven’t picked it up yet, “Social Media ROI: Managing and Measuring Social Media Programs in your Organization” (the quintessential social media operational guide for executives and business managers) is now available worldwide in both print and e-format at fine book sellers everywhere. Read some reviews, sample a free chapter at smroi.net, or if you just want to order it from Amazon, click here.
Brand Building and Online Marketing Blog 
Nice article! The only part that puzzles me is the ‘What about Twitter?’ part. Hope you mean that Twitter is unique in a number of ways and is superior to all the ‘look at everything you can do with me’ platforms.
Twitter is fine. If it fails at some point, I doubt Google+ will have anything to do with it… Unless it releases a worthy Twitter-like substitute.
Another solid post, Olivier…Thank you. It’s important to maintain perspective about new services when the hype machine gets revved up, and I agree with your basic premise and the Pros/Cons analysis.
I wonder about the analogy and conclusion you draw at the end, however. Tea AND coffee. Pizza AND spaghetti. Google+ AND Facebook. In my opinion, there’s a big difference between the first two dyads and the last, and it has to do with production vs. consumption. Food, music, and other physical goods can be consumed equally without excluding other goods (although for food, you’re limited by what you can eat and drink in a single sitting). However, when it comes to digital services, I’d suggest our attention and effort can’t be scaled in quite the same way.
If I’m purely a consumer of content from Google+ and Facebook, then I might be able to drink from the stream of either or both, though I only have a limited time to do so (and I might be gulping similar mouthfuls from each and get tired of it). If, however, I’m also a producer of content for these services (i.e., I update my stream, add photos and video, maintain relationships), then I would argue this is where attention and effort don’t scale in the same way.
The best way I can amplify my point is to offer an analogy myself. By your logic, people could go with Facebook AND MySpace. This didn’t seem to work out too well for MySpace; people made a choice of one OR the other, because there was effort involved in making that selection meaningful over time. This doesn’t preclude the possibility of people using Google+ for one thing and Facebook for another, though I’d guess the only folks who would do that are the nerdy middle. By and large, I think people will have to make a choice of where they invest their time and effort to get the most out of these services/platforms.
It will be interesting to see how it all turns out! Thanks again for your insightful posts.
Agreed. In the end, there can be only one.
But right now, choosing one over the other is silly. Once it becomes clear that Google+ has either failed or overtaken FB, then the time to choose one will come. 😉
Olivier – This was FANTASTIC! It is so refreshing to see some of the more known people saying what I have been saying since I started using G+ a couple of weeks ago. I actually wrote a blog about it, something I rarely do. I called it Google+: A Really Neat Social Media Platform OR a Shiny New Gas Guzzler?
I must say that I am concerned about the Landgrab and the necessity to use it to maintain your ranking by Google’s search engine. I think it is an unfair business practice that people have use a gmail account to get into Google+. I have many more concerns also. Having said that – there are some neat things about it like it is a LOT easier to follow conversations on G+ versus Twitter and there do not seem to be any limits on how long your posts or comments are. Talking from a technical standpoint that will change as their databases where all of this is stored get filled up and thus slow down.
-Jean Pickering
Good points all. The search rankings thing is pretty valid, and I didn’t even think to add that to the post even though it is pretty important.
I definitely agree about the Gmail address requirement to sign up. They aren’t even letting Apps users sign up using their email addresses yet, even though that’s still a Google product. To me, that’s a huge barrier to using Plus, as I am unlikely to constantly switch accounts just to log in.
The idea is to make Google the portal and the platform. It’s a barrier of entry, yes, but Google is betting that G-mail is a small price to pay to get on Google+ (and so Google+ will be a trigger for tens of thousands of internauts to discover and start using G-mail).
Also, you realize that Google can technically read (as in automatically search, analyze and catalog) the content of every email sent via G-mail, right? Think about what that means in terms of consumer profiling and targeting.
You see where this is going, in terms of data collection? It isn’t like they are snooping into people’s private lives or anything. But the more you use Google products, and the more Google products you use, the better Google’s revenue machine works.
It’s kind of clever, really.
Olivier,
Finally a Google bone with some meat on it. I figured I’d get “the skinny” from you without all the hype and sensationalism. Learned more about the platform here than in the handful of blogs I’ve had the misfortune of reading (linkbait victim).
Nicely done…
Thanks, man.
Good article Olivier! I think with the birth of Google+, Facebook will need to work fast in giving more love so people don’t jump ship. People are always falling in love with something new. So only time will tell. Great to have competition though, no room, nor time for complacency.
Hope you’re having a good day!
Thanks, J. If anything, yes, Google+ might shake things up and force Facebook and even Microsoft to take less for granted and raise their own bars a little. One can hope. 🙂
Cheers.
A must read, even if it’s hard to imagine Google to launch a Twitter-like, maybe some alternative to bridge the gap.
Wait and see.
Anyway a great overview and great questions I hope we’ll answer soon.
Thank you the LeBrandeBuiledeur 😉
I would love to see what Google Twitter alternative would look like, especially within the context of a successful Google+ ecosystem. Powerful.
I just wonder how all of that Googleness would fit into an iPhone/iPad world. 😉
I remember the SAME GUYs were as excited about Google Buzz & Wave as now they’re making Google+ as the matter of (online) life and death.
Also it is not the best that wins, the smarter wins. And if facebook goes with ‘what to keep and what to drop’ strategy they’re good to rock for next few years. While Google+ has to prove itself to attract a common user not geek.
Great post as always Olivier.
Thanks, man. It’ll be interesting to see how Google+ galvanizes Facebook and Microsoft (among others), assuming it doesn’t fizzle out. Cheers.
Data and ads. Thanks Olivier for the dose of reality. Amidst all the Google hype, the fact that Google is about acquiring data and selling ads gets lost. You can wrap Google in all the social, community building, info-sharing shell you want but for Google it’s (less than) three licks to get to the data/ad candy center.
@KimBrater
It’s basically what Facebook is as well, really. Just a different approach, but the same data/ad core in terms of revenue.
Indeed.
Great post (as usual!). I found it very helpful as we all navigate these interactive waters. If it the next best thing, great. If not, people with an open mind will learn from it. In the grand scheme of things the world will keep spinning one way or the other.
Either way, what Google just did was give us a glimpse of where the web is going in terms of the macro strategy and what the real game is once you look behind the veil. That could bring a few new players on the field.
One thing I’m really curious about is how content endorsement (this +K, +1 nonsense is going to play a role in search and creating social “influence” circles. I really hope Google Plus doesn’t somehow game the system like these new tools will potentially do in efforts to boost someone’s rank/influence. Any concerns here?
It’s a clone of the Digg model, basically. Not sure how important it will really be. It might be more of a placebo. Like the buttons at traffic lights that make pedestrians feel like they have control over how quickly the lights turn red so they can cross the street.
Great Article! What is the big deal about Google+
Nice job.. food for though.. & well presented, IMHO! 🙂
I know that a lot of people are focusing on Google+ as a Facebook killer. At least in the first couple of weeks, my time on Google+ hasn’t impacted my time on Facebook, but it certainly has impacted my time on Twitter. Twitter is much more vulnerable to Google+ vs. Facebook.
Really?
Thanks Oliver for a great article, really and truly it’s too early to make a change, just got into Google+ and it’s been a bit of a curve, getting a hang of it but at this moment, Google needs to scale fast as we’re starting to see the impact of social media engagement for business.
Have a great day
Favorite line: “fascination and eye-rolling annoyance”. Because I literally banged my head on my keyboard when I heard about Google+, and the surge of positive feedback on a beta tool that’s not complete yet is getting on my last nerve.
That said, my schedule has allowed me to use it and there are things I very much like about it. But I’m tired of reading about anyone who swears this thing is going to give them orgasms or kill them or something else. It is. Too Soon. To know wtf is going to happen. And both worship and gloom are suspect responses to me – makes me feel like the person reporting has some agenda.
Exactly.
maybe the next tweetdeck will have a G+ account 🙂
That would be pretty sweet.
Your subtext (not that ‘sub’ really): don’t focus on the tools. As usual, you are correct.
Some people focus on the tools. Others focus on getting the nail to go where it needs to go, faster and better than everyone else. 😉
I know for me the compelling element is that I’m already using Google Docs all day at work, I have a Google Calendar that tracks stuff and syncs to my Android, and a Gmail account that ties it all together.
Google+ becomes a logical extension of that, especially as it starts seeping into our company culture–set up a “Company” circle, and comments between departments, shout-outs, meeting agendas, and such, can be quickly linked up.
For me, that’s the ultimate end-game–combining social into the existing app suite easily. Facebook doesn’t do that. Since both social networks essentially “own” my data, I’d rather use the one that connects more to my current daily activities.
However, as you say, Olivier, is that enough of a “value add” for the average Facebook-er? Probably not. It’s an interesting world we live in, where we often perceive that the value of not changing exceeds the benefits of making a switch. “It’s just too much a hassle to join Google+. I’ve got 500 pictures, 750 friends, and I just don’t want to learn a new app.”
That’s some significant inertia to overcome.
Excellent point, Steve. So you see why I took a few minutes to talk about Microsoft. 😉
I am so glad to read a dose of reality re: Google+ … anyone who thinks for a minute that targeted ad revenue is not a core objective of *everything* Google does is simply, well, not paying attention. That said, there is one thing about Google+ that gets my attention and it’s quite simple: it is not Facebook. It is quite plausible that the old saying “familiarity breeds contempt” is fueling interest in Google+ right now, is it not?
Ponder this: an increasing portion of Facebook’s users are complaining that Facebook needs to STOP. CHANGING. THINGS. SO. F’ING. MUCH. From my own experience, I am *still* irritated by how FB no longer shows the most recent Status Update next to one’s name, and I am downright *enraged* by FB’s voodoo-algorithm that de-emphasizes certain people on my News Feed. That particular change is yet another indication of one thing Facebook just doesn’t seem to grasp: QUANTITY of data is not the only factor; QUALITY is important too. Just because I don’t talk to that girl from high school very often doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t want to know that her mother had died. Yes, this actually happened to me. Thanks a lot, Facebook.
Now, I am not saying that Google+ won’t mess things up for GenX users (as in, people who remember the 1980s because we were teenagers not infants) just like Facebook has. But, for now at least, I have noticed that the vast majority of people I have connected with on Google+ are GenX. Maybe that’s something we should be examining?
Anyway… just my very longwinded two cents. GREAT ARTICLE, OLIVIER!
“I have noticed that the vast majority of people I have connected with on Google+ are GenX. Maybe that’s something we should be examining?”
Fascinating point! No that I think about it, I am finding many of the folks I am interacting with are also 30+-somethings.
It could simply be that we have less emotional investment in Facebook since we weren’t in college during its growth?
Maybe. I think it might also have something to do with our relationship to the internet. We’re more addicted to certain aspects of it, i.e. collaboration and communication platforms, rather than, say, YouTube, Amazon or iTunes. But I am just guessing.
You’re right, Philip. And the irony of it is that Google+ will have to make many changes, and make these changes happen quickly. So… it will inevitably have to deal with the same problems Facebook faces: unpopular changes, privacy concerns, etc. It’s just science. 😉
As usual, you speak the truth! Now, I wonder:
Since Google’s esprit-de-corps developed at an earlier stage of the Internet world, and since Google is already universally known for data-mining… will Google+ succeed precisely *because* the average user will have a lower expectation re: privacy than many folks initially thought they would have on Facebook?
Olivier, while this is a very nice post it’s so negative (*read with sarcasm*). So many No, No, No’s. It’s like Google+ is set to fail. I would like Stepford Olivier to write a post about Google+ and share all about the hidden rainbows and unicorns. This post, while very excellent, made me feel sad for Google + and how it won’t be killing any of the other platforms.
With respect and sarcasm,
Sara
P.S. This is all Stepford Olivier’s fault! I just have such a special place in my heart for him.
Ok. So until I find the time to write that one, here’s how to manage the wait:
Go read every single Google+ article written by social media gurus so far, and it will seem like #StepfordTBB wrote it. 😀
But okay, just for you, a little one:
10 problems that Google+ will solve in 2012:
1. Mid-life crises.
2. Male pattern baldness (see #1).
3. The US debt ceiling debate.
4. Childhood obesity.
5. Erectile Dysfunction (see #1).
6. Climate change.
7. Poverty (world-wide).
8. Communications between humans and dolphins.
9. E-coli outbreaks.
10. You know the thing where your second sock always mysteriously vanishes in the clothes drier? That.
Google+ must not be compared to facebook or twitter. The goal of google+ is totally different, not communicating like fb and twitter but personalising search results. Google is shifting from ‘if people link to it, it must be good content’ to ‘if your friends like it, it must be relevant to you. What you now see is just the beginnining of google+!
Thanks for the comment.
Blue Ocean?
You don’t mean Emerald Sea? That was the project’s name before Google Plus launched.
Agree, in general, but it doesn’t sound as though you have spent any time at all with Windows Live Wave 4, Office 2010, the web Office that works with Hotmail and SkyDrive or Office 365. I can’t say I like Hotmail but Microsoft has plenty of fresh and innovative stuff that makes some Google products look old hat. Google Docs is still catching up with Office 2003….
Thank you. Finally someone who agrees with me 😉 I had my go on the Google+ vs. Facebook debate yesterday at http://t.co/N8csdGY and to be honest, I was hoping for Google+ to fail but just because I’m a lazy person and I don’t trust Google much, but in the end I’ll go where the crowd goes… (as I said, lazy person). Let’s see what the future brings.
This is a great post and I agree with you completely. I talk about Google+ on my own blog as well and hold a very similar sentiment. The irony is getting a user to switch platforms is a HUGE challenge. The same way no one can touch Google in Search. For now anyways.
Thanks for this post. I have an invitation to Google+ but have not used it. Seems like more noise and time in the social media frenzy. And more privacy leaks…
Where is a universal Web ID plus functionality we need to communicate and organize our interactions, communities, and businesses?
nice piece Olivier. Strangely enough I wanted to retweet your article and realised there was no share this button which linked to Twitter directly. How ironic.
As to Google+ I am still trying to figure out what I can do with it. In a sense, I remember asking myself the same questions about twitter in early 2007 and not being quite able to know what to respond.
Wait and see …
I think one part that Google missed is intuitive branding. Circles, Hangouts (which sounds lame when you ask “want to join me in a hangout”), and Sparks just missed the boat on intuitive taxonomy. Great article, just wanted to throw that out there.
That was a bloody good piece yet now I realised even you jumped on the band waggon if I’m not mistaken … unless there are 2 Olivier Blanchard in Greenville, SC, which is dubious 😉
So, what are your thoughts now?
I am not active on Google+, so it might not be me.
You have a great site. Thank you!
As a business coach, I apologize in advance for giving unsolicited advice; however, I feel confident in saying that if you change your link at the top from “become a client” to something that your potential customer would be interested in, you may get more clients.
As a business owner, I don’t want to “become a client”. I want to “grow my business” and “make more money”. I found your blog because I wanted to “learn everything I can about social media” and “stay on top of the latest trends”.
The point is if you use anything I put in quotes above, you probably will get more hits/clients. If your link said “let me help you make more money” or make more money” I would have clicked, even though the link titles sound Cheesy.
Again, Great site. It’s very good. I apologize in advance for throwing out unsolicited advise.
That’s awesome. Thanks for the advice. I don’t mind it at all. I’m glad that in spite of the not-so-optimized call to action in my menu, you still managed to find this blog because you wanted to learn everything you could about social media. That’s the blog’s purpose. As far as staying on top of the latest trends, I think you’ll do better reading Mashable and subscribing to Peter Cashmore’s feeds both on Facebook and Twitter. He’s a great funnel & filter for that.
Now let me return the favor: I have no idea who you are. None. You’re either “The business coach” or @360Agencies, not sure which. Maybe both. I’m not really sure what a business coach is or does, or what that has to do with 360 (degree) Agencies (more than one)?
1. That’s a bit confusing. Maybe consider creating an account for yourself that is more about the person (you) than a company, let alone 2… or more. Here’s why: If I don’t know who you are, if I can’t put a face to your advice, I have no way of knowing if you’re some douchebag sitting in his basement trying to get attention by posting to my blog or the most brilliant “business coach” in the world.
2. Get a profile photo that doesn’t make me squint. A face is best. People respond far better to a human face than to a logo or an object. Yours though falls into neither category. I still have no idea what that photo is. At 30 pixels across, it looks like a piece of a building, maybe? Is it Times Square? Is it the front of a movie theater or something? I’m not going to click on it.
As an aside, I am not looking for “more clients” I use this blog as a sort of filter. The idea: If someone likes the blog enough to consider working with me, they’ll click any call to action button regardless of the wording. If the wording might be the only thing standing between them being a client or not being a client, they probably won’t be a great client for me. Rather than “more clients,” I am looking for the right type of client. There’s a difference.
Cheers, Business Coach. And thanks for the advice. Come back anytime.