Difference between revisions of "Api-circulate"
From IVP Wiki
(New page: ==Notes about the value of the Circulate service== *Circulate is the only proposed solution that brings the huge forces of social media into alignment with traditional media. Compare news...) |
(→Notes about the value of the Circulate service) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Notes about the value of the Circulate service== | ==Notes about the value of the Circulate service== | ||
| − | *Circulate is the only proposed solution that brings the huge | + | *Circulate is the only proposed solution that brings the huge forces of social media into alignment with traditional media. Compare |
| − | forces of social media into alignment with traditional media. Compare | + | newspaper site traffic with that of Facebook and it's clear which trends are not only prevailing, but CRUSHING. Then note that |
| − | newspaper site traffic with that of Facebook and it's clear which | ||
| − | trends are not only prevailing, but CRUSHING. Then note that | ||
Circulate can bring news to users even when they are on Facebook. | Circulate can bring news to users even when they are on Facebook. | ||
| − | *Circulate is NATIVE to the new online ecosystem AND does something | + | *Circulate is NATIVE to the new online ecosystem AND does something no other proposed solution does. It's a green field, which means new possibilities for business models= that are win-win instead of win-lose. New possibilities for revenue that do not involving fixing what is already manifestly broken, on the questionable assumption that it can be fixed in the first place. |
| − | no other proposed solution does. It's a green field, which means new possibilities for business models | ||
| − | that are win-win instead of win-lose. New possibilities for revenue | ||
| − | that do not involving fixing what is already manifestly broken, on | ||
| − | the questionable assumption that it can be fixed in the first place. | ||
| − | *We invert a distribution model (search) that favors Google | + | *We invert a distribution model (search) that favors Google disproportionately. We shift power back toward publishers by enabling |
| − | disproportionately. We shift power back toward publishers by enabling | ||
users to have a direct relationship with trusted publisher brands. | users to have a direct relationship with trusted publisher brands. | ||
| − | *We're the ONLY native solution being | + | *We're the ONLY native solution being proposed, which means we have the best chance of being truly helpful in this new environment. We have a clear path for increasing traffic and revenue for publishers. And, though currently a tiny company, our model stands up to Google in a financially and logically compelling way. |
| − | proposed, which means we have the best chance of being truly helpful | ||
| − | in this new environment. We have a clear path for increasing traffic | ||
| − | and revenue for publishers. And, though currently a tiny company, our | ||
| − | model stands up to Google in a financially and logically compelling | ||
| − | way. | ||
Revision as of 09:11, 14 September 2009
Notes about the value of the Circulate service
- Circulate is the only proposed solution that brings the huge forces of social media into alignment with traditional media. Compare
newspaper site traffic with that of Facebook and it's clear which trends are not only prevailing, but CRUSHING. Then note that Circulate can bring news to users even when they are on Facebook.
- Circulate is NATIVE to the new online ecosystem AND does something no other proposed solution does. It's a green field, which means new possibilities for business models= that are win-win instead of win-lose. New possibilities for revenue that do not involving fixing what is already manifestly broken, on the questionable assumption that it can be fixed in the first place.
- We invert a distribution model (search) that favors Google disproportionately. We shift power back toward publishers by enabling
users to have a direct relationship with trusted publisher brands.
- We're the ONLY native solution being proposed, which means we have the best chance of being truly helpful in this new environment. We have a clear path for increasing traffic and revenue for publishers. And, though currently a tiny company, our model stands up to Google in a financially and logically compelling way.
