Value Add vs. Infrastructure

Lots of strong reaction to Union Square Venture Partner Fred Wilsons comments about Twitter (his portfolio company) today.

On the issue of third party applications that leverage Twitters API, Fred commented that a lot of the apps today are filling holes in twitter instead of building substantive businesses.

Much of the early work on the Twitter Platform has been filling holes in the Twitter product. It is the kind of work General Computer was doing in Cambridge in the early 80s. Some of the most popular third party services on Twitter are like that. Mobile clients come to mind. Photo sharing services come to mind. URL shorteners come to mind. Search comes to mind. Twitter really should have had all of that when it launched or it should have built those services right into the Twitter experience.

The media jumped on it. In a post titled “Holy Cow Did Twitter’s Top Investor Drop A Bombshell On Twitter App-Makers Today”, Nicholas Carlson lays out some strong reaction from the Twitter App community.

But we talked to sources at a few Twitter apps, and one of them told us Fred’s message is loud and clear. This source heard, "[Twitter is] going to do mobile apps and URLs. [Twitter is] way playing down the role of other apps. [Twitter] desperately need somebody to do vertical/gaming stuff, since that’s what we aren’t going to do ourselves. Bit.ly (as a URL shortener), TwitPic (as a photo uploader) and Tweetie (as an iPhone app) are now considered ‘core’ to the platform. They will either be bought or competed with."

First, Twitter is infrastructure. And true to that mission, it supports the building of applications and services that sit above it. Over time, applications and services start to get commoditized and adopted widely across the ecosystem. At that point, features offered by these apps are considered infrastructure and as history has proven, get pulled into the core of the application. Phone companies provided phone lines and tele marketing businesses built a value add service on top of that. Similarly, utility companies provided juice that allowed us to go from analog to digital with many of our appliances. If you agree that Twitter is infrastructure, the same thing is happening here. Over time the economics change. AT&T now offers business services that sit on top of its phone lines. That’s natural evolution as the service gets commoditized and there’s wide appeal. The market expects it to come as part of the base package and the stability and assurances that come with such a move. And the same thing is happening here.

Second (and this did not come up in Fred’s comments), Twitters success to-date largely mirrors traditional media – its broadcast for a majority of the users. Not conversations or other kinds of synchronous activity that those of us in the early adopter community have embraced. Don’t know about you but I’ve lost count of the number of mainstream users that fully realize the value and promise of Twitter only after they use a third party client such as HootSuite or Tweetdeck. So unless your only interested in following celebrity tweets, engaging with users or discovering new users via Twitters native interface is nothing short of awful.

Twitter needs to fix that as its price of entry stuff. And so coming out with its own spiffy client is imperative. And there’s similar arguments to be made for URL shortners and mobile clients – both critical to engage in a 140 character constrained world. And critical to Twitter if its to be able to successfully haul the water in the long run.

So it may come of as a harsh warning, but it’s natural evolution.

UPDATE: And just two days after posting this, Twitter announces the purchase of Tweetie, a Twitter client built for the iPhone and the Mac. Marshall Kirkpatrick at ReadWriteWeb has some good analysis on this breaking story.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Written on: 04-07-10 · Written by: Sameer Patel · 9 Comments »

This entry is filed under Customer Interaction and SocialCRM, Social Media. Connect on .

  • http://www.estebankolsky.com Esteban Kolsky

    interesting post.

    i think that howard missed the point that twitter is infrastructure, agree with you, and that all those services would be not very good if provided by them (further to your example, ATT does not have best services, just better leveraged).

    i am not sure how long twitter will survive, or live, or persist. but i do know they are far better off focusing on the infrastructure side that in the apps side.

    just my two cents.

  • http://www.twitter.com/sameerpatel Sameer

    Your 2 cents always feel like 4 :)

    Good stuff. Twitter needs to offer its own options for what are coming to be known as baseline social objects. Photo Uploading, Groups, Search Monitoring, etc. And thats what its doing. So I dont get the brouhaha over Fred's comment. (other than the fact that any news on Twitter gets eyeballs and this was one hell of a blog post to twist up)

  • http://cloudcomputing.blogspot.com/ Chirag Mehta

    Good point Sameer. I believe into an application-led infrastructure strategy. Initially the users were not quite sure why or how they should use Twitter. But as you start using it you see an emergent value. I am not religious about who adds this value. This could be third-party apps or the apps built into Twitter “native experience”. Twitter has done a great job building social media infrastructure that brings in tremendous value. They can choose what is core and what is edge – it does not really matter as long as they figure out how they can make money and stay in business. However I would be cautious about an, implicit or explicit, assumption that the applications can always be monetized. The apps need to add value and Twitter needs to figure out how they monetize this value.

  • http://www.twitter.com/sameerpatel Sameer

    Hi Chirag
    Great points. As I see it, whether for new revenue or to derive incremental revenue from existing search deals, they need to drive usage and engagement. And from a business stand point they cant afford to mess around with critical baseline functionality. And thats what they will do, whether a third party app already offers it or no.
    What this discussion underscores is a new lesson that value add builders need to be aware off. You cant expect the platform to not innovate and enrichen its core. Thats complete and absolute fair play.

  • http://twitter.com/FJIbanez Francisco J

    Great article Sameer,
    I agree with you that Twitter is a platform, but so it is the Iphone+Itunes couple. Don’t you think that Twitter could learn from the fruit company and distribute the apps from a centralize service under its control? Of course that would imply changing the policy of apps creation. How do you think Twitter’s ecosystem would react to such move? I think that it depends on how much control (money) Twitter leave for developers. Apple succeeded with its move and I believe that any platform can do so too.

  • martijnlinssen

    You're right on the infrastructure Sameer!
    I think Fred Wilson is trying to tell the difference between discoveries and inventions, although I'm unsure he's aware of that himself. Discoveries are the holes filled he talks about, Facebook gaming has turned out to be an invention – and a good 'un at that

    But, inventions occur to us, mostly. Maybe Facebook was just plain boring and that's why gaming in stead grew big? In the meantime, Twitter is standing by, looking at how other people's discoveries are growing their business and fame, and every now and then they add a small touch to Twitter themselves, but they stick to their slim and small interface, which is a smart thing to do I think

    Compare it to a car: basically we're still driving a T-ford, although endless money's been made meanwhile… The bad Twitter interface actually enlarges the Twitter network: TweetDeck is now a very good, loyal and free “Twitter partner” – and ther are dozens of them out there!

  • http://www.twitter.com/sameerpatel Sameer

    Hi Francisco
    I agree with you. Today there exists a very promising market place for this, created by an ecosystem participant (http://www.oneforty.com). This could have well been one of those basic capabilities that Fred Wilson was referring though he to be fair he did not mention it specifically.
    I do agree with you that Twitter -could- have made money here as did Apple. By the same token, by not charging, the platform got widely distributed and thats more important at this stage of Twitters life. Twitter could well create a premium market place with add ons such as analytics and charge for that. (say, business apps).

  • http://www.twitter.com/sameerpatel Sameer

    Hey there,
    I see where you're coming from. But seriously, as I mention above, I've really seen folks that were otherwise lost become raving fans when they use a client. Some features that are very basic do need to be within Twitter's core to illustrate the true power of the application.

  • http://www.watches-user.com Guess men's watches

    oh,my god ! there are a lot of beautiful blog. I like reading article ! I will always come here.