Online economics
Archives: July 2007

What Google really is: A multi-sided platform

Everyone knows Google as the king of web search. Google started its life with some clever software that was relatively good at figuring out the best web pages that people were searching for. This is a valuable thing, but it’s hard to earn money from it directly, because web searchers probably aren’t willing to pay a membership fee or per-search fee to Google. So Google earns most of its money from advertising, placed alongside its search results, as everyone knows.

So through its search technology Google has created a site that people visit often. Places that people visit often are valuable to advertisers. So Google really creates value by bringing consumers and advertisers together. It attracts consumers by having a good search engine, and attracts advertisers because its popular with searchers. In essence, it’s pretty similar to a railway company that puts advertising on the inside of its trains. A railway attracts consumers by providing transport services, and since it has so many people in one place, it becomes a valuable place for advertisers to advertise. In economics we call this type of business a ‘platform’, because it’s like a stage where different groups come together, and providing that stage is valuable.

More recently, Google has been trying to expand its platform into other areas. Basically they’re trying to create useful things to bring consumers to their website, which is valuable for selling ads. Some of these ‘useful things’ Google creates itself, like Google Maps and Gmail. In other cases they add an extra dimension to the platform to provide the content. An example is Blogger, Google’s free blog site. They provide the tools for people to write blogs, and allow bloggers to put advertisements on their blogs using Google’s adsense service. In this case Google provides the basic technology for the platform, but the valuable content is provided by the people who write the blogs. So this is a more complicated business than a search engine, because Google has to deal with three groups (blog writers, blog reader, and advertisers).

From an economic and business point of view, these ‘multi-sided platforms’ are more complex than ordinary businesses that sell apples or toothbrushes. Actually, in economics they are more often referred to as ‘two-sided platforms’ or ‘two-sided networks’. The reason is that its simpler to analyse a platform that brings together only two consumer groups, although the same principles apply if there are three groups (as with Blogger) or even more.

There are many examples of platform businesses both in Internet markets and offline markets. The reduced cost of collecting and distributing information makes Internet-based platform businesses particularly attractive. Other examples aside from Google include eBay which brings together buyers and sellers, and ‘matching’ sites like online dating services or employment search sites. All of these businesses work in basically the same way: creating value by bringing together two distinct groups in an efficient way.

Recently, there has been quite a lot of attention paid by economists to understanding these types of business. In the Resources section of this site I’ve compiled a guide to the economic literature. Some of it is quite technical and suitable only for readers who are trained in economics. If you lack relatively good knowledge of economics, I highly recommend the book Invisible Engines which is available as a free download under a creative commons license from the MIT Press website or you can buy from Amazom.com here.

Multi-sided platform businesses face a number of challenges that we don’t usually see in other businesses. These include deciding what prices to charge to the two (or multiple) groups that use the platform, and how to get both sides ‘on board’ at once. In some future posts on this blog, I’ll be discussing these and other basic issues related to multi-sided platform businesses like Google.

[tags]Google, two-sided markets, platform economics[/tags]

by aaron. Permalink. Comments (0). Comments RSS.

Does blogging pay off?

Welcome to my new blog about Internet economics. My plan is to discuss basic economics of Internet-related businesses and markets. This is the first post, so I decided to look at the economics of blogging. Most people write a blog for fun and aren’t concerned with making money. Some others have been able to make it into a successful full-time job, however there aren’t many people like that yet. Instead, what if you write a blog in your spare time, partly for fun but partly to make money. Will it pay off for you?

You can make money from your blog by putting ads or other endorsements on your site. Sites like ProBlogger have lots of tips about how to do that effectively. But whether or not it pays off basically depends on 4 things:

  1. How many visitors your blog attracts.
  2. How much money (on average) you earn per visitor.
  3. How much time you spend working on your blog.
  4. How valuable your time is to you.

The amount you’ll earn in, say, a week is the number of visitors times the average revenue you earn from advertising per visitor. Not everyone will click the ads, so you have to average over the total visitors. Ad programmes like Google’s adsense don’t permit people to disclose their average revenue rates. I did some searching and it seems that somewhere under US 1c per visitor is a reasonable assumption. Then, the amount of time you spend per week determines how much you make per hour. Whether or not that’s reasonable for you depends on your alternative options and the value of your time to you.

The following graph summarises the tradeoff between visitor numbers, hours worked and value of time assuming an average visitor is worth 1c in revenue.

In the graph, if you’re above one of the blue lines, you’re making at least the amount per hour shown on the line, if each visitor earns you 1c on average. For example, if you work 10 hours a week on your blog, you need about 3,000 visitors a day to earn $20 per hour. Anything more than 3,000 visitors and you’re ‘in the money’ and making more than $20 per hour. If you’re willing to accept $10 per hour for your time you only need about 1,500 visitors per day.

So how likely is it that you’ll achieve this? According to technorati, the 20th most popular blog right now is Crooks and Liars. According to compete.com, this blog receives about 5,500 visitors per day. I don’t know how many hours per week they spend on the site though. According to my chart, they’re making $30 per hour if they work less than about 12 hours a week. Even then, $30 per hour isn’t a spectacular payoff, but it’s better than some jobs.

In all, it seems hard to make blogging pay off, at the moment. It’s possible for some superstars, but the revenue just isn’t there for amateurs, yet. However, it’ll be interesting to see what happens in the next few years.

[tags]blogging, blog economics[/tags]

by aaron. Permalink. Comments (0). Comments RSS.
© Copyright 26econ.com 2008