So i checked out the site linkedin.com.  It seems like it’s basically just facebook for businesses.  So that got me thinking, you could take most any successful website and a “business version” of it.  For example, you make a website that is basically Ebay for businesses.  This way business could buy/sell used office furniture or business assets to/from each other.  I dunno.  Maybe the ebay idea is kind of corny.  I guess my point is that we shouldn’t overlook the B to B market.  We talk alot about facebook and youtube, and the social networking power they offer, but the B to B world has alot of similar needs and opportunities.

So my roommate and i had cable the first semester.   But then we decided to get rid of it, because it way too expensive.  Guess what?  I don’t miss it!  I can watch everything i want on the internet, whenever i want, without commercials.   This brings up a couple of  questions.  For example, what is going to happen to cable?  I imagine it won’t go away anytime soon, because there are enough people who are more comfortable watching tv on the television than on their computer.  However, i do think that the format of tv will change.  I imagine it will change to an on demand format, more similar to what you would find on YouTube.  Another point worth making is that youtube has introduced a different kind of video experience.  They are generally clips only a few minutes long, just enough to experience a thought or an idea.  Exactly how this will affect the way we think about television, i’m not sure.  But it is interesting to think about!

One really interesting internet phenomenon is that many sites are not money driven.  Take Craigslist for example.  It is a very well known site, and many many people use it.  But at the same time, its founder has not made any great effort to monetize it.  sure, he does has some revenue streams from the site, but mostly it is a free website with no ads.  Now contrast this with other large organizations.  Large companies are always profit driven, even to the point of committing fraud to make their financial statements look good.  Even governments are anxious to monetize themselves, seeking tax revenues any way they can get them.  I guess the internet offers something else to individuals besides money.  I think it’s the whole notion of being part of a community and being able to contribute to that community that is valuable in and of itself.  I believe this is why some very successful internet entrepreneurs, such as the founder of Craigslist, are more concerned with creating a useful website than generating revenue from it.

I have mixed feelings about craigslist.  On the one hand, i love the informality of it.  I love being able to post stuff for free, and take it off whenever i feel like it.  Unlike ebay, i don’t have to worry about fees, or shipping anything as soon as the item sells.  I guess i’m kind of a laid back sort of guy, so this kind of setup suits me well.

On the other hand, i also hate the informality of it.  Anyone can put stuff on there.  People will call about your ad, and never show up to pick it up.  Or you may see an ad for something you want.  So you call the number on the ad, leave a message, and no one ever calls you back.  So in a sense, the site is kinda sloppy.

I wonder what it would be like if craigslist incorporated some sort of barrier to entry.  In other words, filter out the rif-raf so that not just anyone can put ads on the site.  I think this might help make the site more user friendly.

The Kiva concept reminds quite a bit of the website prosper.com, which also allows individuals to act as lenders over the internet. However, it seems (based on my wikipedia search) that with kiva, you have a much better chance of getting paid back. Reportedly, kiva has a loan default rate of a few tenths of a percent, whereas prosper.com is about ten times worse. In fact, kiva apparently has an overabundance of lenders and a shortage of suppliers.

I wonder why this is. It seems like it should be the opposite; after all, with kiva you are lending to people half-way across the globe, many of whom are very poor. I would think they would have a tendency not to pay up.

Here’s my guess: kiva has targeted a specific group of people that naturally has an incentive to pay up. Generally, you are lending to entrepreneurs in developing countries. I am sure these entrepreneurs are anxious to better their situation, and are therefore motivated to repay the loan. This is key. Prosper.com has not done this. Instead of targeting a specific group of borrowers, prosper has taken the shot gun approach: loan to everyone and then try to force them to pay up. Force is never as powerful as natural incentive.

I guess my point is to show how important it is to target the right market. The marketplace is an extremely powerful force that can drive a business forward or crush it.