How Not To Be Abundant

Build an online community that requires you to be invited to join.

The community is called aSmallWorld.net.

I suspect that the community is aptly named.

While I am the subject of my Abundance post, I would like to thank two bloggers whose work over the past couple years inspired that post, Umair Haque and Mike Masnick.  Thanks guys.

Comments

[anonymous]

id argue that something along those lines can beat linkedin.

[Chris Palmieri]

Mixi is the counter-argument, at least for Japan. It's a wildly successful social network, invite only, with all it's content behind the wall.

[david g]

a weird post fred -->

inviting friends is the very definition of social network - % growth through WOM only should be the primary KPI for any social networking site - these guys are probably the only ones who can measure it.

[fred]

david

i am sorry that i didn't explain more in the post. i was rushing this morning.

it's not just that you have to be invited.

you have to be invited by a special member:

Invitations are difficult to come by: only some members have the right to invite friends to join. According to Erik Wachtmeister, the site's founder and the son of a former Swedish ambassador to the United States, a panel considers 12 to 15 variables before permitting certain users to issue invitations.

"You don't want to let just anyone invite," Mr. Wachtmeister said. Asked what those variables were, he replied that it's a "secret sauce."

This is a velvet rope social network.

it will be interesting to see if it works.

fred

[Andrew]

Fred - glad you explained more here was just going to say that gmail and orkut worked on exactly this principle!

I don't buy into your "abundance" posts, either I have misunderstood your message or you are wrong... but enjoy your blog.

A.

[Jason]

Fred - I think that the rules of abundance/scarcity still work fairly well in the 'net.

This invite-by-committe-only deal is probably going to work OK - it's like a country club or a really restrictive version of Facebook I guess.

I think the problem with "net abundance = value" is that it's only true for consumable media and networks whose value increases as they do. Being part of a club (i.e. gmail, facebook) is still only cool if it's exclusive. That's human nature.

[will]

How about those web 2.0 "invite only/ apply thought your favorite blogger/ give us your email address" alpha's?

Web 2.0 launch techniques is all about reducing supply (ie creating scarcity)

It seems to work as far as getting TechCrunch all worked up over it and thus get some air time. . .

[Ken Berger]

Yes-- this is exactly how not to be abundant.

And likely how not to attract top-tier VC backing.

But not necessarily how not to succeed.

Depends what you mean by "seeing if this works". *I* don't want to live in a gated community, and neither do you. I probably don't want to invest in one, and neither do you. But I'll bet there already exists and will exist smaller worlds that will do well for the founders and members, albeit without a traditional venture-to-big-bang exit. (I mean 'bet' figuratively as I just said I wouldn't be investing).

This one doesn't at first glance look like a winner (unless it's aimed at Disney employees, given the name). But we might see some private clubs pop up and succeed where some folks will be attracted by the exclusivity, and the closedness may serve some purposes (in an intranet sort of way?).

-Ken

[anonymous]

i think this model makes for a great business. these gated networks create an excellent demographic to give to advertisers, not to mention classifieds, etc. i bet they can make a lot of money.

[Dave]

Fred: Seems to me you were extolling the Times' web site a week or so ago.

This is yet more evidence, I think, that the Times doesn't "get it" and that your prior analysis was incorrect.

The Times seems a sinking ship.

[fred]

dave,

you are correct that i am impressed by the times and the reach they have acquired using the internet. but i am not a fan of times select and have criticized it often and vocally on this blog.

i do not believe in walls of any kind on the internet. i think they are value subtracting.

Fred

[anonymous]

fred,

i agree that in general they are value subtracting... to an extent. take cellphones and carriers for example (ok, bad example, but i hope you understand what i am getting at). i may get better service with verizon in my area, and you may find cingular more useful. however, this doesn't stop me from contacting you. the same applies for email. walled gardens have their advantages, as long as they don't prohibit interaction across networks.

[Tom Labus]

their CEO's comment: We want a million memebers, the right million.

Someone's line about not wanting to be a memeber in any club that would have them.

[Giordano]

Hi Fred,

I have been a member of aSmallWorld for 2 years, and always had a lot of fun with it, meeting a lot of interesting people and getting to some great parties. In fact, I contacted other members or left a message saying I was in town while travelling in Europe, Asia, LatAm, US etc and always had a blast.

Sure, it is elitist, you are not likely to find anyone who isn´t "old money", it´s really Eurocentric (in Italy we used to joke that looking up on aSW, you could find whoever member of the private school you had attended), and it´s geared toward a younger and partying crowd, but it´s by far the most useful and fun social network I ever used.

ANd it´s not so small either... about 50000 members, and new users have been blocked for a few months now, so no one can join for a while.

My thoughts: not anyone would enjoy it, but if you have a certain background and interests, you will like it. I lost count of the number of nights "saved" by pinging aSW while travelling on business... always met great people, never went to bed before dawn. Eheh.

Cheers,
Giordano

[K T Cat]

Amen to that! A blogger friend of mine had a brief fling with Xanga. Like Myspace, you have to be a member just to leave comments! I got a free membership just to be able to leave comments on his site, but in short order I stopped leaving comments because I didn't like having to sign in and then I stopped reading his blog altogether.