Read more
The success of the million dollar page has triggered a new venture by Alex Tew with the launch of WATER PROJECT. Arguably, designers are trying to use similar strategies used for the million dollar page in their new web page. However they seem to neglect a key feature of their former success which is network “visibility”.
The success of the million dollar page is due to several factors. Firstly, the stand-alone costs for accessing 10 x 10 pixels are relatively low in the web page compared to other forms of advertising. Also, there is a high network value for firms willing to post their brand in the page. Alex Tew has played with exclusivity and rational expectations. He has allotted a limited number of pixels: 1 million. In addition, he has incorporated the word –of- mouth and other publishing strategies to work as an incentive for firms to settle for some pixels. Since everybody is doing it, we saw that the speed at which the pixels were acquired is rapid. Secondly, Alex Tew has used a “visibility” strategy. This web page -as a virtual network- behaves differently from other physical networks like restaurants. We know the case of the man standing in front of two restaurants with no single costumer inside. The man has no reference whatsoever about the two restaurants, so, to decide where to eat, he flips a coin. Once he enters a restaurant, the probability that the next man standing outside the two restaurants enters the one with one costumer is high. The last man probably will not flip a coin anymore and go straight to the restaurant with one client. The next stochastic arrivals will follow accordingly. But what if the first customer decided to leave the restaurant before the second man arrived? In this case history will not matter and the “number of arrivals in the future is independent of the past”1, and the second customer will flip a coin. Now this is an extreme case but the problem of “visibility” is key where history matters. In the million dollar web page, potential customers see that some firms have already bought their pixels and they want to be in as well. When the network reaches one million, firms will have self fulfilled expectations. Not only because they are selling their products through their web page but because of the high value they have given to the network.
For the WATER PROJECT initiative, the “visibility” strategy is not there. You cannot “see” the network and this matter if users are not completely altruistic. So in this case, they put a high value on the network size. So it would be important for its designers to open the page for a visibility of the network otherwise, they are not exploiting the network effects as in their former venture. All in all, the visibility effect should play an important role in TAWE new venture to fully exploit the network effects.
REFERENCE
1.- Poisson Process, Wright 2011
Read more
Your analogy with the restaurants inspires me two comments.
1. What you describe looks like the Arthur model that we will cover in the next class.
2. Insofar as the first diners attract the subsequent ones (who infer the quality of the restaurant from the number of people sitting there), they generate a positive externality both for the restaurant owner and for the subsequent diners. They would thus be in a position to negotiate a monetary compensation for this positive externality. Have you ever thought of asking a discount (or some free drink) to the restaurant owner when you came first in a restaurant and watched other diners follow suit?
Read more
I think that one important point of the million dollar homepage that contributed to its success is the fact that when you have paid, it’s visible for everybody who visits the page.
Evenmore, it’s not only mentioned that you contributed for the project, you can also post your URL and make some advertisement. There is this dimension of “I’m part of it, and you?” that make the visitor pay (in this case) to be part of the network.
The first person who decided to pay also choose to do it because he expected that other persons were about to visit the website and go visit his URL. Without this expectation, he wouldn’t have had any interest in paying for the studies of this guy regarding this importance of being part of something and that everybody knows it.
I think these factors can make the WaterForward project a success.
First of all, the people will find this dimension of being part of a big network. Then, everybody can see that you donate for a friend of you. These 2 factors are very important in my eyes fot the success of the project.
Concerning the expectations, it’s obvious that in the case of the WaterForward project, nothing can be done without the conviction that your friend will also donate on behalf a friend. Nobody wants to be alone in a network, the first one and the followers necessarily believe that the chain will go on. This phenomenon assures the productivity of the site.
Show lessRead more
In my opinion, there are several factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success.
First, the fact that it is for a good cause, allow a student to raise enough money for his university education. Moreover, there is a great part of chance and luck in this project. The word of mouth is the key of the success of this project. The fact that it is unexpected, funny, original is also a factor of this success. Finally, like people said in the testimonials on the website (http://milliondollarhomepage.com/testimonials.php), people who invest in it have nothing to lose by spending a few hundred dollars and if it works, it can have huge repercussions on their society.
Can these factors be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
Like you said in your article, the success of a network is highly unpredictable. It is the succession of small events, of coincidences that will determine the success of it.
As for the Million Dollar Homepage, the WaterForward project is for a good cause. We may believe that it could become even more successful because the cause is environmental, social and will help people that are more in the need than the creator of the Million Dollar Homepage.
The problem is that the Million Dollar Homepage worked because it was the first, it was a new concept. Now that everyone knows that it was a success, everyone wants to do the same. The multiplication of those pages makes the buzz much more difficult to happen. (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage#cite_note-WSJ-1)
Another point is that for the Million Dollar Homepage, people paid to have their brand on the wall and to attract customers on their website. But with the WaterForward project, it is different. People don’t win anything but self-esteem by paying for someone else’s head to appear on the wall. The bait of gain is thus different and maybe less attractive.
Read more
The first factor I would like to stress about the Million Dollar Homepage’s success is the originality of the project. Of course Alex Tew enjoyed a part of luck but I think he was quite inspired. Indeed, he succeed in bringing several aspects of novelty which I’m going to explain: The fact that he was the first one to launch this kind of idea was crucial; moreover the goal of the project was interesting and quite remarkable because it was not usual to hear a student financing his study in that way; then when we enter the website we are directly in front of an homepage with a lot of colours and messages which are quite attractive.
Secondly, the process of the project was smart. People had real incentives to make it worked because they received a space to put an ad or a logo, a slogan and a hyperlink. I think it was an important point to launch the process. Then the total number of pixels sold was limited and the minimum quantity per person to purchase (100 pixels) was quite big, which allowed to accelerate the self-fulfilling prophecy (and to sell the last pixels at a higher price).
Therefore, these two main reasons helped Tew’s idea to enjoy positive expectations and to catch more attention.
Finally, the media attention brought a big impulse and created a buzz which incited much more firms to buy the remaining advertising spaces.
Concerning the WaterForward project, I’m more skeptical about its success because of the same reasons. Indeed, even if the goal is important, it’s not original. And this may avoid catching enough attention which is a brake for the launch of the project. Then, although the minimum price to pay is here lower (10 dollars per person), the incentives for people to participate seem to be less obvious than the Million Dollar Homepage. Indeed, you only have the possibility to see your name and your picture in the book and later the part of the people chain you begetted. Afterwards, the process may be slowed down due to the fact that interested people have to wait for someone to donate on them behalf. So, I think that the expectations would be here less optimistic which makes the success of the project more complicated.
Show lessRead more
1. What are, according to you, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success (with a special focus on expectations)?
According to me there are several reasons which made the Million Dollar Homepage a success:
Firstly, I think that the novelty is one of the biggest factors of this success. On internet, you have a lot of information with interactive users. Those users are waiting for innovation, creativity and originality on internet. Innovation is a good way to attract new users because it is different and users don’t know that. They are curious but they are also familiar with the sorting of information on the web and the avoidance of some information.
Secondly, it is an easy, original and cheap way for firms to make advertising. It is a big place of advertising. Every time a novelty creates a buzz, the number of firms who wanted to be on this website increases rapidly. It is logical because it is the place to be if you want that users see you. It also gives to your firm an image of dynamism.
2. Do you think that these factors can be transported to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
I think there are advantages and disadvantages.
Firstly, the positive factors:
One of the advantages of the WaterForward project is the easy-to-use and the link with other big social networks like Facebook and Twitter. My opinion is that if you want make a buzz now, you have to consider social networks and the place they have in the users’ lives. Indeed, we can see a lot of social networks and their growth. Users gather together in community groups, they spoke to people from all around the world who have some interests in common. I think that thanks to those social networks, WaterFormard may touch a lot of people from all around the world, of all ages and of all social levels. This application is like a big community group.
It is a project to support charity. People like to show to other people they are good person. I think it is a good way for them to achieve it. Furthermore, people often agree to pay little money for charity project because they think it is important and they feel they have done a good action.
Secondly, the disadvantages:
First of all, this project is not a novelty and the buzz system could not appear.
The next disadvantage is the price. If you want participate and put the names and pictures of your friends on the online book, you have to pay $10 on behalf friend, or multiple friends. It must be a barrier because today it exist a lot of free services to put pictures of your friends on the website and show it to other users.
Then I think that you have to pay attention on this chain system. Indeed, you have to invite other friends to do it but those people can decide not to pay and stop the chain.
Show lessRead more
The simplicity of the Million-Dollar home page is the first key element in term of investment for the founder, but also for the potential pixels ‘buyers. Everyone could take part of this funny way to advertise, easily and with a low budget.
Secondly the communication through different medias contributed to attract people and has extended the pixels’ purchasers outside the family’s area. This is a challenge for network projects to get off the ground. Press releases in well-known newspapers have influenced people’s expectation about this original home page. Knowing that a large audience get to know the project, its attractiveness rises because the number of visitors could probably rise in the future. The benefit for pixels ’purchasers resulting from the diffusion of the information is direct.
Thirdly the limited number of available pixels gives a feeling of “race to be in” for the potential buyers. The Million-Dollar home page could be viewed as a trend and as the available pixels are limited, it gives the feeling that potential buyers could miss the chance to be in. The scarcity accelerates the network effect. The visibility of the bought pixels could influence this race and the future expectations (in a beneficial sense but also in a bad way).
The way giving money to WaterForward is also original and simple, but the benefit for participants is not as clear as in the Million-Dollar home page. The charity purpose is more important than the benefit expected by consumers from a large network. I mean a good reason to participate is rather the charity aim than the fact that a lot of people have already joined the “water community”. I think this is a great difference between these two projects and influences people’s expectations.
The communication about the WaterForward project on the website is well designed and attractive, but not enough to spread the information on a large scale. It is the role of the participant to talk about the project and to make it known. This method is more unpredictable than through big medias.
Show less“The scarcity accelerates the network effect.” This is an interesting idea, worth investigating further.
Read more
In the following lines, I would like to explain my point of view about the success of the Million Dollar Homepage if it can be recreate through the WaterForward project.
As said in some previous comments, one of the main reason this project succeed was because it was able to create the buzz. Like most of buzz’s, it starts from a little idea and becomes a great success without knowing exactly why. In this case, to create the buzz, it has to be an innovative, creative and original idea that may catch the attention of people.
Because it creates a buzz, people will talk and talk about it and it will attract more and more customers. The creator of the project Alex Tew could, and probably did, use his own network to launch the project and to propagate the idea…People will also want to be part of the network that is creating the buzz.
Another key to the success was that the cost for being on the web page was really cheap considering the potential revenues it could generate for the buyers. Indeed with the project creating a lot of buzz, many people will visit the website and the presence of an advertising on the website could be highly profitable. The author was able to propose these accessible costs because on his side there were also not many costs or risks to launch this project (only a webpage and informatics knowledge). With the limited amount of pixels, it will give incentives to the most interested people to move quickly and that’s why Alex Tew managed to complete his project in less than half a year.
About the WaterForward project, some of the factors are similar. The project is quite original, innovative and furthermore it serves a noble aim. The creators can also rely on their own network to create a kind of viral effect. However, the concept here is more complex and is more difficult to put in place. Indeed, to be part of the project, interested people will have to count on their own network to invite them so it requires customers who already have a quite acceptable network. This also have a limited effect because once you are donate on behalf of a friend you will donate on his behalf once more because there can’t be many pictures of the same donator.
Furthermore, and even though it is for charity, the costs are more important than for the Million Dollar Homepage. 10$ don’t seem too much for a charity but still, some people would prefer more flexibility and some are willing to donate but have limited funds.
We see that the website has changed since its creation. The current donation format looks more like the traditional way where people can donate directly the amount of their choice on their own behalf. By this way, it’s more sober but also more easier for people who want to donate directly. However, that don’t differ much from the existing charity foundation which can limit the success of this project.
Show lessRead more
1) What are, according to you, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success (with a special focus on expectations)?
The idea of the Million Dollar Homepage was clearly an innovative idea attracting public’s attention all over the world. An important factor, able to explain the success of this particular attempt, is that it was rapidly identified by large news agencies, such as BBC ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/wiltshire/4223590.stm ). As soon as, newspaper articles started referring to this queer idea the website increased rapidly its visitors and since donation is some sort of advertisement, several companies decided to make use of it. The cost of advertising was quit low relative to the views that the website received and so the first argument about its success suggests that it was profitable for firms seeking publicity. Moreover, the fact that it was the first site aiming at selling pixels made it a monopoly and thus there was no competition.
The role of expectations is respectively important, particularly if one bases his reasoning on the importance of history in the formation of beliefs. Up to 2005, when Alex Tew came up with the idea, the Internet had already various examples of successful innovative ventures. Google, E Bay, Youtube and others had demonstrated in the most unambiguous way that the “buzz” offers big profit margins. In this sense, the Million Dollar Homepage being an avant-garde project, was expected to be as successful as the aforementioned web pages.
2) Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
The factors that lead Million Dollar Homepage to be a success cannot be transposed to the WaterFront Project. Even though it enjoys a high amount of publicity and is about donation, it lacks the most important feature; the fresh idea. People have already observed the potentials that Million Dollar Homepage has and thus a case of self-fulfilling prophecy is not probable. In conclusion, since the originality of the idea is gone, the WaterFront is an ordinary website that has to compete the similar ones.
Show lessRead more
As discussed in class yesterday, there is still a mystery for me: why did people visit the page? Curiosity was proposed as a motivation. But this looks not enough to me. If visitors were offered discounts or freebies, I ‘d understand better what was driving the traffic on this page. But it doesn’t seem to be the case. By the way, are there any statistics about the click-through rates on this page? Did advertisers get a decent return on their investment?
Show lessRead more
What are the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success ?
First of all, I think that the success of the Million Dollar Homepage is due to innovation and originality of the project. The project launched by Alex Tew is very simple but very innovative. This is what probably helped the media buzz. Also, there was an element of luck for the creator because the phenomenon could indeed go unnoticed.
Then, a second important factor is low cost for both users (i.e. advertisers in this case) and creator. In fact, advertisers don’t have much to lose to buy some pixels because the risk is very low even if the project doesn’t worked (whatever expectations). Furthermore, users saw directly the impact of their “investment”.
One last important success factor is the project’s excludability. As there is only one million pixels available on the website, users can have the feeling of belonging to a club. Thus, this can make the project more attractive, reflected in the price which were sold last pixels. This fact differentiate between this particular project and traditional network goods. For network goods, the more users, the more good is valued. In the case of Million Dollar Homepage, users are limited and what did the project’s success is the number of webpage’s visitors.
Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
In my opinion, the success of WaterForward project is less clear. Firstly, concept is more complicated than Million Dollar Homepage. Also, many associations and charities already use this method to raise money for a worthy cause. So, this project is not really innovative.
Moreover, the philanthropic action strongly differentiates this project from Million Dollar Homepage. Here, users do not get obviously any financial compensation from their action because they make a donation to a “good” cause.
Also, I think that the principle of a “chain” (as webmail’s chain) of this project is not really good for charity. There may be a kind of “social pressure” on people placed in the online WaterForward book by a friend. This person, not participating to action, could be seen as selfish by others. This may deter some people to donate in these conditions. Furthermore, I do not wish specially that my name and photo be published online when I decided to help a charity that is close to my heart. I believe that the “race to be the most generous” generated by this concept is contrary to the meaning of the gift. However, this is a personal opinion that may have small impact of this project’s success. By cons, famous people could withdraw an advantage of this process because their participation can give them a good public image.
Finally, the fact that people have to donating on behalf a friend or multiple friends could deter many people for fear of annoying or disturbing their friends.
In conclusion, both projects use network effects in their processes, but the nature of the action is so different that it is difficult to compare their respective successes as factors to consider are very different.
Show lessPeer pressure has a way to increase donations to charity. This is a interesting concept indeed!
Read more
1.What are, according to you, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success (with a special focus on expectations)?
I think that there’re several factors contribute to the success of Million Dollar Home page. First of all, and most important factor of all, as mentioned in the article, is consumers value compatibility that bigger networks become more attractive. Because self-fulfilling prophecies arises in a way when people see many other users join a particular network, they will feel themeselves secured and in a main stream of society to join the network. Secondly, the idea was new and creative to people. Because of network effect, advertisers had the opportunity to be connected to a bigger network at quite reasonable price. There are some indirect factors as well, eg. some people want to help Alex raise money for his education, some people seek for a sense of belongingness to society. All these factors play a role in website’s success.
2.Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
I think it can be applied to waterforward project. The way of approaching donation is quite innovative to me. Given the premises that 100% of donations directly fund projects and whole process is transparent. There are two important factors in water forward project. Firstly, water forward works in a similar way to pay it forward. What really matters here is the connection or social network of an individual. By better using social networks(email/FB/Twitter), the project has increased great awareness. Secondly, people’s sympathy in nature to help the less previlleged rather than feel obligated to return favor to friends motives them to donate and does publicize among friend circle. Biologists see in humans a natural willingness to help after many experienments.
Besides that, water forward claims that their model has funded over 6,000 projects in 19 countries, which is quite influential and can be considered as success in a way. We can watch a video regarding this. http://vimeo.com/27156648
References:
https://waterforward.charitywater.org/#slide/17
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/science/01human.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Thanks for these precisions about WaterForward.
Read more
I believe one of the factors which made the Million Dollar Homepage a success lies in early joiners. Since the expectations are crucial to create network effects, joining of key people can guide towards formulation of positive expectations. According to Wikipedia, the first pixels were bought by a close friend of Tew, 20×20 space for 200$. Not long after, the sales reached 1000$ and the news was quickly picked up by the BBC, which has affected the expectations in the positive way by spreading the news. Because of its originality and straightforward benefits, it retained the attention of people.
The Million Dollar Homepage has more characteristics to create network effects than charity water project because of several reasons. It is a simple platform with a simple concept, fundraising for the owner, in exchange of clear benefits to donators (advertisement). Moreover, there are no barriers to join the network and the results of joining can be directly observed.
In case of charity water, the scope is less well defined, it is rather aiming for broader objectives, where the results can not be directly evaluated. One has to go through the whole process to follow up the results of the donation. Apart from higher costs of joining the network, it is not straightforward for everyone to join it since the prospect depends on others to be able to join the network. This structure is not totally in line with their global vision which is people with clean water donate to ones without clean water. I believe the expectations are affected by this notion of exclusivity, thus attracting people who value this exclusivity. Next to other possible factors, this might be the reason of smaller network sizes. They should have made it possible to join the network for everyone.
Show lessRead more
The factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success are multiple but I have pointed out three of them that are, for me, the most relevant.
The first factor is technical : it is the interface of the homepage. It is creative, with a lot of colours and with an original concept. If the interface wasn’t attractive, the success wouldn’t have been possible.
The second factor is about expectations. What’s the feeling when consumer enters into the website ? I think consumer asks himself significant questions : “Will I be the only one who will take part in the project or will I belong to a big participative group ? And if I’m part of this group, will I benefit of a lot of interactions ?”. In my mind it is the most important factor because it can in one hand have very good impacts and benefits on the project if expectations are positive or in other hand it can simply kill the project if the expectations are negative. I think the Million Dollar Homepage is attractive enough to convince consumers they won’t be the only consumer purchasing pixels of advertising.
The third and last important factor is the motivation. When consumer is close to purchase, he searches elements that will justify his purchase. And the Million Dollar Homepage offers two very interesting motivations. The first motivation is the cheap price of the concept ($1 per pixel). Indeed, the price is low in comparison with the benefits your ad could bring to you if the project is successful. The second motivation is the aim of the site. The Million Dollar Homepage was created by a student to finance his studies : a consumer aware of this fact won’t have any difficulty to give money for a good reason.
I think these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project but won’t automatically have the same impacts on the consumer. I’ll take back the three factors exposed above and will apply them to the WaterForward project.
I think the scenario when you enter into the website of the WaterForwar project is very well made and really attractive. They put you in a “setting in situation” with nice pictures and so affect you. The interface is attractive and so is a good start for a successful project.
About the motivation, I think that acting and giving money in order to provide clean water for everybody is one of the most laudable aim. But a brake to this laudable motivation is the benefits you receive by giving money… almost nothing : your name on a web book (if someone puts you in it). It is really not a big benefit and if the project doesn’t have any success, you don’t receive anything ! That brings me to the third point.
I will end my analysis of the WaterForward project by the factor expectations. I think there are too many operations like this one to provide clean water for everybody and so consumer isn’t motivated to give money because he will perhaps be the only one in his circle of friends. Moreover the fact that you have to behalf a friend to perhaps be in the book doesn’t give you a good feeling at all. The chain can easily be broken and it is why I think it is not a good concept at all.
For those reasons (the third above all), I think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project but that it won’t have the success the Million Dollar Homepage did.
Show lessRead more
This comment starts by redefining exactly the million dollar webpage in order to proceed to the analysis of the subject and to answer the questions.
The million dollar webpage is a common story of an internet phenomenon, or meme. The difference with most memes is that it is active. The great majority of memes are passive, the only effect caused by their recognition is a forward bigger recognition; they have no intrinsic goal. Mentos-coca, Gangnam Syle or recently Harlem Shake are well known passive memes. But apart from that some memes are active: their recognition enhance their quest. Another great example of active meme is One red paperclip (1) “created by Kyle MacDonald, a Canadian blogger who bartered his way from a single red paperclip to a house in a series of online trades over the course of a year” (2). The network effect was here as important as in the million dollar web page. Memes are easy to describe: they are concepts that spread from person to person via the Internet (3) but they are hard to predict.
The million dollar webpage was a success because it got popular, so popular that it became an internet phenomenon. The key success factor of memes are three: simplicity, free access, and humility. Those success factors are common to all memes, being active (goal driven) or passive. Simplicity means that the description holds in one phrase, and often within two or three words. This helps the word of mouth to be quicker so the meme is more mobile in the real world. Free access means “reducing obstacles to the natural tendency of information to spread freely and evolve through collaboration. Economists, following Ronald Coase, call these obstacles transaction costs or “friction.” Eliminating friction is the most important step in unleashing a meme.” (4). Finally humility has its weight: the hypothesis is made here that authentic memes are humble and never aim at becoming popular phenomenons. Viral marketing has been trying to recycle the fabulous potential of internet phenomenons by copying and building memes. This is called buzz marketing, The New Beetle and The Blair Witch project are good examples (5). Buzz marketing is close to active memes in the sense that they are both goal driven but they differ by the fact that Buzz are made and studied to get popular, it is their primary purpose.
Let us develop another idea here: active memes are from the web1.0 era. This great article (6) makes an interesting distinction between the web 1.0, 2.0 and mobile eras. The hypothesis is made that web 1.0 was pre-social network and that web 2.0 was based mainly on the principle of social network. As we can see most active memes do come from this web 1.0 era: red paperclip is from 2005 and million dollar webpage is from 2006. They were experiments of the social network effect. But with the arrival of FaceBook, Tweeter and the whole web 2.0 in general, the social network effect got much more structured and complex. Economically speaking, web 1.0 was a perfect competition market for active memes, while web 2.0 is an oligopoly of social networks. The closest idea to active memes nowadays would be crowd funding. Memes are now all free of goal or passive.
The first reason why WaterForward has no chance to copy million dollar webpage is that even though it has a non-profit goal, it stills a buzz marketing campaign made to be popular while authentic memes get popular “by accident”. And the second reason is that active memes died while structured social networks arrived. The main chances of success for WaterForward would be to turn to crowd funding web sites such as kickstarter (7).
References and Notes:
1: http://www.redpaperclip.com
2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_red_paperclip
3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_meme
4: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrydownes/2012/02/21/what-makes-an-idea-a-meme-yes-best-buy-again/2/
5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing_buzz
6: Interesting article despite its lack of shade and also despite the fact that it is absolutely not related to internet phenomenons. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/04/30/heres-why-google-and-facebook-might-completely-disappear-in-the-next-5-years/
Show lessRead more
This is a very interesting comment, indeed! It is worth a post of its own (we’ll think about it). I must confess that I didn’t know the word “meme” before reading your comment. Maybe you’ll find my question stupid but I ask it anyway: could Paris Hilton be considered as some kind of “human meme”? Isn’t she famous simply because she is famous, i.e., because being famous is her full-time activity? 😉
Show lessRead more
Interesting question.
After some reflexion I came to the conclusion that I don’t think human memes exist. I would rather name her a celebrity, this being justified or not. I extended here the debate to a broader comparison between memes and celebrities. I will come back to the particular case of Paris Hilton later.
The difference for me is that memes are free, and most of the time they do not make any money to anyone (1). Wheres as celebrities are part of a system, a real business for which people magazines, fashion brands, perfumes, events organizers, nightclubs, TV shows, … are all stake holders: they can earn visibility, and then money with a celebrity (2). The celebrity system is for me far more complex than the meme system. The meme system is 99.99% free of interests, free of purpose: it is a phenomenon for a phenomenon. In the celebrity system, as I said before, there are many interactions in many ways, and I think that most of them must be hard to perceive.
Finally I would conclude that those two world nearly never merge even if exceptions of course exist: PSY is now more or less a celebrity, see this video where he met Ban Ki-moon (3).
In the other way around, Paris Hilton became a meme when her sex tape was released (4). But I would rather say that the video itself was a meme, because of all the parodies, not Paris Hilton herself. The same way that the million dollar webpage was an internet phenomenon, not Alex Tew personally.
To conclude, memes and celebrities are two separated worlds working completely differently, but in the particular case of Paris Hilton the answer is moderated, as she was at the origin of a meme.
I hope I provide you a clear answer.
1. Of course the million dollar web page is a perfect counter example to this. In this particular case the creator could make money and advertiser could make a buzz. But the interaction is direct, there was no fallouts, no by-products, etc…
2. Once again, there is no debate here wether this celebrity is justified or not
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_53SlRuIVAI
4. “Hilton interrupting sex to answer her mobile phone, which led to a number of parodies” source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Night_in_Paris
Show lessThank you Quentin. We’ll have to think of developing this in a post.
Read more
The factors that have made the Million Dollar Homepage such a great success are multiple. The idea of a 1000 x 1000 pixel grid was innovative and, thus, has created a certain “buzz” on the World Wide Web. This “buzz” has brought, through numerous channels, the attention on the website and has put it under the spotlight making it attractive for people who wanted to share a part of this success story.
The self-fulfilling prophecies which were defined in the post as “the expectancy of potential user that many other users will join a particular network” are directly correlated with the “Buzz”. A “buzz” is fast and is able to spread the information through numerous websites, making sure to attract many users in no time.
Example of websites relating others websites which are making the “buzz”:
– http://www.buzzfeed.com
– http://www.awwwards.com : a website which recognizes and promotes the best web designers in the world
I would like to also talk about the scarcity principle. The principle says that things are more attractive when their availability is limited. The less there is of something, the more valuable it is. This availability might be threatened by limited quantity, a deadline, or competition. For the Million Dollar Homepage, the numbers of pixel were limited and the competition was strong, making each pixel more valuable. The self-fulfilling prophecies associated with limited number of goods, here pixels, increase the feeling of scarcity which push people to buy a piece of the website. For some people, they buy a piece of the history of the internet . (1)
The WaterForward website seems to have changed a lot since 2012. I didn’t manage to find the WaterForward book anymore. But the principle used for the book seemed to be the reciprocity. In general, people feel uncomfortable being in debt to someone. The fact that you can donate on behalf of a friend and their name and picture gets placed in the online WaterForward book is a good use of the reciprocity principle. People feel in debt to you and want to give you something in return. In our case, they will donate. Moreover, the fact that you can see which of your friends has donated influences yourself to donate. It’s called social proof. Indeed, we tend to look to those around us to guide our decisions and actions. We are ever more likely to be influenced by people who seem to be similar to us.(2)
But like the post said, the website has changed a lot. There isn’t an online WaterForward book anymore and you can’t see the impact of your donation. It looks like a normal donation website with some extra features but nothing unusual or innovative.
(1) / (2) : Dr. Robert B. Cialdini; Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Show lessRead more
From my point of view, there is no rational reason that could explain the success of “The Million Dollar Homepage”. There should be an element to trigger the success of the project.
I think the most difficult part is the beginning and word of mouth shouldn’t work very well when there is not many people knowing about the project.
However, I guess Alex Tew, with a little piece of luck, found the right time and place to sent a press release and, as we can now note on the social networks, once a buzz is beginning, it can be share to millions of people in a very short time.
To create the buzz, the main element is probably the originality of the project.
The next step after the introduction was the development and this is logical and well explained with the network theory. As some people seems interested by the story, firms expect them to share it and attract more interested people. Then, if they believe that others will be interested, they should rationally be interested. As they expect others to do the same reasoning, they invest and share the project to other people in order to expand the network. This goes exponentially. If the project was unlimited, there would be an inflection point and a maximum, which couldn’t be attained. This is a big difference with the WaterForward project as I will explain later.
Looking to the WaterForward project, some elements can be transposed as it is also an original project. They also use the donators to do their own advertising and this help the project to develop.
However, there are two distinctive elements that could limit the success of this project.
The first one is the targeted public. The Million Dollar Homepage was targeting companies and their advertising expenses. WaterForward is charity in a funny way but, even if donators spread the project through their sharing, it is different from the network effect as attracting more people won’t make the donation more useful or more rewarding for the donator. These two environment don’t work in the same way and the success factors are then different.
The second element is that the project is not limited in size or time. The limited pixels of The Million Dollar Homepage created some competition in the end of the project and that help to reach the maximum size of the project. The WaterForward project has maybe reached the inflection point too early and it should then evolve in a logarithmic curve to never reach the maximum. While Michael Birch said in November 2011 that the inflection point wasn’t reached yet ( http://techcrunch.com/2011/11/08/michael-birchs-waterforward-is-kind-of-a-chain-letter-pyramid-scheme-for-charity/ ), it could have been reached sooner that he thought.
Like you said in the end of the article, the project has now changed and is more oriented to sharing to a lot of people (after explaining the problem and the project, we are invited to share to 10 people) than to social effect of the donation (put a friend on a visible book). Maybe the reasons of this change are the ones I gave in my comment, who knows ?
Show lessRead more
The factors that made the million dollar homepage a success are several.
First of all, the inventor of this idea had to be the first to do that. If it was not the case, he would probably have had more difficulties to bring so much people on his website.
It’s good to be the first to do something but the idea must also be an original one. Indeed, if the project is only an adaptation of another one, or if it’s a vane copy, it will not bring the success wanted.
Besides “the larger are the communication opportunities, and the greater are the incentives for other agents to join this network.”( https://www.ipdigit.eu/2012/02/network-effects/) In this case, people wanted to buy a pixel because they had the possibility to send a message or to post an ad via this project and thereby communicate with a lot of people.
Furthermore, expectation about the project played a good role. Indeed, in view of the popularity of the homepage, pixel’s buyers had good expectations regarding their return on investment.
Moreover “because consumers value compatibility with other consumers’ purchases, past choices guide future ones”( https://www.ipdigit.eu/2012/02/network-effects/) the more time passed, the more the website made success.
“Network effects are notorious for causing lock-in with the most-cited examples being Microsoft products and the QWERTY keyboard” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect). The fact that consumers cannot change from supplier of service can be a key to make success.
According to me, some of the factors can be transposed to the waterforward project. But some others are more difficult to adapt, as the originality factor. Indeed the idea is very good but something is missing to make the project very original. Furthermore, the fact that people, once chosen by a friend, had to pay 10 dollars if they don’t find someone is very binding.
Beside this, waterforward has the power to make success if they use their strength and the network effects. Firstly they had to make their project famous. Once this step is crossed, the biggest is done. But it is not easy because in their case they are already many organizations who are helping. So they have to be more original. The project must catch the attention of people. Once it is done, people would use their website and the network effect will bring more and more people on their website. We can here consider network effect as a positive externality who will increase the welfare of the people using this website. “The benefit to you from a social networking site is directly related to the total number of people who use the site. When someone else joins the site, they have increased your welfare even though no explicit compensation accounts for this.” (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/networks-book/networks-book-ch17.pdf).
Show lessThanks for the last reference.
Read more
According to me, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success are multiple:
First of all, this idea was creative and original. It’s a new interesting and funny concept which catches firms’ attention because it creates immediately the buzz on the Internet. Indeed, more and more people visit and talk about this page so it’s a new way for firms to reach them. They want to appear on this homepage to be ‘in’.
Moreover, these firms hope that this page become a big network. If it’s happen, they will have their name and will enjoy success without spending lots of money. But they must decide quickly because there are only a limited number of pixels available. No time to have a long thought. This is a great opportunity to seize absolutely.
Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
On the one hand, I’m tempted to say that this project will be not a success too for many reasons.
First, I think this concept is increasingly copied by a number of people. It works less well than the first one.
Moreover, for this project you must give $10 on behalf a friend or multiple friends and their name and picture gets placed in the online book.
– $10 could be a barrier for some. Indeed, this is a certain amount and we cannot forget that this money is given without receiving anything in exchange (not advertising). It’s just a charitable act.
– And I’m not convinced that donated money on behalf a friend is a good idea. Certainly some have to replicate but others will not do. And the chain is limited because a person will not give a lot of money to invite many friends; one is enough to have his own picture in the book. Once the chain is disrupted, the project is done.
Finally, the meaning of this act of charity is ‘wasted’. Indeed, friends will not donate money because they really want to but because they feel obligated to return the favor. This could have a negative impact on the project. (Ok they will have the money but the actions’ meaning is not fair).
However, on the other hand, the aim of the project is different. It’s not here just a classical marketing project where the author has as purpose of raising money for himself (finance his university education). No, the WaterForward project is a social marketing project where the goal is to raise awareness and help people without access to clean water. Furthermore, in spite of the project already exists; the users are not the same. And finally, it’s ultimately might not be such a bad idea to raise money for charity in that way because instead of having one donor, they have (almost every time) twice –dubbed-. Few friends will refuse to replicate.
Show lessRead more
When we take cognizance of the story of “The Million Dollar Webpage” the first success element was the fact that friends and family were the first to invest in his project. The advertising was initially only by word of mouth. It is important to notice that the risk that he incurred was not too much (no more than 50 € to open the website)
Second, media (BBC Online, The Register, The Daily Telegraph, …) started very quickly to talk and to be interesting in that project. We can say that there were several ingredients to make the success: -the originality and the innovation of the project to draw the attention, -the low cost (and so nearly free advertising) for investors to buy a 10×10 blocks, -the good action by helping him.
Indeed, as the article explains it, consumers base their own choices given that what the others have chosen. In the million dollar webpage, that is exactly what happened. The investors were initially parents and family and then, thanks to word of mouth and the media, it became wider: users expected that many future users would have joined the webpage. It worked: the webpage looked then very attractive and investors had to be “in”. People felt they were part of a group and more than that they were doing it for a good cause (helping this young man to pay his university costs).
Regarding the “Waterforward.charitywater”’project is different on many levels. Despite the fact that those two websites are for good causes, the implication’ degree of the investors are different. Another difference is the first project (“The Million Dollar Webpage”) was for mostly intended for firms: it was a way to combine advertising with good cause. In the WaterForward project it is the pictures of anybody that are on the WaterForward book: so the project depends on people and people only! According to me the major issue is the fact that we cannot show that we support the cause until someone donate in our behalf. The price is a bit higher than the other project, so I do not think people will donate for all their facebook and/or twitter friends.
To sum up I will say that some of previous factors that make “The Million Dollar Webpage” a success can be transposed for the “WaterForward project”, as: -the originality and innovation: the fact that they use social network (twitter and facebook), -the good action. But the major problems are the target people and the price that could lead to a problem compared to the previous project.
Show lessRead more
In my opinion, the page and the project of the Million Dollar Homepage was a success for 3 factors.
The first was the willingness of the purchasers to show that they are a part of a group, a network. Like M. Belleflamme explains in the text, people want to be a part of a bigger network (network effect). The first purchasers, so, have to make a strong advertising of this website to be sure that other people will also purchase one or more pixels.
The second fact is in paying for a pixel of this page, people have the impression that they make something good because they help this student for his studies. But they make that with the possibility to show their actions to the others. These actions can lead others to make the self.
The third factor was the novelty of this type of page. By purchasing a pixel of this page, the purchasers show that they can be precursors. To be in the first purchasers can tempt the others to follow to show to the world that they can find ambitious project, etc.
For the WaterForward Project, always in my opinion, I think that some of these factors can be transposed.
For the first factor identified (willingness to show that they are a part of a group), it can be true and false. Indeed, the purchasers don’t have their names and pictures on the website. But I suppose that when they purchase on behalf a friend, this friend know who has purchased for him. So, we can say that directly, when you surf on the webpage of the project, you don’t know the real purchasers. This fact can be negative. But, on the other hand, the friends know (by mail, supposition) who were the purchasers and can be tempted to be also a member of this network.
For the second factor, it will also be positive and negative. I explain my opinion: When you purchase for a friend, this friend can be the same just for you. So, the circle can be limited and doesn’t continue (maybe) with new purchasers. But, for the motivation to show to the others that you make something good for the world, it is reinforced because you say by purchasing: “Guys, I help some people to have clear water AND I purchase on behalf another person!”
Finally, for the third factor, the system to purchase for a friend is maybe a novelty but you can find a lot of non-profit organization on the web with a lot of donation project. So, for this factor, I think that it is not an important factor compared to the purchase on behalf a friend.
Show lessRead more
First of all, I thing it’s very difficult to compare these 2 organisations, because one is a non profit organisation and the other well.
However, Million Dollar Homepage is a succes for different reasons:
– It is a really new concept (I thing), so clients want to try it.
– The participation is really cheap and people can have a big logo on the page for few dollars.
– Clients can propose an advertising of their products or shop, so there is a possible financial gain of getting some pixels because you have a link to your business.
– That can be a mode effect. Furthermore, the site can be know by word-to-mouth.
– You are included in a community. As a bit the “like” effect on Facebook, you also want te be in the new mode effect and you buy some pixels “to do as the others”.
– The selling of the last pixels on E-bay for a very high price. It is to show at the previous buyer that some people can buy pixels for much more than 1 $, so they made a good deal.
However, I thing that it was a risky bet because if the first sold pixels were to compagnies with bad reputation, maybe it would be difficult to sell the other pixels.
Concerning the WaterForward Project, some arguments make me think that the project will not be a succes:
– It is a non profit organisation, but when you give 10 $, you don’t see where is you money going , so people have to TRUST in the organisation to do it.
– People can already see pictures of their friends on Facebook, Twitter, … so I thing it’s not a realy original concept.
– That can be also a mode effect, but if one of the friends doesn’t want to pay 10 $, the chain is to easily broken.
– For the Milion Dollar Homepage, each client has his own objective. Here, if somebody doesn’t care about the water, the chain is also broken.
– There are too many alternatives to do a caritative donation in which you can trust and see the results.
– Maybe, it can be more successful if they do a more concrete proposition with a lower price. For example, 1$ can bring 10 litters of water in the village XYZ in Congo.
In conclusion, I thing that it is realy difficult to compare these 2 project because the objectives are not the same. However, the clients of the 2 projects are so different that it is dificult to say if the project will be successful or not.
Show lessRead more
According to me, the Million Dollar Homepage became a success thanks to the originality of the concept and path dependence. Indeed, the result “hinge on small events that occur early in the diffusion of the network goods”.
The first “event” was when Alex Tew asked friends/family to buy the first pixels to attract people. By this way, firms were aware that the website was working.
The second “event” was the press release taken back by media which permitted to the website to become well-known and increased traffic on the website.
From this moment, firms are very attracted because a lot of users go to this homepage and see ads thanks to the buzz in the media (network effect) and in addition, the price is low (1pixel=1dollar) There is all to win (this is publicity for firms) and nothing to lose. Consequently firms expect that other firms will buy pixels and, given that pixels are limited, if the firm doesn’t buy pixels immediately, there is a high probability not having an ad on this homepage. So, firms’ expectations play a crucial role in the fast success of the Million Dollar Homepage (“The place to be”).
For the WaterForward project I think the idea is also original and not a copy-paste of the previous project. Consequently WaterForward could work through social media thanks to the bonus you receive in opposition with classical donation: you have your photo in the book and everybody can see friends you paid forward to and your total reach in the chain (satisfaction/recognition for helping). But the WaterForward project will be slower to succeed than the Million Dollar Homepage project for many reasons:
1) Compare to the Million Dollar Homepage, the price to add a friend is high (1friend = 10dollar).
2) If you are interested by this action, you can’t be in the book if no one paid forward to you. So, if you don’t have any friends in the book, you must ask to a stranger to donate 10dollar on your behalf, it’s not easy.
3) If you expect that your friends are not willing to pay for this action, you aren’t going to pay forward to them and you stop the chain. Moreover, you are not going to talk about this action around you because of the guilty feeling to don’t have paid for a charity aid.
4) If you expect that the network will not expand at a larger way, you have no reason to pay on behalf a friend because your contribution is a tiny part of the project. As you know that you will be able to add friends when you want (there will always have space), you will wait to see if other people join or if the project becomes better known before paying.
So I think the network effect doesn’t work as well as the network effect for the Million Dollar Homepage and expectations can bring the project in a bad way.
Show lessRead more
1. What are, according to you, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success (with a special focus on expectations)?
In my opinion, the main reason why the Million Dollar Homepage has been a success is that it was a funny concept no one had never thought/seen before, and it quickly created a buzz, thanks to global media attention. The more the media were speaking about the Million Dollar Homepage, the more the website was becoming attractive for advertisers. If I am not mistaken, we can here talk about a Network effect seeing that advertisers had the opportunity to be connected to a bigger network at a fair price. A virtuous self-reinforcing process has been taking place, taking into account that there were a limited number of pixels available.
Moreover, if we have a look at the testimonials available on the Million Dollar website (see: http://milliondollarhomepage.com/testimonials.php), it is to point out that advertisers seems being really happy with their investement, and are thanking Alex for the fair price (some of them are even projecting to buy some more pixels – it was still possible at that time). Everyone is saying their hits have increased at least by 10 in a few days foollowing their investment. In our case, the testimonials have been a very good way to convince advertisers to invest some $$ in the Million Dollar Homepage, focusing on their expectations.
To cut a long story short, it was an original initiative at low participating cost who received a massive global media coverage. The concept was really easy to understand, and advertisers were able to directly see the results of their investment. Last but not least, there were a limited number of pixels available and that was a funny idea no-one had never heard before. All these elements contributed to the website’s success.
2. Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
Before answering the 2nd question, it is to point out that the WaterForward project seems having evolved sinds the 2011 techcrunch.com article referenced on this page. If I am not mistaken, there are no online WaterForward book anymore. After some slides on the website, we are invited to send an email to 10 friends explaining them how to fix the water crisis (see: https://waterforward.charitywater.org/#slide/17).
A few steps later, we are invited to make a donation. And once done, we are told: “Thank you. You are a good person. Share on Facebook.Twitter or send the link via email”. I personally shared their message on twitter, who was saying “Put your Twitter addiction to good use: The world is small, help your neighbors have clean, safe water @charitywater https://waterforward.charitywater.org/2sgz09l ”
The original question was: “Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?”.
My answer is pretty pessimistic: I don’t think so, even if they are not busy with the online WaterForward book anymore.
I was not that convinced by the original concept. In my opinion, the principal statements the website was relying on were false:
1. The friends you are pledging for are ready to pay it forward.
2. People who are charitable want to be recognised by their pairs, and publicised
From my point of view, the main reasons why it didn’t worked are that:
1. the concept was hard to understand,
2. can we trust a web-based organisation?
3. no real visible results for people who were pledging
4. the snake was eating itself: I pledged in your behalf, and you did in mine. We are both happy to be in the book, what’s the next step while I don’t want to pledge on behalf of other friends anymore? No buzz effect,
3. the concept was relying on the charity of our friends (and that’s a real bet).
4. No network effect.
I guess all these reasons explain why the concept of the website has changed. At this time, even if WaterForward has more than 1.3M followers on twitter, it hasn’t created a global buzz yet (as far as I know). The positive point here is that the website is using social networks in a better way than previously (people are invited to share a post by email/FB/Twitter in order to increase the awareness of their friends). Moreover, their twitter account is retweeting tweets from their community, creating there a network and a positive atmosphere. It seems that people now have a feedback on their donation (email saying “Hi, we send the money you gave to Rwanda, cfr. https://twitter.com/charitywater ). So their strategy is better now. It won’t create a buzz as the Million Dollar Homepage, but they may succeed in their project.
Show lessThanks for your research. I understand the WaterForward project much better now!
Read more
1) What are, according to you, the factors that made the Million Dollar Homepage a success (with a special focus on expectations)?
I think that different factors are necessary to have a success like the Million Dollar Home page. The most important element, as it is said in the article, is the fact that people hope that others join the page too, that it becomes a huge network. It is the main point because if they see that others do the same, they feel reinsured. It was not a trap; they are part of the group, of the society.
But for me, it is not the only factor. It has to be for a ‘good cause’ (in this case for the university education of Alex Tew) for ethical reasons.
Those two first elements are directly sources of motivation! When we analyze the Maslow’s pyramid, we see that social need (i.e. to be a part of the group), esteem need and self-actualizing need (i.e. here the ethical reason) are on the top of the pyramid. They are the factors that motivate one person the most.
Moreover, in my opinion, fun is also a key point.
Another element is to benefit from the gift done, as having some ad for a low cost.
Here are all the ingredients to have something that will perform.
2) Do you think that these factors can be transposed to the WaterForward project so as to make it a success too?
We can recover all the necessary factors in the project ‘WaterForward’ and one more capital element: the fact that people feel indebted to another person. Indeed, they pay in order to put someone else in the book and this person receives a mail, saying that somebody pays for her. I think that it is a huge factor of motivation. They feel obligated to return the favor.
However, one aspect could be problematic: here 10 dollars are asked instead of only one in the other case. It could be an obstacle, especially when people receive nothing in exchange (there is no ad for them in this case).
Here is the link of another example of ‘a successful story’. But in this case, it was a lottery and the person has had some problems with Justice. http://www.ehow.com/how_6830962_sell-house-lottery.html
References : http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm
Show lessGood analysis and instructive links.
Read more
I think the factors that leads to the success of this web page are quite simple. The concept itself is easy to understand. He found a cause (raising money for his education) then he put a cheap/easy price (1dollar) and he offers the opportunity to make some advertising. He expect people to buy pixels and the buyers expect that their advert is going to be seen by many people. Alex was probably helped by the fact that his concept was new and original. The real challenge I think was to convince the first people that their advertising was going to be seen by many people. Then it acts like a snow ball effect. I think it was a good simple idea at the right time. I don’t think another page like that will work so well now.
I think it could be translate for the Waterforward project but the way they did it seems not to match with the project. There are problems: the price is more expensive, you pay for a friend (it’s more difficult in this time of individualization), you can only pay if you are in the book (no free access), it’s a voluntary act (you expect nothing in return when the million dollar homepage offered more visibility for your company). Unfortunately, people are little inclined to give money for free.. ( a solution could be to give a symbolic gift or something).
Show lessRead more
The ‘Million Dollar Homepage’ was such a success because Alex Tex was the first who came up with this sort of website. The idea of collecting money for his college fees by setting up a website for advertisements was innovative and original. The low price and its catchy URL also played in favour of the quick dispersion of his website. Moreover, with an initial investment of less than 100$, he didn’t take much risk. For any entrepreneur, the most difficult step is to attract their first customers in order to gain critical mass. Alex Tex managed this first obstacle by having friends and family members bought the first pixels. Thanks to word-of-mouth and some press releases, he managed to attract people’s curiosity and the more and more people visited his website, the more and more firms were willing to buy pixels in order to get their name displayed on the website.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/10/AR2006011001703.html)
In the following years, Alex Tex launched two other projects which were quite similar but where he added some new value (www.pixelotto.com and onemillionpeople.com). Nonetheless, neither of them could catch up with his initial success. This fact clearly shows that, despite his popularity, he couldn’t jump on the bandwagon. Since the success of the ‘Million Dollar Homepage’, there exist many copycat homepages which are exploiting the idea but only have in mind their personal interest.
Despite this fact, the WaterForward project could be a success because the aim is different. Since the ‘Million Dollar Homepage’ is a website being aimed to finance someone’s college, the WaterForward project is a project in order to support charity funds. So the reasons for supporting the one or the other website are different. Moreover, the websites don’t attract the same type of users. While the ‘Million Dollar Homepage’ mainly focused on firms, the WaterForward project depends heavily on the participation of people: people have to be added by someone to the network. So even if you want to support the charity, you have to wait until you’re added by somebody already in the network. Once the chain is disrupted, the project ends in talk. Another disadvantage of this project is that ones you figure on the website and you know that your friend paid for you, you feel obliged to do the same. There is a sort of social pressure which could result in the disappearance of the classical meaning of donation – “A donation is a gift given by physical or legal persons, typically for charitable purposes and/or to benefit a cause” (source: Wikipedia).
Despite these facts, I think that using social networks is a good way to gain people’s interest for the good cause. Moreover, since non-profit organizations don’t have money to invest in large advertisement campaigns, spreading their mission via social networks is a good way to reach a lot of people without means.
A very interesting article about WaterForward:
http://www.hinnovates.org/2011/why-waterforward-is-important-innovating-in-charitable-giving/
Thanks for the interesting links.
I am so grateful for your blog article.Really thank you! Fantastic. gakedfeeagdd