Fast Company magazine published story (Sept. 2009) about the state of “hyperlocal” news websites, with the typical emphasis on mostly huge international carpetbaggers (AOL, the Times, etc.) and their efforts to appear truly local. Most of the focus is on advertising dollars…
Hyperlocal sites — covering cities, towns, or just a neighborhood — can deliver precision-targeted advertising to local and global businesses. As the once-exponential growth rate for most Internet advertising in the United States grinds to a halt, the online local-advertising market is projected to grow 5.4% in 2009 to $13.3 billion, according to media research firm Borrell Associates….
Boosters routinely note that more than $100 billion is spent annually on local ads — TV, radio, print, outdoor, direct mail, and online. Although the stat’s origins are fuzzy, what’s clear is how aggressively folks believe those ad dollars are migrating to the Web. Borrell Associates projects an online local-ad market worth $15.5 billion by 2013, fueled mostly by small businesses ditching the Yellow Pages and local newspapers.
There is a gap between these rosy projections and the more bleak reality. Debbie Galant is the “Queen of Hyperlocal,” as crowned by new-media consultant and hyperlocal cheerleader Jeff Jarvis. Her site, Baristanet, serving Montclair, New Jersey, is often cited as proof that hyperlocal can be profitable. But Galant declines to specify what that profit is. “It’s real money,” she says. “We’ll share that our ad revenue is six figures. But we won’t go into more detail than that.”
The truth is that billions are not migrating to hyperlocal sites. “Advertisers have no interest in community Web sites,” says Gordon Borrell, CEO of the analyst firm whose statistics are routinely cited as evidence of hyperlocal’s bright future. “They don’t have the type of material advertisers want to be around,” referring to archetypal hyperlocal stories about high school basketball and drug arrests. “Sites are connecting the dots inappropriately.”
Even if the editorial mix changed, the ad model may be irreparably flawed. Consider the business model that Patch is pursuing in its three original New Jersey towns. Maplewood, South Orange, and Millburn have a combined population of around 60,000. Patch charges advertisers $15 per thousand impressions. If every resident in all of these towns contributed one impression a day — and all of those impressions were sold out — Patch would make $900 a day in revenue, or about $325,000 a year. Not exactly a windfall after expenses…
Thanks to our many supporters, Front Porch Forum is hitting some great milestones…
And FPF is growing. More people sign up every day, more postings flow through FPF to neighbors, and we’re expanding to more towns… stay tuned!
Andrew Shotland takes on Twitter and local in his recent post…
There has been a lot of digital ink spilled over Twitter’s local search implications. Over the past few months several Twitter services have launched with a local angle. I thought it would be interesting to get them all in one place and provide some details…
Vermont’s Maponics continues to develop its wares…
Yesterday we announced the launch of the Maponics Neighborhood Classification Schema™, a new feature embedded within the Maponics Neighborhood Boundaries™ database. Read our news release here!
With this, we are thrilled to have expanded the depth of our neighborhood boundaries database and made it more powerful for companies looking to target or filter out neighborhoods with specific characteristics.
Brad Burnham of Union Square Ventures makes a good case in his recent post about the economics of social media… gibes with what we’ve been saying about Front Porch Forum for some time…
My frustration with the debate about Free is that it seems like a last ditch effort to fit the internet economy into the familiar framework of the industrial economy. That isn’t going to work. Free is not a pricing strategy, a marketing strategy, or the inevitable consequence of a market with low variable costs. It’s a symptom of a much more fundamental economic shift. Until we agree on what resources are scarce and have a framework for how they will be allocated in the future we are not just talking past each other, we are talking about the wrong things…
…in an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients…
In a world where the scarce resource is some combination of time, attention, relevance and insight, those commodities become the medium of exchange in a parallel economy alongside traditional currencies…
The much more interesting conversation is about the appropriate economic model for a social network that depends on the contributions of its participants and increases in value as more people use it. One possibility is that the economic models of these networks will look more like Craigslist than Yahoo. Recent estimates peg Craigslist’s revenue at more than $100,000,000. Not much compared to Yahoo’s billions, but Craigslist still employs only 28 people. Even allowing for substantial bandwidth, and server costs, it is still hard to imagine how their costs are more than $5,000,000. Since Craigslist collapsed a multibillion dollar classified advertising business into a fabulously profitable $100,000,000 business, perhaps we should be talking about the potential deflationary impact of more “zero billion dollar” businesses. As the radical efficiencies of the web seep into more sectors of the economy, and participants in social networks exchange attention instead of dollars, will governments at all levels need to make do with less tax revenue?
Of course, the other “currency” of social media is the posting. Web 2.0 sites must attract people who post and people who pay attention. Then earn dollars around that. But you’ve gotta have both readers/viewers and content contributors… often two very different beasts.
The Burlington Free Press picked up the Vermont angle on the study recently released about volunteerism…
Vermont and the Burlington area rank high in a new national study of volunteering rates, according to the Corporation for National and Community Service.
The state ranks ninth in the percentage of the population that participates in volunteer efforts, according to the CNCS’s Web site, www.volunteeringinAmerica.gov…
In Vermont, 35.6 percent of the population volunteered; the national average is 26.4 percent. The Burlington metropolitan area, which includes Burlington and South Burlington, ranked 11th among the 75 mid-sized cities polled for volunteer rates…
A volunteer coordinator at the United Way of Chittenden County said she is not surprised by Vermont’s high rate of volunteerism. “We have certainly seen the generosity of this community in giving of their volunteer time,” said Holly Reed, director of the United Way of Chittenden County’s volunteer center. “Vermont is a small place, and we are more acutely aware of what the needs are in the community.”…
The study showed 35.6 percent of Vermonters, or about 180,400 people, volunteered in 2008, putting in 20.6 million hours of service, according to the study…
Front Porch Forum is a great catalyst for getting people involved in their local community. Many local nonprofits have told us of increased volunteer rolls due to FPF… what a thrill for FPF to play a role in this important trend.
Ghost of Midnight is an online journal about fostering community within neighborhoods, with a special focus on Front Porch Forum (FPF). My wife, Valerie, and I founded FPF in 2006... read more