

Why is Microsoft giving away web traffic and abandoning users? - bensummers
http://www.itwriting.com/blog/3225-why-is-microsoft-giving-away-web-traffic-and-abandoning-users.html

======
ghshephard
Microsoft was able to attract 7 million users, and 30 million visitors - and
decided that there wasn't enough value in that to continue developing.

I'm wondering if they came to the same conclusion that Ning did when they
decided to shut down their free web hosting properties?

~~~
kenjackson
What was Ning's conclusion?

~~~
ghshephard
Ning decided there was no profit in "Free" web hosting - even with all the
advertisements they plastered over the pages. They shut it all down and only
support paid hosting.

~~~
kenjackson
OK. That sounds like a reasonable conclusion. I wouldn't be surprised if they
came to a similar one.

I must admit that I find it amazing that blogs or even Facebook make as much
money as they do from advertising. Google I get. I semi-regularly click a
Google ad, because they are relevant. But I've almost never seen a blog ad or
Facebook page ad that had content worth clicking. The exception to this are
specialty blogs, like Engadget. But most blogs aren't Engadget.

With that said, clearly Facebook is making a ton of money. I'd love to see the
data on what actually gets clicked.

~~~
DevX101
Facebook and Google can target users more accurately than a blogging platform.

------
akadien
I'm confused about Microsoft's strategy and directions. They appear to be as
well.

~~~
recampbell
Yes, this seems like a major surrender in the consumer space which brings into
question any of their other consumer-focused web properties.

------
recampbell
Related: "2010 acquisitions--Microsoft: 0, Google: 23"
<http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-20017823-62.html>

These two data points put together make me think something is Seriously Wrong
in Redmond. They both speak to uncoordinated business unit strategy and
paralysis in executive management. Perhaps Balmer is finally on his way out,
resulting in this lack of focus.

------
holychiz
it could be that MS wants to re-focus on its strength: desktop OS. This might
be a sign that MS position its software to be the traffic directors to
preferred 3rd-party partners who are the best-of-the-breed in their respective
market. In Windows past, MS first releases OS w/o important
applications/features, let 3rd-parties fill in the niche, then develops
features that won market acceptance. A modified version of this strategy might
be simply making deals w/ 3rd-party web-sites to monetize the traffic.

If this is the thinking behind closing MS Live Blogs, then, yes, it's a
tactical retreat but actually a step forward in their strategy.

The more interesting question might be how much of Windows Mobile OS
influences this decision.

------
mthoms
> _Now, I thought the Live ID was a single sign-on for Microsoft’s online
> services, and the basis of a network of friends and contacts. Perhaps
> Microsoft is now ceding that concept to Facebook or others? This does seem
> to be a move in that direction; and while it may be acceptance of something
> that was inevitable, it is a bad day for Microsoft’s efforts to matter
> online_.

I disagree. The sooner they kill off unpopular products and focus their
efforts the better. Google has no qualms about quickly terminating projects
that haven't gained traction, and MS shouldn't either. Especially now that
they are going "all in" on search.

------
houseabsolute
A rare moment of clarity, maybe? Let's stick to things we can do for a profit?

------
dotcoma
I thought they were going to offer wordpress-powered blogs on their own
domain(s). Was I wrong?

