Sure, that seems like a preposterous question. Twitter has well over 5 million users and a rapidly growing family of more than 10,000 third party apps supporting it. And yet, the company has not articulated a coherent monetization strategy, its technology could easily be co-opted by other companies, and its developer community could outgun it.
Two colleagues and I recently attended the two day "140 | The Twitter Conference" event in Mountain View, California. Yes, it was highly stimulating. We learned a lot and came away with a fair number of ideas we can incorporate in our CRM product marketing initiatives. And we saw a lot of really cool ideas and invigorating entrepreneurialism. How these ideas convert to revenue is another story. The "if you like what you see, please donate via PayPal" approach seems earthy and neat, but I wouldn't want my mortgage payment to depend on that. But don't take my word for it. Go here and enter in "#140tc" so you can see the chatter firsthand.
Ultimately, for me the most compelling and memorable words were those of Forrester's Jeremiah Owyang (in the picture above). He gave a speech that used the Groundswell approach as the basic construct. (Let me diverge for a second. If you haven't read Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies, what the heck are you waiting for?).
But he also said the following, "Twitter doesn't matter. What matters is the Web, which is real time, mobile, and global." He then intimated that you'll see Twitter as a very successful stand-alone company, or as a feature in many different Websites, or it will dissipate altogether." He also helped "define" Twitter for many folks--e.g., it's a microblogging site, a CRM system (optimally for real-time customer support), a research and listening tool, a viral marketing tool, etc.
In summary, the buzz about Twitter can get annoying. Heck, I heard two guys at my gym this morning condescendingly dismiss it as a fad. But ultimately it's also quite fun to see where this Twitterverse is going. One final comment in this eclectic musing: Yes, I work at a "big brand" and big companies were frowned upon when they first glommed onto the Web in the mid-90s. And they seem to be getting dissed as they seek ways to harness the commercial potential of Twitter now. But from my biased perspective, these big guns are also bringing some order to the mayhem. They have to answer to several higher authorities (no, not like Hebrew National hot dogs!) given that they're public companies. This is in stark contrast to network level marketers, get rich quick hypesters, self-proclaimed motivational coaches, and even dog trainers...so many of whom are hyping their often questionable wares on Twitter.
[Editor's Note: This post also appears on my new blog, which contains professional musings only.]
Link to original post