October 03, 2005

A thousand words

In a spare moment I whipped together this little diagram that tries to explain in pictures what I’ve probably failed to convey in many thousands of words.

It’s certainly more illuminating that the arm-waving “Power of 3” stuff in eBay’s investor relations blurb. There’s magic happening somehow in the arrows in their diagrams.

So, what’s the message? Really, it’s quite simple. Marketplace enablers can be defined by the breadth of goods on offer, and the depth of support for the transaction they offer. The picture shows how eBay, Amazon and Google are currently positioned, and how Skype might be positioned in future. The edges are “clipped” because not all transactions go to the maximum depth; e.g. not all eBay auctions are settled via Paypal, and Amazon sometimes hands off fulfillment to 3rd parties. (The eBay region is made translucent — I hope it’s still obvious which bits are eBay despite the colour transition.)

At one extreme, Google has a very broad business base (any commercial transaction that can have an unambiguous keyword associated with it). But it doesn’t do much beyond that.

At the other extreme is Amazon, which will encase your goods in gift wrap and even deliver them to you personally when it comes to certain digital goods.

eBay falls in the middle. Its business model is narrower and shallower than these extremes, but perhaps encompasses a greater “commercial land area” as a result.

The purpose of the Skype-eBay deal is to push eBay into a broader realm of things for sale. For instance, if you want legal advice today, Google is the only place to go search for it. Want a reputable lawyer nearby? Sorry, the eBay reputation system doesn’t help you — yet.

The many articles on “pay per call” models for Skype tend to miss the bigger picture. Skype isn’t constrained by PSTN circuit technology, so previously unimagined transaction-supporting functionality can be integrated. Only by looking at the increased breadth and depth of a Skype-eBay transaction environment can you see where the value lies.

I expect Google to continue its strategy of expansion along a different axis — the set of “search moments”. I have previously argued that Google missed an opportunity to deepen its business model by acquiring Skype.

Currently Skype’s business is a thin, empty line along the bottom of the diagram. Infinite width, zero depth. US$4.1 billion is a lot of money for what amounts to a risky experiment. But the prospect of re-defining the experience of how consumers and businesses talk to one another is an exciting one. For someone it may even turn out to be a lucrative one, and not just Skype’s management and investors.

Posted by Martin Geddes at 05:08 PM
Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telepocalypse.net/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/mgeddes/MT/mt-tb.cgi/581.

Comments

Assuming that eBay can indeed benefit from Skype-like technology, what I am missing is the need to pay a large amount to have an inhouse technology. Why can't eBay allow for any and all communication technologies, like other IMs? It can't be that deals can be closed outside their system, for one can do that with Skype as well. What am I missing?

Posted by: at October 4, 2005 12:25 AM

First, I ought to state I'm definitely not sold on the fiscal merits of the merger.

That said, I believe it _is_ possible for eBay-Skype to engineer lock-in so that transactions and money flow on-net. Consider a merchant edition of Skype that is capable of natively receiving user profile data, reputation and payment. This would be some multi-modal construct (e.g. "Click here to release your name and address to Foo Plumbers Inc.").

The merchant would be incentivised to use the client because of better transaction completion rates and lower fraud. The user, because of superior usability and the indemnity insurance of eBay for using the "official" route.

It's only by going beyond the 2-way audio channel view of telephony that you can get there.

Now, could they have technically achieved this in-house or by buying a technology rival? Yes, but at the cost of 12-18 months of delay, and the cost of a rival acquiring Skype.

They judged that a risk too far.

Posted by: at October 4, 2005 12:35 AM

Nice chart...

Back on the theme of the rationale for the merger and related to the depth of transaction view.

One thing that was mentioned by Meg Whitman was expertise in technology and how Ebay would not have gone off-line if they had used the technology. So P2P technology is definitely something Ebay is interested in.

The strength of P2P is in distribution of digital media.

I wonder if ebay wants to get involved in audio / video content distribution?

I’m not sure how the auction model fits in with the distribution of a non-scarce resource.

Posted by: at October 4, 2005 09:33 AM
Please enter your comment below. Your comment will not appear immediately -- they all go for pre-approval by me because of the volume of spam I receive.







Remember personal info?