Why the tool grassroots Web site failed

The internet has a famous "70-20-10 Law": "In general, in the field of information technology, there is a 60% or 70% market leader, there is a stable 20% or 30% of the market of the second, leaving a group of small businesses occupy 10% or less market." "Basically, it's a winner-take-all game, unlike Wal-Mart and the roadside food store, Wal-Mart can lose a large company, but aunt's shop still live well." In the Internet market, the Giants eat meat with a bone clean, the remaining one vote small and medium-sized companies struggling. The legend of the domestic Internet in the pioneering period of grass-roots owners are still alive, but as users of the traditional use of the Internet stereotypes and the rise of mobile internet, such days together no longer return.

There is such a type of three-no grassroots web site, no background, no investment, no fixed team. Unlike most of the legendary Internet cafes established by the grassroots web site, the founder of this is a technical background, in Github,basecamp such products to understand the Internet, playing is rubyonrails,node.js such a new technology, With a good vision of the Internet products and a certain user needs are not well satisfied with the identification, to create their own services. It could be a good story, because Facebook started out like this, but it backfired, with limited founders and inexperience, not being good at digging up potential collaborators in the dorm, and not being able to get the money out of the few opportunities to face potential investors, After the accumulation of hundreds of thousands of of users have always been unable to find a similar variety of internet articles on the survival of the road.

So this guy wants me to do is to solve some kind of problem tool product, do not have too many social value, according to the service charge is this kind of product's usual profit means, and its survival so difficult, why not just do their own good things, the product well, to win the user. And that's what this guy really thinks. Aggressively cutting down the site's communities and other modules that require more operational energy, launched a mobile browser version of the site, and spent three months as an iOS app posted to the app Store, then turned the product into a paid service, 60 dollars a year.

Perhaps reader to the following story, but this is not an inspirational story, the result of no twists and turns, the product charges after the old users have scolded, there is a sense of understanding, and indeed there are silently paid, the user lost a lot, but the product does survive. This is a failure story for internet startups, but if you think of him as a normal business, the business is OK and the business that survives is good.

Looking back on the story, perhaps we can sum up some experience:

1, in today's Internet environment, Internet products are more of a service, Web sites and mobile devices are the carrier of this service. To see the services you provide can better meet the user, on the site or on the app, first on what after what is from this point of view.

2, the charge is not impossible, but the charge is not can be reluctantly. You really have to be unique and quality.

3, as a user is a good thing to do their favorite products is also a good thing. But not to regard themselves as the majority of the user's representative, it depends on your product positioning.

4, users do not care if you are not grassroots, you do online games and World of Warcraft competition, you do hand swim and Angry birds to compete, you do communication and QQ, micro-letter competition. So, what you have to do, from what angle, is very important.

5, this story is a real real life, if there is similarity, it is a coincidence.