Didn’t manage to go for the launch of MDA’s IDM initiatives, so yesterday’s sharing by Aaron was really informative.  I don’t think it was possible to leave that session without feeling excited.  Got some of my colleagues from…

However, one weakness online marketing has is an inability to create a brand until a huge critical mass is hit. Also, in asia, you are not mainsteam unless you have off line presence and branding.And not mainsteam means less advertisers and harder to convince potential clients about your product/service.

So my comment is actually a limited point. I am saying that current internet startups should pay attention to non-online channels to. And factor that in when raising money. Do not just have 2% marketing budget and use it mainly for online referral campaigns and online ads. Have a 5-10% one and include roadshows, PR activities, direct mailers, sponsorships etc. Maybe not mass media as that is costly on a per acquisition basis as rightly pointed out.

Having said that i must say I am thinking hard on how to leverage user content and community content to evolve my current old school dot com business. Because as you guys point out, the scability and exponential increase in users is just too attractive to ignore :)

It stems from the Silicon Valley example. The most successful startups there did not utilize Old Media at all. Most famous case in point was Google and Youtube. One can say they had no choice. As a small startup, the cheapest way is to do your mktg free. and only online offers that. Sure, if “Roadshows, mass media ads, emailers, mailers, talks, PR efforts with mainstream media ” are free, they would rationally have done it too.

I think the same works for Asia. If you ask an entrepreneur (nvm Web.20 or not) which mktg will he use, he will choose the most cost-effective ones. If his product/svc is suitale for online WOM, then online is best cos its free. Like E27, we only rely on MSN, blogs to spread the word. One could argue we are building a process and machinery to test how viable viral marketing is as a viable alternative to old media. We do it..

Cos we have no money. And it works. =)

Yeah, one way of gaining your audience is either to be controversial (like Xiaxue) or being seen as controversial (Mr Brown). In Singapore, pop culture dominates, and hence cool technology platforms don’t really appeal to the mass public, unless u are in Silicon Valley.

Viral marketing is not the only thing. You need endorsements from other major players in the industry. It’s just how it works in this sphere.

Keep the comments and questions coming.

So logically, the only advantage a 2.0 approach has is its scalability which is exponential since it is community led. But how does a fledging web 2.0 company scale effectively with limited resources? that seems to be something i hear a lot from our new entreprenuers.

I hear so much talk about viral marketing and I know it works. But there seems to be a disdain for old school marketing and alliances. To me a web 2.0 firm would do well to ally with an existing 1.0 firm which already has a large relevant database and even better in a similar service. At the same time, while the viral marketing is being planned, above the line and below the line marketing should be done too. Roadshows, mass media ads, emailers, mailers, talks, PR efforts with mainstream media etc should all be done.

I find it very strange that our web 2.0 entrepreners work so hard to build a cool platform and then expect viral marketing to do all the rest.

A good example would be Xia Xue who now has learned to leverage mass media to her blog’s advantage.

Another example is STOMP with its clear resource advantage and mass media ads via SPH newspapers. These efforts work sometimes in spite of their software. Just some thoughts.

Thank you for your thoughts to Ridzuan’s questions. We are currently working to get it at least in the form of a podcast so that our readers (who may miss the event) might be able to hear how the whole event transpired.

Ridzuan,

On your first question, to get global, there are two possible ways:

1. Tap into regional markets, focus on mainly big ones like Indonesia, Malaysia, China, India or even Vietnam. However, one barrier of entry may be language and knowledge of the local market which is diverse across the region.

2. Go straight to the source, i.e to Silicon Valley. For that, you need to get your technology startup reviewed by TechCrunch or some big players like Guy Kawasaki. For that one, if I am doing a web 2.0 startup, I must try to save a bit of money to get there and do the promotion at that place. It’s a risk, but not many people will dare to try such an idea.

On your second question, I will say that you need to identify what kind of integration is feasible. One local startup that I liked is BookJetty.com, where I can create a booklist to share with friends and keep track of what new books I like to read. In essence, the service must be specific and focus on something such that one can find monetization later.

1. Get to know people (like the many great people at SGE) who know that particular region that you wanna venture to (e.g. Malaysia or China)

2. Get started with your venture and stay in the game. From my experience, if you stay in the venture game long enough, you are bound to meet interesting and good friends/partners who can help you with whatever expansions to these regions.

Finally, great work to the folks at SGE for bringing this event. Hopefully we can get to view it online via youtube or something for those who are not able to attend.

1. How do I get the word out? This is in-line with what BL said. I’m a Singaporean with contacts primarily based here. How do I capture an international audience fast enough for the venture to sustain itself? Even going for the regional market is tricky because of the diversity of language, culture, etc…

2. Should we still be looking at web 2.0 or should be look at integrating concepts of web 2.0 into the real world? Concepts like user-generated content/services and the like. (perhaps, some emerging technologies could address this?)

just some thoughts…will add to it as they come…

The web 3.0 is a troll. :) After all, in Singapore, with all the web 2.0 successes I see so far, are due to controversies. So, in the same light, a VC I met last night was telling me that MMORPG is web 3.* (put your favourite number).

Actually, I hope that in my lifetime, I can see (pick your favourite number).0 that we can go into the virtual world and move around, like one episode of futurama, where Fry and gang went to the World Wide Web by wearing some headgears that send them to the internet.

It’s interesting that you point out that the useability design, friendly interfaces and ‘viral’ marketing tactics brought about some success for social network community type companies like MySpace and Facebook. The key point is that they have the vast market to allow these companies to tap into, for e.g. the universities, the amateur music and etc. In a more diverse setting in Asia, how can we leverage on these traits to create value for our local web 2.0 companies?

In essence, for Singapore, the first day you build a web 2.0 company, you must go global if you are not building interesting web 2.0 technology that enhances how users can work with the web but more innovative use of technology to deal with markets.