Osservatorio mobile social networks final report

726 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
726
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
34
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Osservatorio mobile social networks final report

  1. 1. Mobile-Internet 2.0 Business Models: A Reference Framework Osservatorio Mobile Social Networks 2009-2010 Research Con il supporto di
  2. 2. Agenda1. Context and Problem Definition2. Research Problem3. Objective4. Methodology Overview5. Research Framework6. Results January 2010 2/64
  3. 3. Context and Problem DefinitionContext • Mobile-Internet Convergence • Web 2.0 and Mobile 2.0 Consolidation • The Social Web: Social ApplicationsProblem Definition • The business models of Social Applications • The 2.0 paradox: need for high number of users vs. need to monetize • The failure of advertisement • Fear of a new dotcom bubble • Lack of systematic research, especially empirical January 2010 3/64
  4. 4. Research ProblemThere is much confusion regarding how Social Applications are defined,which are their characteristics, what are the value sources they exploit togenerate value and how they organize their offering in order to do that.How the business models of Mobile-Internet 2.0 Social Applications in anintegrated Mobile-Internet business and technological domain arearticulated in terms of: a) value proposition; b) multi-channel strategy; and c) value appropriation. January 2010 4/64
  5. 5. ObjectiveThe main objective is: “to propose an analytical reference framework forunderstanding and explaining Mobile-Internet 2.0 Social Applicationbusiness models according to value creation, delivery, and appropriationdimensions”.The main objective can be unfolded into four intermediate objectives: a) to propose a taxonomy model for Mobile-Internet 2.0 applications that can be used to characterize Social Applications; b) to propose a conceptual framework to describe the value sources for Social Applications; c) to propose a classification scheme for the role of the technology delivery channel in Mobile-Internet 2.0 Social Application business models; and d) to propose an analytical model for the revenue channels in Mobile-Internet 2.0 Social Application business models.Finally, the integrated reference framework can be used to analyze andsupport decision-making concerning Mobile-Internet 2.0 business models. January 2010 5/64
  6. 6. Methodology Overview 1/3• Research of an exploratory nature• Inductive mixed-methods research approach• Research framework composed by: • Empirical study • Taxonomy model for Mobile-Internet 2.0 Applications • Conceptual framework for describing the value sources of Social Applications• Empirical study unfolded in two phases: • Quantitative: web and mobile based census survey to map the offering of Social Applications in a market (Italian and Spanish Language) • Qualitative: case studies with selected companies offering Social Applications January 2010 6/64
  7. 7. Methodology Overview 2/3 AnalysisCensus Filters  Primary and Secondary Typology  Service name  Public services  Service provider  Italian and Spanish  Delivery and fruition technologySources  Core features (Personal Profile, Profile Language Online: search engine Information Detail, etc.)  Communication features (chat, IM, profile & directory commenting, status update, etc.) Offline: media&press  Content features (Content Search, Blogging, search, interviews Census etc.)  Cost and means of payment  Web only  ….  Mobile only (Mms, Sms, Browsing, 322 Social Application)  Web & Mobile Applications AnalysisCase studies  Social Application Description Filters  Mobile Technologies  Relevance of the brand  Revenue Model  Presence on Web and/or  PerformanceSources  Value Network positioning on Mobile Direct interviews  Future Perspectives  Issues and Challenges Offline sources: media&press search Case studies 31 Case studies January 2010
  8. 8. Methodology Overview 3/3 January 2010 8/64
  9. 9. Research Framework:Mobile-Internet 2.0 Applications Taxonomy Model Social Applications January 2010 9/64
  10. 10. Research Framework:Mobile-Internet 2.0 Applications Taxonomy Model In Social Content Applications users do not actively interact only with dynamic content, but also with each other during the process of content transformation and enrichment. Thus, the focus here is on the social content, i.e., content collectively produced, shared and/or transformed by users interactions. Dynamic Content Applications (DCA) permit or facilitate interaction between user and content. Applications are focused on the active aspect of the interaction and the dynamic aspect of content. In this approach, users are more than content consumers, as they actively interact with content in order to transform and enrich it. January 2010 10/64
  11. 11. Research Framework:Mobile-Internet 2.0 Applications Taxonomy Model Applications focused on user-user sustained These are interactions mostly through applications focused previously known users on user-user with the aim to maintain transient existing relationships. interactions. The potential to create social relationships is low, but are important to maintain existing Applications focused on relationships. user-user sustained interactions predominantly with previously unknown users with the aim to create new relationships. January 2010 11/64
  12. 12. Research Framework: Value Source Conceptual FrameworkTheoretical Background: Uses & Gratifications Theory, Social Capital Theory,and Social Network Theory (tie strength and brokerage/closure mechanisms)Premise: value in Social Applications is created by fulfilling six major user needcategories: • Informational needs • Social needs • Entertainment needs • Communication needs • Self-Exposure needs • Commercial needs January 2010 12/64
  13. 13. Research Framework: Value Source Conceptual FrameworkTheoretical Background: Uses & Gratifications Theory, Social Capital Theory,and Social Network Theory (tie strength and brokerage/closure mechanisms)Premise: value in Social Applications is created by fulfilling six major user needcategories: User needs relating to the exchange of information and/or knowledge. Benefits related to • Informational needs extended information base and access to experts. User needs relating to establishing new relationships or managing • Social needs existing relationships. Benefits in the form of emotional support and increased informational exchange. January 2010 13/64
  14. 14. Research Framework: Value Source Conceptual FrameworkTheoretical Background: Uses & Gratifications Theory, Social Capital Theory,and Social Network Theory (tie strength and brokerage/closure mechanisms)Premise: value in Social Applications is created by fulfilling six major user needcategories: User needs relating to entertainment use of media through UGC, editorial content, • Entertainment needs virtually “hanging out” or gaming. Usual trade-off between quality and quantity. User needs relating to • Communication needs communicative needs. Social Applications replacing usual CMC tools. January 2010 14/64
  15. 15. Research Framework: Value Source Conceptual FrameworkTheoretical Background: Uses & Gratifications Theory, Social Capital Theory,and Social Network Theory (tie strength and brokerage/closure mechanisms)Premise: value in Social Applications is created by fulfilling six major user needcategories: User needs relating to self-exposure and self-expression. Social • Self-Exposure needs Applications as tools for increasing reputation, visibility, popularity, and authority. User needs relating to business and/or commercial needs. Main benefits include job searching, • Commercial needs service provision and micro- eCommerce. January 2010 15/64
  16. 16. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• 322 services surveyed, results analyzed according to 5 operational variables: • Delivery channel • Web Only • Mobile Only • Web & Mobile • Primary Social Application aspect • Dynamic Content (Blog) • Dynamic Content (Content Sharing & Aggregation) • Social Content (Thematic Community) A single service is characterized by • Social Matching one Primary SA aspect and up to five Secondary. SA aspects. • Social Network • Social Communication • Secondary Social Application aspect(s) • Revenue Channel • None • Advertisement • Subscription • Transaction • Mixed • Freemium Strategy January 2010 16/64
  17. 17. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel • Services roughly equally distributed Evidence of the importance of the Mobile-Internet 2.0 convergence phenomenon. January 2010 17/64
  18. 18. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel Total: 322 services January 2010 18/64
  19. 19. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel Thematic Communities, direct descendents of traditional topic-focused Services that follow a virtual communities, are single-channel still offered mostly strategy belong mostly through the Web to Social Application channel. categories usually associated with older, more established value proposition models. Total: 322 services January 2010 19/64
  20. 20. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel However, services that belong mostly to Social Application categories associated with novel value propositions tend to favor a dual-channel strategy. Total: 322 services January 2010 20/64
  21. 21. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channelNo single concentrationof a sole SocialApplication categoryusing a dual-channelstrategy: Mobile-Internet2.0 convergence is still anew phenomenon, nopredominant value Total: 322propositions have yet servicesbeen found! January 2010 21/64
  22. 22. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel Significant number of Content Sharing services using a mobile-only delivery approach: mobile devices are highly aligned with content creation and sharing. Total: 322 services January 2010 22/64
  23. 23. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition and delivery: technology delivery channel Mobile devices’ limitations when dealing with text may explain the low diffusion of mobile blogging services. Multimedia-rich mobile blogs tend to be marketed as Content Sharing services Total: 322 services January 2010 23/64
  24. 24. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: services as Primary Social Application aspect January 2010 24/64
  25. 25. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results Saturated market,• Value proposition: services as Primary Social Application aspect blogging platforms concentrated among a few large international blog provision services Almost 30% of the analyzed services belong to Social Application categories characterized by novel value propositions.Almost 50% of the These are also the fastestanalyzed services is growing categories, as mostcomposed by older, more services are under 5 yearstraditional Social old.Applications alreadyaffirmed in the Web andMobile channels. January 2010 25/64
  26. 26. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: primary and secondary SA aspects January 2010 26/64
  27. 27. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: primary and secondary SA aspects Much higher incidence of Blog, Content Sharing and Social Communication as secondary then primary aspects. Communication- and content-oriented features tend to be used as value added features in social- oriented services. January 2010 27/64
  28. 28. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: primary and secondary SA aspects Thematic Communities, Social Matching and Social Network are less prominent as secondary aspects. When present, social- oriented features tend to drive the services’ value proposition. January 2010 28/64
  29. 29. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category January 2010 29/64
  30. 30. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category Social Networks are the most complete type of Social Applications, integrating diverse features typically found in other categories. These services also offer the most complementarities, with almost three secondary aspects per service on average. The most common complementarities involve content sharing and communication-related features. Complementariness with Social Matching and Thematic Community is much lower, reinforcing the fact that when present, social-oriented features tend to drive the services’ value proposition. January 2010 30/64
  31. 31. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category More than 4 out of 5 Social Matching services have secondary Social Communication features, highlighting the strong complementariness between these two categories. January 2010 31/64
  32. 32. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category For Thematic Communities, it is noticed a high complementariness with other content-oriented features (Blogs and Content Sharing). However, Thematic Communities are also definitively social-oriented: more than a third have a strong Social Network secondary aspect. This value proposition is based on a middle-term between content and social focus. January 2010 32/64
  33. 33. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category The secondary aspects of both Content Sharing and Social Communication services tend to be few and well-balanced. In fact, it seems that there are no particular opportunities of synergy when content- and communication-related features lead the value proposition of Social Applications. January 2010 33/64
  34. 34. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value proposition: secondary aspects per category Social Communication and Content Sharing are the categories with most services without any secondary aspects: 35% and 20%, respectively. These are also the categories with the lowest average number of secondary aspects, 1,12 and 1,36, respectively. This suggests that these categories tend to be either offered in a simple, concentrated form, or tend to be complementary to other Social Applications. January 2010 34/64
  35. 35. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels January 2010 35/64
  36. 36. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels Huge majority of the analyzed Social Applications tend to be monetized in some way, only 5% are Fully Free. January 2010 36/64
  37. 37. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels Almost half (43,48%) of the Social Applications analyzed rely only on Advertisement for revenue. January 2010 37/64
  38. 38. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels Other revenue channels (combining Transactions, Subscriptions and Advertisement) are roughly divided in half between those that employ a Freemiym marketing strategy. January 2010 38/64
  39. 39. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels Advertisement as source of revenue in Social Applications is largely associated with the Web channel: two out of three Social Applications offered only through the Web derive revenue only 23,60% from Advertisement. When considering Advertisement mixed with other revenue sources, this number goes up to 92,11%. January 2010 39/64
  40. 40. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels On the other hand, results suggest that a 21.43% Freemium strategy is not appropriate in the Mobile channel. January 2010 40/64
  41. 41. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels The Mobile channel is clearly highly aligned with Premium services. Considering both Freemium and Non- Freemium revenue models, more than 70% of Social Applications offered only through the Mobile channel are monetized by some combination of Subscription and Transaction. January 2010 41/64
  42. 42. Results: Empirical StudySurvey Results• Value appropriation: revenue sources and delivery channels The dual-channel strategy seems to be characterized by a diversity of value appropriation strategies, as providers optimize the revenue sources in order to benefit from web- and mobile-specific revenue drivers. More than 10% of all services delivered by both Web and Mobile channels combine all the revenue sources available. January 2010 42/64
  43. 43. Results: Empirical Study The role of the technology delivery channelCase studiesconcentratedon servicesemploying adual-channelstrategy January 2010 43/64
  44. 44. Results: Empirical StudyThe role of the technology delivery channelDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain theservice’s value proposition.According to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the followingmulti-channel strategies: • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 44/64
  45. 45. Results: Empirical Study Mobile-specific Value Drivers: - LBS or context-awareness technologies - Personal/private nature of the content/interaction - Value network dominant positioning or privilegedThe role of the technology delivery channel relationships - User requirementes: immediacy of use, ubiquity of reach orDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain the mobile-specific situations.service’s value proposition. - Micro-payment system embedded in the device - Integration with messaging systemsAccording to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business voice andmay be classified in one of the following - Integration with device’s model videomulti-channelIntegration with device’s contact/address list - strategies: - Integration with device’s content capture/edition tools • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 45/64
  46. 46. Results: Empirical Study Web-specific Value Drivers:The role of the technology delivery channel - Large user base for networking effects - Integration with other web-based servicesDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain the - Vast amounts of textual informationservice’s value proposition. computing power requirements - Demanding - Integration with external software/peripheralsAccording to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentially - Dependency on reliable/secure connectivitypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the following - Dependency on high resolution screen displays/highmulti-channel strategies: performance sound systems • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 46/64
  47. 47. Results: Empirical StudyThe role of the technology delivery channelDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain theservice’s value proposition.According to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the followingmulti-channel strategies: Value proposition relies almost entirely in • Pure Web (PW) web-specific value drivers, but core features are also offered in a stripped- • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) down mobile version. Few or none mobile- specific value drivers are added by the • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) mobile component. • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 47/64
  48. 48. Results: Empirical StudyThe role of the technology delivery channelDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain theservice’s value proposition.According to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the followingmulti-channel strategies: • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) Value proposition relies strongly in web- specific value drivers, but mobile version • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) adds value through mobile-specific value drivers. • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 48/64
  49. 49. Results: Empirical StudyThe role of the technology delivery channelDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain theservice’s value proposition.According to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the followingmulti-channel strategies: • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) Value proposition relies strongly in mobile- • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) specific value drivers, but the web component adds web-specific value through • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) web-specific value drivers. • Pure Mobile (PM) January 2010 49/64
  50. 50. Results: Empirical StudyThe role of the technology delivery channelDependent on the mobile-specific or web-specific value drivers that sustain theservice’s value proposition.According to the web- and mobile-specific value drivers present or potentiallypresent in a service, the business model may be classified in one of the followingmulti-channel strategies: • Pure Web (PW) • Web extended by Mobile (W>M) • Web complemented by Mobile (W+M) • Mobile complemented by Web (M+W) Value proposition relies entirely in mobile- specific value drivers, and core features • Mobile extended by Web (M>W) are not offered in the web version. Web component is usually only an informational • Pure Mobile (PM) webpage or user acquisition channel. January 2010 50/64
  51. 51. Results: Empirical StudyValue Proposition: primary and secondary SA aspects• Content Sharing, Social Matching & Social Communication: focused approach (few secondary aspects).• Social Network, Blog & Thematic Community: diversified approach (many secondary aspects).• Social Communication & Content Sharing the most common secondary SA aspects: complement social-related needs with communication, information and entertainment needs. January 2010 51/64
  52. 52. Results: Empirical StudyValue Proposition: primary and secondary SA aspects• “Future is social”: when socially-oriented aspects (Social Network, Social Matching and Social Content – Thematic Communities) are present, these are normally the primary aspects, driving the value proposition.• Content sharing is no more a differential feature, it is a “must have”.• Some combinations of primary and secondary Social Application aspects seem to be more effective: • Social Matching (primary) + Social Communication (secondary) • Thematic Community (primary) + Blog & Content Sharing (secondary) • Social Network (primary) + Social Communication, Content Sharing & Thematic Community (secondary): social network as “the ultimate social space”.• Convergence in value proposition orientation: toward joint social and content interaction features. January 2010 52/64
  53. 53. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Mobile channel not suited for Freemium: non-trivial costs of service provision• Mobile channel adequate to Premium models: • Mobile users used to and willing to pay • Historically, barriers to enter are higher in mobile, resulting in lower competition between content providers • Mobile devices contain integrated payment instruments (bill, premium Sms, app store)• Lack of perception by Web-based players about the opportunities for using the mobile channel for value appropriation • Lack of know-how about the mobile industry value network and key relationships needed to create mobile revenue generation mechanisms, small web players lack contacts and bargaining power with MNOs • Lack of resources to invest in Web-to-mobile porting • Current revenue sharing agreements not satisfactory January 2010 53/64
  54. 54. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• High alignment between specific SA aspects and revenue models • Privacy and security: subscription is especially appropriate to Social Matching services, as well as Mobile Blogs, Thematic Communities and Content Sharing services dealing with adult content • Transaction models (single buy) are being experimented on all types of Social Applications, with better results in the Social Network category (associated to Virtual Currency and aligned with mobile content, social gaming and digital music) • Display advertising still main component of revenue, but decreasing 5-10% year-over- year: difficulty on placing relevant advertising in social-oriented services, trend towards linking display advertisement with high quality, professionally-produced content in Content Sharing and Thematic Communities • High expectations regarding new models of social marketing: targeted marketing research, sponsorship and branded profiles in Social Networks and personalized interaction experiences in Thematic Communities January 2010 54/64
  55. 55. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver Advertisement Transaction Subscription Number of users Extremely High Medium Low User quality Medium High Medium User engagement High Low Low Content Medium Extremely High Extremely High quality/quantity Trust Low Medium Extremely High January 2010 55/64
  56. 56. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver A critical mass of users that can both attract the Subscription Advertisement Transaction attention and interest of third parties (advertisers Number of users or merchants) and generateMedium existing and Low Extremely High value for potential users through networking effects (thus also contributing to the growth and replacement of User quality Medium the user base). High Medium User engagement High Low Low Content Medium Extremely High Extremely High quality/quantity Trust Low Medium Extremely High January 2010 56/64
  57. 57. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver Advertisement Transaction Subscription Number of users Unique skills, abilities, knowledge, and contacts of Low Extremely High Medium the average users that can represent direct or indirect value for the other users (by producing User quality Medium High quality entertainment or information content, Medium providing audience for self-expression, or by User engagement extending one’s social network, for example). High Low Low Content Medium Extremely High Extremely High quality/quantity Trust Low Medium Extremely High January 2010 57/64
  58. 58. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver Advertisement Transaction Subscription Number of users Extremely High Medium Low User quality Medium High Medium Actual usage of the system by its users generating pageviews on user profiles, User engagement High Low blog posts, ratings and commentaries, Low interaction exchanges, uploaded photos Content and videos, reviews, etc. Medium Extremely High Extremely High quality/quantity Trust Low Medium Extremely High January 2010 58/64
  59. 59. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver Advertisement Transaction Subscription Number of users Extremely High Medium Low User quality Medium High Medium User engagement High Low Low Trade-off between quality and quantity Content of both professionally-created and user- Medium Extremely High Extremely High quality/quantity generated content available to the users. Trust Low Medium Extremely High January 2010 59/64
  60. 60. Results: Empirical StudyValue Appropriation: Revenue Models• Five main revenue drivers identified, according to their fitness to the revenue model component: Fitness with Fitness with Fitness with Driver Advertisement Transaction Subscription Number of users Extremely High Medium Low User quality Medium High Medium User engagement High Low Low Content quality/quantity Representing both trustExtremely High strong Medium in other users (a Extremely High indicative of sense of belonging and commitment) Trust and trust in the system andMedium provider, Extremely High Low service including assurances about privacy, participation in the community governance, and system reliability. January 2010 60/64
  61. 61. Results: Value Source Profiles FrameworkFramework for testing the concept of evaluating the fit between features andfunctionalities offered by a service (value proposition) and the sources of valuefor Social Application categories.For each SA category, the fit between the functionalities typically offered and thethe user need categories was measured in a scale ranging from 1 (extremely lowfit) to 5 (extremely high fit) for both the Web and Mobile delivery channels. Objectives: • Exemplify how to evaluate the fit (describe the logic for later analysis of specific services) • Illustrate how different SA categories explore different value sources. • Exemplify the different effects of technology delivery channel on value proposition.Social Network Value Source Profile January 2010 61/64
  62. 62. Results: Integrated Social Application Business Model Reference FrameworkRevenue Model/Role of the Technology Delivery Channel Positioning Matrix January 2010 62/64
  63. 63. Mobile-Internet 2.0 Business Models: A Reference Framework Osservatorio Mobile Social Networks 2009-2010 Research For further information please contact Filippo Renga filippo.renga@polimi.it Con il supporto di

×