Whatever you want to call it, eCommerce online is due for an upgrade. Marketplaces such as eBay created an easy place for people to trade and PayPal made it easy for merchants to accept payment and for consumers to pay each other. Yahoo Stores allowed any small business to setup a website and trade online. It all seems so complete - so then why do 72% of small businesses in the US still not have a website? What are we missing? For the tech savvy small business owner or individual, setting up an eCommerce presence online is relatively easy - but what about the scores of individuals and SME’s out there that can’t either can’t afford or don’t trust the Internet enough to move forward and setup a presence online?
People have been conducting peer to peer transactions online since the very early days of the Internet and sites like eBay & Craigslist have really made connecting with individuals much easier. My definition for “We-Commerce” is the point at which consumers coming online, do so with the intention of setting up their own web presence in order to become a commercial entity. This succeeds the current paradigm of just User Generated Content - it’s the next step forward.
User Generated eCommerce (We-Commerce) is really about consumers interacting and trading with each other using their own personal websites. Social networks are now creating the foundation for trust, and for a trusted community around prosumer ecommerce on the Internet. It’s easy to argue that people will much rather trade with people in their social network, than outside it. As Google & Facebook dabble in the realms of Google’s Friend Connect & Facebook Connect - it’s going to make it easy for website owners to create social networks around their businesses. Individuals will wield the power that trusted websites currently enjoy.
I’ve often argued the intrinsic value of Social Networks does not lay in the in the walled gardens that they have, but instead in the value of the data that they collect - no one has really figured out how to monetize that data, with respect to privacy. The default is to run advertising and turn a profit - the true monetization will come in time.
There is much to be said about the walled gardens of social networks - and in my opinion, they have their place. Much of the personal information that is collected by a social network is private and should remain as such - but surely the number of friends and connections that an individual has should be indicative of their integration and trust within society. Maybe I’m reaching here - but given that I have over 1,000 friends on Facebook - I’m pretty sure that if I was offering something for sale on this blog and that information was available, that it would infer some level of trust with me, especially for small transactions.
If we’re solving the problem of trust with SME’s & personal users - how do we get them online? We need to make it dead simple. Most SME’s won’t spend the money to build a website - and they will most likely to it themselves - this is what Microsoft Office Live, Google Sites (& SynthaSite 
) are banking on.
Ok, so let’s assume that we’ve made it easy to get a web presence and now social network users and other less initiated Internet users have their own websites - what does that mean?
For many people, buying and selling through sites such as eBay is a way of life and the liquidity in the eBay marketplace really justifies being there - and I won’t argue that point. There are some issues around having to be a power seller before you really become trusted in that network. As a new eBay user, although I have thousands of friends on Facebook & LinkedIn - I am not a trusted entity on eBay - so I would much prefer to have my own site, which is validated by the strength of my network - so that people looking to transact with me can look at my LinkedIn recommendations, for instance. Trust on the Internet has to got to reach the point where it’s transferable from one site to another. There are many companies working in this space on this problem at the moment.
My point really is that commerce on the web is and needs to evolve. The argument that consumers are Prosumers is now truer than ever. CafePress does a fantastic job of allowing consumers to become producers, and effectively retailers.
However, the web is growing so rapidly that as search evolves, so will content. As users search for you on the web - how do you want to be seen? Do you want an old article from high school being discovered at first position in the search engine results - or is it your own presence on the web?
Can you imagine a world where everyone has their own website which they use for content, collaboration & commerce? I can too…
Update (3 June 08): Michael Arrington wrote a nice piece today on where Social Media is heading. He refers back to his previous piece where he describes the “The Centralized me“. As much as I understand, and consumer services such as FriendFeed, I truly believe that the centralized me is about “One man, One Website!”. My blog is my central place for sharing my photos ( I have used FlickR), thoughts, Digg links etc - and for many people, owning their own personal website would fulfill all the requirements they would have for a centralized me. By using API’s and site builders that can easily call 3rd party data (yes, yes - Data Portability plays a part in this) - we are able to create websites which are essentially mashups. Personal websites are more likely going to fulfill the mass user’s requiredment for the “Centralized Me”. It will also fulfill Fred Wilson’s comment that “every single human being posting their thoughts and experiences in any number of ways to the Internet.”
Further Update Wed 25th June 2008: Another good post from TechCrunch on how commerce will move from firms to individuals.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Comments On This Post
May 29, 2008 at 1:32 am
If everyone had a website? What about if everyone had food?
I think the reality is that not everyone will have a website let alone internet access. Additionally for some people the opportunity cost in setting up a website and the benefit that it would bring is minimal.
I guess the point is that every business that has their phone number registered in the phone book should consider having a website. But having said that having a poorly built website may in fact be worse than not having a website at all as the perception could be that the business is not up to standard so this could be a double edged sword.
What can be said though is that the use of the Internet is becoming more individualised. People now have emails and profiles of themselves on websites like Facebook etc. and most businesses have websites.
But it may be that everyone and every business in the world does not become involved in the internet.
May 29, 2008 at 8:32 am
If everyone had a website? What about if everyone had food?
I think the reality is that not everyone will have a website let alone internet access. Additionally for some people the opportunity cost in setting up a website and the benefit that it would bring is minimal.
I guess the point is that every business that has their phone number registered in the phone book should consider having a website. But having said that having a poorly built website may in fact be worse than not having a website at all as the perception could be that the business is not up to standard so this could be a double edged sword.
What can be said though is that the use of the Internet is becoming more individualised. People now have emails and profiles of themselves on websites like Facebook etc. and most businesses have websites.
But it may be that everyone and every business in the world does not become involved in the internet.
May 29, 2008 at 9:21 am
I guess this means you’ve fast-tracked the PayPal integrated SynthaCart?
May 29, 2008 at 4:21 pm
I guess this means you’ve fast-tracked the PayPal integrated SynthaCart?
May 30, 2008 at 12:55 am
I take a very different approach to e-commerce and these are my reasoning’s.
A personal or SME e-commerce site is only ever going to be as good as the time , effort, support and money put into the site.
If an SME called ABC cranks up an “off the shelf” e-commerce site and now starts selling it’s Elvis memorabilia, all very well and good, until they have a sell out of a particular item. The item is not flagged as out of stock, as the site is doing what it is there to do ie. generate sales…now ABC needs to spend valuable time and resources putting out fires trying to keep those Prosumers who are not going to get their already paid for goods A) Happy and B) coming back. Not going to happen.
So ABC need’s someone to baby sit the site just for stock control, if they had a Tech savvy person they would have a site already so now they need to employ someone to look after a site. ABC’s site now becomes as efficient and effective as their new employee.
This “off the shelf” commerce site is now costing ABC and they are wondering what the acronym SEO is they keep seeing.
In the interim, our personal trader, has long given up on his commerce site as this is not what he envisaged, running the site is actually like running a business that’s not why he signed up, so he let’s the site just site around on the net, just like his Facebook profile to reminisce about the one that almost was.
May 30, 2008 at 7:55 am
I take a very different approach to e-commerce and these are my reasoning’s.
A personal or SME e-commerce site is only ever going to be as good as the time , effort, support and money put into the site.
If an SME called ABC cranks up an “off the shelf” e-commerce site and now starts selling it’s Elvis memorabilia, all very well and good, until they have a sell out of a particular item. The item is not flagged as out of stock, as the site is doing what it is there to do ie. generate sales…now ABC needs to spend valuable time and resources putting out fires trying to keep those Prosumers who are not going to get their already paid for goods A) Happy and B) coming back. Not going to happen.
So ABC need’s someone to baby sit the site just for stock control, if they had a Tech savvy person they would have a site already so now they need to employ someone to look after a site. ABC’s site now becomes as efficient and effective as their new employee.
This “off the shelf” commerce site is now costing ABC and they are wondering what the acronym SEO is they keep seeing.
In the interim, our personal trader, has long given up on his commerce site as this is not what he envisaged, running the site is actually like running a business that’s not why he signed up, so he let’s the site just site around on the net, just like his Facebook profile to reminisce about the one that almost was.
May 31, 2008 at 5:09 am
This post makes for great discussion. Brett you have a point, but there are more sides to your story as laid down to be. If your “off the shelf” commerce concept is a dead stubble block, you should consider studying entrepreneurs that find solutions around these issues.
John, regarding that the internet is becoming more individualized… you got that spot on. The “we-commerce” concept Vinny expressed is the underlining definition of integrating the Social Media with an advanced e-commerce business model. The future of personalization is upon us and integrating Social Media with e-commerce is the next step in internet evolution I believe!
Trust is currently still an issue in many terms and this new step into the future of the Web will give way for many entrepreneurs taking advantage of technology on hand and not only exploit these issues with e-commerce at current stage, but pioneer the future that personalization and Social Media Commerce (”we-commerce”) has to offer!
Vinny, you never seize to amaze. I think you could not have written a better article. Your Vision is what keeps you at the forefront of Big things.
Hope all is well in Silicon Valley. Say hi to Mr.Ebay for me will ya!
May 31, 2008 at 12:09 pm
This post makes for great discussion. Brett you have a point, but there are more sides to your story as laid down to be. If your “off the shelf” commerce concept is a dead stubble block, you should consider studying entrepreneurs that find solutions around these issues.
John, regarding that the internet is becoming more individualized… you got that spot on. The “we-commerce” concept Vinny expressed is the underlining definition of integrating the Social Media with an advanced e-commerce business model. The future of personalization is upon us and integrating Social Media with e-commerce is the next step in internet evolution I believe!
Trust is currently still an issue in many terms and this new step into the future of the Web will give way for many entrepreneurs taking advantage of technology on hand and not only exploit these issues with e-commerce at current stage, but pioneer the future that personalization and Social Media Commerce (”we-commerce”) has to offer!
Vinny, you never seize to amaze. I think you could not have written a better article. Your Vision is what keeps you at the forefront of Big things.
Hope all is well in Silicon Valley. Say hi to Mr.Ebay for me will ya!
June 3, 2008 at 6:49 am
Stock control and fulfillment don’t have to be issues for individuals that want to make money from ecommerce without taking on the risk of holding stock. That’s the beauty of content aggregation. However for those who want more risk and reward…
Mum and Dad sellers who rely on Ebay as their sole sales channel are forever beholden to Ebay’s Ts and Cs, including price-rises or rules relating to payment methods (as is the case here in Australia where Ebay is experiencing a backlash from sellers after forcing sellers to use only Paypal). Sellers who have aspirations of becoming retailers must stand on their own two feet by creating independent sites with a brand, their own direct marketing and CRM capabilities, multiple sales channels etc. Australia’s largest online-only retailers (like Deals Direct) moved on from Ebay a long time ago.
June 3, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Stock control and fulfillment don’t have to be issues for individuals that want to make money from ecommerce without taking on the risk of holding stock. That’s the beauty of content aggregation. However for those who want more risk and reward…
Mum and Dad sellers who rely on Ebay as their sole sales channel are forever beholden to Ebay’s Ts and Cs, including price-rises or rules relating to payment methods (as is the case here in Australia where Ebay is experiencing a backlash from sellers after forcing sellers to use only Paypal). Sellers who have aspirations of becoming retailers must stand on their own two feet by creating independent sites with a brand, their own direct marketing and CRM capabilities, multiple sales channels etc. Australia’s largest online-only retailers (like Deals Direct) moved on from Ebay a long time ago.
June 4, 2008 at 9:36 am
Your point about many SMEs not having the budget or know-how to get ecommerce enabled reminds me of MySpace. That network started out as a website solution for bands; it just turned out that there were more fans than bands, and some unsustainable growth ensued. The only questions now is whether MySpace will survive that unsustained growth long enough to revert back to being a network of band pages.
Something about the “Centralized Me,” however, is at odds with social media — namely that it’s egocentric. I think that a huge advantage that social network pages have over a run of the mill website is they are integrated with other pages and (therefore) individuals. That gives them a lot more reach, I think, in providing some kind of trust-meter.
Then again, that just underscores your point about data-portability and how we need a way to carry trust from one network to the next. I agree that there’s a huge impetus for something like Friend Connect or Facebook Connect.
This all goes to beg the question, then, with that kind of data-portability, will anyone really need their own site anymore?
I mean, wouldn’t an eBay or CafePress site suffice?
After all, with portable personal data, the communities to which we belong would be accessible from anywhere on the net we go.
June 4, 2008 at 12:47 pm
[...] of ecommerce in the form of user generated commerce or We-commerce. In a recent blog post titled User Generated eCommerce / eCommerce 2.0 / We-Commerce, Vinny explains: […] My definition for “We-Commerce” is the point at which consumers [...]
June 4, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Your point about many SMEs not having the budget or know-how to get ecommerce enabled reminds me of MySpace. That network started out as a website solution for bands; it just turned out that there were more fans than bands, and some unsustainable growth ensued. The only questions now is whether MySpace will survive that unsustained growth long enough to revert back to being a network of band pages.
Something about the “Centralized Me,” however, is at odds with social media — namely that it’s egocentric. I think that a huge advantage that social network pages have over a run of the mill website is they are integrated with other pages and (therefore) individuals. That gives them a lot more reach, I think, in providing some kind of trust-meter.
Then again, that just underscores your point about data-portability and how we need a way to carry trust from one network to the next. I agree that there’s a huge impetus for something like Friend Connect or Facebook Connect.
This all goes to beg the question, then, with that kind of data-portability, will anyone really need their own site anymore?
I mean, wouldn’t an eBay or CafePress site suffice?
After all, with portable personal data, the communities to which we belong would be accessible from anywhere on the net we go.
June 4, 2008 at 5:32 pm
@CT: You make a great argument. I suppose the honest answer is that we don’t know. I’m willing to bet though, that with data portability rife, there will still need to be a central repository for your life online…
June 5, 2008 at 12:32 am
@CT: You make a great argument. I suppose the honest answer is that we don’t know. I’m willing to bet though, that with data portability rife, there will still need to be a central repository for your life online…
June 5, 2008 at 9:43 am
“Sellers who have aspirations of becoming retailers must stand on their own two feet by creating independent sites with a brand,”
That’s exactly the point. The most professionalize, just like in other branches.
June 5, 2008 at 4:43 pm
“Sellers who have aspirations of becoming retailers must stand on their own two feet by creating independent sites with a brand,”
That’s exactly the point. The most professionalize, just like in other branches.
June 8, 2008 at 1:54 am
I agree there will still need to be a centralised respository of your data. It could be Facebook, eBay, or your own blog. Whatever the case, once the standards are in place we should expect to be able to use our personal data like our cash. And just like how you can store your cash under your mattress, you are going to prefer to store it at a data bank where you can access it wherever you are like EFTPOS. Store it at a secure place you trust, and use it when you need to.
However recognise that whilst you may want to store it in the one place, you could store it in multiple banks ie, your purchases with eBay, your friends list and address book with Facebook, etc.
The point isn’t so much on who stores it - but who can access it. DataPortability is about application interoperability. For a consumer to get the economic benefits over their data, they just need to be able to access it in another context.
June 8, 2008 at 8:54 am
I agree there will still need to be a centralised respository of your data. It could be Facebook, eBay, or your own blog. Whatever the case, once the standards are in place we should expect to be able to use our personal data like our cash. And just like how you can store your cash under your mattress, you are going to prefer to store it at a data bank where you can access it wherever you are like EFTPOS. Store it at a secure place you trust, and use it when you need to.
However recognise that whilst you may want to store it in the one place, you could store it in multiple banks ie, your purchases with eBay, your friends list and address book with Facebook, etc.
The point isn’t so much on who stores it - but who can access it. DataPortability is about application interoperability. For a consumer to get the economic benefits over their data, they just need to be able to access it in another context.
June 8, 2008 at 10:14 am
@Elias
Thanks for your comment. My argument is simply that although your data can and will be stored at many different services, what is the central collection point that *you* as the consumer, chooses to release it as public information and share it outside a walled garden, such as Facebook. Obviously you won’t share everything, but you will want to have a place where people can see your latest photos, movies, Twitter, etc.
June 8, 2008 at 5:14 pm
@Elias
Thanks for your comment. My argument is simply that although your data can and will be stored at many different services, what is the central collection point that *you* as the consumer, chooses to release it as public information and share it outside a walled garden, such as Facebook. Obviously you won’t share everything, but you will want to have a place where people can see your latest photos, movies, Twitter, etc.
June 9, 2008 at 5:34 am
I agree Vinny, but it also raises the question regarding something like “Facebook Connect” and other “social networks” announcements of data portability. I also think one still has to remember that it is a social network. Let me give you an example….
I go shopping on MyTrade.co.za and i search the site for a new poker set per ce. Now i find the poker set i want, but first want to see who is selling it by means of the data portability MyTrade implemented…
…now i see the person selling it… a lovely young lady, which makes me go look deeper into that person, add as a friend… and not before long i’m on Facebook browsing her family pics, house party she had, check out her friends… check out her friends, friends…
now what just happened here? what happened to me searching for a poker set to purchase? my attention was completely shakin off MyTrade by something simple as doing a bit of research on this seller.
MyTrade’s gain would merely depend on the seriousness and discipline of the individual on hand not? what if something like a Business Network ID could be setup, something off the “flirt with me” app I just added and more professional than intruding your social environment with business?
I’m not questioning the legitimacy of something like “Facebook Connect” or data portability as a whole, but even just the mention of something like Facebook could steer a potential Buyers attention off to a more social environment!
How does one get around this issue? yet a bit far fetched at first glance, but there is some reality behind my theory i believe.
your opinion please Vin.
jpvanderspuy_dot_com
June 9, 2008 at 12:34 pm
I agree Vinny, but it also raises the question regarding something like “Facebook Connect” and other “social networks” announcements of data portability. I also think one still has to remember that it is a social network. Let me give you an example….
I go shopping on MyTrade.co.za and i search the site for a new poker set per ce. Now i find the poker set i want, but first want to see who is selling it by means of the data portability MyTrade implemented…
…now i see the person selling it… a lovely young lady, which makes me go look deeper into that person, add as a friend… and not before long i’m on Facebook browsing her family pics, house party she had, check out her friends… check out her friends, friends…
now what just happened here? what happened to me searching for a poker set to purchase? my attention was completely shakin off MyTrade by something simple as doing a bit of research on this seller.
MyTrade’s gain would merely depend on the seriousness and discipline of the individual on hand not? what if something like a Business Network ID could be setup, something off the “flirt with me” app I just added and more professional than intruding your social environment with business?
I’m not questioning the legitimacy of something like “Facebook Connect” or data portability as a whole, but even just the mention of something like Facebook could steer a potential Buyers attention off to a more social environment!
How does one get around this issue? yet a bit far fetched at first glance, but there is some reality behind my theory i believe.
your opinion please Vin.
jpvanderspuy_dot_com
June 9, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Hey JP
I think the notion of an “App” really has a lot of people confused as to the value of social networks. The value lies in the data as an aggregate (”Vinny has 1,500 friends, and therefore he is a trusted entity”). That tpe of logic and usefulness of social networks make much more sense to me. The idea of the social environment, is that it allows trust to be transferred, from offline to online.
And I agree, most of those apps are rubbish…
June 10, 2008 at 6:17 am
Hey JP
I think the notion of an “App” really has a lot of people confused as to the value of social networks. The value lies in the data as an aggregate (”Vinny has 1,500 friends, and therefore he is a trusted entity”). That tpe of logic and usefulness of social networks make much more sense to me. The idea of the social environment, is that it allows trust to be transferred, from offline to online.
And I agree, most of those apps are rubbish…
June 30, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Eric…
Six Apart started a working group in February 2006 to improve the Trackback protocol with the goal to eventually have it approved as…
July 1, 2008 at 6:02 am
Eric…
Six Apart started a working group in February 2006 to improve the Trackback protocol with the goal to eventually have it approved as…
August 5, 2008 at 10:32 am
i think apps are great if used properly even by SME’s. Another great note for those who use features like ’status updates’ to let friends know what is going on.
We at SUTRA use it very effective, so much so that we have poeple calling in to enquire about some of this updates.
I agreed with Vinny that the person value of networks is far greater than mass marketing alone!
August 5, 2008 at 5:32 pm
i think apps are great if used properly even by SME’s. Another great note for those who use features like ’status updates’ to let friends know what is going on.
We at SUTRA use it very effective, so much so that we have poeple calling in to enquire about some of this updates.
I agreed with Vinny that the person value of networks is far greater than mass marketing alone!
August 27, 2008 at 11:39 am
I absolutely agree with you that for many people, buying and selling through sites is a way of life. That's why thank you for your article. It is very good and useful for many people.User Generated eCommerce (We-Commerce) is really about consumers interacting and trading with each other using their own personal websites.
September 29, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Well, I was really shocked to read that 72% of small businesses in the US still do not have a website. They lose a great opportunity to promote their goods. And I agree that commerce on the web needs to evolve.
Join the Dicussion