Will the scale of your audience be more important than the content you hold?

 One of the great hidden costs of the internet, and indeed the reason that the thinking that it is free  is  floored, is driven by peering. To be more accurate, the cost of acquiring content from someone who holds it. If you are doing a near equal exchange then the net costs are nominal, but if you are taking more content than you give, then peering is extremely expensive.  The gatekeepers of the content have all the power, and they take advantage of it.  (incidently this is one glaring omission from Pacific Fibre, and one of the reasons why i’m a cynic ).

But times are changing.  Content isn’t loosing its value per se, instead its being aggregated into a wider portfolio of services. We lump it together now and call it cloud computing in its loosest definition.

Just look at how ‘portals’ (eek theres a ‘90’s term)  like Yahoo, Bing and Google are providing entertainment, business functions like advertising, business productivity applications and  information like finance. Many of those things are cloud computing services.

To me this trend weakens the gatekeepers of content. I now have the ability to self aggregate these services…

…but truth be told i’m lazy like most ‘net users so if someone provided it all to me (like Google does ) i’d probably take it up.  And in that world, Google assumes a new role, they aren’t controlling what content is accessed, they control what gets to me

That’s quite a profound change. The content companies have to get their heads around users and providing a valuable service while application developers will need to pick which vendor ecosystem they take a punt on… and that will be dictated by how they provide access to the users and how they get cut through ..because you aren’t alone. But the long tail can provide a nice living…