(Categories: Wzzup)

Source: Callum ScottOver the years, ever since Chris Anderson published his book ‘The Long Tail’ in 2006, he has been criticized by some about his conclusions. Grant McCracken has pointedly debated with Chris about the impossibility of a ‘million niches’, leading in his opinion to niches of ones, and therefore unprofitable, unlike Anderson likes to suggest. Recently associate professor at Harvard Business School, Anita Eberse, has conducted research and comes to similar conclusions. What does that mean for the tail everybody seems to want to have these days?



Eberse’s research
One of the crucial elements when you’d want people to access a ‘longtail’ is that the selection has to be vast and that search has to be easy. Otherwise it is impossible for people to get in touch with the less popular content (physical as well as digital) in the first place. And it is true that in a digital environment shelf space is endless and that much more products can be displayed than in a bricks-and-mortar environment. One step further it seems an added benefit to have some sort of social interaction in the digital environment that directs users to the niche products. Such things as Amazon’s referral to other products bought by people interested in the same products is an example of this.

But, as Eberse’s research shows, all those elements rather have a positive effect on the growth of the hit products, as they are referred to more, they are found better etc. As it seems, the digital environment has a more positive effect on those block busters then it has on the niche products. It is primarily the heavy users that can be lured into the tail to spend some money there. But don’t expect it to be much, or many. Eberse concludes that the longtail is indeed increasing, but instead of it getting fatter it rather flattens  out.

So what does it mean?
Does that mean everybody who’s trying to tap into the longtail should stop doing that, because it isn’t profitable? I don’t think so. But rather as seeing it as an end goal, I think the longtail should be considerred as a means to an end. All the strategies prooposed in tapping into a longtail, can be very beneficial to a company. It creates opportunities for hits to arise (although it is not likely). Moreover, it provides alternate possibilities to direct audiences to products that might have failed in its initial release. And it provides opportunities to redistribute old versions of content (archives).

However, the biggest lesson to learn here, is that it doesn’t work without some hits to drive the traffic towards other more niche like products. Having a strategy that is only directed at creating a longtail, doesn’t work without putting as much effort and energy (maybe even more) in the head. Does that change the promise of the longtail? It might for some, but for me it is more a confirmation that there’s a lot more to driving traffic to a tail then just having ‘a tail’ then meets the eye at first glance…


No comments

Write Comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
:) :( :imo: :danger: :cash: :brain: :doubt: :dont: :new: :quote: :todo: !!! :conflict: :good: :bad: :ok:
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Cupertino (beta)