» uk-netmarketing: roundup: 07-07-2000

Top 100 ebusiness list credible?
UK-Netmarketing Weekly Round-up - July 7, 2000

For a dotcom business, appearing in a top 100 list is akin to having your wedding succumb to the ‘curse of Hello’ following an exclusive twelve page spread. Boo.com was frequently featured in the national papers’ featured dotcom lists over the last year, so taking the results of these lists with more than a pinch of salt is natural enough. So when The Sunday Times printed their ‘E-league’ of the top 100 ebusinesses last week, their criteria quickly came under scrutiny.

Dave Evans kicked off with, "... I was intrigued by their 'E-league' list of the top 100 e-businesses. Anyone think the list is correct? My personal view is that the way they've structured it skews the results bigtime. There seem to be a lot of companies that may look OK in isolation, but in the context of the markets they're in, they're not going to 'win' against bigger and better funded companies, particularly where rivals don't have to rely on one channel/business model. Any thoughts?"

Robin Edwards replied, "There are some great companies in the list, many of which will succeed, some (many/most?) of which will not. Good to see that the list itself will be updated weekly, as I am sure some of the 100 will [go bust] in the not too distant future. Would I agree with the top 10? Nope, not even close, although that's not to say every company in the top 10 is doomed to failure. Perhaps the experts making the decisions should try actually using some of the services from a customer perspective. They should also take financial viability into consideration - the very idea that a company in the top 10 is still considering how it intends to actually make money shows me that there's a lot of bollocks in there. Perhaps the dotcoms should be ranked by whether or not their model is actually working - it is all well and good saying that customers will pay for X, but if history is showing that customers think the service is crap, and are not paying for X, then it's time to say goodbye."

Mario Tilney-Bassett, positively glowing from working at one of the companies listed, added, "Don’t forget these are private companies that offer good prospects at the moment - but the Internet landscape changes by the month and is full of uncertainty. Think of it as an appraisal of how well the firms on the list can adapt ... its an evolving landscape, but for the info to hand at the mo and with hindsight - i.e. 'experts' know what to look for now ..."

Freddy Fulton agreed with Mario’s take, "Quite right. Quite true. It just shows how much of a gap there still is between perception of this industry the ?grim? reality. I've been in it now for 4 years, and though penetration has increased tremendously in that time, real understanding of how this industry works and what business models one can apply are still sadly and seriously lacking from public perception as well as from those people running businesses ... this industry is still so far from maturity..."

Manou Marzban drew some analogies with the early days of other great industries, "... you will have growth spurts, downslides, con artists, get-rich-quick schemes, hot air, new millionaires, naysayers, promoters as well as tainted or at the very least obscured public perception. Check out the history of the railroad, or telegraph, or radio or even the gold rush and you can draw parallel conclusions. Now add to this mayhem, the power of the digital revolution and the speed the information age is evolving - and you can see why there is so much public confusion or directionless initiatives. It will change, however, and when the dust settles, this industry, like all others, will also find its footing and equilibrium. Until then, top 100 lists are bullocks."

BBC Online carried a story about a recent survey showing that 71% of the FTSE companies could be contacted by email, and of those that could, 20% didn’t respond to the requests. Considering the colossal investment in new media by these same companies, isn’t this a chilling oversight?

Mark Bunting posted details of the article and commented, "Hardly world-shaking news, I suppose, but it seems kind of ironic that when every big corporate worth its salt is rushing to tie up with some sexy Internet venture most of them can't even get the basics right."

Brian Blair questioned their real-world capabilities, adding "I bet that would be replicated if you called or wrote a letter more a reflection on companies than digital"

Mark Bunting responded with "absolutely, but surely the point of the net is that it ought make it easier for companies to manage this kind of relationship. It's a huge opportunity for faceless corporations to develop a more personal approach to people who are sufficiently interested to want to communicate with them."

Bex’s experience added further fuel to the fire, "I know that I've worked for companies that were only interested in a specific market, and, if they received queries from outside that sphere, they would simply ignore them, whether by email or post (though phone calls are a little harder to ignore - they still hired phone operators who were instructed to put people off wherever possible)".

So much for customer relationship management huh? Hopefully those in the Top 100 are paying more attention to their customers.

receive uk-netmarketing-roundup by email, every week
Just pop your email address in the form below and receive the uk-netmarketing roundup via email each week. You'll receive an email with details on how to confirm your subscription.

return to top