In my admittedly naive way I always hope that they will win out by having the better product. But to your point, I think the network effects are much, much, much stronger than anyone (including Theil, from which I first heard this concept) had ever anticipated.
So maybe the question is how does one beat the network effects that are so prevalent?
True, network effects are hard to beat, but one better hope the network builds around the product one themselves built around their federated protocol.
They definitely can be beaten but not for the reasons stated in this article. Network effects cannot be undone without a fundamental shift in their business models. Right now Facebook and Google make their money off advertising and tracking their users. Break the business model and incentivize a Network and a new Network can grow.
You're talking about superiority of experience (product + network), other people are talking about superiority of product, and saying that the network effect should be counted separately
Network effect and market capture are a thing. Being dominant in a market is far from being evidence of having the best product, despite what market leader may have you believe.
When LI started, it didn't have much competition so it was easier.
Network effects is not an impenetrable fortress. It just means your product has to have a really good reason for people to switch, and I dont see anyone in the work network space doing anything really better than LI. I wish someone was.
And I think a lot of people look at network effects right now primarily as a growth lever, but wouldn't think to use them (when they're working) as an argument with investors that their product is defensible.
You're right that fundamentally their products aren't affected that much by network effects. That doesn't mean that "everything has changed" though, which was my point.
So maybe the question is how does one beat the network effects that are so prevalent?
reply