Will Facebook Survive? [Infographic]

Q: Do you know how many years it takes, on average, for a major social network to hit rock bottom?

A: 11 years.

And Facebook has been around nearly 9 years now. Will Facebook — like Digg, MySpace, and AOL — tank, too?

Please share your thoughts in the comments area.

The Rise and Fall of Online Empires
Via: CenturyLinkQuote.com

Thanks to Porter Olsen for sharing this infographic with us.

  • Janet Ann Collins

    If they don’t stop changing things in ways that make them worse they may not last even that long.

  • Janet Ann Collins

    If they don’t stop changing things in ways that make them worse they may not last even that long.

  • Zoe Helene

    You know… whoever did this chart didn’t know some key things: 1) AOL was never, ever anything other than two small guys who hopped on the Internet wave early. It was always a low-end solution for people that didn’t know much about tech. I’m so glad it finally failed—-it was the bane of our existence in the pioneering days because it was so incredibly lame. Not just as a ‘technology’ (which it never was) but also because it severely limited people’s access to just about anything but also confused so many people. People though AOL was ‘the internet’. So that one died a good death as it should have.

    Whoever made this infographic failed mention some of the giants STILL THRIVING. Such as google.com. You can’t make an accurate infographic without including the success stories. The long-term survivors have many things in common: namely THEY CONTINUE TO STAY AT THE FRONTLINES. They never stop growing and investing in the future.

    YAHOO! Was quite early and was easy to use and better than anything else for a short period, then google.com took them over because the information technology was just so, so superior. Also, google.com was always more than a ‘search engine’ and they continue to add more and more useful features and technologies and build clever business partnerships that unfortunately often force us to invest our processes in their empire. Clever.

    MySpace was so poorly done in just about every way I’d put it in the AOL category. Clunky and ugly and it rarely improved and the improvements were slow to come and few and far between. Another ’empire’ that needed to fail from the get-go. I wouldn’t put it in the same list as Facebook. That’s like saying that some non-trained, low talent TV actor lost his career when he started to age and then comparing them with some actual great actor who remains in demand until they die and then comparing the two and trying to make it useful information. Apples and oranges, friends.

    digg? Never even used it. Hardly counts as an empire.

    The graphic also failed to mention Twitter (which I don’t use either because I can’t get past the name!) certainly an empire. And YouTube. Still flying high.

    YES these ’empires’ go through phases but Facebook will hold their place as long as they are able to grow and more importantly to LISTEN to their users. Ultimately that’s the longevity factor in the online world. As companies grow, far too often they lose touch with their ‘users’ and unfortunately for the most part we have become a fickle culture.

    Happy New Year!

  • Zoe Helene

    You know… whoever did this chart didn’t know some key things: 1) AOL was never, ever anything other than two small guys who hopped on the Internet wave early. It was always a low-end solution for people that didn’t know much about tech. I’m so glad it finally failed—-it was the bane of our existence in the pioneering days because it was so incredibly lame. Not just as a ‘technology’ (which it never was) but also because it severely limited people’s access to just about anything but also confused so many people. People though AOL was ‘the internet’. So that one died a good death as it should have.

    Whoever made this infographic failed mention some of the giants STILL THRIVING. Such as google.com. You can’t make an accurate infographic without including the success stories. The long-term survivors have many things in common: namely THEY CONTINUE TO STAY AT THE FRONTLINES. They never stop growing and investing in the future.

    YAHOO! Was quite early and was easy to use and better than anything else for a short period, then google.com took them over because the information technology was just so, so superior. Also, google.com was always more than a ‘search engine’ and they continue to add more and more useful features and technologies and build clever business partnerships that unfortunately often force us to invest our processes in their empire. Clever.

    MySpace was so poorly done in just about every way I’d put it in the AOL category. Clunky and ugly and it rarely improved and the improvements were slow to come and few and far between. Another ’empire’ that needed to fail from the get-go. I wouldn’t put it in the same list as Facebook. That’s like saying that some non-trained, low talent TV actor lost his career when he started to age and then comparing them with some actual great actor who remains in demand until they die and then comparing the two and trying to make it useful information. Apples and oranges, friends.

    digg? Never even used it. Hardly counts as an empire.

    The graphic also failed to mention Twitter (which I don’t use either because I can’t get past the name!) certainly an empire. And YouTube. Still flying high.

    YES these ’empires’ go through phases but Facebook will hold their place as long as they are able to grow and more importantly to LISTEN to their users. Ultimately that’s the longevity factor in the online world. As companies grow, far too often they lose touch with their ‘users’ and unfortunately for the most part we have become a fickle culture.

    Happy New Year!

  • Zoe – Excellent point about networks listening to their users. I think Facebook does that to some extent, because they are constantly releasing new features to make things easier for their users.

    On the other hand, they don’t communicate these releases to their users as effectively as they could. If you’re not following closely (as most consumers aren’t), these changes may seem sudden, unwelcome, and overwhelming.

    Their lack of customer service is atrocious, as is the case with most social media giants. You could blame that on the fact that they have over 1 billion registered users, but I don’t see that as a valid excuse. I think there’s much to be said for developing a strong infrastructure BEFORE allowing the network to grow out of control. Pinterest seems to be doing a better job of planning for growth, but we shall see. They’re still in their infancy stage.

  • Zoe – Excellent point about networks listening to their users. I think Facebook does that to some extent, because they are constantly releasing new features to make things easier for their users.

    On the other hand, they don’t communicate these releases to their users as effectively as they could. If you’re not following closely (as most consumers aren’t), these changes may seem sudden, unwelcome, and overwhelming.

    Their lack of customer service is atrocious, as is the case with most social media giants. You could blame that on the fact that they have over 1 billion registered users, but I don’t see that as a valid excuse. I think there’s much to be said for developing a strong infrastructure BEFORE allowing the network to grow out of control. Pinterest seems to be doing a better job of planning for growth, but we shall see. They’re still in their infancy stage.