

I recently spoke with a large gaming company that is looking to make their Facebook page their primary portal for the brand.
Bold move, and I haven't heard of too many other Fortune 1000 companies considering thinking that way, but it could be a harbinger of things to come.
First of all, I'm not sure we - or you - should be surprised that you're using Facebook so much for news. You work in social media, at the top of your game, and you run a PR firm for God's sake. I'm sorry to have to tell you that your social media behaviour is going to be about as different from that of a 'civilian' as it is possible to be. On top of that, we know that media owners are piling into Facebook along with brands, desperately chasing audiences. You're in it, they're in it -but none of that is evidence that Facebook is going to eat The Web.
Second - there is just the one Web. There are lots of private bits on The Web - but they're not new Webs - I guess Facebook is just the biggest private network on The Web. The Web is the foundation social technology, and arguably a social network itself, that Facebook is built on top of it - Facebook is like tiny app inside its belly.
As a social network The Web is a *lot* bigger - it has about 1.8 trillion users. I think it's difficult to understand this sort of scale and so it *seems* like 375 million is active users is a much bigger number than it really is. 23 million new FB users over 30 days this January IS incredible and unprecedented for a Facebook-style social network, but these numbers are dwarfed by the size of other types of social network - like email, phones, or The Web as a whole. In reality, Facebook just isn't anywhere near big enough to eat The Web, or to better it in any way, at err... being The Web.
Nope, The Web will eat Facebook, and as Mike says above this will happen when they IPO. That's when when the huge, hungry Web will literally eat all the talent, just as the money guys start thumping the table. That's when people, probably only super-early adopters to start with, will begin to tire of it.
Try and think of one thing that Facebook will be able to do that The Web won't be able to do in 3-5 years, but on an unimaginably huge scale. The Web will have a much more developed social layer - totally interoperable and, importantly, wired right through the basement of the Web and converged with phones and telly and everything. Facebook's not going to do that - it wasn't designed to be The Web and it could never eat it. No, The Web will gobble up Facebook just like it did with all those other massive social networks we all felt would last forever while we were going through that phase. We will all eat it, you included. It will be yummy, and then we'll move on to the next meal. That's what us humans are like - utterly insatiable.
It's merely a kind of cognitive trick that makes us think Facebook will be here for ever. It's a massive suspension of disbelief but without it we would be emotionally unable to use Facebook at all.
What will come next is a fascinating thought.
I think that Facebook will not itself be a player in all the web areas. However sites built on the Facebook infrastructure, with the Facebook mentality of making products, will be disruptive to a lot of existing companies especially Google.
Facebook is a walled garden - it will never offer the richness of content available on the open web, nor will developers ever have the flexibility that they have in the wild. The last time I checked Facebook's terms of use were far more restrictive than those of the web (which doesn't have any!).
Everyone talks about this magic 350 million users, but I would love to know how many of them are recently active..ie.. were online in the last week..
People do use the web more than once a month, so to say that Facebook is going is going to eat the web is a bit of a push... a parallel universe yes perhaps.. and for some, their permanent home, but for most just a place to visit every now and again.
Also Facebook isn't the biggest or most successful communication company on the web - Skype has 500 million users, much greater utility and usage, a clear revenue line and is now free from the dead hand of E-Bay.
Whether Google buys Skype and Foursquare or Facebook buys Twitter, or vice versa, I do agree that this year will see a number of mergers and takeovers which will hasten the consolidation of communications platforms.
Ultimately, however, the open web will trump the closed and limited world of Facebook.
A user-focused system, not a corporate-owned system built around advertising business models. No logging into some other system. Secure, not searchable by people we don't know. It would be completely adaptable and able to connect where ever we want, based on our own interests or specifications. Something better, more evolved and positioned for the user. This (in my opinion) won't happen within one company.
This leap is usually too hard for one company to make because it's too difficult to tear down and start over with new (better) assumptions - that undermine established corporate business models and revenue streams. Goes against most company's DNA.
The vast majority of our innovations will happen outside Facebook - because the vast majority of people (creativity) is outside Facebook. The beauty of innovation is its complexity, ugliness, and step-by-step progression in fits and starts where people ride on the backs of each other to take ideas to the next level. Sometimes slow, sometimes great leaps ahead in thinking. Always unpredictable. And never held within one company or culture.
I think we'll soon see some 15 year old kid come up with a completely revolutionary set of platform tools that allows us to break out of the "Facebook platform" model. Something that turns this all upside down.
The question is when will it become information overload?
As to AOL, the reason it failed, beyond the FEE v. FREE conundrum, was that it delivered a less than the sum of the parts experience when placed alongside the web, whereas I'd argue that both iPhone and Facebook deliver more than the sum of the parts experiences in terms of their relationship to the web.
Yet, another reason that Google, historically, a loosely-coupled company that prays to the Church of Algorithms, must fight its DNA to get more integrated (Nexus v. Android) and more human (social platforms and services).
The larger question wrt Facebook is whether it's a brand that you can trust, a topic that I blogged about here:
Is Facebook a Brand that You Can Trust?
http://bit.ly/8xySuW
Check it out, if interested.
Mark
Facebook and iPhone are succeeding because they're not walled gardens in the traditional sense. Plenty of fertile ground in them there gardens, but the walls have windows, doors, pipes, plumbing and all sorts of reliable utility services. Lattice works.
Really? Come on. I love the exploration of how Facebook can get bigger and more powerful but but here's the real test. If Google went away tomorrow, most of us would suffer the loss of an advertising source, the best search engine out there, and a supplier of tons of free applications and services. If Facebook went away tomorrow, someone would (and probably will) replace them with another great, walled social platform.
Mobile will be to Facebook what the Web was to AOL. I will caveat and agree with you that Facebook Connect is an interesting play that may open doors for Facebook to pivot where AOL could not.
2. Still got a long way to go: It's offerings are far too slim for companies to ditch having a website; no org wants to forgo control of consumer data/behavior. Depends on how big the minority of non-adopters are, as well.
These two apposing forces are having their impact, but the first will continue to outnumber the second for a couple of years.
Like all good pyramid schemes, they inevidably collapse, but they will be left with a still sizable market share, just not the mind share.
Side note: A very good comment was made above. Sype's social networking potential is trully untapped. It's audience outpaces FB and it's users actually do want to connect.
http://dogandogs.com/3-reasons-why-social-networking-is-dead-long-1
Basic premise being that soc.net. sites have a finite life span. There was friendster and now its gone. There was myspace and now it blows. There was twitter and now masses have left and the only ones using it are businesses trying to generate traffic to their own websites.
While it seems like FB is king of the hill now, I dont think this will be true 5 yrs from now. my 2 cents :-)
1. When it IPOs, all the creative talent and great strategic thinking will drain right out of the organisation.
2. People are fleeting and fickle and as soon as all the youngsters get too sick of their parents stalking them they will be off to something new.
3. The future of the social web is distributed and shared, not centralised and controlled.
Facebook is in the black right now but it's not making massive amounts of cash. Once it starts really having to make lots of cash it will begin pissing people off quickly.