Web3 Myths (3): The 3+1 Model of Web3
Original Author: Knight Zhang
Original Source: Uncertain Thinking
Related Reading:
Original Source: Uncertain Thinking
secondary title
Related Reading:
Web3 myth collection (1): What problems did I encounter in Web2
Web3 Myth Collection (2): It is very important for users to own Web3Let's continue to talk about web3.
In recent years, I have bought a lot of paid software, as long as there is a paid version of the software that is easy to use, I will pay for it.
Paying for the product, in addition to protecting the developer's intellectual property. One is that most paid products are more comfortable to use, without so many advertisements, and have fresh functions. The second is to pay for the survival of this software. Don't close down because you don't have money, so you won't have your beloved software to use.
For paid software, after using it, I personally think that niche products are better to use.
There is absolutely no way to be forced to pay for some popular paid products!
For example, paid members of major video platforms have been criticized a while ago, and they still watch your advertisements after paying?
This kind of payment is purely a compulsory product under a monopoly. Because the user doesn't have a choice.
product life cycle
General products will go through four cycles, exploration period, growth period, maturity period and decline period.
There are relatively few users of products in the exploratory period, and most products are still figuring out how to win the favor of users. Most of the products fail after this cycle.
The key mark of a product that can pass the exploration period is to find the PMF (Product / Market Fit) point, that is, the product is accepted by the market, and there are real users who like to use the product.
After this point, the app's users generally have a period of rapid expansion.
Investors generally like to ask a few questions:
What's so special about your product?
What is the moat of your product?
What is your product profit model?
This is almost a set thinking, and those who engage in secondary investment in encryption also like to ask these questions. I always like to ask about the profit model and the moat.
Don't you know that products in the exploratory period can't answer these questions at all. If everything can be planned in advance, no one is willing to make new products. Because planning well means no surprises.
Many profit models and moats are gradually explored by mature products.
The core of the product in the exploration period is to answer a question, which makes people really like to use it.
Most web3 products are currently in this period.
Zhang Xiaolong recalled that when WeChat was first incubated, it basically did not use Tencent’s traffic during this cycle, and it all relied on natural growth, in order to truly find a PMF fit point.
Many products are forced to ripen with capital before finding a point of fit, and most of them end in failure.
This rule is also basically applicable to the development of encryption applications. Some applications concentrate on making products, constantly optimizing, and delaying publishing b. Some apps didn’t see anything, so they posted a b with a high FDV, and it’s up to you to judge.
Look for PMF for products in the exploration stage, rapid expansion for products in the growth stage, and the pursuit of profitability for products in the mature stage.
Most of the profits of web2 products are based on extracting user value. It's like after all the sheep are fenced up, you have to figure out how to cut the wool.
About user value
Mr. Yu Jun, the product master, proposed a formula: user value = (new experience - old experience) x replacement cost
No matter what product it is, creating user value is the top priority. Only when user value is created can the ultimate profit be realized.
In the same field, if you want to create a new product, if you want to surpass the old product, the core is to achieve two points, one is that the experience is better than the old product, and the other is that the user’s replacement cost is low enough.
The experience is easy to understand, that is, users feel comfortable using it. For example, there are many chat software that are very cool to use, but they still cannot replace WeChat. Why? Because the replacement cost of WeChat is too high.
For a mature product like WeChat, it is difficult to bring a new experience to users. The way to create profits becomes the continuous high replacement cost, thus making the sheepfold high walls + wires, so that users cannot escape.
What counts as replacement cost? Here are a few common replacement costs:
Social networks (contacts, groups, etc.)
Habits (authentication, operation, etc.)
costJudging from the above replacement costs, we have accumulated a large number of contacts and group relationships in WeChat, and accumulated a lot of favorite content, Moments and comments, as well as various operating habits that we are familiar with.
Zhang Xiaolong once said that every day hundreds of millions of people want to teach him how to make products. Because there are too many people who use it, everyone must have their own dissatisfaction with it, but they just can't replace it.
The term replacement cost is very appropriate, and the most important thing is the word cost. The following is Baidu Encyclopedia's definition of cost:
costIt is the value category of commodity economy and an integral part of commodity value. If people want to carry out production and business activities or achieve certain goals, they must consume certain resources, and the monetary performance and objectification of the resources spent are called costs.
We can see that cost is a monetization performance of resource consumption, the key word is "monetization".
In the matter of product replacement, the replacement cost can actually be directly measured in money, so we will evaluate it subconsciously and finally decide whether to use a new product.
We were literally kidnapped by the product!
Because of the mainstream application of traditional web2, the replacement cost is very high.
Social applications are the one with the highest replacement cost, and other applications have various inconveniences. For example, I used Netease Cloud Music before, and created many playlists in it, and set many music types according to different scenes.
Recently I bought apple music, but it is very inconvenient to use, because most of my favorite music collections are in NetEase Cloud Music. It would be very time-consuming and cumbersome to add manually one by one.
This is a typical replacement cost. My listening behavior is actually my personal data, but Cloud Music will not keep it for me. I also can't get it into apple music.
web2's products use our personal data to build their own commercial barriers, which is unfair.
Who owns the pricing power of the data
The above scenario description is simply to express that our personal data cannot be transferred between web2 applications.
This inability to transfer is due to many reasons. In foreign countries, the openness between applications is relatively good, and there are many standard interfaces between applications.In China, most applications have their own walls, and links cannot be circulated (maybe it will get better later).
User data is stored in each centralized server. Technically speaking, different products have different architectures, adopt different technical routes, and there are many barriers to integration. Product companies are not willing to pay extra costs unless doing so will make them profitable.
In this case, users cannot use the original data even if they get it, because the standards are inconsistent among various applications.
Regardless of technical factors,
A key factor that cannot be transferred is pricing power. The web2 application does not want to give users the pricing power of information, and users do not enjoy the pricing power of their own information.
For example, I use WeChat every day, and I browse various pages. If I can control my data, how much should I sell to the platform?
If the platform does not open these data to users, they have the right to price the data, and they can package and sell it to advertisers.
If the layer of user data is stripped away, for example, all my personal data is owned by the individual, can I change the application and use it immediately!
It is still the user value formula. At this time, the product can only continuously improve the new experience to retain users. This is what web3 is going to do.
Does that mean there is no replacement cost? I think there will still be, but it is not based on the premise of harming the interests of users. For example, the following can be better moats:
good product experience
user habits
Proceeds from user assets (also data assets)
In the world of web3, all user data can be tokenized, they are stored on the standard underlying blockchain, and any product can call it.
At this time, the pricing power of personal information is returned to the user.
everything has memory
The recent opendao incident is very interesting, if opensea doesn't post b, I will post it for you.
Leaving aside whether this matter is correct or not, just from the implementation level, it is very inspiring to us.
If they really have a product with a good experience, this part of the cost may directly cover the various psychological costs of the user, making the user choose to use Opendao.
permanent storage
Fortunately, they don't have any product, so this is just a frothy hype at the beginning of the wave.
But in the future, this model may happen frequently, because the user's data is on the chain, users can set a price for their data, and they can freely switch which application they think is more useful without worrying about losing their data .
All user data on the chain has permanent memory, and it will not disappear.
permanent storage
Our generation is lucky. In the past, people used pen, ink and paper to record information. After a long time, a lot of information was lost or difficult to find.
We have various applications, and we record data in different applications, or in our own disk.
But besides luck, there are also some pain points. I have encountered the situation where the disk is damaged and all data is lost. I have also encountered the situation that the product no longer provides technical support, and all the data in the product cannot be used.
The era of information technology has given us technical means to allow the data we want to save to last forever. These data are our own, but often we cannot control them.
We want to store data in the cloud for posterity, but the data doesn't exist when the payment stops.
In the world of web3, our assets are on the blockchain, and having a private key means owning assets. Our data is on the blockchain, and it will be permanently stored there after payment and will not disappear. Our information is on the blockchain, and every interaction is permanently engraved on the block.
I summarize them as a 3+1 model of web3:
Composability
Censorship resistance
permanent storage
3 key features:
Composability
Censorship resistance
permanent storage
1 key element:
Tokenization
In fact, these characteristics and elements are all developed around the ownership economy, and the core value is "private property is sacred and inviolable".
