disponibile anche in Italiano
|This issue of Netmarketing is mainly about numbers; the opportunity is the
recently published mid-year report by Network Wizards. An analysis based on those (and
other) data can lead to some interesting observations, which are not merely
"quantitative". It's interesting, I think, to see how the evolution of the net
has fluctuations and how many differences there are between areas and countries.
Once again, we see that the net is still in its infancy and with a patchy pattern; it's very unlikely that it will be a common tool worldwide "by the turn of the century". Several more years will have to pass, and probably some major changes will have to take place, before it is really understood and used globally.
A few general observations:
Each reader, I think, can draw conclusions from some of the detailed data, according to his or her specific interests. Broadly, I think a simple truth is confirmed: there will be more disappointments for generic efforts, big opportunities for entrepreneurs who understand the evolution and the way of using the net to fit their specific needs and resources.
After the "quantitative" analyses I shall quote the comments by the author of a recently published book. Other interesting opinions will be reported in future issues of this newsletter. And also a few more considerations based on numbers - there is more to be learnt from data than can be crammed into one issue.
Things are beginning to change. Techno-hype continues to prevail, but experience and deeper thinking are beginning to make their mark: more and more often we read comments that are precise and considerate, with a sound analysis of facts and a healthy dose of common sense.
back to top
|According to mid-year data published by Network Wizards on August 25, the
dominant position of the United States in the internet remains practically unchanged. As
predicted, the US share of global networks is diminishing, but slowly; it's still over 60
per cent. North America is growing at a slightly lower pace than the world average, but
Europe is not (as some had predicted) catching up fast. There is more vigorous growth in
some parts of Asia - and also in "mature" internet environments such as
Australia and New Zealand.
The growth rate is wobbling up and down. After a sharp acceleration in 1994-95 (probably due to the spreading of the World Wide Web and hypertext) it's decreasing. Here are the growth rates in the last five years by six-month periods (number of internet hosts worldwide):
% change in half year
In the first half of 1997 the number of hosts in the United States grew 18 percent, versus 21 percent worldwide. Several countries had fast growth, e.g. Singapore (more than doubled), Venezuela (93 per cent), New Zealand (84), Korea (73), Malaysia (60), Argentina (50). In the next chapter we shall see data on European and Mediterranean countries.
The two largest countries in the world are still far behind. China in this period grew "only" 30 percent (but threefold by adding Hong Kong). India (that has enormous potential) grew 53 percent, but its numbers are very small. I think the situation of large countries with low net presence is worth a deeper analysis, which I shall include in the next issue (this one already has too many "numbers").
By major geographic areas, this is the situation:
As we can see, net penetration is still unbalanced. It's even worse if we consider the dominant status of a few countries in each area. In spite of growth in other parts of Asia (especially in the South-East) Japan still has 66 percent of all hosts in the continent. 95 percent of African hosts are in South Africa. Half the hosts in South and Central America are in Brazil - and another 30 percent is in two countries, Chile and Argentina. We shall see Europe in the next chapter.
The internet is still concentrated in a small part of the world. Twelve countries, with 13 percent of the world's population, have 90 percent of the net, as we can see in this graph (which does not include the United States, for the sake of readability).
"Big" countries in the net
It's pretty obvious that some "small" countries are big in the net, and vice versa. This becomes clearer if we look at per-capita density.
Hosts per 1000 inhabitants
As seen from Italy, this is not encouraging. We have density marginally above the world average, less than half the average in Europe. Italian hosts are 2 percent of the world's, while Italy's is approximately 4 percent of the global economy.
back to top
|Recent RIPE data on
internet hosts in Europe and the Mediterranean confirm unbalanced growth.
RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) July 31, 1997
Growth is fast - but less than generally expected. Britain and Germany dominate Europe, with 40 percent of the net (20 percent of the population). Germany shows fairly strong growth (above European average) but appears to be concentrating on itself and less dynamic than other countries in exchanges with the rest of the world. Italy had strong acceleration between the end of 1996 and the beginning of this year, but is slower now; other European and Mediterranean countries are more dynamic. Turkey has the fastest growth in this period (overtaking its neighbor and rival, Greece) followed by Portugal, Hungary, Spain, Poland and Russia.
The French peculiarity
In all these analyses, France is "underestimated" because hostcounts don't include the "French peculiarity"; widespread use of the minitel. In many countries, of course, there are relevant online activities that don't use the internet: BBSs, community networks, intranets, etc. But some sources estimate that in France there are 14 times more users of minitel than of the internet - I can't think of any other place in the world with anything comparable. Of course the two systems can't be compared mathematically; but with this "peculiarity" online activity in France could be one of the highest in Europe - though minitel communication is within the country and not with the rest of the world.
Here is the European picture in per-capita density.
Hosts per 1000 inhabitants
Italian host density is less than half the average in the European Union (and the lowest among "G7" countries). But if we look, for instance, at the high level in the little Republic of San Marino... it seems very likely that there are "pockets" of high density in our country, as in others (not necessarily in the big cities) though so far we have no reliable data on where they are.
Another interesting picture is density in relation to income (GNP).
Internet hosts in European Union countries in relation to GNP
Germany in this analysis is barely above the EU average: its presence on the net is not in proportion to its general economic dominance. Italy's weakness is sadly obvious.
Two small statistics
"Small numbers" can be relevant, if seen in relation to broader data. Few sites worldwide publish statistics of hits by country of origin. Here are two examples that, I think, are interesting.
The first is the percentage of inquiries received by RIPE - the European internet control and information service - from September 1996 to July 1997:
(This list does not include 96 countries with a percentage below 0,5)
It's easy to understand the relatively low level of queries from the United States and other non-European countries, as RIPE information concerns Europe; not so easy to explain the relatively low frequency of high online density countries such as Finland - maybe it's because they have better information services locally.
Another example is hits on a commercial site, House of Ireland, in a short period - April 20 to 26, 1997.
Of course such tiny statistics have no general significance, but I think it's interesting to see what happens on an individual commercial site.
(This list includes only countries with over 100 hits on the site)
In this example - 80 percent of hits on a European commercial site come from North America, less than 3 percent from the home market and 10 percent from the rest of Europe.
back to top
|In the August issue of Wired there was an interview by Kevin Kelly, titled
"It Takes a Village to Make a Mall", to John Hagel - co-author of Net Gain,
a book that doesn't appear on any bestseller list but is well known among internet
experts. My interpretation of your book - said the interviewer - says that the
feel-good idea of virtual communities as a wonderful thing for humanity is actually a
wonderful thing for business.
Is commerce - asked the interviewer - where the Web is headed?
Hagel observed also that too many strategies were set up without proper regard for the way information is collected and used. If the use of personal information starts to be systematically abused, we shall see a huge backlash around privacy.
So... even in the United States, where the net environment is much more advanced than in Europe, the perspective is still seriously unbalanced. Most people and companies fail to understand that what matters is not the technology, but how people use it. Net marketing, as any use of the net, cannot be handled with blind automatism, vague strategies or hasty choices; it needs depth, time and patience.
back to top
|This little personal story is not important per se, but I think it has a moral. I am
not naming names, because I don't intend to attack or blame anyone, but only to quote an
example of things that can happen -- and indeed are happening more often that they should.
In mid August (when most retailers are closed in my country) the old hard disk of the computer I use more often, after years of faithful service, showed the symptoms of a terminal crisis. Luckily I had backup of almost everything, and time enough to save most of my latest work before the unavoidable catastrophe. But collapse was close... where could I find a replacement?
Easy, I thought: order it online. In a few minutes I found what I wanted and placed the order. In a few hours the vendor, very efficiently, handed the parcel to the courier. Delivery was expected the next morning. But it never arrived.
The system provides online tracking. After a day of waiting, I found a statement: "nobody available to sign". That was not true. We were here waiting. The courier came to the right address, but (quite mysteriously) left without delivering. They promised to deliver the next day. Everyone was on the outlook... but this time no van from that courier appeared in the neighborhood. That night, online tracking repeated the same wrong statement. And so on...
During days of waiting and frustration I had several telephone conversations with the courier's central system. They had the same data that I could read online; but no way of reaching the people making the deliveries and correcting the mistakes, or even finding out what and why had gone wrong. They had my telephone number and may e-mail address, but nobody ever called or wrote. Eventually I had to cancel the order and buy the hard disk from someone else.
I think I know what happened. During August the courier was operating with reduced, maybe temporary, staff. The person making the delivery was inexperienced, nervous and confused. Such things can happen... but the courier's office could not track down the problem and fix it.
These inefficiencies cost them repeated unfulfillments, cancellation of the order and loss of a customer - it's pretty obvious that I shall never again order from that supplier, or anyone using that courier.
The moral is simple: if we put too much trust in automatic technology, and fail to provide human support in case of trouble... the consequences can be much more expensive than the savings we thought we could make by reducing the level of service.