Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Build it and they come" works, for example Hotmail and Google did not invest into marketing initially. But it works in non saturated market with a few players.


They didn't need to; Hotmail offered free e-mail accounts which was unheard of at the time; Gmail went viral for offering 1GB of storage which was unheard of at the time. The latter also had scarcity with its invite system, I'm not sure if that helped make it more popular or not. Definitely helped prevent it from collapsing under its own success though.

Anyway, I think any service now that shows up offering something used by many that is now paid for free will become popular on its own.


That 1GB storage comes at a cost, which is basically a marketing cost. You give something away for free, in the hope it will generate word-of-mouth marketing. That free thing you're giving away is coming out of your marketing budget.


Gmail didn't just offer 1GB, it also offered the ability to search through emails which I don't think any free service allowed you to at the time

In 2004 that was pretty amazing


Yahoo had search. The Gmail one worked a bit better, mostly because you could automatically tag things, but it was not unheard of.


Gmail had plenty of marketing when it started: Both the '1 GB account' and the "Search don't Sort" snippet where heavily pushed through several marketing channels at the time (paid articles, Google search homepage, among others). Not all marketing is "ad banners". For example, all those Businesswire articles are pure marketing and advertising.


The killer feature was archive.

Growth was viral. Only cool people had Gmail.


Playing the lottery works too. Evidence: I see lottery winners. Therefore it must be a good business plan.


I'm too young to remember Hotmail launch but GMAIL did market. Their marketing investments were

1. Free Storage an order of magnitude larger that anything anyone provided at that time which was an unbeatable proposition. I'd say they ate the costs of storage as marketing investment.

2. Viral invitation format -> exclusively perception


> Free Storage an order of magnitude larger that anything anyone provided at that time which was an unbeatable proposition

Gmail's free storage was two orders of magnitude better than the competition. Nearly three orders of magnitude bigger than Hotmail. They launched with a gigabyte against Hotmail's 2 MB and Yahoo's 6 MB.

We're so used to not worrying about email storage anymore that it's easy to forget just how small they used to be.


I was quite young and things seemed shinier when I was young, so take this with a grain of salt. But I remember google differently. Gmail invites were a big deal, even amongst less technical people. Adding that sense of exclusivity to something they would use to advertise to us was remarkably smart.


Like another poster said, Hotmail offered free email accounts. Google offered 1GB of storage. Both of those things are "marketing".


In marketing there’s owned media, earned media, and paid media.

Google initially focused on the first two. They promoted new products like Gmail or Chrome on their search home page, and in the press. It worked well for them because they were already a newsworthy company with a lot of web traffic.

Today, they work quite hard at all three.


Hotmail did a fair amount of commercials https://youtu.be/IQRZcfAwn0g


Also if I remember correctly every email sent from an Hotmail address had something like "this email was sent with Hotmail" at the bottom.


Also email services advertise themselves in the email address!


Wasn't there a waiting list for Hotmail/Gmail in the beginning?


Gmail users initially had to be invited by existing gmail users.

That in itself is marketing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: