Vine’s struggle has comes to an end, and here are some lessons it should’ve learned from its competitors.
Known for its 6-second ever-repeating videos, Twitter’s Vine failed to generate sustainable revenue (and enlarge its community). It was just six months ago that Twitter Inc. called the Vine app one of their “foundational acquisitions”, but their decision to shut it down clearly shows that popularity and profit are not symbiotic when it comes to internet sensations.
Vine’s demise shows how difficult it is for an internet sensation to have staying power and turn a profit at the same time. Even though it might be too late now, the app could have learned from its competitors.
It’s the age of digital marketing: Other platforms, like Instagram and Snapchat, rolled out advertising. This lured brands and influencers to rethink their digital strategies — shying away from solely organic content.
Updates are key: With multiple-platform users being exposed to apps that deliver performance and interface updates on a weekly basis, Vine came off as a static app. There were no significant changes that enticed Viners to keep using the app. In the age of rapidly-evolving technology, Vine fell behind.
Monetization brings profit: While many urban artists found fame and popularity through the app, Twitter never reached out and made any serious attempts to partner-up or support the people who became the backbone of the app itself and help them monetize. Those same people are now making money off Youtube and Instagram.
To say that it was a surprise is not really true if you look into it. Over half of Vine’s top accounts had become inactive or shut down by July this year. Many of Vine’s stars moved on to apps that helped them make some profits for themselves, moving on to competitors like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, some even to Netflix.
The app might be gone, but will not be forgotten. Let’s exploit it while we still can.