To summarize, whenever a new technology is introduced the market is naturally small, because human nature is such that most people wait to adopt technology until it has paid its dues. In other words, you've got the geeks who will go out and buy any new gadget or use any new technology that comes along because that's what they're all about, but they're the minority. And much of what they adopt will never make it mainstream. But certain technologies will not only do well with the early adopter nerd types, but will be adopted by "normal" people as well, at which point the technolgy can become a real money maker for those who are in the right place at the right time.

While some companies might be lucky, other companies are planning out strategies that will put them in the right place at the right time, and they are focusing on marketing to the people who really have the money. It is not the geeks, the early adopters, the visionaries, or the technology enthusiasts who have the money. True, they might have money, but there aren't that many of them, relatively speaking. The real money is with the pragmatists, the people who see the practical value of a technology and say "Hey, that looks good, it makes sense, let's use it," and the conservatives, who say "Yeah, that looks good, a lot of people are already using it, it's been thoroughly tested, there are established companies providing it, so...yeah, let's think about that." These two groups make up the mainstream market, and that's where the big money is.

The "chasm" is the gap between the early adopters and the mainstream market. Some technologies fail before crossing that chasm. More often companies fail to cross the chasm as the technology does. Some companies focus on early adopters and because they have a foothold there, they figure all is well and things will continue to be that way. But soon a company comes along and gobbles up all the mainstream market, leaving the other company terribly marginalized, if not out of business. Often the reason why a company does well with the early adopters but then fails to gain a foothold with the mainstream is because they don't realize they have to switch who they're marketing to. They've been marketing to geeks and nerds who "get it" and suddenly they have to market to Marketing Directors and VPs of this or that and mom and pop retailers and small business owners and all sorts of people whose technical expertise is limited to Word, Outlook, and five or less keystrokes. Showing these people how to Alt-Tab between screens will make a genius in their eyes.

But these are the people with the money. Not that they have more money than geeks, but there are a lot more of them. But it's not just about targeting them the right way, it's about targeting them the right way at the right time.

The question is, where is SEO on the technology adoption bell curve, and where are you?

In my opinion, SEO as a technology or technology-related marketing technique is in the process of crossing the chasm right now. My evidence is anecdotal, and if yours differs I would be interested in hearing it, but my findings suggest that "normal" people or the mainstream are just beginning to "get it" when it comes to SEO. I would say that two years ago they didn't get it at all, a year ago we reached 2%, and now we're at about 5%. I believe 95% of the mainstream market of people who could benefit from SEO have still never tried it, many have never heard the term "SEO," and many don't even understand the basics of how search engines work.

If you agree with me, then you SEO professionals might be thinking "Well this is awesome! I've got nothing to look forward to but more and more customers--I'm gonna be rich!" But when a market becomes lucrative, somebody always spoils it for the small guys. I also happen to skateboard, and it's happened in that industry. For years the skateboard shoe market was dominated by smaller companies run by active skateboarders. But then skateboarding starts becoming more mainstream, and while that has been good for the small skateboard shoe companies, who's really winning? Nike. They came in as things were taking off, introduced a skateboard shoe line, put millions into marketing, and have been able to capture a nice chunk of market share in the industry. Kind of stinks for all the guys who paid their dues for the past ten years and stuck with the industry during the tough times. Not that I feel terribly sorry for them, after all, DC sold a little while ago to Quicksilver for $85M and Etnies does revenues of well over $100M per year. Not bad for companies started by skaters.

But don't expect that the same type of thing won't happen with SEO. When an industry becomes lucrative, it attracts the attention of bigger players, and they will move in and use their resources to take over. Soon you'll see ad agencies with SEO departments, PR firms who say they're SEO experts, and other types of companies who previously didn't know anything about SEO trying to grab a piece of the pie, and you'll be yelling "Hey! I'm the expert! I built this industry!" but nobody will listen and those that do will say "You're just a small guy, why would we trust our budget to you when we can go with this established agency? Obviously they're big, they must know what they're doing." You and I know it's rubbish, but that's how things work.

But ad agencies and PR firms will go after the big companies with deep pockets. What about the small business space where people aren't willing to pay more than a few hundred bucks a month for SEO? An SEO freelancer might be able to make a decent living off these types of clients, but that can get old after a few years. The real trick would be to figure out how to serve this market in such a way that you can make money while you sleep. That means automation and scalability. You've either got to have systems in place that provide a valuable service automatically, or you've got to be able to scale your business such that you have other people doing work for you while you sip Pina Coladas on a beach somewhere, or a combination of both.

I'm not saying if you're a sold SEO guy trying to work with a few clients that you're going to be out of business. But it might get a little tougher. But if you're an SEO firm with several employees I think things could get quite a bit tougher unless you're focusing on crossing that chasm along with the technology itself.

Which brings me to my final point. The mainstream market will be satisfied with less than the early adopters. That's right, do less and make more. Early adopters often want more features, more functionality, more insight, whereas the mainstream often wants simplicity and ease of use. For those who have focused on early adopters finding out what is "good enough" for the mainstream can be a hard lesson to learn. You might be surprised what the small business owner wants or doesn't want when it comes to SEO, vs. your more sophisticated clientele. Don't make the mistake of assuming that if somebody doesn't buy what you've got it's because they want something more, they might want less.

If I'm right, we'll see much wider adoption of SEO with small businesses over the next 3-4 years. We'll see large, multi-million dollar companies emerge providing SEO services through automated systems that allow them the scalability to serve large numbers of clients with simple needs. We'll see traditional marketing firms like ad agencies and PR firms creating SEO departments. Of course some of this is already happening, but where it is happening I think we're still just seeing the beginning.

If I'm wrong, then I'll use some diversionary tactics to make sure nobody remembers what I said here.

digg it!   Add to del.icio.us