BandPage Everywhere looks to help artists make websites more social after tab apps lose traction

Music technology company BandPage, which was previously focused on Facebook tab development, today announced BandPage Everywhere to bring Facebook integration and other key features to all of an artist’s sites across the web.

BandPage Everywhere allows musicians to update their bio, music tracks, photo gallery, tour dates and videos from one central place and then have it update on a number of other sites. Additionally, the app integrates Facebook Open Graph so users can RSVP to events and favorite certain songs, and those actions will be shared back to the social network, even if they are taken on off-Facebook. This adds a social layer that many musicians would be unlikely to implement on their own.

BandPage was one of the first page app developers to integrate Open Graph and allow automatic sharing to Timeline. We thought this might help the app maintain engagement after the default landing tab option was removed from pages, but it turns out it wasn’t enough. As we wrote about earlier this week, page owners and developers who do not actively promote their page tabs have seen an extreme drop-off in monthly active users. BandPage in particular lost more than 90 percent of its traffic, according to our AppData tracking service. This left the developer in a vulnerable position following a $16 million Series B round of funding last August that had been primarily driven by the massive reach the company seemed to have.

Now BandPage hopes to recover by expanding beyond Facebook and providing musicians with an easy way to maintain their presence across different sites. We’d like to see the company introduce more custom Open Graph actions to allow users to share what songs they listen to, videos they watch and other activity back to Facebook. BandPage should also consider making more mobile-optimized experiences.

More about the new BandPage Everywhere extensions is available here.

View the original article here

Facebook’s Subscribe Button for Websites is Now Live

Less than a day after announcing it was introducing a version of its “Subscribe” button for websites, Facebook has taken the new feature live.

According to a post on the Facebook developer blog, the new button has the same functionality as it does on Facebook, with a subscriber seeing the public posts of the person they subscribed to appear in their News Feed. In addition, the new Subscribe action is also shared to friends of the subscriber, so anyone who sees that update will also be able to Subscribe to someone’s public posts via their News Feed.

The subscribe button is already live on a number of websites such as Absolute Radio, The Daily Beast, The Washington Post, The Huffington Post and Time.com. The HTML5, iframe and XFBML versions of the Subscribe button’s code are now available to everyone on the developer blog post.

View the original article here

Facebook Testing “Facebook Credits for Websites” That Helps Third-Party Sites Sell Virtual Goods

Facebook has just announced a closed, limited test in which for the first time it will allow websites to process payments for virtual goods using Facebook Credits. Facebook’s virtual currency is currently the mandatory payment method for all Facebook games on the web, a payment option for Facebook apps, and became available as a payment option to mobile app developers last week. The only initial launch partner for “Facebook Credits for Websites” will be online and downloadable games site GameHouse that until now only accepted payments through credit card and PayPal.

During the test, Facebook will closely monitor the demand for Credits as a payment method and the user experience of those that pay though its virtual currency. If a high enough percentage of users make purchases through Credits and feedback is positive, Facebook may expend additional resources to let more websites add Credits as a payment option.

Eventually, Facebook might open the option to all web developers selling virtual goods or digital media, allowing the social network to earn a 30% cut on transactions across the web. In exchange, sites will be able to provide an easier way to buy their goods and media than punching in credit card or PayPal details. Facebook has provided a signup page for developers that want to try Facebook Credits for Websites if the test is expanded.

GameHouse users that sign in to the site with their Facebook login and play Collapse Blast or UNO Boost will only see Credits as a payment option, not credit cards or PayPal. If they choose to buy virtual goods or proprietary in-game currencies, Facebook Credits will be deducted from the same account that Facebook canvas and mobile games pull from. Similar to how it works within Facebook, users without an existing balance of Credits will be able to purchase a bundle within the payment flow.

Unlike on Facebook where Credits are the exclusive payment method for games, GameHouse may still offer other payment options. However, Ian Fliflet who handles corporate strategy for GameHouse tells me that those signed in through Facebook won’t see the option to pay with a credit card or PayPal account. This could anger some long-time GameHouse users that try signing in through Facebook for the first time only to find their preferred payment options missing in the two test games. That in turn could negatively skew feedback on Credits for Websites.

If the test does indicate a demand for Credits as a payment option outside of Facebook.com, its unclear whether Facebook would require developers to use its virtual currency exclusively. It could simply make them an additional payment option, the way Credits currently work for Facebook.com apps as well as mobile apps and games. However, it might extend this test model so that sites that want to use Facebook as an identity and login provider will also need to use its taxed virtual currency.

The impact of Facebook Credits for Websites could be significant. It could assist independent game developers and digital media merchants with monetization, as customers might be able to quick make purchases rather than having time to reconsider while enduring the friction of entering their credit card information or logging in to PayPal.

Currently, many independent game developers have to distribute through portals like GameHouse that have built a base of users that have already provided their credit card details. Facebook Credits for Websites could give them the opportunity to distribute directly to fans in way that gives them more control over branding. The tax that third-party game portals take on credit card or PayPal transactions may vary widely, so Facebook’s 30% cut could be less or more than developers are used to paying.

Facebook has much to gain from Credits for Websites, though. The more places they’re accepted, the more users that are likely to buy and maintain a balance of Credits, and the more transactions Facebook will get a cut of. A user might buy a bundle of Credits to spend them on a gaming portal or to buy a band’s album, but then spend then become a paying customer of a freemium game on Facebook.com.

More users maintaining a balance of Credits also makes Facebook a more lucrative platform for developers. Typically only a few percent of gamers ever pay to play, but if they already have a balance they may be more likely to spend. Facebook may need to initially reduce its tax or not demand any exclusivity as a payment method to get websites hooked on Credits. With time, though, Facebook Credits for Websites could become a significant revenue source and powerful way to attract developers.

View the original article here

Buddy Media’s ReachBuddy Lets Brands Embed Facebook Page Tab Apps on Websites

Buddy Media has announced several new features to its social marketing suite, including ReachBuddy that lets brands embed on third-party websites the widgets they use as Facebook Page tab apps. ReachBuddy will help brands gain more exposure for the contests, discounts, sweepstakes and content apps the build for Facebook. This will in turn make BuddyMedia more of a cross-web publishing platform than a dedicated social media tool.

The Page management giant also launched C-Rank, a system for scoring and benchmarking Facebook and Twitter that will help brands track their performance. Additionally, clients can now create custom dashboards tailored for different team members such as marketers or community managers to improve the efficiency, compose content for other team members to publish in a way that facilitates corporate/local franchise hierarchies similar to Hearsay Social, and license custom packages of Buddy Media products to keep costs down for brands in specific verticals.

A core part of Buddy Media’s Facebook Page management business is the licensing of its suite of custom tab applications that brands can embed on their Pages. Brands can choose from templates to skin in order to easily offer promotions such as sweepstakes, discounts and user-generated content contests. They can also add content apps to let them distribute their Twitter, YouTube, or Flickr updates.

Most brands are working to build their Facebook fan bases, in some cases Like-gating their Page tab apps so users must become fans to use them. However, some still get much more traffic on their websites, or often create micro-sites for special initiatives. Now, rather than rebuilding widgets that duplicate the functionality of their tab apps, Buddy Media clients can use ReachBuddy to embed these apps on sites outside of Facebook.

ReachBuddy launch partner Pepsi used ReachBuddy to add video to a microsite promoting a partnership with television show The X-Factor. Rather than embedding a YouTube video, Pepsi was able to easily configure  a white-labeled video player for the site through the simple ReachBuddy interface.

Brands have an ever increasing number of ways to distribute their content, between websites, microsites, Tumblr, and now Google+ planning to launch brand pages that can host applications. Redundantly building rich functionality into each of these distribution channels is a waste of resources. By allowing brands to build first for Facebook, the biggest platform, and then replicate their apps across the web, ReachBuddy will make Buddy Media more valuable to clients trying to take advantage of the whole evolving social landscape.

View the original article here

How Facebook Could Make Credits for Websites Work: Optional, Then Mandatory

Last week Facebook announced the first test of “Facebook Credits for Websites”, its new program that could allow any site to sell virtual goods or digital media in exchange Facebook’s virtual currency. For businesses selling things online, a big hurdle to conversions is getting potential customers to enter their payment details, so this could be a big new way for them to make payments easier and monetize more users.

Facebook will need to make a choice regarding exclusivity and Credits for Websites. Requiring Credits to be the exclusive payment method for Facebook-logged in users would allow it to essentially charge websites for access to its identity platform. A rollout without exclusivity requirements could get more websites to adopt Credits.

Therefore, we believe that similar to how Credits were at first an option but then later required to be the sole payment method for Facebook.com games, Facebook may be best off initially allowing websites to use Credits alongside other options and later making them mandatory.

For background, Facebook launched Credits in the summer of 2010 to simultaneously make it easier for game developers to accept payment for virtual good and to give itself a 30% cut on virtual good transactions. Users buy Credits from Facebook with their credit card, PayPal account, mobile phone, gift cards, or offers. Rather than having to enter payment details in each different game or with each developer whose games they play, Facebook Credits allow them to enter payment details once with a single, theoretically more trusted vendor (Facebook) and then spend across different games and developers.

Initially game developers could provide the option to pay with Credits alongside their other payment methods. They would then redeem with the Credits spent by their users with Facebook for 70% of their value. In July 2011, Facebook began requiring all game developers to exclusively process payments through Credits, while utility app developers could (and still can) choose whether or not to use them. Then, Facebook began allowing mobile app developers to process payments with Credits earlier this month.

Offering Facebook Credits as a payment option is a trade-off for developers. Benefits include the ability to:

Instantly process payments from those with a balance of CreditsMonetize international users without having to accept their local currencyMonetize those without credit cards such as teens that can acquire Facebook Credits by completing offers, buying Facebook Credits gift cards with cash at local convenience and grocery stores, or by depositing loose change at Coinstar/Rixty kiosksAvoid transaction and fraud costsLet users pay through a big-name company they may trust moreIncrease user spend because they’re paying indirectly through a virtual currency rather than directly with dollars they may be more careful with

Developers must also endure several drawbacks if they offering Credits as a payment option. Most importantly, they must pay Facebook a 30% tax. Additionally, developers lose flexibility in how they optimize virtual currency costs to maximize sales. Some people don’t trust Facebook and may be more likely to submit credit card information to a game developer than to the social network. Developers are also less likely to earn money off of breakage, where users buy their proprietary virtual currency but never end up spending it. Though there haven’t been many prolonged outages in the past, if the Facebook Credits system went down, those relying on it to process payments could miss out on sales until service was restored.

Finally, Facebook can impose its own exclusivity policies on how Credits can be used alongside other payment options. Facebook allowed the game developers to flourish using any payment method they wanted on the Facebook.com Platform before eventually requiring Credits to be their exclusive way of processing payments. In this way, the gaming industry invested in developing for the Facebook Platform rather than competitors such that it had little choice but to accept Facebook’s 30% tax when it became mandatory.

In many cases, developers would prefer Facebook not implement exclusivity policies, though they begrudgingly accepts them and the 30% as the cost of being able to do business on the Facebook Platform.

In the first round of testing for the new Facebook Credits for Websites program, the social network is working with online gaming portal GameHouse. In two specific games, if users are logged in to GameHouse via their Facebook Credentials they’ll be prompted to pay for virtual goods with Credits and won’t see the credit card and PayPal options. In this way, Credits are the “exclusive payment method for users logging in through Facebook”.

If the tests go well, Facebook could roll out Credits for Websites to more beta partners and eventually to all websites. Here are some of the exclusivity structures it could use, how they would impact developers, and the likelihood that Facebook would choose each potential structure:

Exclusive for all users - Websites can only use Facebook Credits as a payment method if it’s the only option they give to users, even those without Facebook accounts. This would prevent developers from monetizing significant portions of their users who don’t have a Facebook account or don’t log in with it. Therefore it wouldn’t be worth it for developers to switch to Credits exclusively. It’s very unlikely that Facebook would choose this structure. It only works on Facebook.com because every user there must be logged in through Facebook.

No Exclusivity - Websites can offer Credits as a payment option as well as other options such as credit cards and PayPal. Though it would clutter their payment flows, developers could offer Credits as an additional option to lower the payment barrier for those who maintain a balance of the virtual currency. It would help with monetization of international and teen users without forcing developers to pay a 30% cut on all of their transactions.

At first, Facebook may choose to roll out Credits for Websites without exclusivity. This would lower the risk and cost for developers such that Facebook could to get the maximum number of developers to add Credits as a payment option. Getting a wide base at first would also help Facebook push more users to start carrying a balance of Credits because they’ll see them as more widely applicable.

Though it would complicate enforcement, Facebook could require Credits to be listed equally or at least alongside credit card and PayPal options so developers wouldn’t bury Credits behind additional clicks to dissuade users from paying through a taxed method.

Exclusive for Logged in Facebook Users – Websites that want to utilize Facebook as an identity provider to power their registration and login systems would have to exclusively use Credits as their payment method for Facebook-logged in users. This creates a value exchange where developers can’t piggyback on Facebook identity without paying for it. If developers want to monetize their users but not use Facebook Credits, Faceboo could deny them access to its identity platform.

Functionally, it works because only logged in Facebook users would see the option to pay with Credits, and those with an existing balance of Credits would be able to pay instantly. People using a third-party website without signing in through Facebook would only see more traditional payment options, or could also be given the option to log in through Facebook to pay through Credits.

If the test is any indication, Facebook may eventually want this to be the way Credits for Websites works. Third-party sites would be taxed for access its its identity platform the same way Facebook taxes developers on Facebook.com. At first it might allow Credits for Websites to be used without exclusivity, but eventually it might give sites warning that it would become the mandatory payment method for Facebook-logged in users.

Facebook has already carried out this strategy of luring developers with an untaxed Platform, then giving them the option and incentives to use its taxed universal currency, and then finally making Credits the exclusive payment method with games on Facebook.com, and canvas utility apps might be next. A similar long-term strategy for Facebook Credits for Websites could be the best path to monetizing transactions for games, media, subscriptions services, and more across the web.

View the original article here

The Facebook Like Button Placement Guide for Websites

The following is an excerpt from the Facebook Marketing Bible, the comprehensive guide to marketing your company, app, brand, or website using Facebook. The full version of this article, available through a Facebook Marketing Bible subscription, includes an explanation of which Like buttons have publishing capabilities, strategies for adding Like buttons to brand websites, social games, and web apps, and more content types that news, shopping, and review sites can add Like buttons to.

Facebook’s Like button can help a variety of sites forge communication channels with their visitors and generate referral traffic from Facebook. We’ve previously published a Like button style guide for choosing between the various Like button formats, and a walk-through of how to pick the Open Graph meta tags that will maximize the lifetime value of your Like buttons. In the third installment of this series on using the Like button, we’ll look at examples of what kinds of content sites can add Like buttons to and what types of posts to publish to those who click these buttons.

Articles –  Placing lightweight Like buttons on articles allow users to quickly share them with friends, but the button’s owner can’t publish future news feed updates to those who click.Authors – Add Like buttons for authors to their dedicated author profiles, next to their by-line in articles they’ve written, or simply at the beginning or end of any of their articles. Then publish any new stories, quotes, or insights by that author to all those who’ve clicked their Like button. For example, news site The Independent has added a Like button to one of its authors, Simon Carr.

Topics – Rather than putting lightweight Like buttons on articles, news sites can tie Like buttons to a topic discussed within the article. When future articles discuss the same topic, sites can reuse the same Like button, and publish these articles as news feed updates to those who’ve already clicked the button. For example, a Like button could be created for Barack Obama, healthcare, or the iPhone 4.

Review Subjects – By placing a standard Like button on the subjects being reviewed, such as a restaurant or film, users can express their affinity for that thing to their friends, and opt in to receive news feed updates whenever news reviews of it are added. For example, a site could add Like buttons to Bender’s Bar & Grill, or the film Aladdin.

Products – Placing Like buttons on each item an ecommerce store carries gives users a quick way to share with friends, driving additional sales. The site can then publish news feed stories to those who’ve clicked the buttons about when items are put on sale, almost out of stock, restocked, or redesigned. This button can also be shown at the end of the checkout flow, making it easy for users to share the news of their purchase with friends. For example, a bike store could put the Like button on the new Tommaso road bike.

Access the full Like button placement guide for websites containing strategies for more types a sites, a review of the functionalities of different Like buttons, and a walk-through of how to publish to Like buttons, as well as the other parts of our series on the Like button in the Facebook Marketing Bible, Inside Network’s industry leading resource for marketing and advertising on Facebook.

View the original article here