NYT Skeptical - Success guaranteed?

The New York Times has an article today about Twitter. The author, Jason Pontin, doesn’t really seem to get it, and from that he concludes that it won’t succeed. He puts more stock in his own skepticism, saying “I wasn’t sure that it was good for my intimate circle to know so much about my daily rounds,” than he does in the exponentially increasing user base.

But what really bothers me about the article is the discussion of the lack of a business model. This early in the game, Twitter shouldn’t be concerned with a business model. It’s still very early for Twitter, at this point it’s more important to watch how the service is being used and grow the user base. From these two activities the best way to monetize the site will emerge. In fact, the NYT hints at what I believe will be the eventual business model in its discussion of John Edwards. There are two types of twitters emerging 1) the casual user and 2) the purposeful twitter. Some, like Edwards, are using the service to get a message across - these people / companies represent a strong possibility for Twitter to monetize. It’s simple 1) let companies / politicians pay to be featured Twitterers 2) show me a suggested Twitter user on my homepage based on my activity 3) I add that person/company as a friend and start receiving their messages - each of which is paid for or otherwise limited to limit the number of paid messages I receive (it can’t be just an advertising site).

It won’t be long before companies begin Twittering (some already have) - they will gladly pay for reach and visibility - and Twitter should gladly accept payment.