so another question is here, why did i comment here?
thanks for ur tricky comment upstair, and the tache u have not named. even if i’m shy for my faltering english.

now, ur turn, question-master.

Tangos, seems I began to understand why you did not comment here either. Since you know the founder of FeedSky personally, it is indeed not so convenient for you to talk about its business model publicly and in detail.

guest, you see things are becoming increasingly interesting. Seems we two are the only strangers here and we do not know each other either. If everyone avoids commenting at here because they know one another, what’s the purpose of writing publicly and leaving spaces for comments? Isn’t argumentation the true spirit of development?

maybe u should have had some good biz to do already, i don’t think u just see see here.

1) If you notice you see I talked like a business guy, while Tangos focuses on technology. Back to school I was an engineering major, but now I have been brainwashed to believe in the force of commercialization. For example, when I first knew RSS and tried some applications, I was not excited too much about the born of ‘web2.0′ the concept. I was thinking about how companies would make money from using the technology and providing services to end users.

2) I like advanced technology, neat design, innovative products, fancy gadgets. Originality also gets my respect. But only when all these get hints and connection to a certain business model, which is also advanced, neat, innovative, would I be excited.

3) It is a strategic move for SPs like Linktone as well. SPs are seeking new ways to monetize their traffic. Being a first runner in ‘Wap 2.0′ would be sure to help Linktone differentiate its services.

4) There is still one tache missed in the chain between FeedSky and Linktone. Without this tache the future possible business model is still questionable, or their profit will be marginal.

Hey dear Tangos and guest, what’s your opinion on this? How do you like the cooperation of FeedSky and Linktone? Let’s see if we share the same idea.

I personally think biz development is a good consumption of technique. that saying, only with enough technique behind the scene shall it keep alive.

When I first know LinkShare I know the copy of its success in China will be most likely on mobile phone instead of on PC. And the first time I know RSS my bet is that its business success would be on mobile. Now you see FeedSky combines the two and waddles to mobile with LinkTone (LinkTone is surely a big tree for FeedSky at present. Why, what’s the relationship between FeedSky and feedegg?).

Sorry for all the Chinlish I am using here. Hopefully you will know what I mean.

As to the cost per acquistion model… What’s the key point about that? Technology? One of my friends says no. In his opinion, when talking about business model, technology is not gonna be the key point. At least for now for China. In FeedSky’s case, getting that set of tracking technology is less important than getting a copule of big, key, well-known advertisers at the startup stage.

How do you like the above points of view?

Lv has yet disclose the details of the technology behind this cooperation. So I can not say anything about it. But I think you get to the point, the tracking technology is critical to cost per acquisitioin model, even if it is targeted to feed subscribers.