Why Facebook’s Portal TV failed - explained by a marketing expert

[@Chalkie1983]

It also failed because no one wants to pay for something they already have in the palms of their hands.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

We do but some people still love the portal tv for the size of the screen.

[@klaxoncow]

@@marketing-brilliancee Most TVs have multiple HDMI inputs. Plug a laptop into a spare HDMI port and then run your video conferencing software on this second monitor. The complaint is valid - we already own equipment that can do this. (You might say that the Facebook Portal makes it easier, but connecting a laptop or connecting the Portal is exactly the same physical act. The difference is software and, actually, the laptop is superior in every way - it can do so much more on a big TV, besides video conferencing and you already own the laptop and already know how to use it. There really is no advantage to the Portal and just costs you money to buy what you already have.)

[@Brendo2186]

I feel like being frightened to let fb put a camera in your home is a valid fear.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching!

[@InfernalPasquale]

It is a valid fear, but most of us already have multiple cameras, microphones, and other sensors throughout our home, in particular a device which contains every type of sensor and exists within a 30cm radius of your person almost all of the time.

[@Brendo2186]

@InfernalPasquale that's true. However, facebook has a well-deserved bad reputation when it comes to privacy, so I totally get people being way more skeptical of them. But you're right, any of these devices can and most likely do collect data unknowingly and in ways that aren't generally known (Or disclosed in some tiny print legalese that's hundreds of pages long and no one has time to read and couldn't understand if they did) it's all a risk to privacy for sure.

[@deansmits006]

Absolutely right

[@xn9333]

🎯100%

[@russellmurray8306]

As he says £500 of equipment for £100. Why? Because Facebook, like Google, are actually data companies and would 100% use that camera for more than just video calling

[@marketing-brilliancee]

An interesting take.

[@tara5419]

Yeah 100%, what do they have to gain selling equipment at a loss? Equipment isn't what they are selling.

[@John...44...]

Not even in the top 1000 things of the last 30 years. Its not new tech, its just a webcam for your tv. Very few people had a need for it, so very few people bought it

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Think of the USA where families have people all over the country. Could have been very handy.

[@georger5558]

@@marketing-brilliancee Indeed this could have been very handy, if it was invented before video calling on our cell phones...

[@Mick-f4e]

@@marketing-brilliancee Facetime, Whatsapp, Signal, telegram, Facebook Chat. These are all apps which are free and let you video conference with your phone.

[@michael1]

@@marketing-brilliancee Nope people live near their family or they left because they didn't want to live near them. There might be a handful of exceptions but there's not a huge market for this product at all - and suggesting it's the best thing for the last 30 years is just stupid.

[@robhughes645]

Rory has an opinion on everything, if he was always right he wouldn't have to pitch constantly...

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching!

[@ungratefulmango]

How is that a marketing reason? Facebook's history of privacy breaches, data farming, and manipulative advertising model weren't just marketing decisions.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

People don’t trust the brand

[@timg1246]

"Facebook are evil", explains that perfectly.

[@davidcochran848]

It didn't fail for marketing reasons so much as trust reasons. Very few of us trust corporates, especially in high tech.

[@sirmalus5153]

With good reason. They NEVER 'do the right thing' or do things that aren't in THEIR own interests only.

[@mailman63155]

They had camera phones in development 50 years ago but research showed consumers didn't want it then.

[@thrillous]

What was the 2nd?

[@legitgibbo3225]

Some of the stuff this guy says you can tell he's old, it failed because why would we pay to use it on the TV when it's free in the palm of are hands

[@marketing-brilliancee]

The portal was an excellent piece of tech for people living abroad but wanting to sit on sofa chatting for hours with those back at home, but trust ended it

[@alanpartridge1385]

Conversely, you can tell you're young by your comment. A lot of people don't want to do video calling by mobile phone. A pretty common use case would be a family in Australia sitting together and calling their relatives in the UK on Xmas Day. Try doing that on a mobile; it's tedious and for £120 the Meta camera would have really appealed to a lot of people. Would I buy one? No chance, for exactly the same reason Rory Sutherland states.

[@legitgibbo3225]

@@marketing-brilliancee Facebook already has cameras and mics and gsp on most people in a house via their phones, it's not a trust issue why it failed

[@legitgibbo3225]

@@alanpartridge1385 that's not alot of people that's less the half a million people for that demographic you are saying

[@user-jt1jv8vl9r]

Holding or balancing a phone with 2 small kids is tedious. So much easier to have a fixed camera and 65” screen. We just got out of the habit of using it and now can’t find the remote.

[@afishynado6812]

You say frightened, I say reasonably suspicious.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching!

[@nunyabidness117]

There is no way I would let Facebook put a camera in my house.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

This is why it failed

[@rossocorsahf]

It was a solution to a problem no one was worried about and supplied by a company who basically aren't trusted. First time I saw an advert for it I thought why the hell have they made that? Who wants it? Bizzare that huge corporations can concieve something so ill considered.

[@dronegeeks]

This feels like snoop dogg trying to sell me a kitchen accessory he knows nothing about

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Has a great deal of knowledge.

[@dronegeeks]

@@marketing-brilliancee mentions 2 of the best technology inventions in the last 30 years! no mention of crypto and waffles on about a camera we all have in our phone. this is only useful if you are old and tech has passed you by

[@klaxoncow]

@@marketing-brilliancee Marketing knowledge, for sure. That's why we all enjoy watching these videos. But this doesn't extend to making you an expert on the technology product you're flogging necessarily. Snoop Dogg eats food, without question. Doesn't make him a chef.

[@arielamejeiras8677]

Privacy not Marketing issues.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching!

[@MrFootsta]

I listened to this guy a number of times and everything I have heard him say is just nonsense

[@lon3don]

I've never heard of it. It won't sell if nobody tells you.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

It was advertised when it was around on TV and the like. I know some people who still use them. It sounds great for families overseas and the like.

[@rostek91]

You call this the best idea of the last 30 years? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching 😀

[@j0nnyism]

A lot of tvs have cameras anyway. They just don’t advertise the fact

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Interesting

[@user-jt1jv8vl9r]

The portal tv was amazing during Covid as my partner’s family live abroad. It was great to chat to my mum who lives on her own. But gradually once we started seeing each other in the flesh, its use declined. My partner prefers the simplicity of a phone and that she can use the lack of battery to end a call if need be! 😂 I haven’t used my mine once in 2024.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

A friend of mine used it for this and still does to this day.

[@timothychinye6008]

If it was $25 it would've succeeded.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

True but at a huge loss

[@Wooderz245]

If it was $25, it would seem too good to be true and nobody would trust it. You would assume that it was priced so low because they wanted everyone to own one so they could spy on people in their homes, like they did with it when it was $100.

[@user-jt1jv8vl9r]

We paid £100 in a BF sale years back. Not a big deal.

[@RLC-London]

Enjoying the Rory content you guys are posting, but you're seriously undermining the points he's making by cutting off these clips early. He begun saying: "two of the best ideas..." and you only ran for duration of the first. I'm familiar with the original content and there's no reason why you couldn't have stuck it out to include both. I'm guessing you already know that YT Shorts allows for longer posts, so why cut Rory to shreds? Leave that to the trolls in the comments section! 😮

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Noted thank you

[@lisashapiro4714]

😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂 camera guy

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching

[@ImpatientTurtle]

Chunky Gollum.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching!

[@Leon-l5p3t]

Because no one trusts Facebook/Meta 🙄

[@timothychinye6008]

It's a 100 quid... and no one really needs that...

[@marketing-brilliancee]

People with family spread out do.

[@alanpartridge1385]

Because no-one buys technology they don't actually need, do they?(!)

[@deansmits006]

Failed for good reason

[@timstapleman]

This man is an absolute genius. He is right about everything.

[@usefulcommunication4516]

You got your mum to type that for you didn't you.

[@marketing-brilliancee]

Thanks for watching. Very clever.

[@xn9333]

Like facebook wouldn't use it to Orwellian ends🇮🇱