If  anyone needed more proof that social media is volatile and  unpredictable, this week should settle the question, as two erstwhile  giants of the scene -- Friendster and MySpace -- prepare for
humiliating  denouements.
Friendster,  probably the first widely popular social network back when it launched  in 2002, has since basically become a punch-line (literally, after Tina  Fey
took a swipe at it on "30 Rock" a couple weeks ago). Now Friendster is  throwing in the towel in the U.S., announcing that it will delete all  user accounts and content on May 1 as it
prepares to reinvent itself as  an entertainment and gaming site targeting -- wait for it --Facebook  users. The site's new owner, a Philippines-based company called Money,  says Friendster will
focus on Asian markets where it now gets most of  its traffic.
Let's  take a moment to trace the rise and fall of Friendster. After launching  in 2002, Friendster grew quickly to about a
million unique visitors per  month a year later -- but then stalled out in 2004 due to the rising  popularity of MySpace. From 975,000 unique visitors in March 2005, it  edged up to 1.2 million unique
visitors in September 2005 -- then  plunged to 585,000 unique visitors in September 2006. Still, the initial  surge fueled some aggressive venture capital investment. All in all it  raised $50 million
of venture capital backing, including a $13 million  round in October 2003 -- around the same time it received a buyout offer  from Google to the tune of $30 million, which it turned down. After
valuations rose as high as $283 million during the glory days, it was  finally sold to Money in December 2009 for just $26.4 million.
As  noted, Friendster was eventually felled by MySpace,
which in its time  also seemed destined to become the dominant social network. From 1.85  million unique visitors in September 2004, MySpace surged to 21.6  million unique visitors in September 2005
and 55.6 million unique  visitors in September 2006. 
A  year after News Corp. acquired MySpace in July 2005, Fortune opined  that "News Corp.'s purchase of MySpace is looking like
that rarest of  rarities in the media world -- a much-ballyhooed acquisition where it  turns out that the buyer underpaid." Fortune quoted News Corp.'s then  second-in-command Peter Chernin
exulting, "It looks like the best  acquisition we've made in a long, long time. MySpace is the single  biggest growth opportunity this company has." In March 2006, CNN noted  that
MySpace "has 66 million members, and about 250,000 new ones sign up  each day. That's a mind-boggling growth trajectory for an Internet site  that was launched less than three years
ago."
But  things don't go quite as hoped: MySpace never became a profit center  for News Corp., and in fact has always been a drag on its finances.  Purchased back in July 2005 for
$580 million, MySpace lost $150 million  in fiscal 2006, $193 million in 2007, followed by one profitable year  (to the tune of $42 million) in 2008, another loss of $212 million in  2009, and yet
another loss of $575 million in 2010. Now News Corp. is  now planning to sell the loss leader at a remarkable 83% discount,  having set the floor price at $100 million. Talk about humiliating: if
ever there was an admission of total defeat, this is it.
Of  course there's no way to know whether sites which currently dominate  social media are vulnerable in the same ways that
Friendster and MySpace  were -- that's the whole point, and the reason the latest round of bets  by venture capitalists may indeed prove justified. The whole  marketplace has matured a great deal
since just a few years ago, and  sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube seem to enjoy the kind of  momentum which even MySpace lacked. Still, I think the examples of  MySpace and Friendster are
useful cautionary tales: never say never!