Internet Geography Theory

Greg Isenberg shares his perspective on how internet geography differs from traditional physical geography, particularly in relation to business opportunities and franchising models. He believes that while physical geography is defined by street corners and locations, internet geography is defined by audiences and traffic patterns.

Key Points:

• Redefining Geography in Digital Space:

  • Traditional geography: defined by physical locations (e.g., "corner of 25th and 5th avenue")
  • Internet geography: defined by audiences and traffic patterns
  • People "coming into your store" means visiting your digital properties

• Business Model Implications:

  • Traditional franchise models can be reimagined for digital spaces
  • The challenge is maintaining consistency across digital "locations"
  • Just as Chipotle maintains consistent quality across physical locations, digital businesses need consistency across different audience segments

• Challenges in Digital Scaling:

  • Creator-led agencies face difficulties maintaining consistent product quality as they scale
  • Unlike physical franchises, digital businesses often lack standardized operating procedures
  • Product quality can vary significantly unless operators are highly experienced

• Opportunities:

  • Potential to adapt traditional franchise benefits to digital business models
  • Need for standardization in digital service delivery
  • Possibility to create scalable systems for maintaining quality across digital properties

• Future Implications:

  • Traditional franchise models could be reimagined for digital spaces
  • Need for new systems to ensure consistency in digital service delivery
  • Opportunity to create "category of one" businesses in digital geography