If you're a "free" play, the deal is that you need "free" users. They're not freeloading, they're your path to profitability. Said another way, advertisers don't want you unless users want you. So, free users are actually your company's TOP asset. Eureka!

I ran this rant back in July '08. But, indeed, some rants bear repeating as I'm not convinced every company has yet had its 'Eureka!' moment. Or, it seems that once companies reach a certain level of success--or number of users--many can forget just how important those users are to their ongoing success.

This advice does not apply to technology companies that sell software, hardware or consulting services, because that quid pro quo is very defined, and there's actually no "free" involved (i.e. "I'll give you this computer and you'll give me this amount of cash").

But it absolutely applies to "free" tech plays (or companies who use new media to run their businesses that involve giving users something for free). Like companies who offer free tools, content, features, widgets, wikis or otherwise. Because these types of companies--some are 1.0 as with free content, many are 2.0 as with social media tools--need free offerings so as to lure and build traffic...in order to monetize said traffic.

After all, they have employees to pay, servers to run and a host of other expenses.

It also applies to tech plays that have both free and premium-based models. MarketingProfs has two levels of content and I value/use them both. Slide.com is just a nifty and remarkable player that I've spent hours fooling around with. I also enjoy both the free and paid-for rockin' services of Animoto.

Twitter is a great free tool due to so much of my network being on it, and so many lessons learned through the conversations. But the technology is often so unstable--and the communications from management so precarious--that it's no longer a "beloved" brand to me (though I very much love my twitter network). And Facebook lost my face due to putting advertisers ahead of users with the innovation-that-was-actually-an-intrusion called Beacon. (Yes, I know, much of Beacon is gone now. Problem is, so too is my trust).

So, what's the solution? Well, it's more realization (Eureka!) than solution.

More companies need to realize (Eureka!) that free users are not just "users getting a deal because they're given value through free tools/content/platform." Nope. It's the other way around: Due to those free users providing their content, eyeballs, time, and bringing more users to them via WOM, they actually equate to the company's revenue stream.

Thus, they are not free users, they are assets. Period.

Yes, advertisers and sponsors fork over the greenbacks. But advertisers will only do so to gain access to audiences that they value. So, since they value those eyeballs, tech plays need to as well.

If more companies understood and relentlessly ran their businesses by this very basic, if all-too-pivotal notion, then suddenly (Eureka!), more companies would treat their users, communicate and respond to their users, and place the relationships they build with users...as their number-one priority. Because, again, those free users are their assets.

Kinda like "It's the free users, stupid."

They'd realize that it wasn't the market who was fortunate to get free tools but (Eureka!) it's the company's good fortune to have users who care about their tools (and who, in turn, bring them more users). Then every decision would be guided by the yardstick of "How does this new feature, ad model or otherwise work to engage, delight and grow our user base?"

(Because in delighting and growing your user base you are at once growing your revenue stream--since, as we've established, those free users are your assets.)

Plus, once you've built and maintained your user base, then advertisers, sponsors and financiers will court you--as they had their "Eureka!" moment long ago and know how valuable those "free" users really are. Don't believe me? Just ask any executive in broadcast television, radio, or magazine publishing who've long relied on users for ratings and readership levels so that they can maintain their advertising and sponsorship revenue.