Facebook: still a data roach motel when compared to Twitter and friendfeed?

Twitter has done something really remarkable: they have made the entire database of Tweets available to other companies. My favorite friendfeed is one of the beneficiaries of that “firehose” of data. You can watch my Tweets go from Twitter to friendfeed and back again. Oh, and friendfeed makes its firehose available to Twitter in return. You can see how this benefits both services. My liked items go from friendfeed to Twitter.

Now, what did Facebook do today? Well, it turned on an open stream API so that developers can put things into the stream over on Facebook. It also looks like developers can take some data off of the stream and use it in their own applications.

Loic Le Meur, CEO of Seesmic, has already shipped a version of Seesmic that does just that.

One big problem that Marshall Kirkpatrick, over at the ReadWriteWeb points out: Facebook is still keeping most of its users’ data private due to the privacy contract that it has made with its users. See, over on Twitter and friendfeed the bias for most user data is that it is public by default until you make it private (like, in friendfeed, you would have to open a room and make that explicitly private to be able to keep your data from going over to Twitter and over to Google. On Facebook it’s the opposite. If you use Facebook as designed your data only gets shown to your friends, not anyone else).

This is a HUGE difference between the openess of the Twitter/friendfeed model and the Facebook one.

Go see the comments on Marshall’s post. They are very telling about how poorly people understand what’s going on here and how they can articulate what they want.

The real elephant in the room is “where’s the money?”

The real money is in search. Yeah, I’m sure that someone at Facebook this afternoon will point out they are selling lots of display ads because they know their audience demographics pretty damn well (hint: Facebook knows EVERYTHING about who you are. I told it, for instance, that I’m a male 44-year-old democrat who loves skiing and photography, among other things).

But the REAL money has NOT shown up for Zuckerberg and crew yet. What’s that?

Search.

When I can ask Facebook “what sushi restaurants do my friends like?” ONLY THEN will you know that Facebook is getting close to the gold mine.

The thing is, Facebook doesn’t want to let you build that kind of business using its data.

THAT is reason #2 why Facebook isn’t going to turn on its real firehose for friendfeed to study, the way that Twitter has let friendfeed have access.

Reason #1, though, is that Zuckerberg hasn’t yet figured out how to change user expectations from having everything private by default to having everything public by default, the way Twitter and friendfeed work.

In an hour a group of us will be meeting with Facebook executives. If everything works out you’ll be able to follow along at http://live.twit.tv as part of a special Gillmor Gang at about 4 p.m. Pacific Time. I’ll definitely try to figure out how Facebook will change the default mode so that it can turn on the business social graph.

I also will find out if there’s a roadmap to opening up the data stream to include more data leakage outside of Facebook. If I were Zuckerberg I wouldn’t open that up until after I could change user expectations and get people to build a public instance of themselves. That could take a couple of years.

I wonder what you think of Facebook’s moves? Join us on the Gillmor Gang and over on friendfeed (we’re having a live chat about this post over on the beta friendfeed) and let’s see if we can learn something together about where Facebook is headed.

UPDATE: friendfeed cofounder Paul Buchheit just wrote this over on the live chat: “It’s not about defaults, it’s about ownership. On Facebook, you are not allowed to give other people access to your data, because your data belongs to Facebook. On FriendFeed or Twitter, you can choose to be public or private, but either way you can still access your data and do what you want with it.”

Published by

Robert Scoble

As Startup Liaison for Rackspace, the Open Cloud Computing Company, Scoble travels the world looking for what's happening on the bleeding edge of technology for Rackspace's startup program. He's interviewed thousands of executives and technology innovators and reports what he learns in books ("The Age of Context," a book coauthored with Forbes author Shel Israel, has been released at http://amzn.to/AgeOfContext ), YouTube, and many social media sites where he's followed by millions of people. Best place to watch me is on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/RobertScoble

Comments

  1. “… still a data roach motel when compared to Twitter and friendfeed? …”

    Facebook is a roach motel. So is twitter to an extent. So how do you counter-act this? Well the first is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds. Then shovel these feeds through content aggregation services like Friendfeed then pump the results to Facebook. The two distinct phases:

    – create content on the Open Web (text, video, images) & extract using RSS
    – aggregate this content using third party sites (convenience – you could do this yourself)
    – point it to Facebook

    This is the kind of setup I use ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3386846627/in/set-72157600280904949/

    Twitter is another problem. You can save your posts as you post them, but it’s not easy for the non-geek. Getting all you Tweets is also a problem using the API. Probably make for a good service addition to a Twitter app. But most don’t value their tweets that much, so is this a problem?

    “… Reason #1, though, is that Zuckerberg hasn’t yet figured out how to change user expectations from having everything private by default to having everything public by default, the way Twitter and friendfeed work. …”

    You can’t stop people wanting to have private groups talking quietly to themselves. When I first joined Facebook I never bothered with privacy. Why? One advantage of pumping *Open information* into Facebook is most (not all) information is open by default. There will always be some information that you might want private but all of it? So I just let anyone read my stuff but don’t let them comment. How do they comment? Well they’ve got to be my friend. But that’s another story ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3405148559/

  2. “… still a data roach motel when compared to Twitter and friendfeed? …”

    Facebook is a roach motel. So is twitter to an extent. So how do you counter-act this? Well the first is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds. Then shovel these feeds through content aggregation services like Friendfeed then pump the results to Facebook. The two distinct phases:

    – create content on the Open Web (text, video, images) & extract using RSS
    – aggregate this content using third party sites (convenience – you could do this yourself)
    – point it to Facebook

    This is the kind of setup I use ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3386846627/in/set-72157600280904949/

    Twitter is another problem. You can save your posts as you post them, but it’s not easy for the non-geek. Getting all you Tweets is also a problem using the API. Probably make for a good service addition to a Twitter app. But most don’t value their tweets that much, so is this a problem?

    “… Reason #1, though, is that Zuckerberg hasn’t yet figured out how to change user expectations from having everything private by default to having everything public by default, the way Twitter and friendfeed work. …”

    You can’t stop people wanting to have private groups talking quietly to themselves. When I first joined Facebook I never bothered with privacy. Why? One advantage of pumping *Open information* into Facebook is most (not all) information is open by default. There will always be some information that you might want private but all of it? So I just let anyone read my stuff but don’t let them comment. How do they comment? Well they’ve got to be my friend. But that’s another story ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3405148559/

  3. “… still a data roach motel when compared to Twitter and friendfeed? …”

    Facebook is a roach motel. So is twitter to an extent. So how do you counter-act this? Well the first is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds. Then shovel these feeds through content aggregation services like Friendfeed then pump the results to Facebook. The two distinct phases:

    – create content on the Open Web (text, video, images) & extract using RSS
    – aggregate this content using third party sites (convenience – you could do this yourself)
    – point it to Facebook

    This is the kind of setup I use ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3386846627/in/set-72157600280904949/

    Twitter is another problem. You can save your posts as you post them, but it’s not easy for the non-geek. Getting all you Tweets is also a problem using the API. Probably make for a good service addition to a Twitter app. But most don’t value their tweets that much, so is this a problem?

    “… Reason #1, though, is that Zuckerberg hasn’t yet figured out how to change user expectations from having everything private by default to having everything public by default, the way Twitter and friendfeed work. …”

    You can’t stop people wanting to have private groups talking quietly to themselves. When I first joined Facebook I never bothered with privacy. Why? One advantage of pumping *Open information* into Facebook is most (not all) information is open by default. There will always be some information that you might want private but all of it? So I just let anyone read my stuff but don’t let them comment. How do they comment? Well they’ve got to be my friend. But that’s another story ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3405148559/

  4. The more Facebook tries to do the more cluttered the site becomes and the less I want to use it.

    Since joining Twitter I barely use Facebook anymore.

    I’m getting more into FriendFeed after hearing you rave about it. While the latest redesign of FF is great I think that have a few things left to do before it jumps into mainstream use:

    1. FriendFeed needs to implement full Twitter app capabilities

    2. FF shouldn’t show comments by default underneath content

    I provide the reasoning behind this in my latest article if you’re interested.

  5. The more Facebook tries to do the more cluttered the site becomes and the less I want to use it.

    Since joining Twitter I barely use Facebook anymore.

    I’m getting more into FriendFeed after hearing you rave about it. While the latest redesign of FF is great I think that have a few things left to do before it jumps into mainstream use:

    1. FriendFeed needs to implement full Twitter app capabilities

    2. FF shouldn’t show comments by default underneath content

    I provide the reasoning behind this in my latest article if you’re interested.

  6. The more Facebook tries to do the more cluttered the site becomes and the less I want to use it.

    Since joining Twitter I barely use Facebook anymore.

    I’m getting more into FriendFeed after hearing you rave about it. While the latest redesign of FF is great I think that have a few things left to do before it jumps into mainstream use:

    1. FriendFeed needs to implement full Twitter app capabilities

    2. FF shouldn’t show comments by default underneath content

    I provide the reasoning behind this in my latest article if you’re interested.

  7. Hi,

    “like, in friendfeed, you would have to open a room and make that explicitly private to be able to keep your data from going over to Twitter and over to Google.”

    is only half true. The owner of a room can get a (public) RSS feeds URI for a private rooms This enables you to subscribe your feed reader to a private room.

    Regards,
    tamberg

  8. Hi,

    “like, in friendfeed, you would have to open a room and make that explicitly private to be able to keep your data from going over to Twitter and over to Google.”

    is only half true. The owner of a room can get a (public) RSS feeds URI for a private rooms This enables you to subscribe your feed reader to a private room.

    Regards,
    tamberg

  9. Hi,

    “like, in friendfeed, you would have to open a room and make that explicitly private to be able to keep your data from going over to Twitter and over to Google.”

    is only half true. The owner of a room can get a (public) RSS feeds URI for a private rooms This enables you to subscribe your feed reader to a private room.

    Regards,
    tamberg

  10. I think that the “friends-only by default” nature of FaceBook is a big advantage for a lot of people. Many people, especially older people, are afraid of their information roaming about on this big thing they don’t understand called the Internet. But, just sharing some information with friends isn’t scary at all. I suspect this has helped FaceBook attract as many users as it has, and from the demographic that it has. If this is true, changing the model to “public by default” might backfire.

  11. I think that the “friends-only by default” nature of FaceBook is a big advantage for a lot of people. Many people, especially older people, are afraid of their information roaming about on this big thing they don’t understand called the Internet. But, just sharing some information with friends isn’t scary at all. I suspect this has helped FaceBook attract as many users as it has, and from the demographic that it has. If this is true, changing the model to “public by default” might backfire.

  12. I think that the “friends-only by default” nature of FaceBook is a big advantage for a lot of people. Many people, especially older people, are afraid of their information roaming about on this big thing they don’t understand called the Internet. But, just sharing some information with friends isn’t scary at all. I suspect this has helped FaceBook attract as many users as it has, and from the demographic that it has. If this is true, changing the model to “public by default” might backfire.

  13. Facebook is so funny : “All your data is belong to us”
    As the walled garden comes tumbling down, they still cling onto the notion that they own your conversation. Just like Robert made them see that they don’t own his social graph, so they will soon realize that at best they own the conversation for a brief moment while it’s being transferred over their pipes.
    The competitive pressure from Twitter will be too great for them not to open up the conversation to search.

  14. Facebook is so funny : “All your data is belong to us”
    As the walled garden comes tumbling down, they still cling onto the notion that they own your conversation. Just like Robert made them see that they don’t own his social graph, so they will soon realize that at best they own the conversation for a brief moment while it’s being transferred over their pipes.
    The competitive pressure from Twitter will be too great for them not to open up the conversation to search.

  15. Facebook is so funny : “All your data is belong to us”
    As the walled garden comes tumbling down, they still cling onto the notion that they own your conversation. Just like Robert made them see that they don’t own his social graph, so they will soon realize that at best they own the conversation for a brief moment while it’s being transferred over their pipes.
    The competitive pressure from Twitter will be too great for them not to open up the conversation to search.

  16. Twitter is far and away better than Facebook.

    Facebook has devolved into a 21st century GeoCities. The simplest of tools is always best. Twitter is simple and yet profound for what it is.

    Facebook is a passing fad, as is LinkedIn, MySpace, etc. The Internet is now so awash in crap it’s pitiful. The signal to noise ration is astonishing. Mark… Facebook, etc., will not be here in five years, but if they are, they will have been usurped by another paradigm.

    BTW, Scoble… you sure change jobs a lot… :)

  17. Twitter is far and away better than Facebook.

    Facebook has devolved into a 21st century GeoCities. The simplest of tools is always best. Twitter is simple and yet profound for what it is.

    Facebook is a passing fad, as is LinkedIn, MySpace, etc. The Internet is now so awash in crap it’s pitiful. The signal to noise ration is astonishing. Mark… Facebook, etc., will not be here in five years, but if they are, they will have been usurped by another paradigm.

    BTW, Scoble… you sure change jobs a lot… :)

  18. Twitter is far and away better than Facebook.

    Facebook has devolved into a 21st century GeoCities. The simplest of tools is always best. Twitter is simple and yet profound for what it is.

    Facebook is a passing fad, as is LinkedIn, MySpace, etc. The Internet is now so awash in crap it’s pitiful. The signal to noise ration is astonishing. Mark… Facebook, etc., will not be here in five years, but if they are, they will have been usurped by another paradigm.

    BTW, Scoble… you sure change jobs a lot… :)

  19. Great post. I believe Facebook is still way ahead of the game as they have a user base of 200 million by default. Millions of people have already taken the option of making their profiles completely public (your’s sincerely has), and Facebook can take it from there if they choose to.

    I wrote a post on how Facebook can reorganize itself and make money. You can find it here.

    http://oonwoye.com/blog/2009/04/27/my-quest-to-save-facebook-i-am-serious/

  20. @5

    Let’s hope that Twitter can kinda be like Craigslist and keep it simple and ad free, as well as not capitulate. Not everything needs to be monetized to death.

    IMO, not everything should be searchable either, despite what people may say.

    Just because it’s on the net doesn’t mean it needs to be indexed. Case in point would be photos/documents I store online but don’t want made public. I have reasons for this as do others. My former outlaws, er — inlaws, are one reason.

  21. @5

    Let’s hope that Twitter can kinda be like Craigslist and keep it simple and ad free, as well as not capitulate. Not everything needs to be monetized to death.

    IMO, not everything should be searchable either, despite what people may say.

    Just because it’s on the net doesn’t mean it needs to be indexed. Case in point would be photos/documents I store online but don’t want made public. I have reasons for this as do others. My former outlaws, er — inlaws, are one reason.

  22. @5

    Let’s hope that Twitter can kinda be like Craigslist and keep it simple and ad free, as well as not capitulate. Not everything needs to be monetized to death.

    IMO, not everything should be searchable either, despite what people may say.

    Just because it’s on the net doesn’t mean it needs to be indexed. Case in point would be photos/documents I store online but don’t want made public. I have reasons for this as do others. My former outlaws, er — inlaws, are one reason.

  23. If Facebook is a roach motel, then users are cockroaches.

    Yeah, I can see that – pernicious vermin eternally functioning in some fantasy-friends never-never world, at least until the Sun goes supernova.

  24. If Facebook is a roach motel, then users are cockroaches.

    Yeah, I can see that – pernicious vermin eternally functioning in some fantasy-friends never-never world, at least until the Sun goes supernova.

  25. If Facebook is a roach motel, then users are cockroaches.

    Yeah, I can see that – pernicious vermin eternally functioning in some fantasy-friends never-never world, at least until the Sun goes supernova.

  26. Hey body, this is not an ugly design, it’s a lack of design :))

    “they have made the entire database of Tweets available to other companies” – I don’t see any good thing in this.It’s like the entire database of yahoo email is give it to the spammers. No one can agree with this.

  27. Hey body, this is not an ugly design, it’s a lack of design :))

    “they have made the entire database of Tweets available to other companies” – I don’t see any good thing in this.It’s like the entire database of yahoo email is give it to the spammers. No one can agree with this.

  28. Hey body, this is not an ugly design, it’s a lack of design :))

    “they have made the entire database of Tweets available to other companies” – I don’t see any good thing in this.It’s like the entire database of yahoo email is give it to the spammers. No one can agree with this.

  29. The Gillmor Gang video was very interesting and you guys did a good job trying to pin him down on these questions. The point he made that bridges both sides of the issue was when he mentioned “personas”.

    Where personas come in I believe is that a lot of people (myself included) don’t want “everything” out there. I think most people want a Public/Professional persona and a private (friends only) one. I’m new to the social networking scene, been avoiding it for a while for fear of another time sink but I’m trying the Scoble approach with FriendFeed and Twitter. Multiple personas may be possible already via different accounts and such (again just getting started here) but I don’t think these services yet make it painless to have a single account with multiple personas and the associated security.

    I think the first service that enables multiple personas/views of a single account AND provides the search monetization that Scoble describes is going to be the big winner. From a business perspective, I don’t think anybody has yet figured out how to be completely open and have a monetization that wouldn’t be instantly cannibalized.

  30. The Gillmor Gang video was very interesting and you guys did a good job trying to pin him down on these questions. The point he made that bridges both sides of the issue was when he mentioned “personas”.

    Where personas come in I believe is that a lot of people (myself included) don’t want “everything” out there. I think most people want a Public/Professional persona and a private (friends only) one. I’m new to the social networking scene, been avoiding it for a while for fear of another time sink but I’m trying the Scoble approach with FriendFeed and Twitter. Multiple personas may be possible already via different accounts and such (again just getting started here) but I don’t think these services yet make it painless to have a single account with multiple personas and the associated security.

    I think the first service that enables multiple personas/views of a single account AND provides the search monetization that Scoble describes is going to be the big winner. From a business perspective, I don’t think anybody has yet figured out how to be completely open and have a monetization that wouldn’t be instantly cannibalized.

  31. The Gillmor Gang video was very interesting and you guys did a good job trying to pin him down on these questions. The point he made that bridges both sides of the issue was when he mentioned “personas”.

    Where personas come in I believe is that a lot of people (myself included) don’t want “everything” out there. I think most people want a Public/Professional persona and a private (friends only) one. I’m new to the social networking scene, been avoiding it for a while for fear of another time sink but I’m trying the Scoble approach with FriendFeed and Twitter. Multiple personas may be possible already via different accounts and such (again just getting started here) but I don’t think these services yet make it painless to have a single account with multiple personas and the associated security.

    I think the first service that enables multiple personas/views of a single account AND provides the search monetization that Scoble describes is going to be the big winner. From a business perspective, I don’t think anybody has yet figured out how to be completely open and have a monetization that wouldn’t be instantly cannibalized.

  32. I am using Facebook and Twitter both. I think Facebook is very funny and easy to use. There are many additional feature in compare Twitter.
    First is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds.
    Twitter is also simple in use but Facebook is much better.

  33. I am using Facebook and Twitter both. I think Facebook is very funny and easy to use. There are many additional feature in compare Twitter.
    First is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds.
    Twitter is also simple in use but Facebook is much better.

  34. I am using Facebook and Twitter both. I think Facebook is very funny and easy to use. There are many additional feature in compare Twitter.
    First is live in the Open-web. Blog, take images using services that give you RSS or other open feeds.
    Twitter is also simple in use but Facebook is much better.

  35. Facebook is in a tough spot because there is so much personal info. Twitter is just s short blurb, and only a small bio. Facebook has so many things from wall posts to videos to photos of who knows what. And its not just up to the user to control this, you can’t half the time because its your friends that add things. Sure you can de-tag yourself but the photo or video is still in the system.

  36. Facebook is in a tough spot because there is so much personal info. Twitter is just s short blurb, and only a small bio. Facebook has so many things from wall posts to videos to photos of who knows what. And its not just up to the user to control this, you can’t half the time because its your friends that add things. Sure you can de-tag yourself but the photo or video is still in the system.

  37. Facebook is in a tough spot because there is so much personal info. Twitter is just s short blurb, and only a small bio. Facebook has so many things from wall posts to videos to photos of who knows what. And its not just up to the user to control this, you can’t half the time because its your friends that add things. Sure you can de-tag yourself but the photo or video is still in the system.

  38. I’m an active Facebook user (except that I don’t use any of the dumb apps). I use it purely as a networking tool with my geographically distant friends.
    I like the fact that my data is within my control.
    OK, I have to trust that FB doesn’t ignore my privacy settings and expose the data in some way, but fundamentally I put more detail into FB because I know that it’s only restricted to people that I trust – my real friends. I don’t add friends that I don’t trust.
    Slagging FB off for not being as open as some other tool (such as Twitter) is pretty dumb – they are totally different tools. I have control of who I expose my data to in FB and I know in Twitter that everything I post is totally open.
    They work in different ways and are meant for different things.
    Problems arise when the users don’t really understand what they are doing – like making Scoble their “friend” in FB. He wasn’t a friend – he was a hero who then sucked out their data using a script and got banned for his efforts. This event at least had a positive result – FB eventually introduced Fan groups which are much better for this type of contact.

    As long as you are fully aware of what the tool is for, and who the audience is then I have no problem with either tool or model. JUst don’t criticise one over the other. They are both good at what they both do.
    As they say “horses for courses”.

  39. I’m an active Facebook user (except that I don’t use any of the dumb apps). I use it purely as a networking tool with my geographically distant friends.
    I like the fact that my data is within my control.
    OK, I have to trust that FB doesn’t ignore my privacy settings and expose the data in some way, but fundamentally I put more detail into FB because I know that it’s only restricted to people that I trust – my real friends. I don’t add friends that I don’t trust.
    Slagging FB off for not being as open as some other tool (such as Twitter) is pretty dumb – they are totally different tools. I have control of who I expose my data to in FB and I know in Twitter that everything I post is totally open.
    They work in different ways and are meant for different things.
    Problems arise when the users don’t really understand what they are doing – like making Scoble their “friend” in FB. He wasn’t a friend – he was a hero who then sucked out their data using a script and got banned for his efforts. This event at least had a positive result – FB eventually introduced Fan groups which are much better for this type of contact.

    As long as you are fully aware of what the tool is for, and who the audience is then I have no problem with either tool or model. JUst don’t criticise one over the other. They are both good at what they both do.
    As they say “horses for courses”.

  40. I’m an active Facebook user (except that I don’t use any of the dumb apps). I use it purely as a networking tool with my geographically distant friends.
    I like the fact that my data is within my control.
    OK, I have to trust that FB doesn’t ignore my privacy settings and expose the data in some way, but fundamentally I put more detail into FB because I know that it’s only restricted to people that I trust – my real friends. I don’t add friends that I don’t trust.
    Slagging FB off for not being as open as some other tool (such as Twitter) is pretty dumb – they are totally different tools. I have control of who I expose my data to in FB and I know in Twitter that everything I post is totally open.
    They work in different ways and are meant for different things.
    Problems arise when the users don’t really understand what they are doing – like making Scoble their “friend” in FB. He wasn’t a friend – he was a hero who then sucked out their data using a script and got banned for his efforts. This event at least had a positive result – FB eventually introduced Fan groups which are much better for this type of contact.

    As long as you are fully aware of what the tool is for, and who the audience is then I have no problem with either tool or model. JUst don’t criticise one over the other. They are both good at what they both do.
    As they say “horses for courses”.

  41. The biggest problem I see with monetising facebook, is it is too US/UK Centric. Based in spain. My location is recorded as Spain.

    Having thought about using facebook ads what is the point when I have to target a whole country rather than just my region?

  42. <h2 align=”center”>Don't Do For Ugg Boots UK</h2>

    –>If you own a pair of Ugg boots, ugg classic short, be sure to take proper care of them and clean them regularly. With the proper care and cleaning, Uggs can last several years or even a lifetime.

    You love sheepskin footwear and ugg classic because they are comfortable and fashionable. How to keep them looking great? The following are a few tips to help you to know what you don't do for your natural beauty and functionality uggs.

    –>Tip one, don't store your cardy boots ugg in a light place. Because they can bleach in extreme sunlight.

    –>Tip two, ugg boots should not be worn in extremely moist or muddy conditions as moisture can cause problems.

    –>Tip three, don't clean the exterior of? your uggs knightsbridge with a hard brush or cloth at first time dirty.

    –>Tip four, trying not to saturate the sheepskin footwear with water, especially warm or hot water. And don't clean them in a washing machine or dryer, this will cause problems with shrinkage and can adversely change the sheepskin.

    –>Tip five, if need, except specially detergent for sheepskin product, just like classic ugg mini, don't use any wool detergent. Also don't use high concentration cleaning solution.

    –>Some suggestions for you to protect your natural beauty and functionality uggs long periods of time. And also hoping to help you solving your hesitation, spending little time to know more information about ugg boots.

    –>All rights reserved, reprint, please specify source comes from http://www.goodugg.co.ukbailey button,ugg knightsbridge boots,cardy boots,ugg tall classic